Tour average speed again

iainf72

How did they manage to have a higher average speed than Riis, Ullrich and a few of Lance's Tours this year when riding on bread and water?

andyp

Tailwinds. :roll:

iainf72

Heinz Beans - Official Food of the Tour de France!

Doobz

so much technology involved nowdays I reckon they can push the riders right to the limit without them popping. Maybe with bike tech being pretty advanced things are easier for the riders?

I really dunno but sure is interesting..

I hope this thread doesn't go into the realms of doping

andyp

A more serious answer - there were less mountains in this Tour then there has been for some time, i.e. only one proper Pyreneen stage and two Alpine stages, so that may have had an effect.

I think average speed is a poor indicator though - Tour stages these days start fast until a break is established then are ridden at a steady pace until the last 70-50 kms before the speed goes up. Gone are the days when the peloton would ride along at tempo for a couple of hours before the racing started.

dave_1

depend what you measure...the route is easier and shorter with more rest days.---the fact the peleton got blown apart on the Champs ELyesee shows how tired the guys were...they were losing wheels, no robotic cycling...also the slow Alpe ascent by the winner and verified by equally slow ascent by Evans shows something too

Kléber

We're all looking for reasons to support our views. If Astana had been towing round the race and dominating CSC, it would be because Bruyneel had got a supply of 8th generation EPO!

Still, to detect doping, what matters isn't the overall average speed, which is far more a function of the racing style, weather and route, but the "VAM" figures and here they are a bit lower. No more 1800m/h figures, more like 1600m/h which is a bit healthier.

iainf72

andyp wrote:

A more serious answer - there were less mountains in this Tour then there has been for some time, i.e. only one proper Pyreneen stage and two Alpine stages, so that may have had an effect.

I expected it to be lower this year with the much-harder-than-usual first week.

Agree though the VAM's seem lower so perhaps that's something.

dave_1

iainf72 wrote:

andyp wrote:

A more serious answer - there were less mountains in this Tour then there has been for some time, i.e. only one proper Pyreneen stage and two Alpine stages, so that may have had an effect.

I expected it to be lower this year with the much-harder-than-usual first week.

Agree though the VAM's seem lower so perhaps that's something.

I think it is to look at different reference points...the grimace on their faces..the way Menchov went into the red and straight off the back on Alpe Du Huez to recover.. unlike the robot at Luz Ardiden some years back who could go into the red massivley 3 times in around 15 minutes....bullshit really, doping fueled lies. The severity of the Champs showed like never before...the poor stage 19 TTs by the GC men at TDF and Giro 08...no 1, 2 placings like the Ullrich, Lance era, the Induain, Rominger era...all subjective I know...but it helps to have seen plenty TDFs ...you can spot what looks real...not only average speeds. I think the TDF should have power outputs, everything on screen so abnormal riders are red flagged straight away...V0 2 max like Lemond says...never lies.

disgruntledgoat

Comparing average speeds across years is not an accurate measure. The course, as noted has an effect. TTs are shorter these days, particularly the 29km stage in the first week. There are no split stages any more either.

The weather also plays a part, as does the quality of teams in the race, with no one team assuming overall control of the peloton, one would expect the speed to be slightly higher as different squads fight to get on the front for their various leaders.

takethehighroad

You have to remember, CSC all skulked at the back until the crosswinds on Stage 7 and so they had a week of almost rest in their legs.

Small things all add up to proving it wad cleaner. For example, Flecha, Wegmann and nFeillu being eliminated on one of the easiest days of the Tour, simply because they were tired. Kirchen trying to win everything in the first ten days before spending most of the rest of the Tour out the back on the climbs. The final time trial had all the GC contenders at the same area of the standings.

LangerDan

Slightly OT but I was looking at the average winning speeds for the San Sebastian since 1984. Given that the race takes place soon after the TdF (so rider "workload" in the past month has been much the same) and hasn't varied much in distance (and, I assume, course), the average speeds should give an indication of trends. Putting on my geek "pocket-protector", I applied an extremely basic "CUSUM" to look at the underlying trend on speeds over the 23 years, rather than the speeds themselves.

From '87 to '93, the trend was downwards. Come 93 / 94 - Bingo! speeds start climbing (wonder why?) and the trend is upwards ever since except for a blip around 98/99 and 2003. Up to last year, the speeds are still climbing - last years speed would have sat well with the turbo years of the late 1990s

What does it prove (apart from the fact I have Excel on my PC?)- Dunno!

cougie

Its far too simple to look at the speed and try and work out anything from that. Way too many variables, and the racing isnt always the same. To me - it looked cleaner than it has for a good few years.

iainf72

LangerDan wrote:

From '87 to '93, the trend was downwards. Come 93 / 94 - Bingo! speeds start climbing (wonder why?) and the trend is upwards ever since except for a blip around 98/99 and 2003. Up to last year, the speeds are still climbing - last years speed would have sat well with the turbo years of the late 1990s

Interesting. Average speed does tell us something - Look at how it rocketed in the EPO era - If it's remaining the same or climbing slightly there can only be one conclusion. Yes, that's right, the technology and road quality has improved.

alanmcn1

:roll:

andyp

iainf72 wrote:

LangerDan wrote:

From '87 to '93, the trend was downwards. Come 93 / 94 - Bingo! speeds start climbing (wonder why?) and the trend is upwards ever since except for a blip around 98/99 and 2003. Up to last year, the speeds are still climbing - last years speed would have sat well with the turbo years of the late 1990s

Interesting. Average speed does tell us something - Look at how it rocketed in the EPO era - If it's remaining the same or climbing slightly there can only be one conclusion. Yes, that's right, the technology and road quality has improved.

I think in isolation the average speed for a race doesn't tell you much. However with a number of data points, i.e. the last ten Tours, then you can detect trends. Those are interesting, as you say.

iainf72

Kind of lke this?

Year Distance Stages Ave

1985 4,127 22 36.232

1986 4,083 23 37.020

1987 4,231 25 36.645

1988 3,286 22 38.909

1989 3,285 21 37.487

1990 3,504 21 38.261

1991 3,914 22 38.747

1992 3,983 21 39.504

1993 3,714 20 38.709

1994 3,978 21 38.383

1995 3,653 20 39.193

1996 3,907 21 39.227

1997 3,950 21 39.230

1998 3,875 21 39.983

1999 3,686 20 40.273

2000 3,662 21 39.556

2001 3,446 20 40.02

2002 3,282 20 39.93

2003 3,427 20 40.940

2004 3,391.1 20 40.553

2005 3,608 21 41.654

2006 3,657.1 20 40.784

2007 3,547 20 38.98

2008 3554 21 40.4