the myth of the 'pure climber'

dave_1

is that they can jump and kick like track sprinters naturally-pure doper is my opinion. ...don't listen to Ligget and Sherwen's 'pure climber' nonsense anymore..Sastre, Evans and Levi show one thing...clean riders can't do that sh**...the rampaging track sprinter kicks off the front of the group on hard cols. This is my theory and I could be wrong, but you decide. Sastres, Levi and Evans just can't raise the pace much...one steady [ace is all they have it seems, small accelerations but quickly at their limit

While I am not accusing Contador, one thing...I really disliked Contador's body langauge, and facial expression when taking yellow yesterday, it didn't look like a man who felt comfortable and the line from him is 'I wouldn't be there if I wasn't clean'...indeed..but that is not 'I have never doped'...just I'd avoid it if I am not being the other reading. And I sincerely hope he gets beaten by the 2 below. What are the public meant to think when he can hardly raise a smile when he wins yellow off someone who's been dodging dope controls around the world. If he doesn't think he won it fairly, he shouldn't accept it

iainf72

Hmmmm - Lucho Herrera was a pure climber I would say.

The problem in the current climate is you just do not know. People are looking for signs but the signs mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. Ullrich used to suffer and couldn't respond to rapid accelerations and was he clean?

Anyway, anyone who can climb is a freak and I hate them. :P

dave_1

iainf72 wrote:

Hmmmm - Lucho Herrera was a pure climber I would say.

The problem in the current climate is you just do not know. People are looking for signs but the signs mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. Ullrich used to suffer and couldn't respond to rapid accelerations and was he clean?

Anyway, anyone who can climb is a freak and I hate them. :P

Hi Iain

Lucho's Alpe ascent in 1984 was of the 42 minute category..6 minutes off the 1990s times. I can really only remember Lucho winding it up gradually, e.g. 1985 stage to Morzine, he and Hinault pulled away in a steady acceleration..as well as being dropped sometimes.

The only other who could the stuff we saw on the Peyresourde was Pantani or Armstrong

iainf72

It's the variations in pace that make a climber I guess. What we're seeing now is extreme variations in pace uphill.

There was an article in one of the mags a while ago about how things like EPO favoured the Roulers for mountain stages rather than climbers. I guess you can see that if you compare a race in the 80's to the 90's.

dave_1

iainf72 wrote:

It's the variations in pace that make a climber I guess. What we're seeing now is extreme variations in pace uphill.

There was an article in one of the mags a while ago about how things like EPO favoured the Roulers for mountain stages rather than climbers. I guess you can see that if you compare a race in the 80's to the 90's.

The thing I am waiting for the when the Alpe Du Huez ascent times get faster...Hinault in 45 minutes 1986, Fignon pushed it down to 41-42 minutes in 89, then Indurain breaks 40 minutes in 91, Pantani and Lance at low 37 or 36 minutes...on average an 8 minute improvment on the 80s...so, that means by 2008-2011 we should be seeing further progress from Lance and Pantani's record times,,,like 28 minutes or 30 minutes for the Alpe. Why not? I think that will happen when genetic doping is around. EPO allowed a huge jump and the 2004 times suggest no new products/methods are out

barronbike

Notwithstanding the chaos the Tour is in, it appears that we have reached a stage where a rider can only be accepted as 'clean' if he appeals to the writer! If a face doesn't fit, he is obvously a cheat. If that is the case then perhaps we should decide the result based on a pre-race popularity contest. It is hardly surprising that the young Spaniard looled 'underwhelmed' whilst pulliing on the yellow jersey; considering the state of this Tour he would have to be deranged to be grinning like a bloody hyena!

barronbike

The bikes used for the last 5 years, or so, must be at least a sack of potatoes lighter than those of yesteryear; how much of a time difference would that make? I guess that doesn't take Pantani into account, but then he WAS wired up to the National Grid!

skut

barronbike wrote:

Notwithstanding the chaos the Tour is in, it appears that we have reached a stage where a rider can only be accepted as 'clean' if he appeals to the writer! If a face doesn't fit, he is obvously a cheat. If that is the case then perhaps we should decide the result based on a pre-race popularity contest. It is hardly surprising that the young Spaniard looled 'underwhelmed' whilst pulliing on the yellow jersey; considering the state of this Tour he would have to be deranged to be grinning like a bloody hyena!

I disagree. I don't like Cadel Evans at all really, but I would be happy seeing him win the tour, rather than Contador (who is an exciting rider) who as far as I'm concerned is guilty by association

ricadus

Certainly, simply going by Cadel's ugly climbng style he's not on anything, as he's all over the bike, compared to the smooth style of Ras. Then again Ras looked to be around 10 kg lighter than the Aussie (or almost anyone else), which of course is a crucial factor on a long climb.

Bronzie

ricadus wrote:

Ras looked to be around 10 kg lighter than the Aussie

According to the Tour website Ras weighed in at 69kg, and Cadel at 64kg! This can't be right :?:

From their Wikipedia entries, they are 59kg and 68kg respectively, although no idea when these weights were last updated. I would suspect they shouldn't vary too much though (unless your name is Jan ).

mac220

Firstly, i'll caveat this post with the fact that i'm against doping and think it should be rooted out and stopped, just to be clear

with respect to the OP, i think what the ITV lot are on about is not 'pure climbers' what they mean is that those riders have a natural kick or acceleration, which to a large degree is a result of your genetic make up. If you have a good amount of fast twitch muscle fibers then you will have a much faster jump whether on the flat or the hills depending on your size. So what they are saying is these guys have fast a good portion of fast twitch muscle fibers, now of course on the flats they're just too small to compete with the big sprinters, however when gravity comes into play they can show the jump/accderation which is a result of the fast twitch muscle fibers on the hills.

Of course if you on on the absolute limit, then you cant jump in the same way, so it maybe that Evans has a jump when not riding full tilt, but i don't think this is the case as he's a strong time trial rider, and generally a strong sprint and strong TT'ing don't go together.

Regards,

Mark

squired

What I find interesting with riders like Contador is the ability to make repeated attacks. Presumably they are all riding close to their limit on a climb anyway, so the effect of an attack in terms of power output must be somewhat limited. By making that attack they ramp up their heartrate even higher (presumably into the anaerobic zone). Looking back at previous champions, they would generally make one attack and be gone. In the case of the likes of Contador there were multiple attacks, which challenges the body in a very different way.

My view of a pure climber is simply a little guy who isn't strong on the flat or the time trials. They are "pure climbers" because they are only really good at climbing. The ability to make fast attacks doesn't come into it. Moreau made some amazing attacks (especially for a 36 year old, who would in theory lost some of his zip) in both the Dauphine and the first mountain stage of this year's tour. Is he regarded as a pure climber?

lloyd_bower

Dave_1 wrote:

....While I am not accusing Contador, one thing...I really disliked Contador's body langauge, and facial expression when taking yellow yesterday, it didn't look like a man who felt comfortable and the line from him is 'I wouldn't be there if I wasn't clean'...indeed..but that is not 'I have never doped'...just I'd avoid it if I am not being the other reading. And I sincerely hope he gets beaten by the 2 below. What are the public meant to think when he can hardly raise a smile when he wins yellow off someone who's been dodging dope controls around the world. If he doesn't think he won it fairly, he shouldn't accept it

While I didn't hear the said interview, I agree totally, sick of '...I have had X tests and I have never tested positive', instead lets hear as you say 'I have never doped'.

Regarding the title thread, I've always assumed a pure climber to be one who excels at climbing, and whose time trial skills are none too excellent. Someone like the Columbian Herrara in the 80's and our own Robert Millar.

Anonymous

Dave_1 wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

It's the variations in pace that make a climber I guess. What we're seeing now is extreme variations in pace uphill.

There was an article in one of the mags a while ago about how things like EPO favoured the Roulers for mountain stages rather than climbers. I guess you can see that if you compare a race in the 80's to the 90's.

The thing I am waiting for the when the Alpe Du Huez ascent times get faster...Hinault in 45 minutes 1986, Fignon pushed it down to 41-42 minutes in 89, then Indurain breaks 40 minutes in 91, Pantani and Lance at low 37 or 36 minutes...on average an 8 minute improvment on the 80s...so, that means by 2008-2011 we should be seeing further progress from Lance and Pantani's record times,,,like 28 minutes or 30 minutes for the Alpe. Why not? I think that will happen when genetic doping is around. EPO allowed a huge jump and the 2004 times suggest no new products/methods are out

What are you on?