# Contador's P-N Prologue



## choocher (Jan 14, 2009)

How in the world can Contador, a pure climber, beat the reigning Olympic pursuit champion on a flat, 9km course? Couldn't believe it when I saw the results. How can Contador do that, legitimately? I don't care what kind of form he has. He shouldn't be able to do that under ordinary, and fair, circumstances. What do you think?


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

choocher said:


> How in the world can Contador, a pure climber, beat the reigning Olympic pursuit champion on a flat, 9km course? Couldn't believe it when I saw the results. How can Contador do that, legitimately? I don't care what kind of form he has. He shouldn't be able to do that under ordinary, and fair, circumstances. What do you think?


So you're saying Wiggins was juiced at the Olympics?


----------



## BAi9302010 (Mar 7, 2002)

The first thing that I thought is that Conti wanted to make a statement to Armstrong as to who's boss. 

As for the race......come on. The largest time gap between any of the other riders in the top 20 was 4 seconds, and Contador comes out and hands Wiggins his ass by 7 seconds. Anyone who's followed Conti the last couple of years and isn't a little suspicious needs a reality check.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

BAi9302010 said:


> As for the race......come on. The largest time gap between any of the other riders in the top 20 was 4 seconds, and Contador comes out and hands Wiggins his ass by 7 seconds. Anyone who's followed Conti the last couple of years and isn't a little suspicious needs a reality check.


Wiggins get beaten by Contador (whom many seem to regard as no time trialist) three times running at the Paris-Nice prologue but manages to win a gold in the Olympic Pursuit, and you say Contador's ride was the one out of the ordinary?


----------



## Circlip (Jul 26, 2005)

Now that he's the best climber and best TT'er in the world, Conti has announced plans to take over from Cavendish in the sprints for 2009 also. What is he on? His bike, 6 hours a day.


----------



## Digger28 (Oct 9, 2008)

Yeah I'm glad this thread has been started. It's nonsensical to see this guy dominating the way he has been since 07, when he shouldn't even be riding due to Operation Puerto. And to beat Bradley, in a TT of this distance, on this course, is a farce. But himself and Rasmussen were pumping 7.9 watts/kilo in 2007, and as Allen Lim pointed out, unless we've mutated into horse type creatures, this is not possible.


----------



## choocher (Jan 14, 2009)

asgelle said:


> Wiggins get beaten by Contador (whom many seem to regard as no time trialist) three times running at the Paris-Nice prologue but manages to win a gold in the Olympic Pursuit, and you say Contador's ride was the one out of the ordinary?


Yes, that is what I'm saying. For Contador to beat a rider like Wiggins, who specializes in such distances, on a flat course by 7 seconds is ridiculous. 7 Seconds is a huge time gap for such a short distance at the Pro Tour level. I am saying that it appears as if Contador has manipulated his physiology so as to perform above and beyond his natural capabilities. I am also saying that Wiggins, given his specialty in short, flat TT efforts should be able to beat a pure climber on such a course. Both the winner and the time gap look suspicious. Of course, I don't know for certain. The question was meant to start a discussion in a discussion forum. I'm curious what others think--you included.


----------



## Digger28 (Oct 9, 2008)

asgelle said:


> Wiggins get beaten by Contador (whom many seem to regard as no time trialist) three times running at the Paris-Nice prologue but manages to win a gold in the Olympic Pursuit, and you say Contador's ride was the one out of the ordinary?


The whole point is that he should never have been beating him, now or previously, in a TT of short distance. Otherwise he'd be the first ever Grand Tour winner to contest and possibly win an Olympic pursuit.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

choocher said:


> Yes, that is what I'm saying. For Contador to beat a rider like Wiggins, who specializes in such distances, on a flat course by 7 seconds is ridiculous. 7 Seconds is a huge time gap for such a short distance at the Pro Tour level. I am saying that it appears as if Contador has manipulated his physiology so as to perform above and beyond his natural capabilities. I am also saying that Wiggins, given his specialty in short, flat TT efforts should be able to beat a pure climber on such a course. Both the winner and the time gap look suspicious. Of course, I don't know for certain. The question was meant to start a discussion in a discussion forum. I'm curious what others think--you included.


What I think is the facts belie your conclusion. You say that Wiggins specializes in this type of race, but his best previous finish (at least going back to 2003) is 7th. On the other hand, you say Contador is a pure climber, but he never finished below the top 5. 

Contador always places well in the P-N prologue and always beats Wiggins when they meet there. Given the record below, the much bigger question is how Wiggins won the Olympic gold not why he lost to Contador.

2009: 1 Contador, 2 Wiggins @ :07
2007: 5 Contador @ :02
2006: 4 Contador @ :03, 7 Wiggins @ :05
2005: 7 Contador @:05, 62 Wiggins @ :14
2004: 5 Contador @ :13, 114 Wiggins @ 1:13
2003: 21 Wiggins @ :12


----------



## Digger28 (Oct 9, 2008)

"Bradley Wiggins had believed so much in his ability to win the inaugural time trial of Paris-Nice that he was devastated after losing to Alberto Contador.
Bradley has not brought reproach to himself," directeur sportif Lionel Marie explained. "He had seen the course before, he was very focused, he gave 100% and the road was equally wet for everybody. He rode over 60 km/h on the straight sections." Early in his time trial, Wiggins complained about the helicopter being too close to him and he directed the pilot to back away. "With a difference of seven seconds, the winner was clearly the strongest today," Marie said.

from cyclingnews


----------



## choocher (Jan 14, 2009)

Digger28 said:


> The whole point is that he should never have been beating him, now or previously, in a TT of short distance. Otherwise he'd be the first ever Grand Tour winner to contest and possibly win an Olympic pursuit.


Thank you, Digger28--exactly. I'm not saying that Contador isn't a good cyclist. In my opinion, a result like this just points to him being too good to be true.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

I think Wiggins is getting far more credit then he deserves. He won Olympic gold medals because there really isn't any talent in the event he won. He won the final by less than 3 seconds over Hayden Roulston of New Zeland. A solid road pro but no TdF winner. Wiggins' 2nd on the day has to be one of the best results he's ever gotten on the road.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Digger28 said:


> The whole point is that he should never have been beating him, now or previously, in a TT of short distance. Otherwise he'd be the first ever Grand Tour winner to contest and possibly win an Olympic pursuit.


You don't suppose the fact that for 100 years, Grand Tour winners were ineligible to enter the Olympics might have some bearing on that do you? (not to mention the myriad other factors that might have dissuaded riders from attempting a Grand Tour - Pursuit double.)


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

Looks like the Hog has Contadope on the same special sauce Heras used in the Vuelta TT.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

Haile Gebrselassie has just announced he is doubling in the 100 and 200 in London.


----------



## smbrum (Jul 9, 2008)

wiggins or no wiggins doesnt really matter. its not like conti just beat him, he won the dang thing. that is a pretty pehnomenal effort for a climber and lets face it thats what he is. As "the best stage racer in the world" he should be able to put up respectable times in ITT but come on. If it was a 40k hilly TT then I might give him the benefit of the doubt. These short TT's are all power, not power to weight and Conti should not be putting out this kind of power. I think if a pure TT guy like Cancellera won a mountain stage this convincingly some eyebrows might be raised. I'll be honest, I'm the first to give someone the benefit of the doubt and hope super efforts are legit. I do have my doubts about Conti's performance though.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

smbrum said:


> wiggins or no wiggins doesnt really matter. its not like conti just beat him, he won the dang thing. that is a pretty pehnomenal effort for a climber and lets face it thats what he is. As "the best stage racer in the world" he should be able to put up respectable times in ITT but come on. If it was a 40k hilly TT then I might give him the benefit of the doubt. These short TT's are all power, not power to weight and Conti should not be putting out this kind of power. I think if a pure TT guy like Cancellera won a mountain stage this convincingly some eyebrows might be raised. I'll be honest, I'm the first to give someone the benefit of the doubt and hope super efforts are legit. I do have my doubts about Conti's performance though.



What's with all the Contador hate?:lol: 

He's never tested positive, has he?


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

lookrider said:


> Haile Gebrselassie has just announced he is doubling in the 100 and 200 in London.


You may want to read up a little more on energy systems and durations. There's more difference between the 100 and 200 in athletics than there is between a 10 minute and 6 hour stage in cycling.


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

I heard that Chris Hoy is riding La Marmotte this year.


----------



## smbrum (Jul 9, 2008)

lookrider said:


> What's with all the Contador hate?:lol:
> 
> He's never tested positive, has he?


touche...i was waiting for something like that. its just that i have been so educated lately on what is and isnt possible. ive been enlightened and the blinders have been removed.

i still do want to believe in clean cycling as well as super performances. its just getting harder and harder to not be a skeptic. sucks really, ignorance really is bliss!!!


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

asgelle said:


> You may want to read up a little more on energy systems and durations. There's more difference between the 100 and 200 in athletics than there is between a 10 minute and 6 hour stage in cycling.


Your statement is off on its face. The same guys who win the 100 often double up with the 200. The best guys in a flat 10 minute cycling event are rarely the best guys in a cycling race of more than 100 miles.

This takes a lot more explanation than energy systems. Gebreselassie was running 52 second last laps in 10k's. The guy has crazy power. Just not crazy power when compared to the top sprinters.

Seb Coe was running 46 second 400 meters. Not that much off top 400 guys like Michael Johnson who was also running just over a 10 second 100 meters.

Flo Jo ran crazy fast times at distances from 100 meters to 400 meters.

To say Contador's performance is suspect is the understatement of the year.

How come it used to be torture for the pure climbers in the first week of the Tour? They used to have trouble just staying on wheels in order to get to the mountain stages.

Then again LA was dropping 20 minutes to a half hour to people like Rominger and Indurain in the mountains.

Then after 5 years and a near fatal bout with cancer, he's smoking the best climbers.:smilewinkgrin: :smilewinkgrin: :hand: :lol: :yikes:

Contador is 5'10," 136lbs and he's going to beat the Olympic pursuit champ by 7 seconds on a short flat course? So when he beats LA in a short or long flat TT, a guy who outweighs him by 30lbs at the same height what are you going to say? It's absurd.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

lookrider said:


> This takes a lot more explanation than energy systems.


Well let's see. A 1500 m (at the short end of distances Gebrselassie runs) takes him about 210-220 seconds. At that duration, about 80% of the energy is produced aerobically, 20% anaerobically, and a slight fraction through ATP-PCr metabolism. Competing in the 200, he would produce about 5% of his energy aerobically, 55% anaerobically, and 40% through ATP. To be competitive at both events he would have to be outstanding over all three metabolic systems (aerobic/anaerobic for the 1500, anaerobic, ATP for the 200). Gastin, P.B. "Sports Medicine" 31, 725, 1991

Now for Contador to excel on long mountain stages requires virtually 100% aerobic metabolism. The winner of a 10 minute prologue could rely on an 85/15 split if he has exceptional anaerobic capacity, but for someone like Contador, the ratio could be as low as 95/5. So for Contador to be competitive at these two events only one metabolic system has to be exceptional. 

So while Gebrselassie would have to demonstrate world class capability over three metabolic pathways to compete at the 1500 and 200m events. Contador could win over 10 minutes or 6 hours relying only on one system. The analogy is hardly applicable.


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

I prefer the Hog's special sauce explanation.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

asgelle said:



> Well let's see. A 1500 m (at the short end of distances Gebrselassie runs) takes him about 210-220 seconds. At that duration, about 80% of the energy is produced aerobically, 20% anaerobically, and a slight fraction through ATP-PCr metabolism. Competing in the 200, he would produce about 5% of his energy aerobically, 55% anaerobically, and 40% through ATP. To be competitive at both events he would have to be outstanding over all three metabolic systems (aerobic/anaerobic for the 1500, anaerobic, ATP for the 200). Gastin, P.B. "Sports Medicine" 31, 725, 1991
> 
> Now for Contador to excel on long mountain stages requires virtually 100% aerobic metabolism. The winner of a 10 minute prologue could rely on an 85/15 split if he has exceptional anaerobic capacity, but for someone like Contador, the ratio could be as low as 95/5. So for Contador to be competitive at these two events only one metabolic system has to be exceptional.
> 
> So while Gebrselassie would have to demonstrate world class capability over three metabolic pathways to compete at the 1500 and 200m events. Contador could win over 10 minutes or 6 hours relying only on one system. The analogy is hardly applicable.


Well, first off, I was exaggerating with the Haile stuff, and I think you mis wrote your original response saying there is more difference between 100m and 200m than between 6 miles and 6 hour cycling events.

At any rate dropping a guy on a mountain where you might only be going 10 to 15 mph having little meaningful wind resistance is a lot different than winning a TT(where small increases in speed require giant power increases) where absolute power is at a premium, not power to bodyweight. I wonder how much he would have beaten LA by, a guy that generates much more power than Contadoper.

Contadoper has been jacked his whole career also, or  he's another genetic freak that Bruyneel has a habit of landing on his teams.

Jeez, that other extraterretrial Basso looked quite ordinary in the TOC. Wonder what the deal was with that.


----------



## danielc (Oct 24, 2002)

I think I'm more surprised at Cadel's poor performance.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

lookrider said:


> Well, first off, I was exaggerating with the Haile stuff, and I think you mis wrote your original response saying there is more difference between 100m and 200m than between 6 miles and 6 hour cycling events.


Going from 200 to 100 m, energy production changes from 70% anaerobic/30% aerobic to 67% anaerobic/33% ATP. Going from a 6 hour to 6 mile race, the change is only from virtually 100% aerobic to 90% aerobic/ 10% anaerobic (or less). The first case requires incorporating a third metabolic process at a significant level while the second only requires a slight contribution from an additional pathway.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

Wiggins 4k win took 4 minutes and 15 seconds at the Olympics. That's hardly primarily anaerobic, not to mention ATP or even less Creatine Phosphate. 

That's 255 seconds. Guys who can put out these kinds of efforts like Eammon Coghlan have also shown the ability to keep it going for a long time. He was successful at 5,000 meters and ran a 2:25 marathon at the age of 41.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

asgelle said:


> Going from 200 to 100 m, energy production changes from 70% anaerobic/30% aerobic to 67% anaerobic/33% ATP. Going from a 6 hour to 6 mile race, the change is only from virtually 100% aerobic to 90% aerobic/ 10% anaerobic (or less). The first case requires incorporating a third metabolic process at a significant level while the second only requires a slight contribution from an additional pathway.


I'm not buying your argument about how energy production is so segmented, especially in regard to ATP.

If you're saying is true, why are 100 meter runners often very competitive at 200 meters and vice versa?

Also Wiggins 4 minute and 15 second, 2 and a half mile performance in the Olympics was primarily aerobic.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

Digger28 said:


> Yeah I'm glad this thread has been started. It's nonsensical to see this guy dominating the way he has been since 07, when he shouldn't even be riding due to Operation Puerto. And to beat Bradley, in a TT of this distance, on this course, is a farce. But himself and Rasmussen were pumping 7.9 watts/kilo in 2007, and as Allen Lim pointed out, unless we've mutated into horse type creatures, this is not possible.


Allen Lim, another loser, and hater.:mad2:


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

Even Contador was surprised
.
"It's a big surprise for me to get the win today" he commented. "This was a flat time trial and it suited the specialists more than me."


----------



## MarkZeus (Jun 12, 2008)

Just watched it on tivo. I was not that surprise, Alberto Contador spent alot of time over the winter trying to improve his TT form and showed. Popo went before him & must have gave him great insight on the road ahead. AC and Astana is definately the team to beat. Also bad weather played a big role, Vandevelde was doing good up until he crashed. I was also surprised how bad Cadel Evans performed.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

lookrider said:


> I'm not buying your argument about how energy production is so segmented, especially in regard to ATP.
> 
> If you're saying is true, why are 100 meter runners often very competitive at 200 meters and vice versa?
> 
> Also Wiggins 4 minute and 15 second, 2 and a half mile performance in the Olympics was primarily aerobic.


It's not that they are segmented, it's simply that there is a very finite limit to the amount of energy you can derive from immediate energy sources and anaerobic glycolysis. Naturally then as the duration of the event increases that finite amount of non-aerobic energy becomes a smaller and smaller percentage of the total, until it becomes more or less meaningless.

In running, by the time you're at 800m certainly by a mile you've essentially got the same attributes as a marathon runner.

Contador's performance is eye-popping simply because you don't expect a 135 lb guy to be able to outperform the larger riders on a course where his small size accounted for nothing.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

lookrider said:


> I'm not buying your argument about how energy production is so segmented, especially in regard to ATP.


It's not my argument, it's Dr. Gastin's among others. If you have a problem with it, there are plenty of journals just waiting to hear from you.


----------



## Circlip (Jul 26, 2005)

MarkZeus said:


> I was not that surprise, Alberto Contador spent alot of time over the winter trying to improve his TT form and showed.


What has he done over the winter to his TT form?


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

Circlip said:


> What has he done over the winter to his TT form?


whatever he did It sure didn't look like he was that happy with it as he was wiggling all over the bike trying to get comfortable.


----------



## MG537 (Jul 25, 2006)

*One more reason why this*

View attachment 158032

*
is looking more and more like this*

View attachment 158033


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> It's not that they are segmented,.


I agree completely; asgelle's citations make these energy systems appear segmented and discrete, and would cause distinct performance differences between distances of 100 meters and 200 meters. Ancecdotal evidence points in the opposite direction.

Also I've seen some author's, Peter Janssen being one, saying ATP can supply energy for up to 20 seconds without lactate creation.



Dwayne Barry said:


> it's simply that there is a very finite limit to the amount of energy you can derive from immediate energy sources and anaerobic glycolysis..


Yes, but they don't seem to be limiting factors for most top 100 meter runners, many of whom are also very good 200 meter runners



Dwayne Barry said:


> Naturally then as the duration of the event increases that finite amount of non-aerobic energy becomes a smaller and smaller percentage of the total, until it becomes more or less meaningless..





Dwayne Barry said:


> In running, by the time you're at 800m certainly by a mile you've essentially got the same attributes as a marathon runner.


That 400 to 800 meter area is a big transition where you see a lot of different types of runners from Alberto Juantorena to Seb Coe.

I mean, you had Flo Jo running a 48 second 400 meters in the relay and she could barely run 21 minutes for 5k. Just a total collapse at the longer distance. Then you had Coe running in the 46's for 400 and he could still run a mile in 3:47. I'll bet he could have run 5k in the low 13's, if not faster.



Dwayne Barry said:


> Contador's performance is eye-popping simply because you don't expect a 135 lb guy to be able to outperform the larger riders on a course where his small size accounted for nothing.


Oh I agree with you 100% except to say that Contador's performance is ridiculous, and even he knows it based on his backpedaling statements on how he's not the best time trialist. LA would never say that, and neither would Ullrich, two riders who are immensely more powerful than Contador.

This whole thing about energy systems got started when I made a joking reference to Haile.

And BTW, Wiggins duration in his pursuit puts him well in the realm of aerobic atheletes at substantially over 4 minutes, much longer than the 3:43 or so that you implicitly stated with your mention of the attributes of milers/marathoners.

It's obvious that comparing cycling to running is apples to oranges, and my loose writing got asgelle off on a tangent.

In this new world Contador has ushered in, there are apparently no advantages conferred on big heavier powerful riders, in short flat races.

At any rate, I'm not buying Contador's performance as legit.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

asgelle said:


> It's not my argument, it's Dr. Gastin's among others. If you have a problem with it, there are plenty of journals just waiting to hear from you.


Oh, I'm not going to start an argument with some academic. It's just that I think there is a gap between what they are saying in a paper, and how you're translating it to the actual performances that are occurring and that have occurred. 

Physiology hasn't changed in the past 40 years unless one changes theirs the way Contador and Armstrong, have changed theirs, through the introduction of pharmaceuticals or artificial means.

When has someone with Contador's morphology performed in such a manner? This guy has apparently ushered in a new era.:lol: 

As for these physiologists, they have not been infallible as evidenced by the recent revelations in the actual role of lactic acid.

Also, they have egos. Coyle was fairly respected, and now he's a little bit of a laughingstock because he's defending an untenable position, re Pharmstrong, rather than letting the chips fall where they may.


----------



## Circlip (Jul 26, 2005)

bigpinkt said:


> whatever he did It sure didn't look like he was that happy with it as he was wiggling all over the bike trying to get comfortable.


Just wondering 'cause unless he was misquoted or this was taken out of context, here's what he had to say on the topic, from www.cyclingnews.com

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/mar09/mar09news

-----------------------------------

Contador corrected some impressions that he had a new position for time trialing. "I haven't changed anything compared to last year."


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

Circlip said:


> Just wondering 'cause unless he was misquoted or this was taken out of context, here's what he had to say on the topic, from www.cyclingnews.com
> 
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/mar09/mar09news
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link. It is not surprising. I have always heard those stories about the wind tunnel test are mostly marketing hype, more photo opp then anything

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...he_seconds_in_wind_tunnel_article_271831.html


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

lookrider said:


> I agree completely; asgelle's citations make these energy systems appear segmented and discrete, and would cause distinct performance differences between distances of 100 meters and 200 meters. Ancecdotal evidence points in the opposite direction.


Anecdotes are fine, but in the last 40 years, only 3 men have done the double in the 11 Olympics held in that time.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

smbrum said:


> wiggins or no wiggins doesnt really matter. its not like conti just beat him, he won the dang thing. that is a pretty pehnomenal effort for a climber and lets face it thats what he is. As "the best stage racer in the world" he should be able to put up respectable times in ITT but come on. If it was a 40k hilly TT then I might give him the benefit of the doubt. These short TT's are all power, not power to weight and Conti should not be putting out this kind of power. I think if a pure TT guy like Cancellera won a mountain stage this convincingly some eyebrows might be raised. I'll be honest, I'm the first to give someone the benefit of the doubt and hope super efforts are legit. I do have my doubts about Conti's performance though.


WRONG - any distance over about 30 seconds is all about p/w ratios. 11 minutes is an aerobic effort PERIOD. AC won becuase he had a superior p/w ratio and lower drag coefficient - PERIOD. 

But really do the numbers guys - AC won by 1.04% - this could easily be explained by any number of other variables...


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

safetyguy said:


> WRONG - any distance over about 30 seconds is all about p/w ratios. 11 minutes is an aerobic effort PERIOD. AC won becuase he had a superior p/w ratio - PERIOD.
> 
> But really do the numbers guys - AC won by 1.04% - this could easily be explained by any number of other variables...


Well not in this case. Power/weight is not so important, it's power to drag ratio.


----------



## dave2pvd (Oct 15, 2007)

safetyguy said:


> WRONG - any distance over about 30 seconds is all about p/w ratios. 11 minutes is an aerobic effort PERIOD. AC won because he had a superior p/w ratio - PERIOD.
> 
> But really do the numbers guys - AC won by 1.04% - this could easily be explained by any number of other variables...


Wrong.
What you came up with might be appropriate for a timetrial up Alpe d'Huez, not for a flat, fast TT.


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

asgelle said:


> Anecdotes are fine, but in the last 40 years, only 3 men have done the double in the 11 Olympics held in that time.


Here's a list of American sprinters. As you can see, many were world class at both events. In Atlanta, Michael Johnson was timed at 10.12 for his first 100 meters on his way to a 19.32 WR for 200. 10.12 for 100 meters is world class by any measure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_sprinters

Donald Quarrie won gold in the 100 and silver in the 200 in Montreal. Merlene Ottey, Evelyn Ashford, Flo Jo. Alyson Felix has placed 3rd in the 100 in world championships.

That stat leaves a lot of info out. Bob Hayes was a world best 200 meter runner. Steve Williams was a great 100 meter runner and also 200 meter guy. Obviously Jesse Owens.

It's a fact that most 100 meter men fall into competitive ranges in the 200 and the same in reverse.


Actually I'm kind of surprised that 3 have done it at all considering how competitive these events are, with the margins being razor thin and all.

When I look at 100 meter and 200 meter sprints I see more morphological differences if anything.

100 meter guys seem to be more compact and 200 meter specialists seem to be more rangy.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Well not in this case. Power/weight is not so important, it's power to drag ratio.


You are of course correct - and I meant to say just that - My bigger point however is that an 11 minute effort is almost entirely aerobic - except for the start and finish.

Another way to look at his win is that he made a little over 1/2 second each k. Lots of people in the so called "know" might say equipment could account for 1/2 second per k. This seems to be a credible (alternate) reason to doping to explain his performance. Of course training, diet & motivation, would have nothing to do with it..


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

safetyguy said:


> Another way to look at his win is that he made a little over 1/2 second each k. Lots of people in the so called "know" might say equipment could account for 1/2 second per k.


between a felt aero bike and a trek aerobike? really? who?


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

asgelle said:


> Anecdotes are fine, but in the last 40 years, only 3 men have done the double in the 11 Olympics held in that time.


You weak attempt to narrow the pool to just gold misses much. History is FULL of sprinters that medaled in both the 100 and 200, in fact it happened in 

2008
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1972

do I need to go on?


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

safetyguy said:


> Lots of people in the so called "know" might say equipment could account for 1/2 second per k.


When you say "equipment" is that your code word for "bag of blood"?


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

safetyguy said:


> You are of course correct - and I meant to say just that - My bigger point however is that an 11 minute effort is almost entirely aerobic - except for the start and finish.


Again, what is surprising is that it's almost unheard of for a flyweight climber to outperform the big rouleurs in this kind of event. The difference isn's so remarkable, it's who made the difference that is somewhat surprising. IOW, it's very unusual for a small guy to have the best power/drag ratio.


----------



## Digger28 (Oct 9, 2008)

asgelle said:


> You don't suppose the fact that for 100 years, Grand Tour winners were ineligible to enter the Olympics might have some bearing on that do you? (not to mention the myriad other factors that might have dissuaded riders from attempting a Grand Tour - Pursuit double.)


So in summation you believe there's no reason why the type of rider who can win a Grand Tour, which is in many ways a marathon, couldn't also win an individual pursuit in the Olympics? IF this is your belief, then it is the ramblings of a mental case.
Theo Bos and Chris Hoy could, according to this line of thinking, be able to at least, challenge for one day classics....:mad2: 
Contador according to his weight and expected power, should not be able to ride a TT like this - Climb mountains yes, but not this. In the same way that a Prologue rider like Cancellara should not be able to climb mountains like he did last year. Otherwiss what's the point in having specialists??

Your viewpoint here is totally untenable. If yesterday was a 50 km time trial, I'd be more open to Contador's performance, but this is simply not plausible. Wiggins has been beaten before in bigger time trials than this, by fairly small margins, and has never reacted with this kind of anger. He knows, as he knew in Albi with Vino and Kasechkin, that this is not credible.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

den bakker said:


> between a felt aero bike and a trek aerobike? really? who?


Are you serious - do the Cervelo guys say there TT bikes are faster, exactly the same or slower than the competition? Do the Trek guys say their TT bike is faster, the same or slower than Specalized/Felt/Scott/Cannondale......? 

Sorry you are right - go ride what ever aero bike you want they are all exactly the same... Wait, what about the aero helmets, what about the cermanic bearings... elbow position, hell Millar had a water bottle (albiet an aero one) on his bike (but why for an 11 minute effort). There is more - that pesky helicopter, maybe the road was a little dryer for AC, hmmm.. do we know what tire pressure they used for the wet conditions, or what tire type... dang maybe Wiggins forgot to pee before his ride...

... my point being there are any number of variables that could account for a 1.04% difference in time - includling AC spending alot of time working on/improving his TT skills.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

so much BS, so little time. 



safetyguy said:


> Are you serious - do the Cervelo guys say there TT bikes are faster, exactly the same or slower than the competition? Do the Trek guys say their TT bike is faster, the same or slower than Specalized/Felt/Scott/Cannondale......?
> 
> Sorry you are right - go ride what ever aero bike you want they are all exactly the same... Wait, what about the aero helmets, what about the cermanic bearings... elbow position, hell Millar had a water bottle (albiet an aero one) on his bike (but why for an 11 minute effort). There is more - that pesky helicopter, maybe the road was a little dryer for AC, hmmm.. do we know what tire pressure they used for the wet conditions, or what tire type... dang maybe Wiggins forgot to pee before his ride...
> 
> ... my point being there are any number of variables that could account for a 1.04% difference in time - includling AC spending alot of time working on/improving his TT skills.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

Digger28 said:


> So in summation you believe there's no reason why the type of rider who can win a Grand Tour, which is in many ways a marathon, couldn't also win an individual pursuit in the Olympics? IF this is your belief, then it is the ramblings of a mental case.
> Theo Bos and Chris Hoy could, according to this line of thinking, be able to at least, challenge for one day classics....:mad2:
> Contador according to his weight and expected power, should not be able to ride a TT like this - Climb mountains yes, but not this. In the same way that a Prologue rider like Cancellara should not be able to climb mountains like he did last year. Otherwiss what's the point in having specialists??
> 
> Your viewpoint here is totally untenable. If yesterday was a 50 km time trial, I'd be more open to Contador's performance, but this is simply not plausible. Wiggins has been beaten before in bigger time trials than this, by fairly small margins, and has never reacted with this kind of anger. He knows, as he knew in Albi with Vino and Kasechkin, that this is not credible.


FC is far from just being a prologue rider and has always been a good climber. Good TT are almost always good climbers - GL, MI, JU, LA, Levi, Floyd, DZ, Cadel.... 

... so lets look at who wasn't there: FC, Levi, LA, DZ, amongst others... I think AC's progression to this type of performance as indicated by his continued imporvement and maturity (age) as a rider is plausible (4th in the O TT). The kid is only going to keep getting better at TTing and FC is going to continue to get better at climbing (and who will be a tour threat in the years to come).


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

safetyguy said:


> Good TT are almost always good climbers


In the EPO era


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

safetyguy said:


> Are you serious - do the Cervelo guys say there TT bikes are faster, exactly the same or slower than the competition? Do the Trek guys say their TT bike is faster, the same or slower than Specalized/Felt/Scott/Cannondale......?
> 
> Sorry you are right - go ride what ever aero bike you want they are all exactly the same... Wait, what about the aero helmets, what about the cermanic bearings... elbow position, hell Millar had a water bottle (albiet an aero one) on his bike (but why for an 11 minute effort). There is more - that pesky helicopter, maybe the road was a little dryer for AC, hmmm.. do we know what tire pressure they used for the wet conditions, or what tire type... dang maybe Wiggins forgot to pee before his ride...
> 
> ... my point being there are any number of variables that could account for a 1.04% difference in time - includling AC spending alot of time working on/improving his TT skills.


My Dentist says his Cervelo is the fastest bike made.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

bigpinkt said:


> My Dentist says his Cervelo is the fastest bike made.


Now that is VERY funny - is there a possibility I know you in person Big? I say that because I once won a race after a Dentist appt. 

BTW the fastest bike made - at least on Sunday was a Trek -tell your dentist that.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Digger28 said:


> So in summation you believe there's no reason why the type of rider who can win a Grand Tour, which is in many ways a marathon, couldn't also win an individual pursuit in the Olympics?


You either are not understanding what I wrote or are being deliberately obtuse. There is a world of difference between the metabolic requirements for a 4 minute pursuit and a 9 minute prologue. There is virtually no difference in those requirements between a 9 minute prologue and 7 hour road stage. I don't know how you get there is no difference between 4 minutes and 7 hours from that.


Digger28 said:


> Theo Bos and Chris Hoy could, according to this line of thinking, be able to at least, challenge for one day classics....:mad2:


Again you show you don't understand the concept of how energy is produced for events of differing duration. Bos and Hoy are primarily track sprinters riding only as far as 1Km. The metabolic systems needed for those events have little to do with and may be contrary to success in a one-day classic.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Digger28 said:


> Wiggins has been beaten before in bigger time trials than this, by fairly small margins, and has never reacted with this kind of anger. He knows, as he knew in Albi with Vino and Kasechkin, that this is not credible.


Wiggins has been beaten by Contador in the Paris Nice Prologue every time they met by times ranging from 2 to 60 seconds. Why should he be so surprised he was beaten now? Maybe he was mad that his program didn't provide as big a boost against Contador as he was promised.


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

asgelle said:


> Wiggins has been beaten by Contador in the Paris Nice Prologue every time they met by times ranging from 2 to 60 seconds. Why should he be so surprised he was beaten now? Maybe he was mad that his program didn't provide as big a boost against Contador as he was promised.


Armstrong, The Hog, and Contador himself were surprised. You knew it was going to happen all along.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

bigpinkt said:


> Armstrong, The Hog, and Contador himself were surprised. You knew it was going to happen all along.


Once again you fail to distinguish between not accepting statement A and believing the opposite of A must be true. The fact that I'm not surprised that Contador beat Wiggins yesterday does not imply that I would have been surprised if he had not.

And since when do you take what those three have to say as Gospel truth?


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

asgelle said:


> The fact that I'm not surprised that Contador beat Wiggins yesterday does not imply that I would have been surprised if he had not.


Of course, that allows you to argue both sides of the argument and not have a point in either.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

bigpinkt said:


> Of course, that allows you to argue both sides of the argument and not have a point in either.


Yes, it is quite possible that the polar extremes of an argument are both incorrect. 

Given their head to head performances at previous Paris Nice prologues, it is not surprising that Contador beats Wiggins. Given his performance on the track and other shorter TT's, it is not surprising that Wiggins beats Contador. Neither has shown such domination over the other that the outcome of yesterday's race should have been considered a foregone conclusion. 

There, that's my point.


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

asgelle said:


> Yes, it is quite possible that the polar extremes of an argument are both incorrect.
> 
> Given their head to head performances at previous Paris Nice prologues, it is not surprising that Contador beats Wiggins. Given his performance on the track and other shorter TT's, it is not surprising that Wiggins beats Contador. Neither has shown such domination over the other that the outcome of yesterday's race should have been considered a foregone conclusion.
> 
> There, that's my point.


 Wiggens and his team told everyone that would listen that he was targeting Paris-Nice prologue this year, training focused on it. In the past he took as nothing more then a warm up race. Because of this it was a surprise for almost everyone who follows the sport that a skinny little climber not just beat him, but the rest of the field, by a good margin.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

bigpinkt said:


> Wiggens and his team told everyone that would listen that he was targeting Paris-Nice prologue this year, training focused on it. In the past he took as nothing more then a warm up race. Because of this it was a surprise for almost everyone who follows the sport that a skinny little climber not just beat him, but the rest of the field, by a good margin.


Just because he targeted the race doesn't mean he would do well - and that ought to teach him and his team to advertise the fact. Wiggins could have just messed up his preparation - it happens. 

BTW AC has shown that he is much more than a "skinny little climber." He demonstrably has the rare ability to TT, Climb and hold off a field in a break all on his own - exactly the qualities of a 3x grand tour champion.


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

safetyguy said:


> Just because he targeted the race doesn't mean he would do well - and that ought to teach him and his team to advertise the fact. Wiggins could have just messed up his preparation - it happens.
> 
> BTW AC has shown that he is much more than a "skinny little climber." He demonstrably has the rare ability to TT, Climb and hold off a field in a break all on his own - exactly the qualities of a 3x grand tour champion.


Yup, and I heard he is riding Paris-Roubaix next month too


----------



## lookrider (Dec 3, 2006)

asgelle said:


> You either are not understanding what I wrote or are being deliberately obtuse. There is a world of difference between the metabolic requirements for a 4 minute pursuit and a 9 minute prologue. There is virtually no difference in those requirements between a 9 minute prologue and 7 hour road stage. I don't know how you get there is no difference between 4 minutes and 7 hours from that.
> 
> Again you show you don't understand the concept of how energy is produced for events of differing duration. Bos and Hoy are primarily track sprinters riding only as far as 1Km. The metabolic systems needed for those events have little to do with and may be contrary to success in a one-day classic.


And there is even more of a difference between the metabolic requirements of 100m and 200m?

This is absolute nonsense as myself and bigpinkt have pointed out with tons of anecdotal evidence of the same athletes performing well in both events..

How come Said Aaouta could run an 800 in 1:44, and 10,000 in less than 27:30, with a gold and WR in between at 5,000 meters.

This is laughable.

Contador is going to start winning crits and sprints too along with Paris Roubaix?

As far as anyone is concerned a 4 minute and 15 second effort is based primarily on aerobic capacity.

Did Fabio Parra or Lucho Herrera ever win a prologue? :lol: :yikes: :sad: ut: :hand: :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## function (Jun 20, 2008)

asgelle said:


> You either are not understanding what I wrote or are being deliberately obtuse. There is a world of difference between the metabolic requirements for a 4 minute pursuit and a 9 minute prologue. There is virtually no difference in those requirements between a 9 minute prologue and 7 hour road stage. I don't know how you get there is no difference between 4 minutes and 7 hours from that.
> 
> Again you show you don't understand the concept of how energy is produced for events of differing duration. Bos and Hoy are primarily track sprinters riding only as far as 1Km. The metabolic systems needed for those events have little to do with and may be contrary to success in a one-day classic.


On the contrary, 4minute and 9minute efforts are more closely tired (lots of vo2max dominance) than a 7 hour effort. Cyclists should be able to hold their vo2max power from 4 - 7 minutes...


----------



## function (Jun 20, 2008)

safetyguy said:


> Just because he targeted the race doesn't mean he would do well - and that ought to teach him and his team to advertise the fact. Wiggins could have just messed up his preparation - it happens.
> 
> BTW AC has shown that he is much more than a "skinny little climber." He demonstrably has the rare ability to TT, Climb and hold off a field in a break all on his own - exactly the qualities of a 3x grand tour champion.


When did he hold off the field on a non mountainous stage?


----------



## gray8110 (Dec 11, 2001)

4 minute efforts are certainly aerobic as are 9 minute efforts and 7 hour efforts. That's not to say that V02max dominance (as in a 4-9 minute effort) isn't crucial to being successful in a 7 hour race. The Ardennes classics are perfect examples - the rider who wins is usually doing so with an all out VO2 effort of 2-10 minutes at the end of a long day. They are drawing on the same systems as a prologue specialist, but the ability to make the most of a high V02 after 7 hours isn't available to many of the prologue specialists. It's worth pointing out that many riders who are competitive in the finish of the ardennes classics are in Contador's mold not Wiggins'. The top 15 in the ardennes is usually a mix of strongmen and grand tour contenders.

More to the point, I would argue though that there is a significant real-world difference between a steady 4 minute pursuit on the track and a 9 minute TT on a marginally technical course in wet conditions. The riders were coming to a crawl in the turns on the wet roads and sprinting out of them - repeated accelerations aren't terribly useful in a 4k pursuit but can gain time in every turn. This is completely overlooking the obvious - that bike handling is crucial in a short TT -- there is certainly handling skill to riding a flawless pursuit, but the skills aren't comparable.

Argue as much as you want about the physiological requirements of a pursuit compared to a short TT, Wiggins has shown (by his lack of significant results on the road) that his talent on the track doesn't translate to wins on the road. Looking at his Palmares, his only real notable result on the road was a win at the Dauphine Prologue last year.

Aside from a few specialists (Boardman, Cancellara, etc) prologues are the domain of the GC racers. Not all GC riders seem to be able to perform in them, but Contador has a strong history in them for sure, especially in Paris-Nice. He's been 4th and 5th in recent years on shorter courses. 

If you want to get down and dirty - does this ride make Contador more suspect in terms of doping? Not to me - his body of work, his associations and the circumstantial evidence surrounding him speaks for itself - the only thing that would cast more doubt his way would be if he failed a test. Winning a prologue at a targeted race in March? Not surprising. He's 27 - the ideal age for a champion stage racer. His palmares shows similar results throughout his career and he is at an age where he's able to break through and win the type of event that has been just out of his reach in the past.


----------



## Chili Fries (Jul 4, 2008)

bigpinkt said:


> Yup, and I heard he is riding Paris-Roubaix next month too


Lol. 

Can't compare the past P-N prologues cause they had a hill. In the 2007 Tour de France Wiggins beat him by 12 seconds in 8 flat kilometers. Now Contador wins by 7 seconds. A 19 second flip in 8 kilometers is crazy when Wiggins was after this one.


----------



## Nimitz (Jul 8, 2004)

MarkZeus said:


> Just watched it on tivo. I was not that surprise, Alberto Contador spent alot of time over the winter trying to improve his TT form and showed. Popo went before him & must have gave him great insight on the road ahead. AC and Astana is definately the team to beat. Also bad weather played a big role, Vandevelde was doing good up until he crashed. I was also surprised how bad Cadel Evans performed.


he said he hasn't changed his TT position since last year at all.

Chad


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

Chili Fries said:


> Lol.
> 
> Can't compare the past P-N prologues cause they had a hill. In the 2007 Tour de France Wiggins beat him by 12 seconds in 8 flat kilometers. Now Contador wins by 7 seconds. A 19 second flip in 8 kilometers is crazy when Wiggins was after this one.


Very true. The other two were it was close had climbs. But Asgelle still knew Contador was going to stomp on everyone.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

bigpinkt said:


> Very true. The other two were it was close had climbs. But Asgelle still knew Contador was going to stomp on everyone.


Well this will no doubt continue the discussion.

Big tosses up two profiles – I would argue the two shorter prologues would tend to favor the power type rider over a climber. A 60-70m hill in roughly 2k is not much of a climb (~3%). It is uphill but the distance/time is so short that the bigger (power) rider will do very well on that profile. The heavier rider will also fly down the back side of the hill (especially if it is straight). Now make that hill >5% and make it >10k – the climber will destroy the power rider.

AC would also do extremely well in the northern classics – he could probably win LBL, AG and the like. The cobbles are a different beast however and do seem to favor the bigger rider who can also power over the (relatively) short climbs and who can absorb a beating. 

The point at which I would become extremely suspect would be if AC started wining sprint finishes against the likes of Cavandish, Boonen and Petachi types – there should be no physical way – given his size - that he could maintain the same power over the same distance.


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

gray8110 said:


> He's 27 - the ideal age for a champion stage racer. His palmares shows similar results throughout his career and he is at an age where he's able to break through and win the type of event that has been just out of his reach in the past.


Isn't he closer to 25?


----------



## gray8110 (Dec 11, 2001)

iliveonnitro said:


> Isn't he closer to 25?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Contador

Looks like he's 26... his racing age is 27


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

bigpinkt said:


> Very true. The other two were it was close had climbs. But Asgelle still knew Contador was going to stomp on everyone.


I believe there's still room in the remedial reading class. Hurry before it's gone.


----------



## DMFT (Feb 3, 2005)

gray8110 said:


> 4 minute efforts are certainly aerobic as are 9 minute efforts and 7 hour efforts. That's not to say that V02max dominance (as in a 4-9 minute effort) isn't crucial to being successful in a 7 hour race. The Ardennes classics are perfect examples - the rider who wins is usually doing so with an all out VO2 effort of 2-10 minutes at the end of a long day. They are drawing on the same systems as a prologue specialist, but the ability to make the most of a high V02 after 7 hours isn't available to many of the prologue specialists. It's worth pointing out that many riders who are competitive in the finish of the ardennes classics are in Contador's mold not Wiggins'. The top 15 in the ardennes is usually a mix of strongmen and grand tour contenders.
> 
> More to the point, I would argue though that there is a significant real-world difference between a steady 4 minute pursuit on the track and a 9 minute TT on a marginally technical course in wet conditions. The riders were coming to a crawl in the turns on the wet roads and sprinting out of them - repeated accelerations aren't terribly useful in a 4k pursuit but can gain time in every turn. This is completely overlooking the obvious - that bike handling is crucial in a short TT -- there is certainly handling skill to riding a flawless pursuit, but the skills aren't comparable.
> 
> ...



- Wow, reasonable AND does make sense. In the doping forum no less.....


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

DMFT said:



> - Wow, reasonable AND does make sense. In the doping forum no less.....


As a pretty big skeptic, I'm willing to believe that Contador is riding clean and quite possibly the first clean GT winner in history. Of course, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he was doping either.

All that being said. What is remarkable is that at ~135lbs he is beating the rouleurs in long flat TTs let alone a prologue type event where they should have even slightly more of an advantage over a small rider.

What other small GC riders could hold their own, let alone win long flat TTs or flat prologues? I can remember Pantani and Simoni producing some respectable TTs toward the end of a GT but I don't think they were on flat courses.

Clean or not, Contador's performances in these type of events seems pretty exceptional to me.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> As a pretty big skeptic, I'm willing to believe that Contador is riding clean and quite possibly the first clean GT winner in history. Of course, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he was doping either.
> 
> All that being said. What is remarkable is that at ~135lbs he is beating the rouleurs in long flat TTs let alone a prologue type event where they should have even slightly more of an advantage over a small rider.
> 
> ...


How about the 60 kg Carlos Sastre only loosing 29 seconds to Cadel in stage 20 of the 08 TdF (to me that falls into the category of "holding their own"). This performance is much more suspect than Contadors recent P-N TT.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

safetyguy said:


> How about the 60 kg Carlos Sastre only loosing 29 seconds to Cadel in stage 20 of the 08 TdF (to me that falls into the category of "holding their own"). This performance is much more suspect than Contadors recent P-N TT.


I don't exactly think of Cadel as a rouleur, regardless there were ~10 rouleurs who did finish a minute or two faster than Sastre, many of whom also put time into Cadel. So if anything that stage illustrates my point perfectly.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> As a pretty big skeptic, I'm willing to believe that Contador is riding clean and quite possibly the first clean GT winner in history. Of course, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he was doping either.
> 
> All that being said. What is remarkable is that at ~135lbs he is beating the rouleurs in long flat TTs let alone a prologue type event where they should have even slightly more of an advantage over a small rider.
> 
> ...


...and Levi's 2007 stage 19 TT win - at 62 kg. AC was 5th...


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

safetyguy said:


> ...and Levi's 2007 stage 19 TT win - at 62 kg. AC was 5th...


Yeah, I thought of him as a possible exception. Although he's ridden far more where he wasn't at the front. I think he's also done some decent prologues.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> I don't exactly think of Cadel as a rouleur, regardless there were ~10 rouleurs who did finish a minute or two faster than Sastre, many of whom also put time into Cadel. So if anything that stage illustrates my point perfectly.


You said what other small riders could "hold thier own" in a long flat TT. I have given you 3 examples of small riders holding thier own - how many do you need?


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

safetyguy said:


> You said what other small riders could "hold thier own" in a long flat TT. I have given you 3 examples of small riders holding thier own - how many do you need?


Well I don't consider Sastre losing a couple of minutes holding his own, especially when that was a fairly good ride for him, no?

So we have Contador and Leipheimer?

And what about the small GC guys who typically lose many minutes or seconds in these type of events?

I'm standing by my original point, it is unusual for small GC riders not to concede lots of time in flat TTs.


----------



## safetyguy (Mar 17, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Well I don't consider Sastre losing a couple of minutes holding his own, especially when that was a fairly good ride for him, no?
> 
> So we have Contador and Leipheimer?
> 
> ...


Cadel Evans - 64 kg... Andreas Kloden 63 kg... I can keep going with a bevy of riders under 65 kg who are excellent TTers and GC threats - BTW there are also some who were/are dopers like Hamilton... 

Point is there are plenty of small guys who are very good TTers...


----------



## identifiler (Dec 24, 2005)

wiggins should really be mad at himself... It's a good thing the pure TT field was so small or he would have been in the pits !


----------



## identifiler (Dec 24, 2005)

I know it sounds nasty, but dropping from Paris Nice to go to your wife's grandma funerals... half of me says he is a decent guy, the other half says he has no killer instinct. C VV has only seen his daughter 3 times since she was born more than a month ago...


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*well golly*



choocher said:


> How in the world can Contador, a pure climber, beat the reigning Olympic pursuit champion on a flat, 9km course? Couldn't believe it when I saw the results. How can Contador do that, legitimately? I don't care what kind of form he has. He shouldn't be able to do that under ordinary, and fair, circumstances. What do you think?


Pantani did something like that in his TDF win.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

been saying it for a couple of years...
operation puerto and they have bags with conit's name on it.
spanish fed wont do squat...
only guy to hang with Raz on climbs and now outpowers TT guys. 
sheesh ignorance must be bliss....


----------

