Climbing vs. TT Skills

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by jim.egan
What are the physical characteristics that make someone a good time trialist? I seem to do well on climbs but I'm mediocre on the flats and in time trials. I know training can improve my TT skills, but what are the common "limiters"? For example, are bulkier cyclists with more muscular legs usually better? Heavier riders? I know great climbers are usually stick-people. But does the opposite apply to good time trialists?

Very good question, the answer is probably somewhere in the middle, the climbers have a very high watts/kg number whereas the sprinters are capable of pumping out massive amounts of pure power. The time trialists are probably the best in the middle but that's not always the case and to be honest, it probably leans more in favor of CONSISTENT climbers or people who can climb well at a steady pace without becoming tired. Of course, I'm not a sport scientist so I can't say with a high degree of certainty but those are my observations with comparing sprinters and climbers.

It's also important to note that TTists are very good at energy management. Another reason why you HAVE to be a good time trialist to have a ghost of a chance of winning TDF.

Thomas Davis

1) Force (ability to turn the pedals hard)
2) Endurance (keep them turning for long periods)
3) High Pain Threshold
4) Lots of practice in the aero position

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Randybaker99
1) Force (ability to turn the pedals hard)
2) Endurance (keep them turning for long periods)
3) High Pain Threshold
4) Lots of practice in the aero position

To clarify, force is *NOT* a limiting factor in endurance cycling performance. During all endurance cycling forces are very low, and can easily be met by untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls. For e.g., during Chris Boardman's Superman Hour Record, the force at the pedal would've been about 228 Newtons or 23 kg. During say a 40-km TT a good amateur male will probably generate ~ 300 W, the forces here would be about 177 N or 18 kg.

Most people (see caveat above) can easily generate far more power than an elite TdF pro can TT at. In fact people considerably smaller and female can generate more power. In other words, it's highly unlikely you can't generate enough force already (unless, say you have a functional disability, are a frail old lady, etc.).

It's cardiorespiratory and metabolic factors that limit endurance cycling performance (i.e., VO2 max, and LT) in all events greater than say 90-secs.

Ric

Ricstern,
I've read your comments about force development during cycling in the past. By definition, power = force x velocity. In metric units Watts = Newtons x meters/second. I'm sure that's what you did to get your numbers since my numbers for roughly 440Watts and 100rpm on 170mm cranks give almost the same values as in your post.

There is a problem with this calculation. First off, that's average power over a pedal stroke. We all know that the act of pedaling is inefficient except for on the downstroke portion. Research shows that the power output looks more like the absolute value of a sinusoid. If we assume that the peak is roughly 1.41 times larger (square root of 2) which relates peak to average value of a sinusoidal function, then we're up to a force of 328N when the leg is actually pushing downward. Also, that force is for a single leg effort, so that doubles the value again when comparing to "gym" strength when using both legs. That's equivalent to doing hundreds of reps with virtually no rest with around 67kg in the gym. Not heavy by any means, but not as light as you make it seem. If it was, every woman and child could at least get up to - if only for a moment - the 34mph or so that Boardman pulled off for an hour. We all know they can't. Consider lower cadences at the start of a jump in a big gear, and forces generated can be enormous... much, much larger than a layperson can generate on their best day while fresh. Glad to chat more on this.
T

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by ricstern
To clarify, force is *NOT* a limiting factor in endurance cycling performance. During all endurance cycling forces are very low, and can easily be met by untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls. For e.g., during Chris Boardman's Superman Hour Record, the force at the pedal would've been about 228 Newtons or 23 kg. During say a 40-km TT a good amateur male will probably generate ~ 300 W, the forces here would be about 177 N or 18 kg.

Most people (see caveat above) can easily generate far more power than an elite TdF pro can TT at. In fact people considerably smaller and female can generate more power. In other words, it's highly unlikely you can't generate enough force already (unless, say you have a functional disability, are a frail old lady, etc.).

It's cardiorespiratory and metabolic factors that limit endurance cycling performance (i.e., VO2 max, and LT) in all events greater than say 90-secs.

Ric

There are so many points to disagree with you on, I am not sure where to begin.

Why are you equating Time Trial racing with "endurance cycling"? And how can you believe that force is not a relevant ability in a TT? So given two time trialists, one capable of generating force X, the other X*2, the former has as much of a chance as the latter??? Speaking as someone who considers his force to be a major limiter, I wish it were so - but it ain't.

Certainly, cardiorespiratory/metabolic factors are important, but if those skinny little legs can't turn the crank, then heart and lungs aren't going to win the race on their own.

Well, excuse me as I have to go and cancel my weight training plans for tomorrow, and book a visit to the oxygen bar...

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by ricstern
To clarify, force is *NOT* a limiting factor in endurance cycling performance. During all endurance cycling forces are very low, and can easily be met by untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls. For e.g., during Chris Boardman's Superman Hour Record, the force at the pedal would've been about 228 Newtons or 23 kg. During say a 40-km TT a good amateur male will probably generate ~ 300 W, the forces here would be about 177 N or 18 kg.

Most people (see caveat above) can easily generate far more power than an elite TdF pro can TT at. In fact people considerably smaller and female can generate more power. In other words, it's highly unlikely you can't generate enough force already (unless, say you have a functional disability, are a frail old lady, etc.).

It's cardiorespiratory and metabolic factors that limit endurance cycling performance (i.e., VO2 max, and LT) in all events greater than say 90-secs.

Ric

But what differentiates TT's from climbers ?

Leon

In real simple obvious terms...

power to weight ratio has got to be a big factor in climbing.

If you are really big and very “strong” (can perform well ) on the bike and you stay in the saddle and grind out awesome power, You probably going to have the potential to be good at TT over some specified distance..

The lighter guys with better power to weight ratio are going to knock you off on the hills simply because of gravity.

So, why doesn't a high power/weight ratio also mean that in a flat TT this same rider performs well too? Is it the case that on the flats, weight is less of an issue than a) power and b)aerodynamics? So, it isn't power to weight that matters, it's pure power, plus the ability to perform for length at LT, plus aero?

Then you would assume that a strong climber, might have high power/weight, but comparatively lower power than a strong TT. The climber would obviously be thinner and not as strong, the TT would be bulkier, stronger.

True?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by jim.egan
So, why doesn't a high power/weight ratio also mean that in a flat TT this same rider performs well too? Is it the case that on the flats, weight is less of an issue than a) power and b)aerodynamics? So, it isn't power to weight that matters, it's pure power, plus the ability to perform for length at LT, plus aero?

Then you would assume that a strong climber, might have high power/weight, but comparatively lower power than a strong TT. The climber would obviously be thinner and not as strong, the TT would be bulkier, stronger.

True?

for the same reason, that if elephants had wings they still would not be able to fly !

there is a mass v power index that works against the large heavy and powerful when pitch against gravity... There are also complex things like.. how they train, genes,

maybe a TT-er who used to be a good climber or something similar will post ?

I would say that strength is only 1/3 of the equation.

There is some interesting info on the aerodynamics of TT equipment at VeloNews: http://www.velonews.com/tech/report/articles/5389.0.html

(It is the letter that starts at the bottom of the page (do a find on the page for "A700TT"😉 and continues onto a second page of the article.)

The part that is relevant to this thread is the importance of the rider maintaining a position that is both comfortable and aerodynamic.