The Hour *** spoilers ***

ozzzyosborn206

I don't know about others but on a out and back TT I find if better to have a bit of wind, than none at all as you lose less with the head wind than you gain with the tail to FF comments about there being no wind on a track making it easier than the road is a mute point, same goes for slight drags, on the downs you can recover and still go fast but not lose too much on the ups, obviously this hinders greatly on the gradient as when they get over a certain % you don't get the speed back

johnboy183

So has the hour record always been set on a velodrome? Anyone know the history of why this may be?

bompington

ozzzyosborn206 wrote:

I don't know about others but on a out and back TT I find if better to have a bit of wind, than none at all as you lose less with the head wind than you gain with the tail to FF comments about there being no wind on a track making it easier than the road is a mute point, same goes for slight drags, on the downs you can recover and still go fast but not lose too much on the ups, obviously this hinders greatly on the gradient as when they get over a certain % you don't get the speed back

Really? I know very little about TTs but I do know the laws of Physics...

thegibdog

Pokerface wrote:

I have no doubt that you could go MUCH faster on the track with a geared bike over an hour as opposed to a fixed gear.

Not sure about this, I'd have thought that providing you get the gearing & pacing right* then fixed would be quicker. Plenty of advocates of fixed on the TT scene (where variable wind & terrain are also thrown in), isn't a fixed gear supposed to be more efficient?

*Obviously easier said than done, I guess this is one of the areas where track experience would be an advantage for the likes of Wiggins.

Daz555

johnboy183 wrote:

So has the hour record always been set on a velodrome? Anyone know the history of why this may be?

It would make it impossible to measure otherwise - imagine the hour record you could set riding along a straightish road with a galeforce wind smashing you in the back.

johnboy183

That's what I was thinking too. However velodromes are carefully selected to provide the optimum chance of success. Think Chris Hoy in Bolivia(?), eddy Merxcx in Mexico etc I deed sir Wiggo is thinking Majorca because it's a fast track. Plus atheletes can pick and choose where they attempt records on occaisions. Theoretically you could find a steep road with tailwind that runs downhill and you could perhaps record a sub 2 hours. Why not have similar for hour record?

Pokerface

thegibdog wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

I have no doubt that you could go MUCH faster on the track with a geared bike over an hour as opposed to a fixed gear.

Not sure about this, I'd have thought that providing you get the gearing & pacing right* then fixed would be quicker. Plenty of advocates of fixed on the TT scene (where variable wind & terrain are also thrown in), isn't a fixed gear supposed to be more efficient?

*Obviously easier said than done, I guess this is one of the areas where track experience would be an advantage for the likes of Wiggins.

I'm guessing by more efficient you mean less power losses from the drivetrain. It's lighter (less gears = less weight). No need of mechs etc. But easier on the legs? Not so sure.

On the road with a fixed gear isn't the same as on the track. There are always subtle variations in elevation, even on a 'flat' road. Plus winds can affect your speed/pedalling. And from what I understand, guys using fixed for TTs doesn't necessarily pick the biggest gear they can push for an hour. It will be something they can spin a bit more. but everyone is different in self-selected cadence, gearing, power output, etc.

As I mentioned earlier, I've seen studies that say a varied pacing strategy can lead to faster times than a fixed one.

Pokerface

johnboy183 wrote:

That's what I was thinking too. However velodromes are carefully selected to provide the optimum chance of success. Think Chris Hoy in Bolivia(?), eddy Merxcx in Mexico etc I deed sir Wiggo is thinking Majorca because it's a fast track. Plus atheletes can pick and choose where they attempt records on occaisions. Theoretically you could find a steep road with tailwind that runs downhill and you could perhaps record a sub 2 hours. Why not have similar for hour record?

Many times riders would go to altitude to attempt the hour record, as it can provide faster times. But if all the top riders attempting the record do it, the playing field becomes level again. (Not all attempts are made at altitude as although you can certainly ride faster, the thin air can provide other challenges to performance, especially over longer durations.)

keezx

frenchfighter wrote:

Keezx wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Yes, but not on the track. Track is so much harder as you're stuck in one gear going around in circles. It's difficult to slow down, speed up, recover, etc.

Surely the track is significantly easier than the road? Super smooth surface and next to no wind. No braking or little thinking.

No , it isn't.
You can't leave the pressure off the pedals 1 second, that's the problem.

Really? How to do you stop then if you cant take pressure off?

You know what I mean.
If you take pressure off, the speed drops, and if you don't want anything on the hour record, it's dropping the speed.

keezx

Pokerface wrote:

I have no doubt that you could go MUCH faster on the track with a geared bike over an hour as opposed to a fixed gear.

I have no doubt that you may go only a very little bit faster.
The human body has a very narrow powerband, the only advantage of more gears is that releaving the pressure of the pedals for a few seconds may recover the muscles better.
As soon as the acids are gone you have to shift up again to keep the oxygen consumption as low as possible, that's the bottleneck.

Pokerface

Keezx wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

I have no doubt that you could go MUCH faster on the track with a geared bike over an hour as opposed to a fixed gear.

I have no doubt that you may go only a very little bit faster.
The human body has a very narrow powerband, the only advantage of more gears is that releaving the pressure of the pedals for a few seconds may recover the muscles better.
As soon as the acids are gone you have to shift up again to keep the oxygen consumption as low as possible, that's the bottleneck.

Indeed.

bompington

This paper measures derailleur gears at up to 97.2% mechanical efficiency, as against 99% for fixed, and points out that that would mean 0.5km off Boardman's record .

cougie

When would you need gears on an hour record ? Just starting off and after that - its a near constant speed ? So you'd carry all that weight and inefficiency round with you.

johnboy - the hour record is iconic - the idea is that the playing field is broadly level for all - so it has to be a track. It'd be silly to do it on a road. Even proper TT courses have to be selected so that they are roughly level and cant all be tailwind assisted.

RichN95.

cougie wrote:

When would you need gears on an hour record ? Just starting off and after that - its a near constant speed ? So you'd carry all that weight and inefficiency round with you.

johnboy - the hour record is iconic - the idea is that the playing field is broadly level for all - so it has to be a track. It'd be silly to do it on a road. Even proper TT courses have to be selected so that they are roughly level and cant all be tailwind assisted.

In Marathon (and other road) running, for a course to be eligible for records the start and finish can't be more than 50% of the total distance apart and with no more than 1 metre per kilometre net descent in altitude.

ManOfKent

cougie wrote:

When would you need gears on an hour record ? Just starting off and after that - its a near constant speed ? So you'd carry all that weight and inefficiency round with you.

johnboy - the hour record is iconic - the idea is that the playing field is broadly level for all - so it has to be a track. It'd be silly to do it on a road. Even proper TT courses have to be selected so that they are roughly level and cant all be tailwind assisted.

What do you mean by "proper" TT courses? Those used in Grand Tours are often nowhere near level. And near here there's one well-known 25 route that starts at the top of a fairly big hill and finishes at the bottom, giving about 70m of descent; I believe the rule is that the start and finish must be within a certain distance of each other (1 mile) rather than at the same altitude...

On the gearing... Two guys in my club rode a custom-built track tandem a good many years ago that had two chainrings and two (freewheel) sprockets of different sizes, one each side of the wheel. They started off with the higher-geared one only loosely attached and it tightened up as they accelerated using the lower gear, giving them in effect a change of gear after a certain number of turns of the pedals. They did quite well but were only allowed to use it once.
I believe they also once overtook a lorry on a dual carriageway.

greasedscotsman

ManOfKent wrote:

On the gearing... Two guys in my club rode a custom-built track tandem a good many years ago that had two chainrings and two (freewheel) sprockets of different sizes, one each side of the wheel. They started off with the higher-geared one only loosely attached and it tightened up as they accelerated using the lower gear, giving them in effect a change of gear after a certain number of turns of the pedals. They did quite well but were only allowed to use it once.

Wasn't there a British WC track rider who used to use that setup? Either a kilo or pursuit rider. Can't remember who it was!

wallace_and_gromit

Pokerface wrote:

As I mentioned earlier, I've seen studies that say a varied pacing strategy can lead to faster times than a fixed one.

That's interesting. Can you provide more detail as to what variable pacing strategies were effective? (I'm not saying this as an indirect way of saying I don't believe you - I'm a "negative splits" man myself.)

In my previous life, I did a lot of training and racing on static rowing machines. Whilst these aren't fixed gear, once you've started on a particular effort, you're stuck with the resistance setting you've chosen, so not dissimilar to a track effort in terms of variable.)

There was endless debate in "indoor rowing" circles as to the optimum pacing strategy. The general consensus, though obviously this was not scientifically proven, was that a slight negative split strategy was best. For example, if you were aiming for under 7 minutes for 2000m then successive 500m splits of 1:46, 1:45 and 1:45 should be targeted for the first 1500m before seeing what was left in the final 500m - hopefully something under 1:44.

A few favoured the positive split approach whereby you'd target a fast first quarter e.g. 1:44 then successive 1:45s, so that your cumulative average pace was always faster than your overall target pace on the grounds that it's easier mentally to stay ahead of a target than make up lost ground.

The differences in approach weren't huge, as everything was targeted within 1 second per 500m either side of target pace i.e. +/- 1%. The cubic relationship between power and speed rules out any wildly variable strategies.

My thinking was that given the difficulties in knowing exactly what you're capable of on the day, the negative split approach is best as if you slightly overestimate your capabilities, you still have the option of an even-paced slightly sub-par effort. If you overcook a positive split approach then you'll have done the first quarter far too quickly given capability on the day and will die a painful death in the final quarter.

Omar Little

ManOfKent wrote:

On the gearing... Two guys in my club rode a custom-built track tandem a good many years ago that had two chainrings and two (freewheel) sprockets of different sizes, one each side of the wheel. They started off with the higher-geared one only loosely attached and it tightened up as they accelerated using the lower gear, giving them in effect a change of gear after a certain number of turns of the pedals. They did quite well but were only allowed to use it once.
I believe they also once overtook a lorry on a dual carriageway.

Quite ingenious!

Jocelyn Lovell used a set up like that in the kilo at Olympic and Commonwealth games level, you can see the two chainrings in this photo.



Ive also read about Nelson Vails having a system where he could activate a gear change by releasing a cable but i dont know how that worked and havent been able to find any photos of it. I think that was probably banned unlike Lovells system.

Pokerface

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

As I mentioned earlier, I've seen studies that say a varied pacing strategy can lead to faster times than a fixed one.

That's interesting. Can you provide more detail as to what variable pacing strategies were effective? (I'm not saying this as an indirect way of saying I don't believe you - I'm a "negative splits" man myself.)

In a nutshell: http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/fitness/ ... best-23148

From personal experience, and using a 20-minute power test as an example, I've achieved the best results by gradually increasing the power output over the 20-min period. Ramped it up each minute for the first 3-4 mins, then again at the 10-minute mark. And went for broke in the last few mins. Got better result than trying to hold power steady from the start.

wallace_and_gromit

Pokerface wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

As I mentioned earlier, I've seen studies that say a varied pacing strategy can lead to faster times than a fixed one.

That's interesting. Can you provide more detail as to what variable pacing strategies were effective? (I'm not saying this as an indirect way of saying I don't believe you - I'm a "negative splits" man myself.)

In a nutshell: http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/fitness/ ... best-23148

From personal experience, and using a 20-minute power test as an example, I've achieved the best results by gradually increasing the power output over the 20-min period. Ramped it up each minute for the first 3-4 mins, then again at the 10-minute mark. And went for broke in the last few mins. Got better result than trying to hold power steady from the start.

Thanks. Another reason I preferred negative splits is that it reduces the amount of time spent suffering. Obviously, there needs to be a compensatory increase in the level of suffering, but I found it easier to crank up the pain levels in exchange for less time in the "hurt box". I never did find out if this was purely physical or if there was some mental thing in play.

Paul 8v

Omar Little wrote:

ManOfKent wrote:

On the gearing... Two guys in my club rode a custom-built track tandem a good many years ago that had two chainrings and two (freewheel) sprockets of different sizes, one each side of the wheel. They started off with the higher-geared one only loosely attached and it tightened up as they accelerated using the lower gear, giving them in effect a change of gear after a certain number of turns of the pedals. They did quite well but were only allowed to use it once.
I believe they also once overtook a lorry on a dual carriageway.

Quite ingenious!

Jocelyn Lovell used a set up like that in the kilo at Olympic and Commonwealth games level, you can see the two chainrings in this photo.



Ive also read about Nelson Vails having a system where he could activate a gear change by releasing a cable but i dont know how that worked and havent been able to find any photos of it. I think that was probably banned unlike Lovells system.

That's quite mad!

stagehopper

Revolution Series ‏@RevolutionUK

Looking ahead to @RevolutionUK Round 5 in London could see the 1st hour record attempt in UK. Hoping to make announcement before Xmas

https://twitter.com/RevolutionUK/status ... 6341673986

Round 5: 27/28 February - London

jscl

stagehopper wrote:

Revolution Series ‏@RevolutionUK

Looking ahead to @RevolutionUK Round 5 in London could see the 1st hour record attempt in UK. Hoping to make announcement before Xmas

https://twitter.com/RevolutionUK/status ... 6341673986

Round 5: 27/28 February - London

It's a womens hour record too!

ic.

JSCL wrote:

stagehopper wrote:

Revolution Series ‏@RevolutionUK

Looking ahead to @RevolutionUK Round 5 in London could see the 1st hour record attempt in UK. Hoping to make announcement before Xmas

https://twitter.com/RevolutionUK/status ... 6341673986

Round 5: 27/28 February - London

It's a womens hour record too!

Jo Rowsell?

RichN95.

It's probably Ellen van Dijk. She's expressed an interest in the past

jscl

RichN95 wrote:

It's probably Ellen van Dijk. She's expressed an interest in the past

It's a Brit.

Daz555

I'd love to see Rowsell have a crack at it. Trott too.

Pokerface

Could also be Sarah Storey.

jscl

Pokerface wrote:

Could also be Sarah Storey.

Nope.

I'd love to see Rowsell have a crack at it. Trott too.

Neither of them this time unfortunately

RichN95.

So who are we left with?

King? (injured)
Barker?
Archibald?
Houvenhagel? (has she retired?)
Armitstead?
Pooley?
Romero?