Victor Campenaerts Hour Record Attempt

[nooneline]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

They have rules on all sorts of things related to position on the bike, like "The maximum inclination of each elbow rest (measured on the support surface of the arm) is 15 degrees" and yet the most significant resistance a rider faces is air resistance. It is a mockery that there are no standards for temperature, humidity or pressure.

so: what if somebody trains, peaks, and travels to a velodrome for an hour record attempt and there's a weather pattern that moves in that challenges the track's ability to stay within these mandated parameters. The track cranks the climate-control system, everybody monitors the meters, and finally the UCI official blows their whistle and says, "The conditions do not allow an attempt." The rider just doesn't get to do an attempt that counts? Their months of preparations are all for naught? The time and money all wasted? Personally I think we should be removing barriers, not creating new ones. The unified rule was a great move - look at all the interest in the Hour Record since then!

Before UCI events, every rider puts their bike in a jig. If my bike is underweight, I can shove an allen key up the seatpost; if my handlebar angle is not correct, I can tweak it and take the start line. But making rules about the weather? c'mon.

[MattTuck]

Originally Posted by nooneline

so: what if somebody trains, peaks, and travels to a velodrome for an hour record attempt and there's a weather pattern that moves in that challenges the track's ability to stay within these mandated parameters. The track cranks the climate-control system, everybody monitors the meters, and finally the UCI official blows their whistle and says, "The conditions do not allow an attempt." The rider just doesn't get to do an attempt that counts? Their months of preparations are all for naught? The time and money all wasted? Personally I think we should be removing barriers, not creating new ones. The unified rule was a great move - look at all the interest in the Hour Record since then!

Before UCI events, every rider puts their bike in a jig. If my bike is underweight, I can shove an allen key up the seatpost; if my handlebar angle is not correct, I can tweak it and take the start line. But making rules about the weather? c'mon.

I hear what you're saying. I personally think the UCI messed up the hour record with the new rules. There is no historical continuity.

And clearly, there is a difference between a freak storm rolling in and changing the atmospheric pressure, and a person purposely traveling to a high altitude track to seek out an aero advantage.

I'd have liked to see "the hour" split into two distinct events. The "hour competition" would be an event that rolled over every calendar year. The person with the best time from 2019, would be the 2019 champion and hold that honor during the 2020 racing season. He or she would get to wear a special hour themed jersey, just as the word champion wears the rainbow stripes. The rules would be the unified rules that are now in force, and there would be no special restrictions on where the attempt must occur. It would be a fun competition for pride each year, and a way for riders seeking contracts to show their stuff. In many ways, this would create evergreen interest in "the hour" as a discipline, in a way that incremental and punctuated rules changes cannot.

The "hour record" would still use the Merckx rules, and have some restrictions on using high altitude tracks. This would be the historical yardstick that true champions could measure themselves against the all time greats. The problem with the hour record is that each new record makes it harder to justify the time, effort and investment required to make an attempt. That is why I'd rather maintain the integrity of the 'record' and also have a living competition.

But, I am just a guy on the internet.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

They have rules on all sorts of things related to position on the bike, like "The maximum inclination of each elbow rest (measured on the support surface of the arm) is 15 degrees" and yet the most significant resistance a rider faces is air resistance. It is a mockery that there are no standards for temperature, humidity or pressure.

That might be concern if a rider built their own velodrome optimized for a record, and then immediately tore it down after setting the record. But most velodromes are available to whomever wants to rent it out for a record attempt, so the location/climate of the velodrome provides no advantage to any specific riders that is not available to other riders.

In other sports, there are know to be "fast" and "slow" tracks, so everybody knows that there are some tracks were it is more likely that records will be set. This includes running, skating, various motorsports, and even swimming.

[MattTuck]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

That might be concern if a rider built their own velodrome optimized for a record, and then immediately tore it down after setting the record. But most velodromes are available to whomever wants to rent it out for a record attempt, so the location/climate of the velodrome provides no advantage to any specific riders that is not available to other riders.

In other sports, there are know to be "fast" and "slow" tracks, so everybody knows that there are some tracks were it is more likely that records will be set. This includes running, skating, various motorsports, and even swimming.

What do you think the hour record is measuring?

If you think that the distance is the output that you care about, then I guess you have a point. But, I could go do the descent from Haleakala to Maui and probably cover more ground in an hour than 55km (just barely, I looked and the climb is on 58km long).

My point is that the hour record is not really about distance, it is about human performance. Distance is just the proxy we use to measure performance in this case, and we know from physics that the distance has a different relationship with human performance at different altitudes.

I say, let the hour record stand for a certain level of human performance. You seem to be saying that human performance is a secondary concern. If riders can perform at a lower level, but use other advantages to more efficiently convert their energy into velocity, we should view those efforts equally.


http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2014/09/

The UCI disallowed aerodynamic advantages based on certain positions, like Obree's. Why continue to allow aerodynamic advantages based on altitude?

[82Picchio]

Kudos to Campenaerts! The haters can shove it.

Hell, Ritter, Merckx, and Moser all "cheated" by setting hour records at altitude in Mexico. Get over it people.

[nooneline]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

The UCI disallowed aerodynamic advantages based on certain positions, like Obree's. Why continue to allow aerodynamic advantages based on altitude?

Because there's a big difference between "changing what constitutes a bicycle" and "changing where you ride a bicycle." I think that's a reasonable distinction.

The UCI was afraid - rightly or wrongly - that if people kept changing what a bicycle looks like and how a rider interacts with it, that before long it would just be fully-faired recumbent time trials. And they wanted to keep bicycles bicycles. I think that's pretty reasonable, even if it means that a Commissionaire eyes my bike pretty closely before an event.

But I don't think there's any comparable fear around having a few locations that are just faster. It's just a fact.

However, I encourage you to start a timetrial league in which riders must wear poorly-fitting skinsuits, ride bikes with ill-adjusted bearings, and only ride on bumpy, cracked, mid-century American velodromes located in public parks.

For historical comparison, of course

[MattTuck]

Originally Posted by nooneline

However, I encourage you to start a timetrial league in which riders must wear poorly-fitting skinsuits, ride bikes with ill-adjusted bearings, and only ride on bumpy, cracked, mid-century American velodromes located in public parks.

For historical comparison, of course

touché

And I encourage you to start a time trial league on a floating velodrome that sails in the low pressure eyes of hurricanes, so as to set the fastest times possible

[nooneline]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

touché

And I encourage you to start a time trial league on a floating velodrome that sails in the low pressure eyes of hurricanes, so as to set the fastest times possible

Better yet, I'll build one so big that the rider will have a perpetual tailwind around the eye.

[echappist]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

touché

And I encourage you to start a time trial league on a floating velodrome that sails in the low pressure eyes of hurricanes, so as to set the fastest times possible

Originally Posted by nooneline

Better yet, I'll build one so big that the rider will have a perpetual tailwind around the eye.

well played, both of you!

Golf clap for the drole bantering

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

What do you think the hour record is measuring?

The Hour Record is measuring how far a rider can go in an hour, within a set of rules. Nothing more, nothing less.

Originally Posted by MattTuck

If you think that the distance is the output that you care about, then I guess you have a point. But, I could go do the descent from Haleakala to Maui and probably cover more ground in an hour than 55km (just barely, I looked and the climb is on 58km long).?

The rules cover this. The record must be set on a regulation velodrome track. Riding on a closed circuit (velodrome) negates any prevailing wind or slope. (In a related note: The Boston Marathon was just run here in town yesterday. This is the oldest marathon event in the world, and one of the most prestigious. But you can't set a world record on this course: The rules for marathon records regulate the course, including stating that the start and finish have to be within a maximum distance and elevation differential from each other, in order to negate wind and altitude differences; the Boston Marathon course is point to point, ends at a lower elevation than it starts, and the prevailing winds are a tailwind.)

Originally Posted by MattTuck

My point is that the hour record is not really about distance, it is about human performance. Distance is just the proxy we use to measure performance in this case, and we know from physics that the distance has a different relationship with human performance at different altitudes.

I say, let the hour record stand for a certain level of human performance. You seem to be saying that human performance is a secondary concern. If riders can perform at a lower level, but use other advantages to more efficiently convert their energy into velocity, we should view those efforts equally.

Then why not just ride on an ergometer?

Originally Posted by MattTuck

The UCI disallowed aerodynamic advantages based on certain positions, like Obree's. Why continue to allow aerodynamic advantages based on altitude?

Obree's innovations were banned primarly because the UCI didn't like Obree, (who insisted in working outside the "system" and a was a vocal critic of the UCI).

The most famous hour record might be Eddy Merckx's. His record is often considered the "gold standard" of a demonstration of pure human performance And yet, when preparing for the record, he specifically went to a track that was climatologically advantageous for the record - the track in Mexico City was at 7,500 feet altitude, with its accompanying reduced air resistance. Are you saying that he "cheated" by using an aerodynamic advantage?

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by nooneline

However, I encourage you to start a timetrial league in which riders must wear poorly-fitting skinsuits, ride bikes with ill-adjusted bearings, and only ride on bumpy, cracked, mid-century American velodromes located in public parks.

For historical comparison, of course

There are a few time trials, mostly small and local, that have "non-aero" categories, that only allow "standard" road bikes (usually defined as what would be allowed in a mass start event). The purpose of these categories is to allow amateur athletes to compete on a more equal footing without having to invest a lot of money in specialized TT equipment. I think this is a great idea at the lower amateur level, but when you get to the level of world records there's no reason to be so restrictive.

[82Picchio]

For comparison's sake, Colorado Springs, where USA Cycling has its training base is at 6035'. Aguascalientes, where Campenaerts set the record, is at 6194', a difference of mere 159'. Mexico City, where Ritter, Merckx, and Moser set their hour records, is at 7,382. And you people are bitching about Campenaerts. Where were you in 1968, 1972, and 1984?

[ultraman6970]

63x15 and 59x14 was the multiplication he was trying, I believe he went for the 63x15 (video and pictures)...

Almost the same gear but they must feel a lot different... the 63x15 is easier to roll and mantain IMO.

Insane power tho...

[slambers3]

It is fairly common to use Aguascalientes for record attempts. if you were going for the hour and could do it anywhere in the world, why wouldn't you do it at the fastest possible place? Stack the deck in your favor (within the rules) and eliminate all doubt. That's how professionals operate.

[weisan]

I like it that he did it without any fanfare and all the stupid drama buildup that some of these guys like Wiggins did.