Zurich Cycling Would Championship.

[AJB Temple]

Pogacar attacks 100km out and basically is not seen again by the rest of the pack. Incredible dominance. He may turn out to be the best cyclist the world has ever seen so far. I used to live just round the lake from the course there and it was lovely to watch.

 

[Mike G]

Jonas Vingegaad would have a view on Pogacar's ranking, methinks. Granted, Pogacar is more versatile than Vingegaad, and more exciting to watch, but when fully fit, Vingegaad has beaten Pogacar in 2 TdFs.

 

[AJB Temple]

True. I remarked to my wife that the only one capable of staying with Pog is Jonas. But he was not there this time. In one of those two TdF Jonas had a vastly better team and they were well organised. Teams were not really relevant in Zurich due to the race type and conditions according to the commentators. Not sure I quite get why.

 

[StevieB]

The main advantage to having a team in a stage race/grand tour is that they can protect the team leader, specifically shelter/drafting but more importantly going at a pace the team leader dictates rather than the pace a rival rider/team dictates. If you are on the edge (and these guys know their watts and output levels and what they can and cannot sustain) then riding just below that max can be incredibly important. Sure, when the high mountains kick in and teams drop away to leave just the leaders, this all evaporates except perhaps drafting since you can draft behind anyone, but you have to be able to hold their pace to do so. A grand tour is both a 'strongest cyclist' race and a tactical battle fought between teams. A strong team can help a weaker team leader (relatively, they are all super fit!) win, but a weak team cannot help a strong team leader if they cannot go at a pace that he requires. So for Zurich yesterday, no teams (or not enough of a team to be useful) and no radio's for riders to be able to coordinate strategy means the stronger cyclist has an advantage, not the strongest team.

 

[Mike G]

I think that team radio thing is quite a big deal, as are the power meters. I would love to see both banned. You would then get a whole lot more unpredictability. Banning power meters would make an enormous difference on hills, and in time trials with riders having to judge their pace without just sitting watching a screen. I've done TTs against riders with power meters, and they just know how fast they can go throughout the race without the danger of blowing up or cramping........whereas I just had to know my own body. Guys who weren't fundamentally faster than me would beat me concistently because of their power meters. Banning radios would make the job of domestiques even more critical, and give the sprint teams real problems with breakaways on the flatter days. It would really shake up road racing, particularly stage races.

 

[AJB Temple]

It was interesting yesterday as I've never seen anyone tell the field at that start when he was going to break away, and then just do it, 100km out. One guy tried to stay with him for a while. Presumably the field thought they would reel him in towards the end, but in reality the gap became bigger.

Chris Boardman said at one point that the numerous small attacks for second and third tend to result in a slower overall time - presumably because they all expend a burst of energy and then have to recover. He also said that there was little advantage from slip streaming in that race but I wasn't clear why.

He also commented that it was important for Pog not to get hunger weak (can't recall the term he used) towards the end, but I didn't see him take any energy bars. I don't think there was team radio as Pog was shown a chalk board from a motorbike a couple of times, telling him what the gap was.

Presumably everyone could fit a power meter if they wanted to, so it would even things out?

 

[Mike G]

All the pros have power meters. Every last one of them. There's a generation that has grown up relying on them.

Energy additives, protein and/ or carbohydrate, are available for drinks. You don't have to take them in the form of gels or chews, so it isn't actually possible to tell when someone is re-fueling as opposed to re-hydrating. The word you were looking for is hypo-glycemic, or, colloquially, "bonking".

 

[AJB Temple]

I thought bonking meant something else.

 

[AJB Temple]

Based on the above, I read up about power meters. Seem very smart as they measure pedalling rate and torque applied to the cranks via crank or pedal and feed it to an onboard computer, which along with heart rate device gives continuous monitoring of how much fuel is being burnt by the body vs how much theoretically is left, and all kinds of information on performance. Quite an eye opener as I thought they just measured cadence. Seems like a great tool, but jolly expensive. https://www.bikeradar.com/advice/buyers-guides/best-power-meters

 

[spb]

Yep. The very simplified theory is that you train with one recording your power output at all times, and end up with the absolute knowledge that, other things being controlled for, you can continue to output X watts for Y hours without running into problems. Then you just ride so that your power meter reads X at all times, and you know for certain that this is the fastest ride your body is capable of right now. No guesswork, no riding to how you feel, just the numbers.

Of course it can't help you descend, but on the big climbs and time trials where the grand tours are won, it basically guarantees you're riding to the best performance you can.