Re: 500 watt athlete

Quoted message said:

Another Tour rider was outfitted with a watt-meter

this year and could sustain 500 watts for up to four hours
according to the article.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68310,00.html?tw=wn_tophe...

They put the meter on a wheel.
They could precisely measure burned 74,000 kcalories during 2100
miles of bike racing.>

Gee, a couple electrodes attached to the seat, could generate some new
records.

"rick++" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Another Tour rider was outfitted with a watt-meter
this year and could sustain 500 watts for up to four hours
according to the article.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68310,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2
They put the meter on a wheel.
They could precisely measure burned 74,000 kcalories during 2100
miles of bike racing.

Sorry, but this is [censored]. No person can sustain 500W for 4 consecutive
hours. Absolutely impossible.

VO2max for a top cyclist is in the 500W range. One cannot maintain 500W for
4 hours, or one hour.

State your source. The original post had a link provided for info
verification. Without a source your just complaining because you can't do
it.
"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"rick++" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Another Tour rider was outfitted with a watt-meter
this year and could sustain 500 watts for up to four hours
according to the article.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68310,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2
They put the meter on a wheel.
They could precisely measure burned 74,000 kcalories during 2100
miles of bike racing.

Sorry, but this is [censored]. No person can sustain 500W for 4 consecutive
hours. Absolutely impossible.

VO2max for a top cyclist is in the 500W range. One cannot maintain 500W
for 4 hours, or one hour.

rick++ said:

Another Tour rider was outfitted with a watt-meter
this year and could sustain 500 watts for up to four hours
according to the article.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68310,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2
They put the meter on a wheel.
They could precisely measure burned 74,000 kcalories during 2100
miles of bike racing.

I think this was over the entire Tour, not continuous - unless there's
another reference buried in those pages.
http://tinyurl.com/cc6w4

"In the end, however, we believe it was the time he didn't or couldn't
spend at supra-maximal intensities that had the biggest impact on
Floyd's Tour. At a total of 234 minutes or 3.9 hours at or above 500
watts, we think that if Floyd was able to spend 10 more minutes (4%
more) at that top end, he might have been on the podium."

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people"
-Bernd Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

standelds said:

State your source. The original post had a link provided for info
verification. Without a source your just complaining because you can't do
it.

I think it's fair play for him to use himself as a source. He does have
research experience in exercise physiology, which means he's almost certainly
either lab-tested top cyclists himself, or at least been present during such
tests.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

A new NY Times article today mentions anybody can
buy these bike power meters for $700+.
The article questions the value of all these gizmos.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/fashion/thursdaystyles/28Fitness.html

Donovan Rebbechi said:

standelds said:

State your source. The original post had a link provided for info
verification. Without a source your just complaining because you can't do
it.

Quoted message said:

I think it's fair play for him to use himself as a source. He does have
research experience in exercise physiology, which means he's almost certainly
either lab-tested top cyclists himself, or at least been present during such
tests.

But, Donovan, how is 'standelds' supposed to know that? You may know that,
but he doesn't. Neither does he know you (I assume) and consequently, why
should he take your word for it?

jobs

Quoted message said:

Donovan Rebbechi said:

standelds said:

State your source. The original post had a link provided for info
verification. Without a source your just complaining because you can't do
it.

Quoted message said:

I think it's fair play for him to use himself as a source. He does have
research experience in exercise physiology, which means he's almost certainly
either lab-tested top cyclists himself, or at least been present during such
tests.

But, Donovan, how is 'standelds' supposed to know that?

He could either lurk for a while before posting, or if he's too enthusiastic
to do that, he could google a little and learn a little bit about the forum.
Or he could spend 5 minutes doing some research that would cast some light on
the claim.

Failing that, he could introduce himself a little more politely (e.g. he could
*ask* for a source, instead of *ordering* Sam to provide one)

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Quoted message said:

Donovan Rebbechi said:

On 2005-07-28, standelds <[email hidden]> wrote:
> State your source. The original post had a link provided for info
> verification. Without a source your just complaining because you can't do
> it.

Quoted message said:

I think it's fair play for him to use himself as a source. He does have
research experience in exercise physiology, which means he's almost certainly
either lab-tested top cyclists himself, or at least been present during such
tests.

But, Donovan, how is 'standelds' supposed to know that?

Quoted message said:

He could either lurk for a while before posting, or if he's too enthusiastic
to do that, he could google a little and learn a little bit about the forum.
Or he could spend 5 minutes doing some research that would cast some light on
the claim.

I understand what you're saying, but it's not always possible or feasible
to look up the posting history of a poster whose post you are interested in.
Posters come and go, handles change, and it can be time consuming to verify
the credentials of posters every time.

About doing research on a claim, even a lot of the regulars don't
always do research before asking for a citation/source. So, I can
cut him some slack on that one. Obviously, if someone keeps doing
it all the time, then it's not cool.

Quoted message said:

Failing that, he could introduce himself a little more politely (e.g. he could
*ask* for a source, instead of *ordering* Sam to provide one)

I agree, this would be a much better and more feasible approach.

jobs

Quoted message said:

a lot of the regulars don't always do research before asking for a
citation/source

I don't believe that, jobs - where's your proof?

Charlie Pendejo said:

Quoted message said:

a lot of the regulars don't always do research before asking for a
citation/source

I don't believe that, jobs - where's your proof?

yeah jobs without a source your just complaining cos you dont have won

--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Charlie Pendejo said:

Quoted message said:

a lot of the regulars don't always do research before asking for a
citation/source

Quoted message said:

I don't believe that, jobs - where's your proof?

Proof you are, Padawan Pendejo.
Research my claim, you did not.
Use the r.r. archives, you must.

jobs

rick++ said:

Another Tour rider was outfitted with a watt-meter
this year and could sustain 500 watts for up to four hours
according to the article.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68310,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2
They put the meter on a wheel.
They could precisely measure burned 74,000 kcalories during 2100
miles of bike racing.

sorry, i believe you've read the story wrong. what they say is-
"On his way to a ninth-place finish, Landis spent nearly four hours of
the Tour at a power output level of more than 500 watts "

they are saying that when they take measurements over all 20 stages and
add up all the time he spent over 500 watts, the total time spent riding

Quoted message said:

500 watts is over 4 hours. they aren't saying he rode those 4 hours

consecutively.

i think this quote sums up landis' abilities better
"Over the course of the Tour, Landis averaged 232 watts of power when he
was on the bike. But that was just his average; in a stage like the
final time trial, where Landis finished sixth, he averaged 379 watts
over 75 minutes."

so in a itt where he's going as hard as he can sustain for the duration,
landis averaged 379 watts over 75 minutes. that's more believable.
heather

Dot said:

I think this was over the entire Tour, not continuous - unless there's
another reference buried in those pages.
http://tinyurl.com/cc6w4

[censored], i just sent a post saying the same thing, sorry i didn't read
yours well enough first.

hh

standelds said:

State your source.

example
http://www.cyclecoach.com/articles/?article=Power_Guidelines&ext=.htm

Distance / Event Power range (% of MAP)
3 km TT 89 - 91 % (possibly higher)
4 km TT 88 - 91 % (possibly higher)
16.1 km TT 75 - 81 %
40.2 km TT 72 - 77 %
80.5 km TT 64 - 72 %
161 km TT 60 - 68 %

Because events such as road races, and criteriums depend on both
drafting ability as well as power to mass ratio, it is a little harder to
predict power for these events, but, based on experience, the following
ranges cover most races, but do bare in mind that these are only
guidelines.? However, these are not based on % of MAP, but on body scaling.
Road races longer than 90 minutes duration are generally between 11 - 14
W/kg**0.67, whilst short criteriums are generally between, 14 - 18
W/kg**0.67. Accordingly, for a 70 kg rider, mean average power output would
be between 190 - 241 W for a road race, and between 241 - 310 W for a
criterium.

Quoted message said:

they are saying that when they take measurements over all 20 stages and
add up all the time he spent over 500 watts, the total time spent riding

Quoted message said:

500 watts is over 4 hours. they aren't saying he rode those 4 hours

consecutively.

That does make sense.
Still impressive.

You are an idiot. Sorry to be so rude, but LA has produced a little over
500 watts at the end of a VO2max test (525 the last data that I saw). That
means he was there for about 1 minute. How does someone maintain that for 4
hours?

I am not complaining just pointing out the ludicrous.

I linked on the several of Allen Lim's links and saw no claim by Allen (a
colleague of mine whom I have assisted in getting research projects done)
that Floyd could maintain 500W for 4 hours. I might have missed a link
however.

"standelds" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

State your source. The original post had a link provided for info
verification. Without a source your just complaining because you can't do
it.
"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"rick++" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Another Tour rider was outfitted with a watt-meter
this year and could sustain 500 watts for up to four hours
according to the article.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68310,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2
They put the meter on a wheel.
They could precisely measure burned 74,000 kcalories during 2100
miles of bike racing.

Sorry, but this is [censored]. No person can sustain 500W for 4
consecutive hours. Absolutely impossible.

VO2max for a top cyclist is in the 500W range. One cannot maintain 500W
for 4 hours, or one hour.

"rick++" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

A new NY Times article today mentions anybody can
buy these bike power meters for $700+.
The article questions the value of all these gizmos.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/fashion/thursdaystyles/28Fitness.html

[censored], I cannot get in without a registration and I do not remember what mine
is. However I will say that for a serious, competitive cyclist a powermeter
is indispensable.

One of the beauties of cycling is the ability to quantify the workload in
watts and kilojoules. Since speed is directly related to power output (a
nearly cube function), knowing one's power output allows for precision that
cannot be found in many other sports.

I will check the link from work (where I have the registration on my
computer) and give a more meaningful response.

Powermeters are so superior to HRM that it is not even worth the discussion.

Of course, it is a tool and one must know how to use the tool and the
information it provides.

To learn more check out www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com

Thanks Dot, I suspected that might be the case and makes sense. I remember
a paper from Asker Jeukendrup relating a member of the Rabobank team who
finished a flat stage of the Tour averaging 98W! He pretty much sat in and
drafted the entire stage. Even at the pace they are going the 4th person in
a paceline is not doing a lot of work. That is part of the reason you see
LA in that position. (After 4th the savings are not worth much in that you
might save a few W, but not worth worrying about).

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

rick++ said:

Another Tour rider was outfitted with a watt-meter
this year and could sustain 500 watts for up to four hours
according to the article.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68310,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2
They put the meter on a wheel.
They could precisely measure burned 74,000 kcalories during 2100
miles of bike racing.

I think this was over the entire Tour, not continuous - unless there's
another reference buried in those pages.
http://tinyurl.com/cc6w4

"In the end, however, we believe it was the time he didn't or couldn't
spend at supra-maximal intensities that had the biggest impact on Floyd's
Tour. At a total of 234 minutes or 3.9 hours at or above 500 watts, we
think that if Floyd was able to spend 10 more minutes (4% more) at that
top end, he might have been on the podium."

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people"
-Bernd Heinrich in Racing the Antelope