TDF 2023: Stage 16:- Passy to Combloux, 22.4km ITT ***Spoilers***
Comments
-
BMI should be taken with a pinch of salt, as should online weight guides. I raced at 6% bf (measured with callipers) and had a bmi of 18.2. I was really lean, but didn’t look as lean as these gt guys.0
-
Some good counter-arguments, but this supposes that just cos it happened that way in the past, it will do again (also, wasn't EPO largely redundant early-ish in the 00's thanks to testing, and replaced with blood transfusions?)rick_chasey said:
*what was he on*wallace_and_gromit said:
One is always entitled to an opinion, and if you think JV was legit yesterday then that's fine. But to dismiss accusations of doping in pro cycling as spurious, given the sport's unfortunate history with doping, does feel a little optimistic.rick_chasey said:Anyway, utterly spurious doping accusations aside.
AFAIK, cycling is the only sport where in respect of its flagship event (the Tour de France) there are years (the Lance era) where it is felt inappropriate to declare a winner due to the number of busted dopers in the results!
Eyebrows are always likely to be raised, after "unbelievable" performances the day after the second rest day.
Look. 90s and 00s doping was transformed by one drug and one drug alone; EPO.
Doping went on for ages before that but they never really made *that* much different. You were playing at the edges.
EPO genuinely changed people from bang average to world beating.
Right?
So unless there's some new drug that's just like EPO that no-one has heard about before, you're just doing a "no smoke without fire" accusation, with nothing to support it other than the bloke doing really well in the top bike race (which, after all, is sort of the point of competing in a bike race).
And even if there is some transformational drug no-one has heard of yet, why are only about 5 riders taking it?
People bang on about a ride that's never been so dominant, including comparing to all the doping years, so clearly doping is not the factor in deciding how dominant a ride is or not?!
As has been mentioned, doping in the past came about from medical products that were already on the market being found to have beneficial application for endurance sports, and therefore were known. It's really not too much of a stretch given the amount of money in sports (not necessarily cycling) these days that there is specific research into doping for sports, and that they can find their way to other sports through dodgy doctors.
This is not to say that I think Ving/Pog are necessarily doping, but just that the reasoning that 'if there's a super doping product out there, we would've heard of it' has a few holes in it.0 -
It has about the same number of holes in it as the argument that "we've seen doping in the past so why wouldn't we see it again"poweredbyidris said:
Some good counter-arguments, but this supposes that just cos it happened that way in the past, it will do again (also, wasn't EPO largely redundant early-ish in the 00's thanks to testing, and replaced with blood transfusions?)
This is not to say that I think Ving/Pog are necessarily doping, but just that the reasoning that 'if there's a super doping product out there, we would've heard of it' has a few holes in it.0 -
JV has spent his entire year training for these three weeks where as TP was top 5 in 5 one day races in a month and then broke a wrist, spending most of his training indoor after that in the lead up to the TdF.0
-
I don't know about the latest doping products, BMI or aerodynamics, but I do know I'm already bored with people (elsewhere) expecting to see a normal distribution in a population that's already been selected from one tail of the curve...2
-
Take a step back and look at it logically, and it's clear that JV team management think that Vingegaard's ability to absorb a heavy load and still remain fresh is the key to him winning the Tour. They made the race hard last year, and have done exactly the same this year, with WVA playing a key part, and then Vingegaard can use his relative freshness at a key moment (the Granon climb last year, the TT yesterday this year) to win the race.
I would imagine they've been more confident this year because Pogacar's enforced absence has meant he is probably lacking a little in his endurance.0 -
Even if we hadn't heard of it I'm pretty sure all the other major teams would have. If you had a product like that to sell you wouldn't limit yourself to one or two clients would you?poweredbyidris said:
Some good counter-arguments, but this supposes that just cos it happened that way in the past, it will do again (also, wasn't EPO largely redundant early-ish in the 00's thanks to testing, and replaced with blood transfusions?)rick_chasey said:
*what was he on*wallace_and_gromit said:
One is always entitled to an opinion, and if you think JV was legit yesterday then that's fine. But to dismiss accusations of doping in pro cycling as spurious, given the sport's unfortunate history with doping, does feel a little optimistic.rick_chasey said:Anyway, utterly spurious doping accusations aside.
AFAIK, cycling is the only sport where in respect of its flagship event (the Tour de France) there are years (the Lance era) where it is felt inappropriate to declare a winner due to the number of busted dopers in the results!
Eyebrows are always likely to be raised, after "unbelievable" performances the day after the second rest day.
Look. 90s and 00s doping was transformed by one drug and one drug alone; EPO.
Doping went on for ages before that but they never really made *that* much different. You were playing at the edges.
EPO genuinely changed people from bang average to world beating.
Right?
So unless there's some new drug that's just like EPO that no-one has heard about before, you're just doing a "no smoke without fire" accusation, with nothing to support it other than the bloke doing really well in the top bike race (which, after all, is sort of the point of competing in a bike race).
And even if there is some transformational drug no-one has heard of yet, why are only about 5 riders taking it?
People bang on about a ride that's never been so dominant, including comparing to all the doping years, so clearly doping is not the factor in deciding how dominant a ride is or not?!
As has been mentioned, doping in the past came about from medical products that were already on the market being found to have beneficial application for endurance sports, and therefore were known. It's really not too much of a stretch given the amount of money in sports (not necessarily cycling) these days that there is specific research into doping for sports, and that they can find their way to other sports through dodgy doctors.
This is not to say that I think Ving/Pog are necessarily doping, but just that the reasoning that 'if there's a super doping product out there, we would've heard of it' has a few holes in it.
In the case of most of the current generation of top talent, and even those sitting just below, most have been remarkable since junior days. People were talking about WVA, MVDP and Remco long before they reached the pro ranks. That's actually one of the reasons I can understand cynicism in respect of Jonas, he was pretty much unknown internationally before going to Jumbo.0 -
Vingegaard looked super steady on the tt bike going uphill - that must have saved him plenty of watts.0
-
Pog is lacking in so much endurance he beat the rest of the field by 3+% yesterday.andyp said:Take a step back and look at it logically, and it's clear that JV team management think that Vingegaard's ability to absorb a heavy load and still remain fresh is the key to him winning the Tour. They made the race hard last year, and have done exactly the same this year, with WVA playing a key part, and then Vingegaard can use his relative freshness at a key moment (the Granon climb last year, the TT yesterday this year) to win the race.
I would imagine they've been more confident this year because Pogacar's enforced absence has meant he is probably lacking a little in his endurance.
That is what im struggling with. That JV demolished the rest of the field by not far off 10%. It is a phenomenal performance. I cant think of a better athletic performance by anyone else ever.0 -
-
Indeed. But once bitten, twice shy. Though I'm not particularly disappointed as such. I'm just cynical.rick_chasey said:That should excite you, not disappoint you!
0 -
That's what caught my eye yesterday tbh. Pog hammered the rest of the field in dominant fashion, but got taken to the cleaners himself. It's a "double whammy" that takes some believing.stage_hunter said:
Pog is lacking in so much endurance he beat the rest of the field by 3+% yesterday.andyp said:Take a step back and look at it logically, and it's clear that JV team management think that Vingegaard's ability to absorb a heavy load and still remain fresh is the key to him winning the Tour. They made the race hard last year, and have done exactly the same this year, with WVA playing a key part, and then Vingegaard can use his relative freshness at a key moment (the Granon climb last year, the TT yesterday this year) to win the race.
I would imagine they've been more confident this year because Pogacar's enforced absence has meant he is probably lacking a little in his endurance.
That is what im struggling with. That JV demolished the rest of the field by not far off 10%. It is a phenomenal performance. I cant think of a better athletic performance by anyone else ever.
Pog and JV have been beating climbing records all Tour, but I've been able to convince myself that these are OK, perhaps naively, as they are from different teams and other riders have been reasonably close to them.0 -
stage_hunter said:
Armstrong said 5% over Pog on The Move and went on to say that Usain Bolt at his peak was 3% over the rest. At these levels 5% is a huge amountandyp said:.
That is what im struggling with. That JV demolished the rest of the field by not far off 10%. It is a phenomenal performance. I cant think of a better athletic performance by anyone else ever.0 -
It's the margin of victory that is the concern. Jonas anihilated everyone by a margin not seen before.rick_chasey said:That should excite you, not disappoint you!
Pog was not having a bad day, but was utterly destroyed.0 -
I likened it on another forum to a 10000m track race where the winner is a lap and a half ahead of second and second is a lap and a bit ahead of third0
-
The 16th 10000m race in a row, not the first.r0bh said:I likened it on another forum to a 10000m track race where the winner is a lap and a half ahead of second and second is a lap and a bit ahead of third
Half man, Half bike0 -
The margin between 1st and 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc were larger yesterday not only than any tt in modern Tour history but in pretty much any elite level athletic event. Whatever the reason was, that's hugely abnormal.Lanterne_Rogue said:I don't know about the latest doping products, BMI or aerodynamics, but I do know I'm already bored with people (elsewhere) expecting to see a normal distribution in a population that's already been selected from one tail of the curve...
0 -
I am not buying that Pogacar was a bit sub par.
Pogacar beat WVA by 1'-13" yesterday over 22kms and by 1'-31" in 2020 over 36.5kms. (that performance has been called into question too.)
JV was simply on a different level, taking more risks, handling his bike better and able to take time on the climb, despite being on a heavier machine.
Everything else is just speculation.
Anyway, stage 17 is underway."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.1 -
BMI is a garbage stat (no offense). It's much too simplistic especially for (elite) athletes. My BMI at the end of high school was 19.3. It's 20 now with much more muscle many, many moons later. I looked normal.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm not being unduly cynical here, but I don't believe Wiggo raced at 69kg. That's a BMI of 19.1, which is freakishly low. (Pog's Wiki height and weight <=> BMI of 21.3, which is entirely plausible, though maybe a tad higher than ideal. Ullrich's BMI per Wiki data = 21.8) He was a skinny dude in his Tour days, that's for sure, but there was still a lot of him by climbing standards. And he was obviously far superior as a climber vs Wout as he won the Tour, which for all Wout's attributes, is likely not something Wout will achieve.Dorset_Boy said:
Wiggins and Wout are the same height (1.9 m) according to Google.andytee87 said:
Wiggins, Froome, Hesjedal are GT GC winners over 6ft like Wout but they all got very lean. WVA looks race fit fine, but no way has he got a climbers build. His race weight is at least 8kg heavier than Wiggins I think.wallace_and_gromit said:
Wiggo was a pretty big unit by Grand Tour climber standards. Not as spectacular as Wout, but clearly a very good climber in 2011/2012.Dorset_Boy said:
Do you have an explanation as to how Wout is one of the best 4 mountain domestiques in the world?rick_chasey said:
Maybe wout should start taking drugs in the spring then too?Dorset_Boy said:
Given how often riders are tested, particularly when in yellow, along with the bio-passport, who knows?rick_chasey said:So what are they taking?
Maybe you don’t remember but back in the day we had a pretty good idea what they were all on.
But Wout's grand tour performances, and Jonas's today, simply aren't close to be normal, even for the best cyclists in the world.
Maybe they are just uniquely good, generational talents, but compare Wout with MvdP - MvdP beats hit at cyclocross, in classics and monuments, but can't ride up mountains like a 63 kg climber as Wout does.....
🙄🙄🙄🙄
He isn't built to climb mountains at the speed he does.
When was the last time someone his size climbed like he does?
Prior to that we're looking at Ullrich I think.
Wiggins's TdF weight was 69 kg, Wout is listed at 78 kg.
Pog is listed as 66 kg
Jonas as 60 kg
Froome as 67 kg at the Tour
I'd be surprised if Wout races on the road at 78kg. ('Cross season maybe.) I've seem him listed as 75kg elsewhere.
Which leads me to the obvious observation: riders' listed weights (*) are all part of the "smoke and mirrors". As are heights, surprisingly, as they're much easier to verify.
(*) as part of the "performance gains via weight loss" explanations.
Based off of BMI Eliud Kipchoge should probably be in the ER. 😉PTP Champion 2019, 2022 & 20230 -
Except for the fact that elite athletes in a particular disciplines tend to have very similar builds. Unsurprising really as to be elite they will have somewhere near optimum limb lengths and relative limb lengths (*), do the same sort of training and eat the same sort of diet. Thus a BMI materially lower than is normal for the particular sub-group of elite athletes is potentially explained by rogue data. Hence my comment that I doubted that Wiggo raced at 69kg. He may well have done, but his implied BMI is at the extreme end of the scale in a sub-group of the population that is already highly selective towards being "light".m.r.m. said:
BMI is a garbage stat (no offense). It's much too simplistic especially for (elite) athletes.wallace_and_gromit said:
I'm not being unduly cynical here, but I don't believe Wiggo raced at 69kg. That's a BMI of 19.1, which is freakishly low. (Pog's Wiki height and weight <=> BMI of 21.3, which is entirely plausible, though maybe a tad higher than ideal. Ullrich's BMI per Wiki data = 21.8) He was a skinny dude in his Tour days, that's for sure, but there was still a lot of him by climbing standards. And he was obviously far superior as a climber vs Wout as he won the Tour, which for all Wout's attributes, is likely not something Wout will achieve.Dorset_Boy said:
Wiggins and Wout are the same height (1.9 m) according to Google.andytee87 said:
Wiggins, Froome, Hesjedal are GT GC winners over 6ft like Wout but they all got very lean. WVA looks race fit fine, but no way has he got a climbers build. His race weight is at least 8kg heavier than Wiggins I think.wallace_and_gromit said:
Wiggo was a pretty big unit by Grand Tour climber standards. Not as spectacular as Wout, but clearly a very good climber in 2011/2012.Dorset_Boy said:
Do you have an explanation as to how Wout is one of the best 4 mountain domestiques in the world?rick_chasey said:
Maybe wout should start taking drugs in the spring then too?Dorset_Boy said:
Given how often riders are tested, particularly when in yellow, along with the bio-passport, who knows?rick_chasey said:So what are they taking?
Maybe you don’t remember but back in the day we had a pretty good idea what they were all on.
But Wout's grand tour performances, and Jonas's today, simply aren't close to be normal, even for the best cyclists in the world.
Maybe they are just uniquely good, generational talents, but compare Wout with MvdP - MvdP beats hit at cyclocross, in classics and monuments, but can't ride up mountains like a 63 kg climber as Wout does.....
🙄🙄🙄🙄
He isn't built to climb mountains at the speed he does.
When was the last time someone his size climbed like he does?
Prior to that we're looking at Ullrich I think.
Wiggins's TdF weight was 69 kg, Wout is listed at 78 kg.
Pog is listed as 66 kg
Jonas as 60 kg
Froome as 67 kg at the Tour
I'd be surprised if Wout races on the road at 78kg. ('Cross season maybe.) I've seem him listed as 75kg elsewhere.
Which leads me to the obvious observation: riders' listed weights (*) are all part of the "smoke and mirrors". As are heights, surprisingly, as they're much easier to verify.
(*) as part of the "performance gains via weight loss" explanations.
As I understand it, BMI is not good for use on the general population as a health measure, as it's too easy for overweight people to point to pro rugby players with BMIs of near 30 (because they are stacked with muscle, despite relatively low bodyfat) and say that their BMI of 30 is due to the muscle they put on in their odd trips to the gym when in reality it's due to excess "timber".
(*) e.g. elite swimmers and elite rowers tend to have similar stats re height and weight, but swimmers have relatively long arms, whereas rowers have relatively long legs.
0 -
JV beat TP by 1m30 at the end of a cumulative race of 63 hours. In that context, it's not that much.
I know that's pretty facile, but the point is that one shouldn't expect the gaps between them in performance terms to be as comparable at this stage as they would be at other stages.
And if there is a magic drug that gives as much benefit as Ving got yesterday and which avoids detection at the post-stage doping control, I think that would be news to just above everyone!2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #4s)
2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)0 -
JV beat TP by 1'-38", not 1'-30", so you need to add 8 seconds to your rather "specific" logic.larkim said:JV beat TP by 1m30 at the end of a cumulative race of 63 hours. In that context, it's not that much.
I know that's pretty facile, but the point is that one shouldn't expect the gaps between them in performance terms to be as comparable at this stage as they would be at other stages.
And if there is a magic drug that gives as much benefit as Ving got yesterday and which avoids detection at the post-stage doping control, I think that would be news to just above everyone!
What I mean by specific logic is:
Last year, over a hilly 40km course, after 75 hours of racing, the top 5 were separated by 42".
This year, over 22km, after 63 hours of racing, the top 5 were separated by 3 minutes.
I am not saying that your conclusion is wrong, but in this context, it does look that much."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
How do you explain the relatively small gaps in the Stage 20 Giro TT then?larkim said:JV beat TP by 1m30 at the end of a cumulative race of 63 hours. In that context, it's not that much.
I know that's pretty facile, but the point is that one shouldn't expect the gaps between them in performance terms to be as comparable at this stage as they would be at other stages.
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/giro-d-italia/2023/stage-200 -
I thought Roglic's gap was pretty big given he stopped at one point.r0bh said:
How do you explain the relatively small gaps in the Stage 20 Giro TT then?larkim said:JV beat TP by 1m30 at the end of a cumulative race of 63 hours. In that context, it's not that much.
I know that's pretty facile, but the point is that one shouldn't expect the gaps between them in performance terms to be as comparable at this stage as they would be at other stages.
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/giro-d-italia/2023/stage-200 -
Antoine Vayer is having a meltdown, almost regretting Chris Froome
" At the slightest acceleration by Froome, four-time winner of the Tour with 410, 412, 419 and 410 watts, the almost human, journalists or informed observers, self-proclaimed experts and scrupulous commentators were up in arms. The press howled. This year, nothing. Maybe they've retired or got used to their children's superheroes? Maybe they think, as they do, that fiction has surpassed reality. Kids. They've got shit in their eyes. Maybe not in the head, but that remains to be confirmed."
BASI Nordic Ski Instructor
Instagramme0 -
Given most of the riders will have been taking it relatively easy, I'm not sure what the speed distribution is meant to show...
I think there is a level of historical revision around how much we "knew" in the past too.1 -
amrushton said:
JV was nearly 10% better than 3rd. That's like Bolt beating the bronze medallist in the 100m final by almost a second. he came nowhere near doing thatstage_hunter said:
Armstrong said 5% over Pog on The Move and went on to say that Usain Bolt at his peak was 3% over the rest. At these levels 5% is a huge amountandyp said:.
That is what im struggling with. That JV demolished the rest of the field by not far off 10%. It is a phenomenal performance. I cant think of a better athletic performance by anyone else ever.0 -
It was. I reckon (as I went back to watch last night) once you factor in the stop, all of that 40 seconds gained was in the last 11 minutes. He was 16 seconds up at the third check, and lost about 20 seconds on the mechanical.TheBigBean said:
I thought Roglic's gap was pretty big given he stopped at one point.r0bh said:
How do you explain the relatively small gaps in the Stage 20 Giro TT then?larkim said:JV beat TP by 1m30 at the end of a cumulative race of 63 hours. In that context, it's not that much.
I know that's pretty facile, but the point is that one shouldn't expect the gaps between them in performance terms to be as comparable at this stage as they would be at other stages.
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/giro-d-italia/2023/stage-200
