Alpe Du Huez under 40 minutes means +ive

dave_1
dave_1 Posts: 9,512
edited July 2008 in Pro race
Watch Alpe Du Huez on youtube with side by side windows..you have Hinault and Lemond in 86 creeping up it in 45 minutes...the 95 guy is so fast in 35-36 minutes...it is very obvious even without a stop watch when EPO arrived..likewise. I predict we will not see any sub 40 minute ascent of Alpe Du Huez next week...if they do...target test them as they are + for blood doping
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player

Comments

  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    But Hinault and Lemond had a huge lead over the peloton and were not attacking each other - you can't set that as a benchmark clean time.

    Didn't some amateur or semi-pro do it in 45 min at one of the Oisans events around the Marmotte last week?
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    Like Conconi climbed the Stelvio, you mean?

    Who are we trying to defend, here, after all? Pantani?
    I'd loved the guy's panache.
    An all time great: artist on a bike, but was he clean?
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    DaveyL wrote:
    But Hinault and Lemond had a huge lead over the peloton and were not attacking each other - you can't set that as a benchmark clean time.

    Didn't some amateur or semi-pro do it in 45 min at one of the Oisans events around the Marmotte last week?

    no EPO eh?lol...try and be less obvious
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,549
    I've done it in 57 mins - does that make me a doper?
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    andyp wrote:
    I've done it in 57 mins - does that make me a doper?

    I did it in less than 30 during the Marmotte in 2006.










    Ok, I was in a car.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • Cumulonimbus
    Cumulonimbus Posts: 1,730
    This page, though its only wikipedia, gives some of the fastest ascents.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d'Huez

    I did also find another page with a list of the fastest times - but i cant find it at the moment :oops:

    For what its worth, this year saw Piepoli climb the Hautacam 1.08 slower than armstrong did in 2000 and 2.55 slower than Riis did in 1996.


    http://www.cyclismag.com/article.php?sid=4348
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    Yeah, but he was waiting for Cobo.
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • drenkrom
    drenkrom Posts: 1,062
    Piepoli looked like he could've been sipping a cup of tea at times on Hautacam. He could've put a minute on Cobo in no time. Conversely, Hautacam was the cornerstone of Riis' onslaught in 96.

    Let's face it, there are way more variable than pharmaceuticals affecting times up climbs.
  • Cumulonimbus
    Cumulonimbus Posts: 1,730
    Um I know there are more variables determining the effort :lol: For instance, in 2004 the alpe d'huez was a time trial stage, iother times the previous stages may have been harder, or the stage itself could have been raced at a faster pace, etc, etc. I just think that comparing finish ascents can give you some idea of whether times are generally getting faster or slower. Alpe d'huez is perhaps especially useful for this as it is definitely a stage that everyone wants to win. On this occasion Hautacam was the final climb before a rest day and several flattish stages so i would have thought that people would have been pressing hard. Given the doubts over SD and the distance that their riders finished ahead of the others i thought it may be interesting to see how their times compared to historic ones. The main GC contender such as Evans did times of about 40 minutes.

    Have found the list of fastest times up alpe d'huez

    http://www.answers.com/topic/alpe-d-huez

    although i dont know where answers.com got the info.

    2006 only has three times given but Sastre, Leipheimer, Menchov, Rasmussen and Caucchioli all also went under 40 minutes. For what its worth Evans did about 40.10 give a second or so. In the 2004 time trial i think that Moncoutie did almost exactly 40 minutes which has significance if you believe he doesnt dope at all. 1999 is not mentioned at all and i dont know why this is.

    Another factor is the progression of sports science and technology. People nowadays are cycling on faster bikes and greater knowledge of sports science should mean that people are also faster. This means that trying to compare back 20 years is very awkward as performances should be a bit quicker now anyway. Another factor is that it depends how clean you think people were 20 years ago.

    In summary, i know that the time up any climb is not a perfect test at all and that the results are open to interpretation but i will still be interested in how fast they climb l'alpe.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    I'm not sure about the 40 minutew threshold, but here's some selected times for the Alpe from 2006
    Landis	38:38:00
Kloden	38:38:00
Sastre	39:03:00
Leipheimer	39:17:00
Menchov	39:49:00
Rasmussen	39:49:00
Pereiro	40:17:00
Rogers	40:17:00
Evans	40:17:00
Zubeldia	40:32:00
Schleck	40:46:00
Simoni	40:52:00
Cunego	40:57:00
Moreau	41:16:00
Garzelli	41:56:00
Chavanel	42:04:00
Mazzoleni	42:14:00
Merckx	43:42:00

    Calculated from knowing the results, Schleck's time, and how far Schleck's group where ahead of the peloton - 3.18 - and who was in it.[/code]
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Dave_1 wrote:
    DaveyL wrote:
    But Hinault and Lemond had a huge lead over the peloton and were not attacking each other - you can't set that as a benchmark clean time.

    Didn't some amateur or semi-pro do it in 45 min at one of the Oisans events around the Marmotte last week?

    no EPO eh?lol...try and be less obvious

    What? H & L were not racing up the Alpe, they were basically on a lap of honour by that point. How can you use that as a benchmark?

    Might be better to look at average power outputs, it's a tad more reliable. If anyone is averaging more than 450 W up there (and that's being generous) it is time to ask questions.
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • bahzob
    bahzob Posts: 2,195
    DaveyL wrote:
    But Hinault and Lemond had a huge lead over the peloton and were not attacking each other - you can't set that as a benchmark clean time.

    Didn't some amateur or semi-pro do it in 45 min at one of the Oisans events around the Marmotte last week?

    Grimpe D'Alpe was won in 44:25 http://www.la-marmotte.info/resultats/Resultat28.xls. However this was measured from the car park to the Marmotte finish which is lower than the tour finish.

    More impressive (IMO) was the 1:37:07 that Bert Dekker (who came second in Marmotte by 1 second!) did in the Grandes Rousses the Wed before. This is a 40km race that involves 1800m of climbing, right to the (real) top of the Alpe then descend then 6km at 10% to Le Collet Vaujany. We reckon Bert must have done the Alpe ascent in around 45 minutes..
    Martin S. Newbury RC
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,549
    iainf72 wrote:
    I did it in less than 30 during the Marmotte in 2006.










    Ok, I was in a car.
    Smirk.

    It took me an hour and 20 minutes that same day, at the end of the Marmotte. I was pleased with that.
  • Belv
    Belv Posts: 866
    Were the stages the same length before and/or after Alpe D'huez?
    Were they riding similar machinery to ten year prior?
    Were the weather conditions the same?
    When in the Tour were they attacking the climb?
    What was at stake (on the day and on the Tour as a whole)?

    There are far too many variables to put it down to doping.
  • skavanagh.bikeradar
    skavanagh.bikeradar Posts: 1,097
    However we can be certain that doping was one of the variables and a significant one too.
  • flattythehurdler
    flattythehurdler Posts: 2,314
    It took me 1:16 as a stand alone. I was flat out. But my heart ain't right.
    Dan

Categories