If you're going to have riders turn around and traverse the same piece of road from the opposite direction in such a short timeframe, it's just careless to not split the course in half with barriers.
Not to mention closing down the street properly when you're doing the cycling event in the middle of a large city.
Nor to mention the poor lady who was assigned to stand in the middle of the road, with no barriers, fluorescent jacket, whistle or signal flag when she had cyclists coming at her at high speeds, from two sides.
And of course, there's the idiocy of the car driver who must have ignored official's instructions somewhere, as well as the policeman who goes to stand 5 meters away from an injured woman to point cyclists, instead of phyisically protecting her.
CrueTrue wrote:
You do realise it's a race car (with officials), right?
Looking back, this could be the case, as the guy getting out is wearig some sort of keycord, but the car itself doesn't show up before the breakaway at the start, nor does it really look like an organizer's car.
It doesn't matter either way, and actually makes it worse if it was an official's car. Cars pack a little bit more impact than bicycles, and it would mean that someone assigned this woman to that location, knowing that cars would pass right behind her back as well.
BMC Racing
Cannondale
RadioShack-Leopard
Sky
Argos-Shimano
Garmin-Sharp
Saxo-Tinkoff
Champion System
UnitedHealthcare
Team Novo Nordisk
Colombia
Bissell
Bontrager
Optum
Jelly Belly
Jamis-Hagens Berman
baseballlover312, 06-03-14 : "Nuke Moscow...Don't worry Russia, we've got plenty of love to go around your cities"
Sarah Palin, 08-03-14 (CPAC, on Russian aggression) : "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke"
Big thanks to jdog for making this AMAZING userbar!
BMC Racing
Cannondale
RadioShack-Leopard
Sky
Argos-Shimano
Garmin-Sharp
Saxo-Tinkoff
Champion System
UnitedHealthcare
Team Novo Nordisk
Colombia
Bissell
Bontrager
Optum
Jelly Belly
Jamis-Hagens Berman
Not Belkin?
The team would already have there season well and truely mapped out so not a surprise they are not there
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/
I'm guessing everyone here has already seen this, but still worth bringing up to once again show what an absolute creep Bruyneel is.
After stating that he is being unfairly judged and can't defend himself because of his lawyers, he says this:
“If Armstrong had not come back and if I had included Landis in the squad again, all of this would never have happened. I am two hundred percent convinced of that. Without those two facts, we would be talking completely differently.”
Translation: "It's a pity that the truth came out, otherwise I'd still be doing the same thing as before."
BritPCMFan wrote:
Lol at the article. 410 is supsicious.
Cadel is normally at 420. which means apparently his clean. Maybe its just me, but that doesn't make much logical sense.
Also not really trusting it on the whole, you need to pay to see the results thing. Seems like, make random table, release sensational story, sit back and profit tactic.
You're not familiar with Watts in cycling, are you ?
ppanther wrote:
I think the whole Watt thing is kinda misleading. I mean if someone could do ridiculous Watt numbers it's an indicator of doping. But if i would go on the full program, i would certainly still suck against pros. So my numbers would be considered clean, but i am not. So Evans maybe is a mediocre rider, who doesn't manage to do better even if he is doped up to the gills. (not that i am believing that, i don't know whether he is clean or not)
Yes, but consistency tends to be an indicator. Evans has always had quite constant numbers, no matter what the doping landscape around him has looked like.
And besides having one training session with Ferrari, back in the early 2000's, there's really little against him. One can deny Sky's doping as much as possible, but the evidence against Sky leaders is 200 x the evidence against Evans.
TheManxMissile wrote:
Anything not published in an academic or similar Journal that has been vetted and passed by a group of peers i tend to not trust fully. Plus this offers up nothing new especially as the borders are self generated and seem arbitrary. They might as well have set the boundaries at 200 watts for mutant and it would be just as credible
Yes, because very few people can do 200 Watts. I'd officially be a mutant then, and you'd find it credible ?
I mean, it's not like cyclists haven't been measured, tested, etc. for decades.
Heck, even a kid (at the time), like me had his power and weight figures measured in the late 90's.
I guess people who wrote those articles (Vayer, Portoloeau, etc.) know something about Watts. Check their curriculum if you doubt it... There's a limit to what's humanly achievable (being clean). Of course limits are meant to be broken, and their "radars" have a 5 to 8 % error margin (SRM have a 1,5 to 5 % margin of error).
More or less, 410 W is that limit, and it applies to a 70 kg rider with 8 kg of equipment, and for efforts that last around 40 minutes at the end of a long stage with many mountains.
For longer or shorter efforts, it's about 1 W/minute to figure what's acceptable (390 W during 1h or 430 W during 20 minutes).
Even if you're not convinced by biology, physiology, or science, you might find statistics are more reliable. Past a certain number of Watts, and the furthest above that certain level, riders are caught positive or end up being strongly linked to doping.
TheManxMissile wrote:
Anything not published in an academic or similar Journal that has been vetted and passed by a group of peers i tend to not trust fully. Plus this offers up nothing new especially as the borders are self generated and seem arbitrary. They might as well have set the boundaries at 200 watts for mutant and it would be just as credible
Yes, because very few people can do 200 Watts. I'd officially be a mutant then, and you'd find it credible ?
I mean, it's not like cyclists haven't been measured, tested, etc. for decades.
Heck, even a kid (at the time), like me had his power and weight figures measured in the late 90's.
I guess people who wrote those articles (Vayer, Portoloeau, etc.) know something about Watts. Check their curriculum if you doubt it... There's a limit to what's humanly achievable (being clean). Of course limits are meant to be broken, and their "radars" have a 5 to 8 % error margin (SRM have a 1,5 to 5 % margin of error).
More or less, 410 W is that limit, and it applies to a 70 kg rider with 8 kg of equipment, and for efforts that last around 40 minutes at the end of a long stage with many mountains.
For longer or shorter efforts, it's about 1 W/minute to figure what's acceptable (390 W during 1h or 430 W during 20 minutes).
Even if you're not convinced by biology, physiology, or science, you might find statistics are more reliable. Past a certain number of Watts, and the furthest above that certain level, riders are caught positive or end up being strongly linked to doping.
I wasn't saying 200 watts should have been the limit, but that the limits while based on certain tests are hardly perfect and to me, without spending money to read the report, seem almost randomly selected.
You misunderstood my point. Wasn't saying 450 isn't mutant etc. but that the article is not very credible in my eyes, and that if they had picked 200 as mutant, the credibility would not have changed. Of course that is a slight exaggeration to make a point.
I shall re-phrase my point. The article is not absolute or credible, as it is not published in a peer-reviewed Journal or similar publication. It is only accessible by paying directly for the report, which screams of soft science. It is about as credible as anything written about Watts in Lance Armstrongs auto-biographies.
ppanther wrote:
Looking at the graph, why did Ullrich not manage to beat Armstrong at least once? He did higher numbers 1997/1998 than Armstrong at his wins. When was the hematocrit limit introduced?
Ullrich in 1996 was already a bit like Froome would be in 2012, paid to end second but most likely able to win it for himself, had he been allowed to.
In 1997 he was pure class, erm, I mean pure PED. It was the last time the actual classy Ullrich could be seen on a bike.
In 1998, no matter that his figures and Pantani's were quite high, he was only a shadow of his former self. Already he was too heavy at the start, and most likely he took it easy on the PED aspect.
In 1999 he won the Vuelta, but probably with a lower level than Armstrong at Le Tour.
In 2000 : too fat at the start, ending 2nd was quite an achievement. EPO tests were introduced in September or so, so everyone slowed down on EPO again.
In 2001 he was strong (nothing 1997 like), but Armstrong was stronger. He only finished 5th or so in some TT. Ullrich 1997 was in another dimension in TT.
2002 : injured, not at the Tour.
2003 : Armtrong was weaker than usual, but Ullrich has his preparation perturbed by Team Coast folding, etc. That's when he came the closest to winning it again, but had Armstrong not had bad days in the hot weather, Ullrich wouldn't even have been close after a disastrous first Alpine stage.
2004 : again, peaking too late. His form had been worrying all before Le Tour. He was dropped in the first Pyrénées stage, and was lucky to end 4th.
2005 : same shit, different year. Ready too late, horrible first mountain stage (bad blood bag at work). It went better as the race went on, but Armstrong (and Basso) were stronger.
2006 : seemed to be more in shape than during the previous 4 years. Then Operacion Puerto ended it all.
Bad preparation, weak mental, amateur management and antidoping progress prevented him from ever being his former self again after 1997.
Too bad, he was/is much more ok as a guy than the Texan, as far as I can tell.
BritPCMFan wrote:
Lol at the article. 410 is supsicious.
Cadel is normally at 420. which means apparently his clean. Maybe its just me, but that doesn't make much logical sense.
Also not really trusting it on the whole, you need to pay to see the results thing. Seems like, make random table, release sensational story, sit back and profit tactic.
You're not familiar with Watts in cycling, are you ?
Depends what you'd consider familiar. I'm not an expert and I'm not going to be capable of running the math to calculate each riders wattage, but then you don't need to in order to understand how their argument doesn't make any sense. They are saying that above 410 is suspicious, stating Cadel is usually at 420 (So ten points above what they are considering as suspicious)
They then state that Cadel is the only clean rider to win the tour. That obviously makes no sense. No need to understand wattage, merely the numeracy skill to understand 420 is higher then 410.
Unless of course you going to tell me that wattage works the other way, and the 1 is a high output then 100. In that case, my current argument is rubbish, but I can counter with the fact that the same article stats 410 is suspicious, 450 is mutant and therefore they don't understand wattage either.
The long and the short of it is that the report is nothing that wasn't already known, the info contained within is stuff that is already within the public domain and it is nothing more then a get rich off sensational headline story.
EDIT: Vid at the top of this page. That is freaking insane. I had to watch it a couple of times to find out WTF happened.
Although, if it wasn't for the fact that poor woman is horrifically injured, the cyclist that basically flips his big over to try and jump her would be hillarious. That got to be the most shocking piece of course design i've ever seen. Also, shouldn't she be in like some kind of marshall gear, and have actual flags and signs to use. Rather then just pushing at the air with her hands.
Really piss poor race organisation there. Hopefully she sues the people that organised that race and forces them into taking things seriously next time.
Edited by BritPCMFan on 11-06-2013 20:03
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
