The One Hour Record

bikeguy

[QUOTE=gntlmn] Then look at this photo while he's actually riding. See how bent his arms are?

http://www.sportal.com.au/otherspor...i=news&id=68573

That photo is from him riding on aerobars in a road TT event, not the Mercx style hour event. Note the red aerodynamic helmet.

-Bikeguy

taras0000

It was the one hour record at the time that they made their attempts, so therefore, there attempts were within the rules. It was later renamed because the UCI has their heads up their ass when it comes to allowing the sport to evolve. The "Merckx" record should be dubbed the performance, as that is what it is. But enough on the UCI. I could go on and on about them. It would be nice if we had a crystal ball that allowed us to see into the future so that future attempts can be made with whatever rules get changed down the road.




The superman position helps the short and the tall. It is just more aerodynamic. And Boardman wouldn't need a smaller front wheel, just a smaller head tube. He had plenty left over to shorten it if he wanted to, and he still would've been in the rules. The drops of his handlebars are a few centimeters above the top of the tire. He could've dropped his bars down so that they are level with the top of the tire, that's the allowable limit in the rules.


http://www.cbw.cz/phprs/2005072523.html



http://www.velomag.se/contents/imag...ndrej190705.jpg

And some other shots.

http://www.sosenka.cz/uvodni.jpg
http://www.mojenoviny.cz/obrazek/sosenka_oval.jpg

Now you have a picture of each rider, on the straightaway, in a similar position. Go ahead an make your comparisons about position.

The front of his torso is level with the ground. Same with Merckx, same with Boardman. The shoulders of all three riders are just above their hips. The breastbone/stomach/pelvis on all three riders creates a line parallel to the ground, giving them all a similar, if not the same torso angle. Sosenka's position just looks more dramatic because his long arms and legs neccesitate a deep drop to the bars. So, because all three riders share the same postion, your argument about Sosenka's position being more aero doesn't hold water.




I recall Eddy taking full advantage of everything he could. Drilled this, titanium that, altitude. Is that bending the rules or just taking the rules to the limit of their gray area? Or were there no rules about that back then? Shouldn't Eddy have rode a bicycle similar to Henri Desgrange's, using a position similar to his as well?




Aerodynamics would then be an illegal advantage? I would think that aerodynamics would be more of an equalizer. Anyone can employ them, and usually the smarter riders do. Eddy did. He used a skinsuit, tucked down low when he rode, went to a velodrome where the air was thinner. In fact, Eddy exploited what was available then more than Sosenka or Boardman did. If you look at the spirit that Eddy attempted his hour record in, the Athlete's hour should be the sideshow, something that riders, if they have the balls to do it, can compare themselves to the greats of yesteryear. The Hour record as it was in it's former state, should still be viewed as the ultimate record to achieve, as all Hour Records leading up to Eddy's and beyond were done in the same spirit, to be faster than anyone before.

__________________
Taras

2006

This quote nails it on the head.

And what about previous WR's at other distances which are now being broken by riders using superior equipment and technology.

Time moves on, riders are better, technology is better, therefore allow things to advance. Merckx was GREAT, and make no mistake on that. No one can discount his accomplishments.

I've always said, you can only beat your contempuraries, after you've done that you have no control regarding the future.

2006

gntlmn

The only photo which really shows Sosenka from a side profile is the one I posted earlier. I'll repost the link here.

http://www.cbw.cz/phprs/2005072523.html

The other photos you can't really discern the forward lean or lack thereof. You just can't tell what's going on.

If you want to determine how much drag a posture generates, you pretty much have to test it in a wind tunnel. I don't have any reason to believe that Boardman's 56 kph attempt in 1996 (later disallowed) was more horsepower than his 49 kph recordbreaker in 1999. I wouldn't believe it until I saw what happens in a wind tunnel and with tubes and wires hooked up to him. It's kind of late for that now. Remember 56 may sound impressive against 50, but it doesn't sound very impressive against 84 kph (hpv's). Given that Boardman was somewhere in between a UCI bicycle and an HPV with regard aerodynamics, who knows if it's very impressive at all. It's only impressive because he later did break the record on a UCI bike, albeit by only a few meters.

As for standouts, the only one that still stands out in my mind among the latest 3 UCI record holders is Merckx. He was the most disadvantaged of the 3 because of the time period and his lack of access to all the advancements since then: nutrition, training (power meters, heart rate monitors, altitude tents, etc.), financing. He may have had thin air on his record, but he was not acclimatized to the air in Mexico City. So the lack of oxygen would have canceled the aerodynamic advantage (most likely). And then there's that question of no forward lean. Hmmm.

taras0000

If you can't see the angles of their torsos, then you're wither being stubborn or you need your eyes checked. And you mentioned a downward lean in one of your earlier posts, well, a downward lean is not more earodynamic then a flat torso. Look up the windtunnel tests of all the top riders and how the results changed with their positions. Velonews had an article on the Mercury cycling team, John Cobb did tests on all the Postal/Disco riders, Rabobank tested their riders, so did Gerolsteiner. Read those articles and tell us what you find. The more parallel the torso to the ground, the more aerodynamic it is. Turning yourself into a wedge, whether facing forward, or backwards, is less aerodynamic. I don't care who you are, Lance or Joe Average, air is going to behave the same for everyone. Will people have subtle differences in their drag? Yes, some people are just more earodynamic than others, but the same aerodynamic stance will apply to all riders. Lance doesn't sit so high on his TT bike because it's more aero for him, he sits that high to get more power and open his chest up.

Take a good look at the photos. You don't need to have a side view to see where their shoulders are in relation to their hips. Each riders shoulders sit just slightly above their hips when they are doing their attempt. The photo you posted of Sosenka from the side can't be used since he is not actually riding. And it wasn't taken after the attempt, it was taken before he set off. Lets compare apples to apples here.




Bringing HPV's and aero equipment into the discussion is irrelevant. All riders had a similar position, used similar equipment. Boardman just sqeaked past Merckx, Sosenka eclipsed them both. All were impressive rides.





ALthough he didn't have an altitude tent, Eddy trained for the Hour with a trainer and air mixtures that had a similar composition to Mexico City's. You don't need a power meter to attempt the record, or a heart rate monitor, just a watch and a velodrome, and I'm sure Eddy had access to that. The financing wasn't a problem, his team and sponsors took care of all his training. Yes he did pay out of pocket to have the attempt in Mexico City, but everything up until then was taken care of for him. Financing didn't seem to impede his attempt either, seeing as he clearly had the money to take the best of everything to pull it off. How about we set a new standard, sea level attempts only, and a bicycle that mimics the designs from 1905.


what about it?

__________________
Taras

gntlmn

If you want me to look at some articles, you'd have better luck including the links. But let's grant you the benefit of the doubt and say that the most aerodynamic posture is as parallel to the ground as possible. Well, that does make sense, especially if your legs are parallel as well. For example, the world records with HPV's are with both upper body and legs parallel to the ground. So the advantage of having the legs parallel, as opposed to only the torso (Boardman style, including arms) will get you about another 28 kph, if you include also the aerodynamic advantage of the windfoiling. That's a huge number.

As I said, I can only see the angle on Sosenka, and that looks parallel to the ground to me. He is not riding, but he is sitting on the bike on the seat, and his arms are in the drops. The other riders' torsos are slightly uplifted relative to him. I'm not being stubborn in the sense that I am refusing to concede an observable fact. I am being stubborn about refusing to call an apple an orange when you insist that they are equivalent. Indeed, this is not a small point you make. The difference between parallel to the ground and slightly uplifted will be substantial, as you say, judging by the wind tunnel analyses. I haven't read those articles, but my guess is that you are correct in those statements. Yes, that does make sense. My guess is that if Sosenka lifted his torso to the angle the other riders had (Boardman, Merckx), he would not have broken the record. He may prove me wrong by going out and redoing the event in a slightly uplifted posture, but I doubt that he would do it that way. Why? Because he didn't break the rules. He is not to blame for Merckx' and Boardman's not taking the rules to their allowable limit. That they weren't clever enough to interpret them the way he did is not his fault.




HPV's and aero equipment did apply to this discussion. If you read the thread way back, there was a discussion of the difference between the One Hour Performance and the One Hour Record (UCI). The continuity of the UCI event goes from Merckx' record breaking effort in 1972 in Mexico City to Boardman's next breaking of the record in England in 1999. There were many attempts on the record in between those two dates, but none of them were deemed to fit the UCI standard. Therefore, they were tossed. When I mentioned the HPV record, it was in response to a reader's comment that Boardman had set the best record out of all with his 56 kph attempt. Well, that's not true. It was the most aerodynamic posture of all which were even considered to be one hour attempts on Merckx' record. Even you will concede that. In fact, you already have by your discussion. The reason I brought up HPV's is that 56 kph may sound great against the UCI record, but he didn't follow UCI rules in that attempt. So when you remove the rules, what do you get? Well, you get a competition against HPV's, which don't have such restrictions. 56 KPH is lousy against 84 KPH, which is the HPV hour record. To say that it is the strongest effort of all really doesn't make much sense. That's the point I was making.





I'm aware of Eddy's training with the air mixture. If you read carefully the scientific literature regarding the altitude tents, you will see that there is only minimal advantage to training at elevation. That's not the way to go. The motto is sleep high, train low. In other words, you get a training effect by sleeping in the tents (or living in them, meaning relaxing, eating, sleeping, etc.), and then going outside and training at sea level. You don't want to train at elevation because you don't get the muscle training effect. In other words, you cannot train for power that way. With your blood acclimatized to elevation from the tents, on the other hand, you will have greater horsepower at sea level. Thus, you will have a greater training effect as well.

Sure, you don't need a power meter or HR monitor to attempt the record. But it sure helps when you're training before you get there. To think otherwise is to ignore the contributions these devices have made to the sport. I doubt anyone would argue otherwise, even you. So Merckx had a disadvantage in that regard.

It's easier to see the financing issue if consider the relative numbers. How much money do you think was spent in Merckx' day by sponsors? Then compare that with todays. The difference is astronomical. Financing has dramatically changed the sport as we know it today. Merckx is hailed as the best rider of all time by virtue of his palmares. What made that possible? Well, it was lack of financing. Lack? Yes, lack. He had to compete in so many events in a year that he had little time to focus on key events. But the other riders couldn't either. Gone are those days. Riders now have much greater financing. They are able to train for the Tour de France and make it their one race for the year. They ride other races, but their focus is the Tour. They couldn't afford to do that in Merckx' era. They needed the financial rewards from competing in so many more races. Therefore, they could not peak like they do today. Thus, financing gave Boardman and Sosenka better opportunity than Merckx had because they are in another era in cycling where financing is more abundant.

I guess if you want to change the current UCI regulations on this event, you'd have to bring it up with UCI. If you consider history, though, you will have to consider comparability. What will be most comparable to the most riders holding the hour record in the past: the 1905 frame, or the one currently allowed? I don't think the 1905 standard would help.




The relative lean that Sosenka had is what gave him the biggest advantage in the hour. He had a forward lean relative to the other riders (leaned to parallel position to the ground, as evident in the photo). The others' leans were upwards of parallel. Advantage: Sosenka.

gntlmn

from http://www.bicirace.com/news/2005/20050720.html

these are the recognized holders of the uci one hour record from its inception:

1893: 35.325K - H. Desgrange
1894: 38.220K - J. Dubois
1897: 39.240K - M. V.d.Eynde
1898: 40.781K - W. Hamilton
1905: 41.110K - L. Petit-Breton
1907: 41.520K - M. Berthet
1912: 42.122K - O. Egg
1913: 42.306K - R. Weise
1913: 42.741K - M. Berthet
1913: 43.525K - O. Egg
1913: 43.775K - M. Berthet
1914: 44.247K - O. Egg
1933: 44.588K - J. van Hout
1933: 44.777K - M. Richard
1935: 45.090K - G. Olmo
1936: 45.398K - M. Richard
1937: 45.558K - F. Slaats
1937: 45.840K - M. Archambaud
1942: 45.871K - F. Coppi
1956: 46.159K - J. Anquetil
1956: 46.393K - E. Baldini
1957: 46.924K - R. Riviere
1958: 47.346K - R. Riviere
1967: 47.493K - J. Anquetil
1967: 48.093K - F. Bracke
1968: 48.653K - O. Ritter
1972: 49.431K - E. Merckx
2000: 49.441K - C. Boardman
2005: 49.700K - O. Sosenka
(There were many attempts between 1972 and 2000, but those were used with special aero setups.)

you'll notice that moser was the sponsor for sosenka's frame. recall that he is one of the ones that held the aerodynamically aided version of the uci record before it was later disallowed due to aero advantage. i wonder if he had something to do with sosenka's frame design. my guess is that he had some input. i wouldn't be surprised if it was he who knew how to take the rules to the edge of the envelope.

gntlmn

Now that Sosenka has convincingly broken the hour record on what looks like a bike designed speicifically for a very, very tall rider, how long is it going to be before we see another assault on the hour? I don't hear anything from Armstrong about it. I suppose his retirement is complete and even includes the Hour Record. It would be neat to see him and Sosenka have a back and forth competition for a few years. It would certainly add excitement to the sport.

gntlmn

Armstrong may decide in a few years whether to go for this record. I think his range of good years is greater for this One Hour event than it would be for the Tour de France. In other words, he is retired from road racing, but there is no reason he should call it quits for the One Hour Record. He may even have a chance at it into his early 40's. I believe the 24 hr HPV record wss set by a 55 year old. This is the cycling event with the full aerodynamic bulletlike airfoil. Age seems to enhance determination. He doesn't have to get up the next day for another stage race either.

wilmar13

Age isn't his downfall... I remember reading that Armstrong will never be able to challenge the hour record because he can't get into a good aero position. At least on paper with wind tunnel data he has no chance.

wilmar13

Maybe paced though? Can't be worse than Maggy's recent attempt.

gntlmn

Hmmm. That may be true. Without seeing any wind tunnel data, we have to judge by what we see. He has wider shoulders than most riders. That might support your contention. Lemond looked decidedly different in top form, clearly exhibiting narrower shoulders and thicker legs.

If what you say is true, then that may explain why Armstrong suggested he would attempt at altitude. There, aerodynamics are not nearly as much of a factor; it's more a matter of wattage per kg. Then he may have a relative advantage.

on the age factor, take a look at this: http://www.bikecult.com/bikecultboo...ecordsHour.html

Notice that the oldest man to ever claim the hour record was 33 years old when he did it, assuming the list is accurate, and no older athletes have been excluded. But then notice that the oldest woman was 42 when she set hers. So I don't think age would put him out of commission. I think the men retire from the sport and set the record at about that time. If they focused exclusively on the Hour Record after retiring from pro road racing, the oldest male record holder I think would rise in age considerably.

matbooth

Back in January or February it was announced that Laszlo Bodrogi is going to have a crack at Sosenka's record. The attempt is due to happen shortly before the 2006 Road World Championships. There's a brief report on my website (www.trackcycling.info) in the old news section (Feb 2). Detail was a bit sparse at the time but I believe the attempt will be in Bordeaux, not Wien as suggested in that piece.

gntlmn

Hey! Thanks a lot for the tip. I'm not familiar with how to navigate your website, but I'm doing searches now on Bodrogi. He's 6'1 1/2" (1.87 m) and 77 kg (169 lbs). When I have more time, I'll look closer at your website for that article.

It's a relief that someone else is having a go at it so soon. I was a little worried that Sosenka had scared off the competition, but apparently this is not the case.

I see on 4/13/2006 that a report had him scheduled to ride and test himself and equipment the following week: http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3924 (at the bottom of the page).

Here they say he completed the test on 4/21. the article is dated 5/1. http://www.procycling.com/news.aspx?ID=2068 (again at the bottom of the page).

I can't seem to find a photo of that Look bike he is going to ride, which he wind tunnel tested. I guess it's like his road bike. Does anyone know of a photo of him on his bike? I've seen a few, but they are not full profile, and they are small. I'm trying to get a good idea of his aerodynamic posture.

It appears the event is still a go. Thanks again for mentioning it.