La Vuelta 2013 (24 Aug - 15 Sept) **SPOILERS**
- Thread starter smutchin
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
Yes, FDJ have had a good year that looks promising for the future. And, yes, a great win for Elissonde. (I don't know owt about him, but he's a very crouched climber with enormous-looking handlebars!)
This from the Science of Sport guy posting The Clinic
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1339454&postcount=1351
"What Horner's impending win cries out for, among other things, are more studies of performance vs. age. There don't seem to be that many in the literature. The studies I've found are fairly old, but suggest that V02 max declines about 5% per decade after 30 for endurance athletes (more like 10% per decade for non-athletes). If we assume Horner reached his physical peak in his late 20s, this suggests a decline of about 7% in V02 max, and presumably that correlates fairly closely with power.
By his own SRM data, Horner put out 393 watts and allegedly 6.05 watts/kg in stage 10, during a 15 minute climb. The aging data suggest that if he did this naturally, then naturally he would be able to put out about 6.5 watts/kg in his prime. That's for 15 minutes, it would be less for 30-40 minutes, but even in the wild west EP0 era of the late 90s and early 00s, you would think someone with that much power would end up as an elite rider on the Euro circuit. And that 6.05 value is contested, it assumes a weight that some think is overestimated (resulting in an underestimate of watts/kg)."
Sorry but it's hard not to discuss this, nor do I think we shouldn't.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1339454&postcount=1351
"What Horner's impending win cries out for, among other things, are more studies of performance vs. age. There don't seem to be that many in the literature. The studies I've found are fairly old, but suggest that V02 max declines about 5% per decade after 30 for endurance athletes (more like 10% per decade for non-athletes). If we assume Horner reached his physical peak in his late 20s, this suggests a decline of about 7% in V02 max, and presumably that correlates fairly closely with power.
By his own SRM data, Horner put out 393 watts and allegedly 6.05 watts/kg in stage 10, during a 15 minute climb. The aging data suggest that if he did this naturally, then naturally he would be able to put out about 6.5 watts/kg in his prime. That's for 15 minutes, it would be less for 30-40 minutes, but even in the wild west EP0 era of the late 90s and early 00s, you would think someone with that much power would end up as an elite rider on the Euro circuit. And that 6.05 value is contested, it assumes a weight that some think is overestimated (resulting in an underestimate of watts/kg)."
Sorry but it's hard not to discuss this, nor do I think we shouldn't.
Edge705
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Thornton Lancashire
Even if Horner didn't win look at the alternatives, valverde? nibali? Its a disappointing result all round methinks
Pedrosanchezo
Veteran
- Location
- Perthshire, scotland
Vo2 max can decline with age. The figure of 5% after 30 is an average though not a rule. Many athletes peak early 20's and many peak mid 30's. There's no predicting when Horner will have peaked physically and to use generic formula to use as evidence as his doping/cheating is simply misguided.
His power stats for one of the stages was revealed and was under the "suspicious" level created by some number geek who thinks that stats can tell the full story. 6.2kg's seems to be the magic number, under that and you're normal and above then you are doping. Super technical stuff. Horner was gauged as "normal".
The assumption that Horner should have hit 6.5watts/kg in his 20's is dependent on so many factors that i can't see how it can be taken seriously. Was he training in the same way as he is now? Was he with the same coach? Same team? Nutritionally the same? Same weight? Same dedication? etc etc etc. It's just not quantifiable.
I get the argument guys, i just don't see how he could get away with it considering the amount of doping required to make this apparent donkey into a GC winner and contender.
I actually now hope he has been doping, and gets caught soon, as it is the ONLY clear result that can be had that will close the book on this case.
Last edited:
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
Absolutely unsurprising that most of the comments on Cyclingnews.com after today's stage are all saying how Horner's performance shows what hard work and clearn living can do, and how much he deserves this - this from all the same people who were attacking Froome's strong but much less incredible TdF performance, as unbelievable
threebikesmcginty
Corn Fed Hick...
- Location
- ...on the slake
Little Chris Horner
Cycled La Vuelta
Eating some drugs and stuff
He must think we're thick
To believe his old schtick
He's a cheating nobber sure enough
Cycled La Vuelta
Eating some drugs and stuff
He must think we're thick
To believe his old schtick
He's a cheating nobber sure enough
Look at the question in the light of my correction above, and consider his massive injury lay off this season and lack of racing. Doping is the only way to make up the shortfall. I believe I'm right in saying he's just posted the second fastest time up Angliru in the last 15 years!
Pedrosanchezo
Veteran
- Location
- Perthshire, scotland
Can't comment on the speed/time up the climb so will take your word. Who was fastest curiously? Worth noting that many factors can affect performance on a climb and the overall time is no scientific evidence of doping. Nor is an athletes age.
Many athletes have PB'd after long lay off's as, though they do not have race sharpness, they have fresh legs. A good example would be Niballi as he was far from his best at this Vuelta. Aiming to peak during certain events is also key. You just need to look at Froome at the TDF and compare to his performance in the Tour of Utah. Or his performance at last years tour then the Vuelta. A noticeable difference. Riding one race all year can bring a freshness that is not possible otherwise.
Again though i am not defending him. In fact i don't even like him. I am defending an individuals right to be innocent until proven otherwise. The problem with this is that the finger can be pointed forevermore, and a rider can protest their innocence forevermore, but the only fact based evidence that can be presented to finalise the debate is a positive test. There is no such similar test to prove a riders innocence.
So to summarise Horner is guilty until proven guilty.
Noodley
Guest
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
Horner's comments yesterday suggested that he had struck a blow for oldies. I'm 17 years older than him and I think he should SFTU.
I've read many different interpretations of the power stats, same as Froome in the Tour, they tell only part of the story. His history, the statements he's made, yes his age, his ambivalence on doping topics, all the things that surround him, tell us the rest of his story. I'm hoping his biological passport data will tell others the same. Let's see if he makes a donation to the UCI...
