Pure Climbers
Comments
-
nice
Yeah defo, I didn't know of it though. nly noticed him when he bossed the hilly tour of Tobago a couple of years ago. So first time I'm reading him do well in the mountains.Turfle wrote:wombly knees wrote:Not exactly elite climbing when Seeldraeyers wins, but Zoidl second on a high mountain stage. Wowzers, and a nice looking national strip.
Zoidl clearly has good form, but he still beat some good climbers like Busche, Edet, Aru, Chris Anker, Matthias Frank, and that's tough to do on form alone.
Kitzbüheler Horn today, which should be good. Predicting Dombrowski's first pro win.0 -
Well Dombro comes up short today but Aru impresses and Zoldi remains in contact. Nice work by Seeldraeyers who shows once again that he can climb very well indeed (as he has shown multiple times in the past)
1 Kevin Seeldraeyers (Bel) Astana Pro Team 4:17:15
2 Alexsandr Dyachenko (Kaz) Astana Pro Team 0:00:05
3 Fabio Aru (Ita) Astana Pro Team 0:00:14
4 Dries Devenyns (Bel) Omega Pharma-Quick Step 0:00:26
5 Riccardo Zoidl (Aut) Team Gourmetfein Simplon 0:00:37
6 Nicolas Edet (Fra) Cofidis, Solutions Credits 0:00:44
7 Petr Ignatenko (Rus) Katusha 0:00:51
8 Matija Kvasina (Cro) Team Gourmetfein Simplon 0:00:56
9 Sergei Chernetckii (Rus) Katusha 0:01:05
10 Jure Golcer (Slo) Tirol Cycling Team 0:01:13Contador is the Greatest0 -
I dont believe there are any pure climbers left in the peloton. Not in the style of 20 plus years ago, anyway. Climbers have to work on all aspects of there riding now, especially time trailing, that they lose some of that inborn climbing ability. If they want to win a GT they have to be more of an all rounder or lose too much time away from the mountains.
Pantani was probably the last pure climber to win the Tour.0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:hammerite wrote:Wish this was on TV, I know a lot of these towns/ski stations through skiing, would be interesting seeing them climb up to them.
@dimspace has posted a 25min highlights clip of yday's stage on his Velorooms site
http://velorooms.com/index.php?action=m ... ls;lid=752
Cool thanks.0 -
I'd guess there have been a number of factors that have contributed to the demise of the "Pure Climber".
One of those factors is obviously blood doping, EPO and other performance-enhancing drugs. Andy Hampsten's analysis of the change in the peloton from the late 1980's into the early 1990's reveals a lot. He rode cleanly and as he says, guys he was previously leaving behind with ease on the hills were suddenly passing him and leaving him for dead, even though he was climbing as well as he ever was. EPO ensured that a large number of non-specialist climbers were now operating in the pure climber's environment. Where previously climbs were being tackled on the small ring from the start, those same climbs were now being tackled on the big ring for longer than normal, thus probably not suiting the pure climber.
I recall reading an article years ago, possibly in "Cycle Sport", about pure climbers and their demise. One of the ideas put forward in that article was that the necessity to turn massive gears in the pro peloton was ruining the climber's natural suppleness. As the amateur climber turned pro and spent more and more time riding in the very big gears on the flat, he started to build more muscle and this changed his physique. The supple, lightly-muscled climber became a little bigger and less supple and lost some of his natural climbing ability. The article estimated that this transformation took about three years to occur. Bernard Hinault also makes reference to this in Robin Magowan's book "King of the Road". He spoke about Robert Millar's "new time-trialling prowess has not been gained at the expense of his efficacy as a climber; you may be more powerful but you still have to carry those new muscles".
I'm not sure when the 11 sprocket was introduced but I doubt it has helped the pure climber. A couple of different factors, over the last twenty years, have probably seen the 11 sprocket being used, improved road surfaces and an EPO-fuelled peloton being some of them.
Another thing that climbers have to face is the requirement to transform themselves from pure climbers into "overall GC contenders". A good climber will often finish in the top-ten of a grand tour early on in their career. Pierre Rolland being a good example in recent times. How many directeur sportives are happy to let the climber just do his thing? The focus quickly changes from climbing, mountain stage wins and the polka-dot jersey and moves to turning the climber into a climber/time-trialler. David Moncoutie is possibly the only example in recent times of a rider who was allowed to plough his own furrow as a "pure climber". Eric Boyer spoke about trying to change Moncoutie and raising his ambitions but that didn't happen, although that might be down to Moncoutie's personality. Rolland is currently in the polka-dot jersey so maybe this state of affairs indicates the return of a type of rider who is happy to be "just" a climber. Someone will just have to have a word with him about those shorts!
Hopefully as the peloton moves away from the use of performance-enhancing drugs, the goal posts are now moving back in favour of the pure climber.
DD.0 -
Good post DD, thanks for the contribution.Contador is the Greatest0
-
mike6 wrote:I dont believe there are any pure climbers left in the peloton. Not in the style of 20 plus years ago, anyway. Climbers have to work on all aspects of there riding now, especially time trailing, that they lose some of that inborn climbing ability. If they want to win a GT they have to be more of an all rounder or lose too much time away from the mountains.
Pantani was probably the last pure climber to win the Tour.
There's still plenty of pure climbers around, it's just that they don't win GTs and also the way GTs get ridden these days the overall contenders tend to pull them back on the climbs through pure power. Someone like Pozzovivo is a pure climber I'd have said and there are others, there's just not the races there for them to show themselves.0 -
So Dombrowski lost 10mins on stage 2 which is really bad. Not seen any good indication yet why other than he wasn`t good enough. Aru continues to hang in there.Contador is the Greatest0
-
As our heroes move into the mountains tomorrow, what changes are being made to their bikes to help get up the slopes as fast as possible?
I'd guess wheels are probably the main focus for most climbers, given that a standard pro bike is usually near the 6.8kg mark on a flat stage. I noticed that many riders had very low profile rims on their bikes today, especially the climbers, whereas the sprinter/roadmen had the deep aero-profile wheels still in place. What are the climbing wheels of choice for 2013. I think Mavic have a special carbon climbing wheel and Lightweight (with their Gipfelsturm) have something similar. I noticed as well that Sojasun and Astana are using a wheel with stainless steel spokes. Can a carbon rim be built up with stainless steel spokes or does it have to be carbon spokes too? Is any team running alloy box-section rims in the mountains this year? It'll be interesting to see what the riders use during these hilly stages.
DD.0 -
Dolan Driver wrote:As our heroes move into the mountains tomorrow, what changes are being made to their bikes to help get up the slopes as fast as possible?
I'd guess wheels are probably the main focus for most climbers, given that a standard pro bike is usually near the 6.8kg mark on a flat stage. I noticed that many riders had very low profile rims on their bikes today, especially the climbers, whereas the sprinter/roadmen had the deep aero-profile wheels still in place. What are the climbing wheels of choice for 2013. I think Mavic have a special carbon climbing wheel and Lightweight (with their Gipfelsturm) have something similar. I noticed as well that Sojasun and Astana are using a wheel with stainless steel spokes. Can a carbon rim be built up with stainless steel spokes or does it have to be carbon spokes too? Is any team running alloy box-section rims in the mountains this year? It'll be interesting to see what the riders use during these hilly stages.
DD.
Snot like it used to be. Bike stuff is crazy light anyway nowadays so any changes are marginal / there for sponsors.
Biggest changes in the mountains are likely to be related to handling on the descents.0 -
Pross wrote:mike6 wrote:I dont believe there are any pure climbers left in the peloton. Not in the style of 20 plus years ago, anyway. Climbers have to work on all aspects of there riding now, especially time trailing, that they lose some of that inborn climbing ability. If they want to win a GT they have to be more of an all rounder or lose too much time away from the mountains.
Pantani was probably the last pure climber to win the Tour.
There's still plenty of pure climbers around, it's just that they don't win GTs and also the way GTs get ridden these days the overall contenders tend to pull them back on the climbs through pure power. Someone like Pozzovivo is a pure climber I'd have said and there are others, there's just not the races there for them to show themselves.
It is interesting what you have to say here. Pozzovivo is my favourite active rider, and although he is one of the finest pure climbers right now, on the moderate gradients 8-10% or so, even GC riders who aren't necessarily great climbers don't lose too much time to him. A good example is in the Giro this year, on the mountain stage where he seemed the strongest on the steepest section, at the end of the stage, riders like Cadel (same time) and Wiggins (only about 30 seconds down). I think in the big tours it seems like GC riders through power alone, are not far off the pure climbers. I wonder how it would be if there were more stages in tours with climbs like Punta Veleno. I would love to see a climb like this in GT with on form GC riders against pure climbers like Pozzovivo, and just see how much time gaps would occur.0 -
Some good photos here:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/tou ... e-pyreneesContador is the Greatest0 -
Contador is the Greatest0 -
Luis Herrera
Contador is the Greatest0 -
Have I already mentioned I LOVE COLOMBIANS. Great Riders, Great Country, Great Cycling Traditions, Great Bocadila. As you were.0
-
Wout Poels wins the Queen stage of the Tour de l'Ain, his first win since his his bad crash a year ago. Bardet wins the overall. Pure climbers? The Tour de l'Ain has been a bit less mountainous than previous years0
-
FJS wrote:Wout Poels wins the Queen stage of the Tour de l'Ain, his first win since his his bad crash a year ago. Bardet wins the overall. Pure climbers? The Tour de l'Ain has been a bit less mountainous than previous years
Wouldn't say pure climbers - but both (especially Bardet) could be excellent GC guys. Both very classy riders too.0 -
No mention of Christophe Riblon? His recent exploits would suggest there is a man of some climbing prowess0
-
Mentioned before on this thread but Barguil really impressed in the Vuelta with two stage wins and both with class, panache, racing nous beyond his years, race face strapped and riding on feel. The guy is amazing and I hope he goes on to great things.
Someone like my teammate Warren Barguil, for example. I have rarely seen a rider that talented (and an all-round great bloke on top of that)
-Koen de Kort.Contador is the Greatest0 -
Chris Horner is surely a pure climber according to anyone's definition! ;-)0
-
Bringing a real thread back to the front page with this:
Beauty is not the goal of competitive sports, but high-level sports are a prime venue for the expression of human beauty. The relation is roughly that of courage to war.
The human beauty we’re talking about here is beauty of a particular type; it might be called kinetic beauty. Its power and appeal are universal. It has nothing to do with sex or cultural norms. What it seems to have to do with, really, is human beings’ reconciliation with the fact of having a body.¹
Of course, in men’s sports no one ever talks about beauty or grace or the body. Men may profess their “love” of sports, but that love must always be cast and enacted in the symbology of war: elimination vs. advance, hierarchy of rank and standing, obsessive statistics, technical analysis, tribal and/or nationalist fervor, uniforms, mass noise, banners, chest-thumping, face-painting, etc. For reasons that are not well understood, war’s codes are safer for most of us than love’s.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/sport ... =all&_r=1&
It is why my favourite tennis player is Federer by miles.
This is why I love cycling.
This is why winning is of no consequence.Contador is the Greatest0 -
ddraver wrote:Except when your boy wins, then it's the be all and end all...
What is the point of this post?Contador is the Greatest0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Bringing a real thread back to the front page with this:
Beauty is not the goal of competitive sports, but high-level sports are a prime venue for the expression of human beauty. The relation is roughly that of courage to war.
The human beauty we’re talking about here is beauty of a particular type; it might be called kinetic beauty. Its power and appeal are universal. It has nothing to do with sex or cultural norms. What it seems to have to do with, really, is human beings’ reconciliation with the fact of having a body.¹
Of course, in men’s sports no one ever talks about beauty or grace or the body. Men may profess their “love” of sports, but that love must always be cast and enacted in the symbology of war: elimination vs. advance, hierarchy of rank and standing, obsessive statistics, technical analysis, tribal and/or nationalist fervor, uniforms, mass noise, banners, chest-thumping, face-painting, etc. For reasons that are not well understood, war’s codes are safer for most of us than love’s.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/sport ... =all&_r=1&
It is why my favourite tennis player is Federer by miles.
.
With you there.
Nadal is the Indurain of tennis.0 -
frenchfighter wrote:ddraver wrote:Except when your boy wins, then it's the be all and end all...
What is the point of this post?
To point out that people tend to pick and chose when winning is important or not. To be blunt it sounds like more of the "cycling is so beautiful" nonsense that infects the sport.
DavidWe're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
ddraver wrote:frenchfighter wrote:ddraver wrote:Except when your boy wins, then it's the be all and end all...
What is the point of this post?
To point out that people tend to pick and chose when winning is important or not. To be blunt it sounds like more of the "cycling is so beautiful" nonsense that infects the sport.
David
I's Raphaitis, I tells ya!"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Bringing a real thread back to the front page with this:
Beauty is not the goal of competitive sports, but high-level sports are a prime venue for the expression of human beauty. The relation is roughly that of courage to war.
The human beauty we’re talking about here is beauty of a particular type; it might be called kinetic beauty. Its power and appeal are universal. It has nothing to do with sex or cultural norms. What it seems to have to do with, really, is human beings’ reconciliation with the fact of having a body.¹
Of course, in men’s sports no one ever talks about beauty or grace or the body. Men may profess their “love” of sports, but that love must always be cast and enacted in the symbology of war: elimination vs. advance, hierarchy of rank and standing, obsessive statistics, technical analysis, tribal and/or nationalist fervor, uniforms, mass noise, banners, chest-thumping, face-painting, etc. For reasons that are not well understood, war’s codes are safer for most of us than love’s.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/sport ... =all&_r=1&
It is why my favourite tennis player is Federer by miles.
.
With you there.
Nadal is the Indurain of tennis.
Being a massive Indurain fan and quite the opposite where Nadal is concerned, I really want to disagree with this, but I'm struggling to...
0 -
I think more than any other Pantani fits the image of a pure climber.
He was always single minded a bit edgy and you could imagine the trauma if he did not have the right socks to wear
I loved the race where Armstrong dropped him and he nodded his head, it was just not acceptable for him to lose.
For all his troubles he has made great contribution to cycling IMO0 -
Cycling generally is missing the heroic typical pure climber - he who can climb a lot better than anyone else by miles but can't do anything else for toffee.
Recently the best climbers have also been pretty good all rounders.0
