The One Hour Record

gntlmn

Although I don't think he has publicly stated it, I think Lance Armstrong would love to have this world One Hour Record. He says he may skip the Tour de France in 2005 to do other cycling events. My guess is that he may take the opportunity to set a world record in the one hour.

n crowley

Don't forget that today's riders are at a big disadvantage when attempting
the UCI standard hour record because it is mainly TT riders who take up the
challenge and all their TT riding has been done in a completely different
position on aero-bars. When was the last time Armstrong rode at close to
maximum power output in the drops position for an hour. While Boardman
already had a bone defect, his hour record victory in that drops position did
not do his back any favours. However if any rider was to acquire the
linear pedaling style, it would suddenly become his new normal TT style,
in keeping with all UCI hour record rules and enable him to use a relaxing
powerful pedalling technique, ideal for the hour record and TT's, instead
of the torturous back breaking circular or stomping pedalling styles.

gntlmn

You may have noticed we talked quite a bit about Boardman quite a ways back on this thread. He certainly took a big hit on his speed by riding the UCI approved bike compared to what he did as his best in the One Hour Performance (as opposed to what they call the UCI record--the One Hour Record). Actually, if you really want to compare different riding positions and aerodynamics, compare the HPV's, which are turning around 50 mph for an hour, compared to the UCI Merckx bike standard, which is closer to 31 mph. So you know why they had to rein in the natural progression from what this group of riders was doing in outdoing themselves all the way from the first rider to break Merckx' record on a nonstandard bike to the last, which was Chris Boardman in the Superman position. Chris would have ridden far faster in an HPV with full fairing. It's just that the game would have changed so much; you would have wondered if we were still watching cyclists. After all, there are HPV's which fly, and they pedal those too.

As for pedalling styles, much is written about those, but as far as I know, there is no UCI limitation on how you pedal. If you want to stomp them, spin them or pedal, as you say, linearly, I don't think any official's going to say foul. I haven't seen anything negative written about Lance's riding style. He chooses to spin quickly, in the tradition of Anquetil and Indurain. I don't think he'll modify his pedalling or need to. But I agree, it will take some getting used to to ride the UCI Hour Record bike. It will be interesting to follow this from when he decides to make a run at it all the way through the actual event. I haven't heard any definite plans from him though.

n crowley

Do you know if there is a restriction on the width of the normal drop bars ?

ric_stern/RST

Boardman's distance was significantly less in the UCI approved record in part simply because his power output was significantly less than when he did the "superman" record. In other words, he was much less fit.

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

n crowley

[QUOTE=ric_stern/RST]Boardman's distance was significantly less in the UCI approved record in part simply because his power output was significantly less than when he did the "superman" record. In other words, he was much less fit.


For any rider, over a 15 or 30 min. period, is his/her power output in the UCI
approved drops position equal to the power output in the aero bar TT
position?

ric_stern/RST

noel, i don't understand your query? do you can a rider produce the same power in the drops as they can in a TT position? (they can probably produce the same or more).

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

n crowley

You understood it correctly. Graeme Obree claimed that the more forward
position on the bike/saddle gave him more power and made it possible for
him to turn those bigger gears in his pursuit events in an aero TT position.
He said it gave a more powerful out of the saddle type of riding with less
weight resting on the saddle.

gntlmn

I would agree with you that his power output was probably less, but what evidence do you have that he was less fit? It may have been that he was able to generate more power in the superman position than he could in the classic position.

Consider the following. The athletes with the greatest aerobic output per kg are not cyclists. They are cross country skiers. If power output were the only limitation, then they would also be the fastest TT cyclists (ie, the best cc skier would have the hour record). Such is not the case. Clearly they cannot generate the wattage they do on cc skis on bikes. Are they in poorer shape when they get on the bikes? Nope. Something else is at play here.

Granted, this comparison is quite a bit different than the comparison of a cyclist's power output in one position compared to the same cyclist's power output in another, but it's a leap to say that Chris was not in as good shape when he was on the classic bike. I would believe it if I could see power output readings in both positions.

You can make the same argument with HPV's. If it were a simple translation of wattage from road (or track) bicycle riding to HPV, then Chris would have claimed the one hour HPV record. He didn't attempt it. It's not that easy. Talents cannot be assumed to be transferable even with a small change such as classic position to superman. It may not be the same rider who would win both ways.

If you have some evidence to show that a rider can generate the same wattage irrespective of positioning, I'd like to see it here. That would be interesting. My guess is that the data would show that the wattage does not transfer seamlessly.

ric_stern/RST

while this is true (i.e., different positions), usually you produce less power in the aero position than the classic position not the other way around.

additionally, it was well reported in the press that he was less fit and would be touch and go if he could beat the record, and finally i was at university with his advisors, so also know the former point.



not when matched for size. and anyway, the greatest power is put out by sprinters



this just shows you have a misunderstanding of exercise physiology. just because someone can generate a lot of power in one exercise modality doesn't mean they can do it in a different modality. this is why adaptations to training are specific to the joint angle and velocity at which they're trained. an elite runner/skier/whatever will only be elite at their proper sport in a different sport they may only be average (or whatever) and lesser athletes could be better than them. this lack of transfer from one modality to another is part of the reason why weights are a waste of time for endurance cycling performance (see training section of the forum).



see my point above.

however, the main point is that he wasn't as fit (i.e., lower power output in any position) as reported in the press and to his team, and the fact that you generate more power in the classic versus the aero position.

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

n crowley

however, the main point is that he wasn't as fit (i.e., lower power output in any position) as reported in the press and to his team, and the fact that you generate more power in the classic versus the aero position.

ric[/QUOTE]




Why do you generate more power in the classic position ?

Daniel.lloyd

Its simply due to the nature of the 'extreme' time trial position - the lower you attempt to get at the front end, the more constricted your lungs and therefore breathing can be. There is always a trade off between aerodynamics and postion - the most aerodynamic position isn't always fastest, if it means that it severely restricts your power output. I don't like to use him as an example, but Lance shows this - his position is by no means the most aerodynamic out there - wind tunnel testing has brought him to his current position where he produces the best power/aerodynamic drage ratio.

Zac

Samr thing with Big Mig. His lungs were so large that he couldn't get as low as he would need to truly be great on the track. Boardman on the other hand could easily get as low as he needed to be as aero as possible. By the way. What are the restrictions to the new UCI rule for the hour record. Couldn't you get around the no aero bars thing by simply slapping on a really long stem and some extra narrow bars?

gntlmn

I think your problem is not perhaps with your knowledge of exercise physiology, but with your logical reasoning. You say that I have a misunderstanding of exercise physiology, and then, to support this point, you go on to make the same point I already made, inferring that I hadn't made the point yet.

"just because someone can generate a lot of power in one exercise modality doesn't mean they can do it in a different modality," you say.

You see what I mean? That was the point I made to begin with. The original contention you made, if you may recall, was that Chris Boardman was out of shape when he broke the world record on the UCI bike. I contended that we don't know whether Chris Boardman was really very out of shape or if he simply could not generate as much power in the classic position vis-a-vis Eddy Merckx, even though he seemed to generate a substantially higher power relative to the other riders in the Superman position.

That it was "generally reported in the press" that Boardman was out of shape doesn't mean that he really was. That's why I suggested we might want to look at data. My experience with researching exactly what is said in the press with what is really true has demonstrated to me time and time again that what people generally take to be true needs a closer look. Often it's not true.

Another point that you make contradicts yourself. You say that exercise specificity results in varying power output (again, this is the point I already had made). Then you go on to say that the aero position is lower for power output, not greater.

How many people do you know who have trained in the Superman position? If they don't train in the Superman position, then they cannot get exercise adaptivity. Therefore, just because they cannot immediately generate as much power on the first day of doing this Superman position doesn't necessarily mean that they cannot adapt, with training, and generate relatively more power in the future. I suspect that Chris Boardman trained in that Superman position long enough to get exercise specific adaptivity. So his power readings in the Superman position cannot be compared with the other riders without first considering this important distinction. It wouldn't be fair to the other riders who haven't trained that way.

Furthermore, we both agree, although you seem to think I hadn't made that point yet (see above), that power output varies greatly with positioning and exercise modality. The subject of this thread is the One Hour Record on the UCI bike. Eddy Merckx had held that record for so many years until Boardman broke it. All the while, he didn't get the credit he deserved because his efforts were overshadowed by rides which were done on more aerodynamic bikes by riders who could not beat him on the classic bike. The fact that Boardman broke the record only by a very small distance when he went back to the classic bike is no small point here. If he were out of shape at the time, I'd have to see some hard data, not just what a reporter claimed and then everyone else repeated in the press. This is not at all to belittle what Boardman accomplished on that day. More importantly, it highlights just how great Eddy Merckx was in Eddy's day and what a huge difference aerodynamics makes on the One Hour Record.