DennistheMennis said:
OK, I'm not the expert youse are, but doesn't the proportion of fast-twitch and slow-twitch come into play too? Or is that factored into a rider's power output?
I think that "hill climbing" cannot be reduced to a simplistic power to weight formula, any more than cycling as a sport can be expressed in the same way. Obviously, as a general principle a rider with superior power to weight should be a better hill climber, but in most situations, it also means that the rider should be a better rider overall. Where the route is significantly flat, wind resistance is more of a factor than body weight so pure power numbers over the ride should win the day. In other words, a few extra pounds on a drafting rider are not as big a deal as when the same clydesdale starts to climb. For a time trialist, riding posture and aerodynamics might be a bigger issue than body mass. But even those things are just a general rule and there are always exceptions. I.E. a hilly time trial. At the end of the day, the rider with superior power to weight is probably always your "best overall rider" I can't imagine a rider without exceptional power to weight either winning the GC or the King of the Hill in the TdF, and there aren't many good fat time trialists. So "power to weight" as riding advice is the same as when your doctor tells you to eat right and exercise.
Other than that, what do you mean by "hill climbing" how high is the hill, what grade, how long is the climb. Some hills are nothing more than brief sprints up a short steep grade, so I would assume that sprinters would win that type of hill and "fast twitch" muscle composition may be important. If you are talking Pyrenees and Alp stages of the TdF, than there is no cheating power to weight over that kind of grind. Down to 15 miles an hour there is still some drafting advantage so the ability to draft and stay reasonably aerodynamic while seated may help in that setting, certainly if the hill can be climbed in the high teens and is long enough. And timing is key. Gassing at the crest will kill a good hill climb and leave you with no momentum as you start the descent.
For us club/recreational riders there are a lot more factors. Paramount among them may be the subjective "rider desire" I don't like to ever let someone beat me up a significant hill. I will kill myself to win it and be bummed the rest of the ride if I am not first or in the first group. And I feel the difference if I am a lean 165 versus a portly 175, and I am still going to kill myself getting up there even if I am carrying the extra lbs. But if I don't win the sprint at the end of the ride, or dog at the front during my pull in the paceline, I can live with myself.
As far as hill training in the winter, I can tell you that like one of the other posters to this thread (French?), I spend a lot of time on my trainer sitting and grinding it out close to the anerobic threshold in interval fashion to improve my climbing. Since most of the steep hills in my area (SE PA) can be climbed in about 3-8 minutes, I tend to do my fair share of intervals in that time frame, I also like a pyramid hill where I am increasing tension on my spin bike at minute intervals for a total "virtual" hill climb of about 12 minutes, with the last two or three minutes finally standing. I also like a lot of those Johnny G style jumps on the spin bike (5 sets of 100) increasing tension on each set.
But in the summer, I train on the very hills I climb. I know the gear I want to be in when I hit certain spots on the hill and when to sit and where to stand. I also will turn around and re-do a hill in interval fashion till I have it figured out. On "my hills" I will usually beat even a superior hill climber (better power to weight) because I know how to ride them.
