Professional Cycling For the Fans - Climbing rate of Contador - a record climb

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/07/tour-2009-contador-takes-yellow.html

comments?

ed rader

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/07/tour-2009-contador-takes-yellow.html

comments?

ed rader

Interesting. I wish he would have posted say the top ten climbing rates in the Tour. I'm curious as to where Pantani ranks. And what was Lance's best climb. He does mention that tactics do play a part in it. Every Tour and every stage has different tactical variables that probably play a significant role.

An amazing climb.

He also wrote that the previous record was held by an admitted dopester.

interesting analysis/ comparisons on VAM as i am only beginning to use that metric to see how i do on my regular climbing routes... of course my 1,100ish VAM over a half hour climb seems paltry by comparison.

I'd like to see some more about that myself - like where Pantani's Alp d'Huez record falls, and Lance's Luz Ardiden climb in 2003.

Amazing performance...

Contador is a small and immensely powerful guy and as such does gain quite an edge on climbs over guys like Armstrong who is of course a little older and about 20 pounds heavier.

If Contador is to win the Tdf he will win it in the mountains where few, if any, will be able to challenge him.

Pantani was considered one of the best climbers of all time and doping aside (cause they are all juiced)... his TdF win was also done in the same manner to eliminate the hopes of anyone who thought they might close the gap in the final sprint.

If he repeats this in the upcoming climbs there will no-one that can catch him.

Contador also has the backing and support of the strongest and most skilled team in the tour and this is a huge factor.

Doesn't Armstrong hold the Alp d'Huez record? I think I saw that on the poster at the top after I climbed it in record time (for me that is).

I think Pantani does. 37 minute minutes or so.

Richard

Doesn't Armstrong hold the Alp d'Huez record? I think I saw that on the poster at the top after I climbed it in record time (for me that is).

No, I don't recall the years for sure but Pantani in 96 or 97 set the record, and Armstrong missed it by just a few seconds in one of his tour wins. 2001 maybe.

on edit - there's a little bit of controversy in this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d%27Huez , but Pantani's still listed on top

No, I don't recall the years for sure but Pantani in 96 or 97 set the record, and Armstrong missed it by just a few seconds in one of his tour wins. 2001 maybe.

on edit - there's a little bit of controversy in this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d%27Huez , but Pantani's still listed on top

Now I am going to have to go through my old pictures and check it out.

I think the difference between the Pantani and Armstrong ascents of Alp, was that Pantani's was at the end of a stage with a mountain top finish up it, but that day included other HC/Cat1 climbs. Armstrongs was a ITT.

Ouch. That makes me feel even slower. Contador's average speed up that climb was nearly four times as fast as mine is for a similar gradient.:o

This is what I found. The year was 2004
Time was 37 minutes 36 seconds

I find myself only able to quote him from the Trek commercial. "Wow!"

I read the linked article. Although it was a great climb to say that it was a record I think is a stretch. A short climb with a following tail wind can lead to a figure like this. Also to compare it to other TDF climbs that are longer and with different tactics is not science. From what everyone was saying the gas was on from the get go of this climb. A lot of times a climb doesn't have the riders go hard immediately, instead they wait for a while.

Also there is a dispute over the incline between 7.1% and 7.5% and he used the 7.5% figure in his calculations. Also Andy Shleck had a VAM of 1837 which is right behind Riis's 1847 so I think the calculations are off.

But this also begs the question if Riis was doped to the gills and he admitted so much, how can clean riders possibly even come close to or exceed these figures??

This is what I found. The year was 2004
Time was 37 minutes 36 seconds

Cool pic - that must have been an awesome ride up there.

Armstrong's was in a short TT, while Pantani went one second faster at the end of a long mountain stage, so its fair to say Pantani is deserving of the record (assuming he wasn't doped to the gills).

I read that a few years ago the resort town named each switchback after a Tour winner of the stage and put up signs and so forth...so maybe that's the sign from a stretch of the road dedicated to Lance?,

Nice find. I was wondering about the duration on the climbs - Sastre had a phenomenal climb, and the numbers bear that out.

Contador is as good a climber as I've seen in ten years. He reminds me of a Mayo or Herras (please don't start with the doping).

Add his time trialing ability and he's almost impossible to beat.

Cool pic - that must have been an awesome ride up there.

Armstrong's was in a short TT, while Pantani went one second faster at the end of a long mountain stage, so its fair to say Pantani is deserving of the record (assuming he wasn't doped to the gills).

I read that a few years ago the resort town named each switchback after a Tour winner of the stage and put up signs and so forth...so maybe that's the sign from a stretch of the road dedicated to Lance?,

No that sign was not on a switchback, it was at the very top and from what I was told indicated the record at the time. Although it was a time trial to the top, he had no help along the way and the crowd, full of drunk Germans made it difficult for all the riders. Now I can say that cause I am a German, although I am no longer a drunk!

Not a record climb (especially if this puts A.Schleck right by Riis' time). But, it definitely was extra-ordinary.

he really droped the hammer and hit 400w.

well, they did say it was a shorter duration than other climbs and that allowed faster ascent times.

There is a new post that shows the previous fastest climbs.
linky (http://www.sportsscientists.com/)

There is a new post that shows the previous fastest climbs.
linky (http://www.sportsscientists.com/)

His findings are fraught with unscientific assumptions if you ask me. Even a road surface can make a big difference.

Also his take on doping is wrong in my opinion. EPO should allow one to climb faster than without it. To say that drugs only help in recovering and allow you to do strong efforts day after day is only part of the equation.

From a study:

"The data from these studies on either healthy or trained humans suggests that moderate rhEPO supplementation results in significant increases in VO2 max (7 to 9%) and endurance performance (9 to 17%).[1] This suggests that the use of rhEPO as an ergogenic aid for performance enhancement is a viable option"

Some guys need dope to be great. Every once in a while someone comes along and is great without the help of dope.

In addition to road conditions, the calculation should consider temperature and humidity.