Riders TT ability
specialgueststar
Posts: 3,418
Is there some sort of graphical thing based on numbers that shows graphically the numerical goodness in a quantifiable way of how good a rider does at time trials. Like Martin would be 1 and Wiggins 0.92 and Steegmans 0.62 and Dumolin 0.29 and etc etc
Thinking about it there probably isn't
eg comparing Valverde vs Peraud vs TJ Van G etc
rather than qualitatively - x is a better time triallest than y....by how much ?
Thinking about it there probably isn't
eg comparing Valverde vs Peraud vs TJ Van G etc
rather than qualitatively - x is a better time triallest than y....by how much ?
0
Comments
-
Specifically including Peraud, Pinot, Valverde and other podium hopefuls!0
-
coriordan wrote:Specifically including Peraud, Pinot, Valverde and other podium hopefuls!
No not really - just think someone could produce a program based on ongoing performances at every race - procycling stats could probably knock something up0 -
Whats the bet Nibs does a monster test and beats Tony Martin in the TT?0
-
The closest recent TT was 2012 (52 Km)... TJVG gave Nibali a minute... the others weren't there or didn't perform.left the forum March 20230
-
I'm sure you could pull all the stats from somewhere and combine them somehow to get a single number for each rider. The question is how much faith could you really put in the results. I don't think it would be much better than the problems you get trying to compare climb times with no context. You'd have to account for (or ignore) the weather varying during a TT, the weather being different across different TTs (someone might be good in the dry but struggle in the wet), when each TT took place (start of a GT would be different from the end, especially for GC contenders), the individual parcours of each TT (flat vs MTT or whatever) and whether a rider was actually trying to put in a good performance as opposed to rolling round trying to save themselves for hard stages to come.0
-
adr82 wrote:I'm sure you could pull all the stats from somewhere and combine them somehow to get a single number for each rider. The question is how much faith could you really put in the results. I don't think it would be much better than the problems you get trying to compare climb times with no context. You'd have to account for (or ignore) the weather varying during a TT, the weather being different across different TTs (someone might be good in the dry but struggle in the wet), when each TT took place (start of a GT would be different from the end, especially for GC contenders), the individual parcours of each TT (flat vs MTT or whatever) and whether a rider was actually trying to put in a good performance as opposed to rolling round trying to save themselves for hard stages to come.
Surely best thing would be to create a graph...0 -
Frenchfighter put together some head to head stats you can find here (near bottom of page): viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=12976666&start=300Life is unfair, kill yourself or get over it.0
-
adr82 wrote:I'm sure you could pull all the stats from somewhere and combine them somehow to get a single number for each rider. The question is how much faith could you really put in the results. I don't think it would be much better than the problems you get trying to compare climb times with no context. You'd have to account for (or ignore) the weather varying during a TT, the weather being different across different TTs (someone might be good in the dry but struggle in the wet), when each TT took place (start of a GT would be different from the end, especially for GC contenders), the individual parcours of each TT (flat vs MTT or whatever) and whether a rider was actually trying to put in a good performance as opposed to rolling round trying to save themselves for hard stages to come.
+1
You'll find the top 10 tomorrow will just be TT specialists and GC contenders. My guess is that these will be the main protagonists.
Panzer
Dumoulin
Izagirre
Turbo Durbo
Lady Garden
Pinot
Nibali
Peraud
Konig
Tuft
Kwiato0 -
Joelsim wrote:adr82 wrote:I'm sure you could pull all the stats from somewhere and combine them somehow to get a single number for each rider. The question is how much faith could you really put in the results. I don't think it would be much better than the problems you get trying to compare climb times with no context. You'd have to account for (or ignore) the weather varying during a TT, the weather being different across different TTs (someone might be good in the dry but struggle in the wet), when each TT took place (start of a GT would be different from the end, especially for GC contenders), the individual parcours of each TT (flat vs MTT or whatever) and whether a rider was actually trying to put in a good performance as opposed to rolling round trying to save themselves for hard stages to come.
+1
You'll find the top 10 tomorrow will just be TT specialists and GC contenders. My guess is that these will be the main protagonists.
Panzer
Dumoulin
Izagirre
Turbo Durbo
Lady Garden
Pinot
Nibali
Peraud
Konig
Tuft
Kwiato
Sounds right but don't forget Valverde... he's the Spanish TT champion you know!
(only because none of the major teams other than movistar took part I seem to recall...)0 -
SpecialGuestStar wrote:Is there some sort of graphical thing based on numbers that shows graphically the numerical goodness in a quantifiable way of how good a rider does at time trials. Like Martin would be 1 and Wiggins 0.92 and Steegmans 0.62 and Dumolin 0.29 and etc etc
Thinking about it there probably isn't
eg comparing Valverde vs Peraud vs TJ Van G etc
rather than qualitatively - x is a better time triallest than y....by how much ?
Cheng is 8.46Head Hands Heart Lungs Legs0 -
Speed handicapping as used by horse racing enthusiasts? Possibly too many variables in parcours, conditions etc to use meaningfully, though.Team My Man 2018: David gaudu, Pierre Latour, Romain Bardet, Thibaut pinot, Alexandre Geniez, Florian Senechal, Warren Barguil, Benoit Cosnefroy0
-
SpecialGuestStar wrote:Is there some sort of graphical thing based on numbers that shows graphically the numerical goodness in a quantifiable way of how good a rider does at time trials. Like Martin would be 1 and Wiggins 0.92 and Steegmans 0.62 and Dumolin 0.29 and etc etc
Thinking about it there probably isn't
eg comparing Valverde vs Peraud vs TJ Van G etc
rather than qualitatively - x is a better time triallest than y....by how much ?
Still, the engine is where it matters most.You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
An annual ergo championship would be one way to pick the best physical TT specimen. Would be terrible TV tho!You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
Joelsim wrote:adr82 wrote:I'm sure you could pull all the stats from somewhere and combine them somehow to get a single number for each rider. The question is how much faith could you really put in the results. I don't think it would be much better than the problems you get trying to compare climb times with no context. You'd have to account for (or ignore) the weather varying during a TT, the weather being different across different TTs (someone might be good in the dry but struggle in the wet), when each TT took place (start of a GT would be different from the end, especially for GC contenders), the individual parcours of each TT (flat vs MTT or whatever) and whether a rider was actually trying to put in a good performance as opposed to rolling round trying to save themselves for hard stages to come.
+1
You'll find the top 10 tomorrow will just be TT specialists and GC contenders. My guess is that these will be the main protagonists.
Panzer
Dumoulin
Izagirre
Turbo Durbo
Lady Garden
Pinot
Nibali
Peraud
Konig
Tuft
Kwiato
You posted that with such confidence. It reeks of safe. I'm going for Cheng to storm it.0 -
Vuelta Ciclista al Pais Vasco had a 25.9km TT this year - results:
1 Martin Tony 38:33
2 Contador Alberto +0:07
3 Kwiatkowski Michal +0:15
4 Špilak Simon +0:16
5 Peraud Jean-Christophe +0:35
6 Dumoulin Tom +0:38
7 Izagirre Ion +0:41
8 Valverde Alejandro +1:02
9 van Garderen Tejay +1:05
10 Pinot Thibaut +1:250 -
Coachb wrote:Joelsim wrote:adr82 wrote:I'm sure you could pull all the stats from somewhere and combine them somehow to get a single number for each rider. The question is how much faith could you really put in the results. I don't think it would be much better than the problems you get trying to compare climb times with no context. You'd have to account for (or ignore) the weather varying during a TT, the weather being different across different TTs (someone might be good in the dry but struggle in the wet), when each TT took place (start of a GT would be different from the end, especially for GC contenders), the individual parcours of each TT (flat vs MTT or whatever) and whether a rider was actually trying to put in a good performance as opposed to rolling round trying to save themselves for hard stages to come.
+1
You'll find the top 10 tomorrow will just be TT specialists and GC contenders. My guess is that these will be the main protagonists.
Panzer
Dumoulin
Izagirre
Turbo Durbo
Lady Garden
Pinot
Nibali
Peraud
Konig
Tuft
Kwiato
You posted that with such confidence. It reeks of safe. I'm going for Cheng to storm it.
Cheng is 6 18 down at checkpoint 2. I still expect him to pull that time back to win it.0