P1080585
  • Lyndon

    Such an interesting to look at race preparation, thanks for putting content like this together. I’m always eager to learn more about the behind the scenes data collection that teams go through and to see the different approaches that are taken. The software sounds like it could be as beneficial as wind tunnel time at a smaller outlay and with the added versatility of being able to be used anywhere. Well anywhere there is a velodrome.

  • Michele

    A great article. I enjoy all of Dave’s contributions to CT.

    Just a quick question. If a climb averages 4.7% in 9.6 kms, how does it ascend 501 metres in that distance?

    Wouldn’t it be 96% of 470 metres, e.g 451 metres?? (10 kms = 470 m, 9.6 kms = 96% of 10).

    A virtual chocolate bar for the best explanation/answer.

    • Jason de Puit

      According to the stage profile (http://www.letour.com/paris-nice/2015/us/stage-7.html) the climb starts at 36m (as opposed to 0) so the actual ascent is 483m. The “Mountain Passes and Hills” part of that page claims this is an average of 4.7%:

      • Michele

        There’s no downhill section on this climb.

        Isn’t total ascension 501-36 = 465m, which is 4.85 %. Yet if you add up the average gradients per km (77 + 85 + 56 + 38 + 33 + 70 + 59 + 56 + 12) the ascension is 486m, or average gradient (assuming last km is dead flat), of 5.1%.

        So unless the last 600 m drops 21 metres, something doesn’t quite add up. But even 465 m for 9.6 kms is 4.85.

        Yes, I’m bored at work this afternoon ????

        • Jason de Puit

          One thing I forgot to mention in my previous comment was that I agree with you, the math doesn’t add up to me either. I was just trying to point out what the “official” information is.

          • Michele

            No problems. :)

            I agree 100% with your other comment - it’s a great article. I love reading stories like this.

        • Dave

          Official information obviously prepared using a Garmin.

          At least it appears they were lucky enough to avoid a 700 metre spike or detour via northern Uzbekistan.

    • http://www.littlepeople.id.au Chris Little

      Two typos - parameter, not perimeter

  • max

    I’ve got a theory that road TT bikes with gears and freewheels may well be faster for the hour record.

    Reason being that all the pros seem to complain that the hour is so painful, because you cant change cadence, position or even stretch out for a moment with a brief freewheel. They say a road TT of 50km is less painful.

    Perhaps a bit of time moving about a bit on the bike every 10 min or so and maybe the odd gear change to help vary the cadence would make them quicker - reliving the agony of the track pursuit position?

    • James Fifield

      They may well be faster, but they are illegal.

      • max

        but why should they be? aren’t track bikes set up without freewheels for safety? there’s only one rider on the track so why worry?

        • James Fifield

          That’s above my pay grade, but suffice to say that if safety of other competitors was the only concern then individual pursuit would not be fixed gear. Double diamond frames are neither faster, nor any safer, than beam bikes but they are still required.

          • max

            ok. but if they were legal - I think they may be faster.

  • Jason de Puit

    Great article - I really enjoy reading about this sort of information. Although it makes me want a career change…

  • Matt

    Montreal shout-out to Andy and the team at Alphamantis. They’ve been at Palma with many pro teams this January (including Sky and Bora-Argon 18).

    • Alphamantis Tech

      Thanks, Matt — right back atcha!

  • jbridesbikes

    That Bontrager disc looks an awful lot like a Zipp 900.