would we see a decrease in average speeds by about 1-2 mph in professional races? 15-20 years ago (before epo and epo-like products) the pro peloton was slower by about 1 mph and 2-3 mph slower in the mountains according to an article I read last night.

Or do you think the increase is mostly due to better conditioning and technology?

would we see a decrease in average speeds by about 1-2 mph in professional races? 15-20 years ago (before epo and epo-like products) the pro peloton was slower by about 1 mph and 2-3 mph slower in the mountains according to an article I read last night.

Or do you think the increase is mostly due to better conditioning and technology?

Hard to say, I don't think there have been any real changes in training principles since intervals became widely known ('70s ?). It's all just tweaking a bit here and there. Probably better monitoring of athletes physiologic condition so as to provide enough training stimulus without overtraining today.

FWIW, I think many of the record times up climbs were set in the mid to late 90s when EPO use became widespread and before the 50% hematocrit rule kept things in check.

I think it's more a case of having a bigger competitive field these days. I'm no cycling historian but I've read that in the past there were fewer riders capable of going for the victory but now there are quality riders just busting to get away from the pack.

Also the level of $$$$ has made winning stages such a big thing so more people are escaping and escaping harder, more people are chasing and chasing harder.

hope so anyway ay...

I don't think you would see pro races get slower, although you might see the main group get smaller as the number of riders able to maintain the highest speeds shrank. I think the increase in speed over the last few years is attributable to technology & training. Remember, the typical racing bike circa 1989 weighed 20+ pounds, had 32 spoke 3-cross wheels, and had a 7 or 8 speed cassette with downtube shifters. Just changing from that to a modern bike has to be good for 1 mph.

Also, I wonder if the use of race radios has had an effect on speeds, since the peloton is better able to chase down breakaways? Just a thought.

First, who's to say no one was doping 15-20 years ago? I heard about "blood packing" back in the 70's.

There is no excuse for using EPO, which is illegal, when you can get the same or better effect from sleeping in a hypoxic tent, which is entirely legal. The tent is cheaper, too, and with fewer health risks. Maybe less convenient, but why risk it?

As someone mentioned, the more participants world wide we have, the more likely it is that we'll select a better group to be the 180 or so that starts the Tour. We didn't even have an American in the Tour until 1981, Boyer, and now there are lots. There are probably hundreds more in the US now who could compete, raising the level of "good" riders in the Tour, and having nothing to do with doping.

Also, we may need to define "doping." Does that mean only banned substances, or anything that enhances speed, but may not *yet* be on the banned list?

When Paul brought up how, compared to a decade ago, whole groups of riders are being dropped now, not just 1's and 2's. He implied the pack stayed together, longer, back then. No comment from LA on that. Don't know what he was implying; was he trying to say he has suspicions about the 'cleanliness' of the lead group?

Yeah, we might see the average peloton speed drop with blood boosting enhancers, legal or otherwise.

When Paul brought up how, compared to a decade ago, whole groups of riders are being dropped now, not just 1's and 2's. He implied the pack stayed together, longer, back then. No comment from LA on that. Don't know what he was implying; was he trying to say he has suspicions about the 'cleanliness' of the lead group?

Yeah, we might see the average peloton speed drop with blood boosting enhancers, legal or otherwise.

I saw that too. I think Sherwen was saying that because there were more riders getting dropped this was an indication of less doping. I took it to mean that a peloton which was rife with doping would stay together longer since the lesser riders would need doping to keep them up with the top riders.

I saw that too. I think Sherwen was saying that because there were more riders getting dropped this was an indication of less doping. I took it to mean that a peloton which was rife with doping would stay together longer since the lesser riders would need doping to keep them up with the top riders.

They have been saying this for years now, that EPO essentially leveled the playing field, and thus far more guys were able to hang around until pretty late in the classics, with far more small bunch sprints as a result rather than the a few riders in the finale.

I've always found it hard to compare the 'average' speeds of anything to find a valid conclusion... I assume that the original question was directed more at the Tour than anything else...but in terms of the Classics, I think the question has more relavence.

Simplistic statement: if everyone in the peloton was riding all out, no breaks would ever get away. Even if each of the 20 some teams sent 4 members to work each day, how fast could 80 motivated dedicated pro riders ride? faster than the current 'fastest average speed' of the Tour probably.

There are piano hours in the Giro...there are days off in the Tour (just let the 'right' break go). (not a big follower of the Vuelta)

Maybe the an average based off of TT or TTT would be a better yardstick...but the problem with that is different courses, different winds etc etc...is this why the Hour Record is one of the yardsticks of the Greats?

The speed difference could just be the result of having a fully dedicated team ride for a single leader (most exemplified by USPS Tour 2004) and not worrying about the rest of the season. (The same LA vs. Merckx arguments could apply here...Merckx's domestiques had to ride the entire year, LA's domestiques ride a bit, but really focus on the peak in July...)

As for the Doping issues, take to heart everything that Russ said. IMHO, cycling does not want to get clean...the controls in place are token and easily bypassed. They are meant to catch the obviously guilty and the 'too dumb not to get caught'. The current controls are not meant to stop or deter doping...just to placate the public so the fans don't leave.

get real. since 1970 the tour de france speeds have increased from 35km/h to 40km/h, and the tour is even longer than it was then. that's huge. take away EPO and watch the numbers drop significantly. this has nothing to do with "better teams" (as if there was a team that was better than merckx's) and people training specifically for the tour.

sd

Pardon me but your ignorance is showing!

1970 4,205 kms
1971 3,608 kms
1972 3,846 kms
1973 4,090 kms
1974 4,098 kms
1975 4,000 kms
1976 4,017 kms
1977 4,096 kms
1978 3,908 kms
1979 3,765 kms

2004 3,360 kms - 600 kms LESS on average than the '70's

So... what we have here is longer Tours, ridden on vastly inferior roads, using much heavier equipment, and all done by guys racing 120+ days a year.

It's not a real mystery to ME that modern Tour average speeds have increased, the wonder of it is that they've only gone up by around 5-6 kms/hr

I heard a discussion regarding TV coverage of the races. In the past, TV coverage started after the race was already in progress. The riders, their sponsers, etc. were not as driven during the early portions of a race because no one saw them. Then, when the cameras turned on, the real race began.

These days, the races are being televised from start to finish. The sponsors want their logo to get air-time. The riders and DSs are pushing themselves and their team to get attention for themselves and their sponsors. A long/early break now brings greater publicity and bigger gains.

Guys are more willing to go on that all day, solo attack because they know the world is watching. I'm willing to bet that Thomas Voelker found some extra energy to stay in yellow those extra few days because he had a camera on him 24/7.

Guys are more willing to go on that all day, solo attack because they know the world is watching. I'm willing to bet that Thomas Voelker found some extra energy to stay in yellow those extra few days because he had a camera on him 24/7.


Not to mention Voeckler's team is searching for a sponsor next year. They were tres tres motivated to ride a good tour. Which they did.


Hampsten Guy makes an excellent point tho. They still ride piano in the Giro which I believe is broadcast start to finish and the Vuelta doesn't have much of that early race intensity either.

Would anyone know what the avg speeds for those two races have been over the years?

Pardon me but your ignorance is showing!


So... what we have here is longer Tours, ridden on vastly inferior roads, using much heavier equipment, and all done by guys racing 120+ days a year.

It's not a real mystery to ME that modern Tour average speeds have increased, the wonder of it is that they've only gone up by around 5-6 kms/hr

lol, got me there.. after i posted i did a check on that website and found the error.. was hoping i wouldn't be called on this after ;)

sd