The One Hour Record

Aha, I've got it!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/sponsors/italia/2004/colnago/?id=colnago5

so 5.5 kg.

wilmar13 said:

I'm going way out on a limb here and going to guess Sosenka. 😕

I'm not sure if you don't understand the UCI's "athletes hour", your english (or my interpretation of it) is really bad, or a combination of both. Soenska beat Merckx's record with the same bicycle technology Merckx used 30 years ago (and without riding at 2000M altitude)... your comment about bicycle technology is a moot point as it is not allowed to be used for the athletes hour...the last person to attempt the hour record using "modern" bicycle technology was Boardman back in 1996 and he managed 56.38 km in one hr. FWIW Boardman also beat Merkx without his "modern bicycle" or riding at altitude as well.

Sosenka put a different twist in the game in that his back wheel is extra heavy. UCI has lower limits on weight, but I don't think it says where those weights can be distributed. It also doesn't say you have to be approaching the lower limit. Sosenka ignored the lower limit. If it were an uphill TT, that would have clearly been a mistake, but this game is flat. Perhaps it is advantageous to have a slightly heavier rear wheel, perhaps not. He didn't use exactly as light weight bicycle as Merckx did, but he did break the record convincingly. Also the track was longer too for Sosenka. It's pretty hard to get these various riders to duplicate the conditions exactly throughout history, even with rules. Clearly, Sosenka followed the UCI rules and broke the record. The prevailing wisdom is that the lighter the bike, the greater advantage. I'm not so sure that is true in the One Hour. Still, bottom line: Sosenka's the man now. I'm eager to see him make another go at it. He wants to break 50 km.

Sosenka's record notables:

rear wheel weight=3.2 kg=7.04 lbs
gears=54 x 13
total bike weight=9.8 kg=21.56 lbs
cranks=190 mm
rider's height=6'7"=200.7 cm

Note also that the bike is "standard" in form but not in substance; since his legs are so long, the seat is extra high for the frame size he chose. Therefore, he must lean way down to reach the drops. It's not a superman position, but clearly it's not typical for road riders to have such a high seat. Actually, when I look at the bike, I begin to realize why he didn't want to flirt with the lower UCI weight limit. His frame size is smaller than you would expect for a big man like him. Therefore, he'd need more weight in the bike to prevent flex in the smaller triangles. The extra weight in the back wheel also reduces flex loss. He achieves this by not worrying about weight. His payoff is a better aerodynamic position. The more I think about it, the less impressed I am about his record. Merckx didn't lean way down like this. Clearly, Sosenka has a more aerodynamic bike by taking advantage of the fact that it is vertically too small for him. Take a look.

http://www.sosenka.cz/m12.jpg

gntlmn said:

Clearly, Sosenka has a more aerodynamic bike by taking advantage of the fact that it is vertically too small for him. Take a look.

http://www.sosenka.cz/m12.jpg

Sosenka's set-up is not that much different from most tall riders. When people start getting as tall as he is, it usually comes more from their limbs than from their torso. So, long legs, short torso, and long arms = long seat tube, short top tube, and a big drop to the bars because of the long arms. Is he in a more extreme position than Merckx? Yes. Is this wrong? No. If Merckx was smarter, he would have been in a more aerodynamic postion also. But that sort of knowledge wasn't as refined back then as it is know. Clearly Sosenka's set-up was pure smarts. The bike fit his body. He is primarily a TT'er. They usually have agressive aerodynamic tucks. The hour is a TT. He clearly mimicked his aero tuck as much as possible with the classic position.

taras0000 said:

Sosenka's set-up is not that much different from most tall riders. When people start getting as tall as he is, it usually comes more from their limbs than from their torso. So, long legs, short torso, and long arms = long seat tube, short top tube, and a big drop to the bars because of the long arms. Is he in a more extreme position than Merckx? Yes. Is this wrong? No. If Merckx was smarter, he would have been in a more aerodynamic postion also. But that sort of knowledge wasn't as refined back then as it is know. Clearly Sosenka's set-up was pure smarts. The bike fit his body. He is primarily a TT'er. They usually have agressive aerodynamic tucks. The hour is a TT. He clearly mimicked his aero tuck as much as possible with the classic position.

Yeah, I found it really enlightening just how much voodoo stuff is esposed by even the supposed greats of cycling... reading the link that catabolic jones put about Colnago drilling out everything on Merckx's bike to make it lighter just makes you wonder how of much thier succuss was in spite of what they did rather than because of what they did... also I will never buy a Colnago, geesh what a moron 😄

wilmar13 said:

reading the link that catabolic jones put about Colnago drilling out everything on Merckx's bike to make it lighter just makes you wonder how of much thier succuss was in spite of what they did rather than because of what they did... also I will never buy a Colnago, geesh what a moron 😄

Heheheh. I tend to agree with you about the drilling and the weakening of the frame. On the other hand, very few riders would be that insightful. It probably helped scare a few riders who didn't have the resources & specialists to drill their bikes too. 😄

taras0000 said:

Sosenka's set-up is not that much different from most tall riders. When people start getting as tall as he is, it usually comes more from their limbs than from their torso. So, long legs, short torso, and long arms = long seat tube, short top tube, and a big drop to the bars because of the long arms. Is he in a more extreme position than Merckx? Yes. Is this wrong? No. If Merckx was smarter, he would have been in a more aerodynamic postion also. But that sort of knowledge wasn't as refined back then as it is know. Clearly Sosenka's set-up was pure smarts. The bike fit his body. He is primarily a TT'er. They usually have agressive aerodynamic tucks. The hour is a TT. He clearly mimicked his aero tuck as much as possible with the classic position.

I do agree with you about Sosenka and his brilliant interpretation of the rules such that it probably created such an advantage that he wouldn't otherwise have broken the record were it not for his radical positioning of the seat and a relatively small vertical frame height. Yet he is within the rules because seat height apparently is not addressed in the rules. Merckx failed to see it. I wonder what the result would have been had he done what Sosenka did. Merckx is tall, but not nearly as tall as Sosenka, who stands something like 6 inches taller than Merckx. Still, Merckx could have done it had he thought of it.

The sad thing is that we want to compare the greats against their true potential, not their aerodynamic posture. I'm not so sure Sosenka stands close to Merckx in that regard now that I've seen Sosenka's radical posture. It's not even very apparent until you look at the bike. While he's sitting on it, it's pretty hard to tell how dramatic it is. If Sosenka breaks it again, maybe he'll get even more radical with the seat and frame height. That ought to be interesting.

It's interesting that with a small variation comes a different record holder. Well, I guess it isn't a small variation given that the average speed goes from about 50 kph to about 66 kph. What I'm talking about is the Derny paced hour record. This is done indoors on a track with the help of a Derny motorbike pacer. Here's a short video clip of the October 29, 2005 attempt by Magnus Backstedt.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=derney+paced+hour+record&btnG=Google+Search

I guess that link isn't working anymore. Here's a summary of the attempt with some good photos too. http://www.roadcyclinguk.com/news/article/mps/UAN/912/V/1/SP/332864698790342926288 It's interesting that the one hour motorbike aided record (66.1+ kph http://www.londoncyclesport.com/news_2005/magnus_d.html ) is not even close to the one hour record for an HPV with no motor support (84.2+ kph http://www.hpva.us/hpvadempr.html ).

Of course, the one hour record which is the subject of this thread is still the 49.7 kph set by Sosenka in July, 2005. He talked about making another attempt at it by the end of 2005, but he didn't.

Just goes to show how great of a record Boardman set in the aero position back in 1996. 56.3 kph

2006 said:

Just goes to show how great of a record Boardman set in the aero position back in 1996. 56.3 kph

Why would you find that impressive? it was because of aerodynamics, and if you go all the way with aerodynamics, you get an hpv at 84 kph.

I harped a little about Sosenka's position too because i think his height gave him an advantage in bending the rules on the UCI bike that a shorter person, like Boardman, would not have. Let's face it, you can only raise the seat much higher if you are tall.

What was impressive about Boardman is that he broke Merckx' record without aerodynamic advantage. I don't really feel like Sosenka's record is quite on the same par because of the aerodynamic advantage of the high seat and relatively low handlebars. It was not at all like Boardman's version of the UCI standard whereby Chris broke the record by a few meters without using the superman position or a high seat.

If Boardman had ridden the record on the same day as his aero record using the UCI version, he would gone over 51 kph.

That is why his 56 kph is so impressive. 🙂

was Sosenka's bike carbon?

I thought the new rules said the bike must be steel, which is why Boardman rode the Ultrafoco Look

gntlmn said:

Why would you find that impressive? it was because of aerodynamics, and if you go all the way with aerodynamics, you get an hpv at 84 kph.

I harped a little about Sosenka's position too because i think his height gave him an advantage in bending the rules on the UCI bike that a shorter person, like Boardman, would not have. Let's face it, you can only raise the seat much higher if you are tall.

What was impressive about Boardman is that he broke Merckx' record without aerodynamic advantage. I don't really feel like Sosenka's record is quite on the same par because of the aerodynamic advantage of the high seat and relatively low handlebars. It was not at all like Boardman's version of the UCI standard whereby Chris broke the record by a few meters without using the superman position or a high seat.

You seem to think that because Sosenka shattered the record that it was done unfairly. He may not have looked like Boardman during his attempt, But then again, neither did Boardman look exactly like Merckx either.

If you look at their torso angle, all three of them, you will find that they aren't that different. Merckx and Boardman both have horizontal torsos during their record attempt, and so did Sosenka, with Merckx being least extreme, and Boardman being the flattest. It's there, look at the pictures. Sosenka in fact may have been less aerodynamic because his torso is so short and forces him to take more of a hunch instead of a laid out position. Don't forget that Boardman used a 16 cm stem on his hour record bike to stretch him out, so in fact, Boardman did use aerodynamic advantages to break Merckx' hour record. I can't recall his road bike having an extension that long. Sosenka didn't bend any rules. That's just how a bike would fit him. His road bikes have a similar drop to the handlebars. In fact, there is only about a 1-2 inch difference in handlebar height between his hour record bike an his road bikes. Had they made a more "normal" looking bike for Sosenka, it would be illegal as the distance from the headset to the bottom bracket would be in excess of what is currently allowed. A bike like that would also put him in more of a superman-like position because his arms are so long, then you would be harping on that. If you want to take away the merits of hour records based on a riders physical makeup, how about we take away Greame Obree's records because he had a lung capacity in excess of 6 Litres or Indurain's records because he just produced so much damn power?

taras0000 said:

You seem to think that because Sosenka shattered the record that it was done unfairly. He may not have looked like Boardman during his attempt, But then again, neither did Boardman look exactly like Merckx either.

If you look at their torso angle, all three of them, you will find that they aren't that different. Merckx and Boardman both have horizontal torsos during their record attempt, and so did Sosenka, with Merckx being least extreme, and Boardman being the flattest. It's there, look at the pictures. Sosenka in fact may have been less aerodynamic because his torso is so short and forces him to take more of a hunch instead of a laid out position. Don't forget that Boardman used a 16 cm stem on his hour record bike to stretch him out, so in fact, Boardman did use aerodynamic advantages to break Merckx' hour record. I can't recall his road bike having an extension that long. Sosenka didn't bend any rules. That's just how a bike would fit him. His road bikes have a similar drop to the handlebars. In fact, there is only about a 1-2 inch difference in handlebar height between his hour record bike an his road bikes. Had they made a more "normal" looking bike for Sosenka, it would be illegal as the distance from the headset to the bottom bracket would be in excess of what is currently allowed. A bike like that would also put him in more of a superman-like position because his arms are so long, then you would be harping on that. If you want to take away the merits of hour records based on a riders physical makeup, how about we take away Greame Obree's records because he had a lung capacity in excess of 6 Litres or Indurain's records because he just produced so much damn power?

Neither Obree nor Indurain broke the UCI one hour record. Both of them used aerodynamic advantage which was later ruled not allowable. It's too bad that they didn't know about this ahead of time. Particularly, I'd like to have seen Indurain have a go at it with strict UCI rules, which other riders had already bent but UCI had not ruled on by the time he made his attempt. He assumed his attempt when he did it was within the rules. As it stands, we don't know how he would have done on the Merckx/UCI standard bike. That's a shame. He was a great rider.

The superman position would help Boardman because he is so short. For him to get an aerodynamic advantage from downward lean, on the other hand, he'd probably have to have a smaller wheel in the front and thus break the rules. So that option he probably didn't consider. The superman position didn't require a smaller wheel. Of course, it was later ruled illegal.

As for Sosenka's position, it's not that easy to see this from the camera shots. If you look closely, it's apparent, especially when you see the bike without him on it. Here's a photo of him after the race:

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

Notice that his lean is flatter than Merck' or Boardman's even when his arms are straight. Then look at this photo while he's actually riding. See how bent his arms are?

http://www.sportal.com.au/othersports.asp?i=news&id=68573

Now go back to those two photos you posted. See the difference?

I admit that it is not easy to see this. You almost have to notice the bike first and then look for the posture change while he rides it. It's a very subtle difference, but when you're cruising at 50 kph, a subtle aerodynamic shift can make a big difference in an hour.

Sosenka didn't break the rules. They were there for everyone the same. He (or his team) was just better at working the rules to his advantage than were the others. I call it bending the rules. Well, that's not exactly fair either, I guess. It's more like taking the rules to the limit of their gray area and staying on the legal side.

As for lung capacity, 6 liters is good but not particularly remarkable. Indurain's was greater than 6 liters. Also, comparing horsepower and lung capacity are not the same as comparing aerodynamic advantage, which is the heart of our discussion about posture on the bike. After all, you don't need more horsepower or greater lungs if you can improve your aerodynamics. Those other features, which are perfectly legal (big lungs, big strong heart, high anaerobic threshold, low lactic acid production, superior rhythm relating to nervous system coordination) are held forth as advantages that riders might trumpet. You don't have to be ashamed of or hide natural advantages. In fact, you can (and they do) boast about them.

You do bring up some good points though. Sosenka's height is so much taller than the typical rider and any of the other hour record holders. It's not like he decided to create rules that were to his advantage. He just so happened to find that they were.

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

http://www.sportal.com.au/othersports.asp?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

gntlmn said:

Neither Obree nor Indurain broke the UCI one hour record. Both of them used aerodynamic advantage which was later ruled not allowable. It's too bad that they didn't know about this ahead of time. Particularly, I'd like to have seen Indurain have a go at it with strict UCI rules, which other riders had already bent but UCI had not ruled on by the time he made his attempt. He assumed his attempt when he did it was within the rules. As it stands, we don't know how he would have done on the Merckx/UCI standard bike. That's a shame. He was a great rider.

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.

gntlmn said:

The superman position would help Boardman because he is so short. For him to get an aerodynamic advantage from downward lean, on the other hand, he'd probably have to have a smaller wheel in the front and thus break the rules. So that option he probably didn't consider. The superman position didn't require a smaller wheel. Of course, it was later ruled illegal.

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

gntlmn said:

Notice that his lean is flatter than Merck' or Boardman's even when his arms are straight. Then look at this photo while he's actually riding. See how bent his arms are?

http://www.velomag.se/contents/images/big/206_SosenkaOndrej190705.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.

gntlmn said:

Sosenka didn't break the rules. They were there for everyone the same. He (or his team) was just better at working the rules to his advantage than were the others. I call it bending the rules. Well, that's not exactly fair either, I guess. It's more like taking the rules to the limit of their gray area and staying on the legal side.

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?

gntlmn said:

As for lung capacity, 6 liters is good but not particularly remarkable. Indurain's was greater than 6 liters. Also, comparing horsepower and lung capacity are not the same as comparing aerodynamic advantage, which is the heart of our discussion about posture on the bike. After all, you don't need more horsepower or greater lungs if you can improve your aerodynamics. Those other features, which are perfectly legal (big lungs, big strong heart, high anaerobic threshold, low lactic acid production, superior rhythm relating to nervous system coordination) are held forth as advantages that riders might trumpet. You don't have to be ashamed of or hide natural advantages. In fact, you can (and they do) boast about them.

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.

Quoted post said:

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.

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

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.

gntlmn said:

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 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.

gntlmn said:

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..

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.

gntlmn said:

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).

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.

gntlmn said:

And then there's that question of no forward lean. Hmmm.

what about it?