Rio Olympic Track events *Spoilers*

jscl

Dinyull wrote:

JSCL wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Daniel B wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

Given how sieve-like BC seems to be if there was some BC-wide cheating program it would have been all over the Daily Heil years ago...

Talking of which are some people still outraged that Jess Varnish wasn't selected?

Seeing how good Katy M is, I have to say no - it was the right decision - sadly.

But if you look back several months, Jess was ahead of Katy and delivering much better. If you give the same lead-up and gave them both the Olympic kit, Jess would still be beating Katy at this Olympics, I firmly believe.

I don't know if she deserved an individual spot or not but it does seem to have been a monumental cockup not to qualify for the team sprint with the talent we have.

As for the GB team performance - I don't think we are doping but I can see why some question the improvement - it's not as if a new bike and skinsuit comes close to explaining it. It's almost as if the coaches deliberately under prepare for other events to mislead the other nations into setting targets that aren't enough - perhaps our womens team sprint failure was just a misjudged example of that.

They *say* that the Olympic kit is worth at least two tenths of a second extra per lap. Add that up over a 4km TP or a sprint, it's the difference between winning and losing. Being able to deliver off the Olympic kit on the UKSI bikes and the standard Adi kit, you can guarantee at least the above improvements when you're riding in the new skinsuits at Rio and the new Cervelo's.

On that, what't he craic with wheels?

I seem to remember the (Mavic I think) track wheels used to only come out at Olympics but I read earlier this week that they had to move to Campag because the Mavics were too wide for the Cervelo's. If that's true was it an oversight or are the new wheels part of the Olympic kit now?

Different wheels have a different aerodynamic profile in the bike. The Campag wheels were more aero in the wind tunnel and actually fitted the frames properly.

Daz555

When it comes to performance gains here and there - and big claims about savings here and there due to skinsuits or left handed chain rings etc we have to remember that all the top bikes and setups are so close that really the riders legs are still where the performance is to be lost or gained in any given moment.

Trott et al would have won their TP on the American's setup and Wiggo et al would have beaten the Oz boys on theirs.

jscl

Blazing Saddles wrote:

JSCL wrote:

Daniel B wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

Given how sieve-like BC seems to be if there was some BC-wide cheating program it would have been all over the Daily Heil years ago...

Talking of which are some people still outraged that Jess Varnish wasn't selected?

Seeing how good Katy M is, I have to say no - it was the right decision - sadly.

But if you look back several months, Jess was ahead of Katy and delivering much better. If you give the same lead-up and gave them both the Olympic kit, Jess would still be beating Katy at this Olympics, I firmly believe.

For a man in the know, you don't know that much.
Who said that Jess has selection grievance with Katy?
I think that's what folks assume and they are wrong to do so.
I've had to bite my tongue since this sh*tstorm hit the press, cos reality is nothing like how thing were painted in the press.

I *never* said that she had grievance with Katy, I was just quoting that one post which mentioned her. I'm fully aware that her opinions might be more directed to your connection, but I really really really don't want to get in to any kind of debate about that now. It's done, both Becky and Katy have shown good form and delivered well. They're both wholly deserving of their places in Rio.

I don't side with any one individual, period. If we're delivering results and success follows, then I'm happy. I like seeing people being inspired and getting out on their bikes, that's exactly what the Olympics does and this nice weather we're having will be helping too.

Richmond Racer 2

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

Blame the way UK Sport work, then. BC are working to the way they allocate the funding and set medal targets.

But FWIW Becky James was set to keep the women's sprint success rolling. See her 2013 Worlds double golds. We would have seen more rainbow jerseys. And then followed her two year nightmare.

Jason Kenny, however, I will never understand even if I get to be 105

Daz555

What IS interesting about the bikes is the occasional use of the old GB secret squirrel bike - Hindes used it in the Team Sprint for example. This bike is pre-Beijing I think with some minor tinkering for London.

I wonder why? My guess for Hindes was stiffness - perhaps the Cervelo is too sloppy for his power. No idea what Elinor Barker's reason is for using the old bike though.

Any ideas?

Pross

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

BCs process of only caring about the Olympics is thrust on them by the performance indicators that secure their funding. If UK Sport decided World Champs medals counted then their strategy would be different. Without the funding then the we would be kissing goodbye to the success. I thought everyone realised and appreciated that this was the case.

Daz555

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Jason Kenny, however, I will never understand even if I get to be 105

When interviewed he says he does not understand himself in this regard either.

Richmond Racer 2

Pross wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

BCs process of only caring about the Olympics is thrust on them by the performance indicators that secure their funding. If UK Sport decided World Champs medals counted then their strategy would be different. Without the funding then the we would be kissing goodbye to the success. I thought everyone realised and appreciated that this was the case.

Seemingly not

Richmond Racer 2

Daz555 wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Jason Kenny, however, I will never understand even if I get to be 105

When interviewed he says he does not understand himself in this regard either.

Joining a long line of coaches, performance analysts, and the rest of us :-)

Daz555

Pross wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

BCs process of only caring about the Olympics is thrust on them by the performance indicators that secure their funding. If UK Sport decided World Champs medals counted then their strategy would be different. Without the funding then the we would be kissing goodbye to the success. I thought everyone realised and appreciated that this was the case.

And even with that focus British Cycling still win a shed load of World Champ medals.

Pross

Maybe it's just hard to keep your motivation up permanently when you been there and done it? A bit like Wiggins post 2012, he had other aims but appeared to just not be able to make those 'sacrifices' again.

TheBigBean

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Pross wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

BCs process of only caring about the Olympics is thrust on them by the performance indicators that secure their funding. If UK Sport decided World Champs medals counted then their strategy would be different. Without the funding then the we would be kissing goodbye to the success. I thought everyone realised and appreciated that this was the case.

Seemingly not

You are both confusing my dislike with blame. I know why they target Olympic medals, that doesn't mean I like it.

FocusZing

Daz555 wrote:

When it comes to performance gains here and there - and big claims about savings here and there due to skinsuits or left handed chain rings etc we have to remember that all the top bikes and setups are so close that really the riders legs are still where the performance is to be lost or gained in any given moment.

Trott et al would have won their TP on the American's setup and Wiggo et al would have beaten the Oz boys on theirs.

Exactly, it's tantamount to saying Bolt wins because he's got the new improved Pumas. Why aren't the yanks winning? They even went to the extreme of switching crank sides.

Pross

TheBigBean wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Pross wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

BCs process of only caring about the Olympics is thrust on them by the performance indicators that secure their funding. If UK Sport decided World Champs medals counted then their strategy would be different. Without the funding then the we would be kissing goodbye to the success. I thought everyone realised and appreciated that this was the case.

Seemingly not

You are both confusing my dislike with blame. I know why they target Olympic medals, that doesn't mean I like it.

What would you have them do then?

Edit - it's not as if they never compete at Worlds or fail to win medals at them!

Pross

FocusZing wrote:

Daz555 wrote:

When it comes to performance gains here and there - and big claims about savings here and there due to skinsuits or left handed chain rings etc we have to remember that all the top bikes and setups are so close that really the riders legs are still where the performance is to be lost or gained in any given moment.

Trott et al would have won their TP on the American's setup and Wiggo et al would have beaten the Oz boys on theirs.

Exactly, it's tantamount to saying Bolt wins because he's got the new improved Pumas. Why aren't the yanks winning? They even went to the extreme of switching crank sides.

I'm always surprised how little attention is apparently given to equipment and clothing in athletics. Bolt sprints in quite a baggy jersey and many of the women are running with long hair flapping around. The only person I can recall really trying something aero was Kathy Freeman in Sydney.

jscl

Pross wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

Daz555 wrote:

When it comes to performance gains here and there - and big claims about savings here and there due to skinsuits or left handed chain rings etc we have to remember that all the top bikes and setups are so close that really the riders legs are still where the performance is to be lost or gained in any given moment.

Trott et al would have won their TP on the American's setup and Wiggo et al would have beaten the Oz boys on theirs.

Exactly, it's tantamount to saying Bolt wins because he's got the new improved Pumas. Why aren't the yanks winning? They even went to the extreme of switching crank sides.

I'm always surprised how little attention is apparently given to equipment and clothing in athletics. Bolt sprints in quite a baggy jersey and many of the women are running with long hair flapping around. The only person I can recall really trying something aero was Kathy Freeman in Sydney.

Would you have them all running in one-piece lycra aerosuits and aero helmets? Like in speed skating? Now THAT, I would like to see

lostboysaint

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

They don't "do their sport once every four years". They work to peak at their sport every four years but they "do their sport" every day during that four years and the results are exceptional. As has been discussed on this thread (and by Hoy on the TV) the work that goes on in the background during those four years is properly cutting edge stuff that needs time to understand whether it's working or not - so would never work with a 12 month results target cycle. In fact you might say that you'd immediately fall into the same rut that the US, Australians and others have fallen into, continually using old training techniques, older sports science, older kit etc...........

dinyull

I can't imagine aero being important in running, unless you were able to keep a stable upper body like in speed skating.

Pross

I'd have thought some form of skin suit and tying hair up would be beneficial. Freeman ran with a hood and one piece full length suit, I assume it wasn't beneficial though. I think a few others trialled more figure hugging stuff too. Longer distances I assume comfort is a priority due to relatively low speeds but in sprint events there must surely be a benefit?

lostboysaint

If you're after aero then surely you just tell Bolt to bend forward to reduce the frontal area before you get into skinsuits etc. ?!

dinyull

The 100m is all about power though and getting everything out through arms and upper body. I can't see a way you could test that in a wind tunnel. And the tech would be totally different depending on height and build.

Richmond Racer 2

Pross wrote:

Maybe it's just hard to keep your motivation up permanently when you been there and done it? A bit like Wiggins post 2012, he had other aims but appeared to just not be able to make those 'sacrifices' again.

Well, at least BW was able to recalibrate goals like the World's, PR last year & so on

A trackie sprinter...different story

I think Sutton's description of Kenny as a bear who only comes out of hibernation every 4 years, is apt

FocusZing

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

+1

Pross

lostboysaint wrote:

If you're after aero then surely you just tell Bolt to bend forward to reduce the frontal area before you get into skinsuits etc. ?!

Not really because biomechanics is still going to be a bigger factor. If you can maintain the best position to deliver power while minimising drag at 20mph though there must be a benefit surely? Running kit changed a lot in the 90s, for women in particular, but doesn't seem to have moved on since. There must be a reason though as the kit manufacturers would be all over anything they could sell to the amateurs as an advantage.

Pross

Anyway, how did Trott get on in the time trial?

TheBigBean

Pross wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Pross wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Doping chat aside, I dislike any sports person that thinks they only do their sport once every four years. BC's process of only caring about the Olympics is very much in that category.

BCs process of only caring about the Olympics is thrust on them by the performance indicators that secure their funding. If UK Sport decided World Champs medals counted then their strategy would be different. Without the funding then the we would be kissing goodbye to the success. I thought everyone realised and appreciated that this was the case.

Seemingly not

You are both confusing my dislike with blame. I know why they target Olympic medals, that doesn't mean I like it.

What would you have them do then?

Edit - it's not as if they never compete at Worlds or fail to win medals at them!

My dislike is mostly aimed at athletes who sometimes forget that other people actually pay to play sport.

With all sports governing bodies there is a balance to be had between maximising their income and promoting their sport. BC may have the perfect balance, but giving the impression that the sport only matters every four years seems to promote the Olympics more than cycling. As you say, they clearly do compete at the Worlds, so maybe that impression only comes from the media rather than BC.

RichN95.

Pross wrote:

Anyway, how did Trott get on in the time trial?

Second behind Edmondson

GC
Trott 156
D'Hoore 144
Hammer 140
Edmondson 130
Wild 106

Pross

They do have some leaner years but that is often where the previous generation have retired and new blood is getting introduced. The system is actually quite good as the young riders tend to get introduced at lower level competition such as Euros or World Cup and then progress to the Worlds before the Olympics so they are seasoned campaigners but reaching a peak at the Olympics. I think Olympic success also promotes sport in the UK more than anything else which is presumably why UK Sport use it as their benchmark.

Pross

RichN95 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Anyway, how did Trott get on in the time trial?

Second behind Edmondson

GC
Trott 156
D'Hoore 144
Hammer 140
Edmondson 130
Wild 106

Feels like her lead should be bigger than that for some reason.

No_Ta_Doctor

Pross wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Anyway, how did Trott get on in the time trial?

Second behind Edmondson

GC
Trott 156
D'Hoore 144
Hammer 140
Edmondson 130
Wild 106

Feels like her lead should be bigger than that for some reason.

I think that's what people were getting to above, in the discussion of the points race weighting. Second place is basically 2 * 5 pt sprints and a 3rd place behind her, having finished 3rd, 3rd, 2nd, 4th as opposed to Trotts 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd.