The One Hour Record

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by gntlmn

I had read and heard many times about this long standing record, but I only today discovered it was set in Mexico City.

It Ain't standing, the margin was small but it has been broken, actually very fast after the UCI declared it the standard again.

Correct. It is not current, but it is long standing. It held from 1972 until it was officially broken by UCI standards in 2000 by Chris Boardman in Manchester, England at close to sea level. Chris was probably about 6,000 feet lower in elevation at Manchester v. Mexico City. His record is 49.442 km v. 49.431 km by Merckx. On OLN, they make a big deal about the fact that Merckx' record stood for 28 years and that when it was broken, it was only broken by a little less than 11 meters. My point is that they fail to mention that Boardman's record is at sea level whereas Merckx' record is at 7,000 feet. The air resistance at 50 kph is a far bigger factor than the oxygen deprivation. In other words, cyclists can expect to go a few kph quicker at that elevation than at sea level, even though the breathing is more labored. If Boardman had acclimatized to the altitude as Merckx had, his record would be a longer distance in Mexico City.

I was inaccurate in my original post, however, about the advantage of aerodynamic design. Boardman also holds the best world hour performance (the non classic version) at 56.375 kph which he set 4 years earlier in 1996, also at the track in Manchester, England. When he switched to the Merckx design to better the UIC standard, he was about 7 kph slower. I venture to say that this gap would not have been as great if both records, a) the one hour record (the UIC version) and b) the best world hour performance (which allows more modern equipment) had been set in Mexico City, but it still would be significant. These are not only aerodynamic improvements but ergonomic as well. Boardman complained about feeling cramped up on the Merckx design.

As I gathered information for my reply here, I grew to admire Merckx even more. He set out to break the 5 k, 10 k and 20 k records en route to breaking the hour record in 1972, and that's precisely what he did. He did this all in one because of time constraints. So he risked "blowing up" in the end, but still managed to hold his own. And it wasn't his original idea to ride in Mexico City. He originally wanted to race on the Vigorelli track in Milan, Italy so that his record could be more easily compared with the greats of the past. But the track wasn't ready for him. So that's when he decided to go to Mexico City.

Boardman is the better time trialist, but Merckx still gets my vote as the best overall rider of all time.

My point here though is not about the people who hold the records, but the failure to make clear the effect of elevation on the UIC one hour record. The less aerodynamic a bicycle and riding position are, the greater the difference between a sea level performance and one in thinner air. So if you are going to eliminate aerodynamic advantages, you better pay attention to the elevation.

Any thoughts on this? Maybe there are riders out there who have some idea of what the altitude difference makes on a solo track ride. Maybe a few of you have kept records of this. If so, please reply.

It might be 28 years but they only invented the rules for that after it stood 27 years, before everyone was in the opinion that you could break it with modern technology. So the fact that it stood for 28 is not so remarkable. maybe there probabely is a climbing record on major mountain on a single speed bike that stands for 50 years but because there are no official rules, noone cares.

So what do you think Chris Boardman would have done for a distance on the classic bike if he had ridden in Mexico City instead of Manchester, England for his one hour record? Let's just assume for fun that he was down there for a few days like Merckx was (due to rain), acclimatizing to the altitude.

Also, what about the differences in technology and bike design that occurred within those 28 years?
Was Boardman on a replica of Merkx's bike or was it just a similar design?
Those along with the improvements in training and nutrition and recovery techniques.
What about the track surfaces too - they would've changed in 28 years, surely?
Did Boardman break the 1k, 5k and 10k records too, as Merkx was supposed to have done?
How much difference does the "thin air" really make - especially if Eddy didn't have time to get used to it, breathing-wise?
There seem to be too many variables to be able to accurately compare the rides/riders, but it certainly is interesting! 🙂

According to one web page which I have seen today located at http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0801.htm, a group of scientists actually has examined most of the variables you mention, leveling the playing field and comparing these different riders' best rides with what they would have done at sea level using Boardman's equipment and position (the "Superman Position"😉 when he set the record in 1996. This was his best ride, not the one in 2000, even after adjusting for the different equipment. Shortly after his ride in 2000, he retired, announcing that he has osteoporosis (brittle bones). This may have been hampering his riding even as he broke the One Hour Record using equipment identical to the bike Merckx rode.

I could not locate the original reference material on the web, but apparently this came from the following according to the website I mentioned above: Bassett et al (1999, Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 31(11), pp. 1665-1676). If anybody is really net savvy out there and can locate this material on the internet, please post this information.

According to the web page which I looked at, which makes reference to the study above, the scientists converted each rider's performance to a wattage of power which they sustained for an hour. Out of the 8 riders they studied from Bracke's world record setting hour ride in 1967 to Boardman's record in 1996, the riders produced largely identical results on this virtual reality even playing field, except for the notable exception of 2 riders who stand in a league of their own. These two are Tony Rominger for his 1994 performance and Chris Boardman for his 1996 performance. Tony is the overall champ. Apparently, a chart is posted in this study which shows how far they would each have gone using Boardman's equipment at sea level.

Indeed, this study compares how far they actually would have gone in their rides by directly converting all the elements they had to deal with during their rides. But it doesn't address the changes in nutrition and training techniques.

But with the elimination of most of the other variables, there aren't so many left. This is where the learning begins. What sets the two riders, Boardman and Rominger, apart? Is it all training and nutrition? If so, how did their training and nutrition differ? Did they both use oxygen deprived sleeping environments? How much difference would this have made?

Also, how much faster would a little guy go if he generated the wattage that the champs generated (442 watts for Boardman, 460 watts for Rominger)? And I wonder if the wattage itself is not variable depending on the positioning. I have a feeling the Bassett et al study may have answered these questions as well. It sure would be interesting to look at that study. If nobody posts the link on this site, maybe I can find this study at the library. Stay posted.

Hi there

I know what you're saying about the altitude but I'm not that sure Merckx prepared properly to make best use of this... when the French guy broke 60 for the kilo at altitude he had to train there for quite a while. My point is, if he wasn't properly acclimatized the altitude would in fact have worked against him.
I live in Manchester and after seeing Boardman suffer I can't see anyone going any faster [but I thought a 4min team pursuit was impossible!]. Of course what he should have done was pre-empted the UCI law changes and done it superman one day and then old fashioned the next... the form he was in back then would've laid to rest any of these arguments.

But obviously Merckx was the best roadman ever!

steve

That's interesting about the anaerobic phase of exercise. I didn't consider that altitude would have a negative effect on anaerobic performance. I wonder if this is a consistent result for most track cyclists.

The Superman/conventional immediate comparison rides would have also lent some credence about the accuracy of the comparison study that was done. It sure looks convincing on paper, but the followup Boardman ride in 1996 would have been a big confirmation (or not, depending on the outcome).

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by st3v3
Hi there

I know what you're saying about the altitude but I'm not that sure Merckx prepared properly to make best use of this... when the French guy broke 60 for the kilo at altitude he had to train there for quite a while. My point is, if he wasn't properly acclimatized the altitude would in fact have worked against him.
I live in Manchester and after seeing Boardman suffer I can't see anyone going any faster [but I thought a 4min team pursuit was impossible!]. Of course what he should have done was pre-empted the UCI law changes and done it superman one day and then old fashioned the next... the form he was in back then would've laid to rest any of these arguments.

But obviously Merckx was the best roadman ever!

steve

Merckx did prepare for altitude. Read this report on his hour attempt -

http://www.torelli.com/owen/eddyhour.html

Mention was made of Rominger's effort being exceptional. I believe he admitted to using EPO for his attempt. This was before EPO was specifically and generally the subject of a ban by the UCI.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by VeloFlash
Merckx did prepare for altitude. Read this report on his hour attempt -

http://www.torelli.com/home.html?[url]http://www.torelli.com/owen/eddyhour.html&1[/url]

Mention was made of Rominger's effort being exceptional. I believe he admitted to using EPO for his attempt. This was before EPO was specifically and generally the subject of a ban by the UCI.

The link that you inserted is not working. I click it, and it says page cannot be found.

I did read that Merckx prepared for the mountains, but the preparation he did was not what you would consider now to be very adequate. He used to train with some kind of device in his mouth for a while. He also was in Mexico City for something like 4 days because of rain. This is why he was not able to ride immediately after he arrived, as he intended.

The best way to train for altitude, as is now generally accepted, is to sleep high/train low. This generally means using a low oxygen tent or room for sleeping and lounging every day. If the tent is at sea level, you don't have to drive to adjust for altitude. You just go outside. Otherwise, they'd be driving up to the mountains to sleep and driving back down to train, a waste of gas and time. Merckx didn't have access to a facility like this at the time. They didn't exist.

That's interesting about Rominger and EPO. Is that just a rumor or is that a fact? If that's the case, I guess Boardman then was the one who was really in a league of his own. But then again, I bet Boardman slept in a hypooxic chamber. Other top riders do this now too, like Lance Armstrong.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by gntlmn
The link that you inserted is not working. I click it, and it says page cannot be found.

Go to http://www.torelli.com and click the "Owen Mulholland" link.

There are a number of 1 hour record stories including:

Eddy and the Hour: Eddy Merckx's World Hour Record ride.

Re: Rominger. It is only from recollection what I read. Moser in his second attempt in the 90's also admitted to EPO use so it was not, at the time, considered an admission that would serve to discredit your achievement. It was only during the TdF (1998?) that when persons external to the cycling fraternity discovered the phials on the Festina soigneur and laid charges that EPO came into public prominence. It had been in use in cycling since about 1986.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by VeloFlash
Go to http://www.torelli.com and click the "Owen Mulholland" link.

There are a number of 1 hour record stories including:

Eddy and the Hour: Eddy Merckx's World Hour Record ride.

This is great reading.

I see that Eddie trained with a tube to his mouth hooked to an air mixture identical to Mexico City air. Although this probably helped him somewhat, I think his training would have been greatly enhanced by sleeping at simulated altitude. The low oxygen chamber manufacturers claim something like 3% - 8% increase in VO2 max in two weeks from sleeping at simulated altitude and training at sea level. Although they say it helps to supplement this with half hour rides on the trainer using the low oxygen setup like Merckx used, it doesn't do nearly as much as the sleep high/train low approach that is the main focus.

To Merckx' credit, he also went out very hard on the hour record, breaking the 5 km, 10 km, and 20 km records on the way. That may have shortened his hour distance, but he still finished strong.

No one has mentioned the fact that Merckx attempted that hour record after a full racing season. I think he attempted the record shortly after a 200+ racing season. He had to have been exhausted. Can anyone elaborate on this?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Maxie
No one has mentioned the fact that Merckx attempted that hour record after a full racing season. I think he attempted the record shortly after a 200+ racing season. He had to have been exhausted. Can anyone elaborate on this?

I always thought that the end of the road racing season was the rider's favorite time to try for the world hour record. That's when the rider is the strongest because of all the racing during the season. I remember that's when Lemond and Indurain did it. Often after their first attempt, riders say that they never want to try it ever again: most don't.

I didn't know that Lemond ever attempted the hour record.

I wonder if Lance will ever try it...although he isn't a pure TT'er but rather a much more gifted climber than TT'er.

Wonder why no one mentions Graeme Obree. Man what a great story.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by oneradtec
I didn't know that Lemond ever attempted the hour record.

I wonder if Lance will ever try it...although he isn't a pure TT'er but rather a much more gifted climber than TT'er.

Wonder why no one mentions Graeme Obree. Man what a great story.

I think you're right about Lemond never having attempted it. I remember that he was talking about it at one time, and then I didn't see any results then when he was supposed to have attempted it, which was after the end of the riding season one year. I assumed that he simply had not broken the record. In fact, I don't think he attempted it for one reason or another.

I have websearched for quite a while now after you pointed this out, hoping to come across a record of the attempt, but I could not find one. I did see where he may still hold the record for the fastest time trial in the Tour de France, but I the distance was less than one hour.

speaking of high altitude records, Tourant's kilo time of 58.875secs was set at 11,000 ft elevation. i would like to see him break a minute at sea level. big difference.
i think that all records should be attempted at under 1000ft elevation to make it more fair.
if some guy does a 59secs kilo at sea level, he wont have the record but he could have had the record if he was at 11,000ft. kind of seems unfair.

Funny, with all this talk about Boardman and Merckx... I went today to pick up my new Eddy Merckx Gara (my first ever road bike!). In the shop, (http://www.cyclefit.co.uk/) they have a TT bike which Chris Boardman raced on! You can see it on their website. I got to have a little play with it :-)

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by peshwengi
Funny, with all this talk about Boardman and Merckx... I went today to pick up my new Eddy Merckx Gara (my first ever road bike!). In the shop, (http://www.cyclefit.co.uk/) they have a TT bike which Chris Boardman raced on! You can see it on their website. I got to have a little play with it :-)

Boardman commented that he felt very cramped up on this bike. Did you get that same impression? I wonder if Merckx preferred this geometry for a particular reason. Maybe it wasn't so cramped up feeling for him. I suppose if it is kind of cramped up, there might be less lost power in the flex, if your body can handle it.

I'll bet you wouldn't mind owning the genuine Boardman TT bike. It probably ought to be in a cycling museum, if there is such a thing.