When are we going to be able to buy the new Cannondale Synapse, sounds epic

Oh my God...the carbon hating curmudeon luddite in me is getting smashed in the face by the arrival of the near perfect, future-is-now bike that happens to be made of plastic...this is a mind blowing paradox the likes of which have not be seen since Lazarus had to battle his anti-self in a corridor between parallel universes for eternity after Kirk blew up his ship, which was actually a time machine. (Star Trek, Episode 20, Season One: The Alternative Factor)

McQuaid gone?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/538134/pat-mcquaid-s-uci-president-nomination-declared-void.html

Jules said:

McQuaid gone? http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/538134/pat-mcquaid-s-uci-president-nomination-declared-void.html

I'm wondering if by election time he can weather the storm and everyone will just forget and vote him back in.

lennard zinn's first answer in this Q&A is hilarious...

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/04/bikes-and-tech/technical-faq/tech-faq-all-about-carbon-clinchers_284201

he all but calls "richard" a fat fuck. i kinda felt sorry for the guy.

Jules said:

Awesome - the hissy fits have begun already!

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/04/news/froome-i-will-lead-sky-at-the-tour_284164

i feel for froome.  it's gonna be tough for the guy to win a  PR battle with (sir!) wiggins. 

and that's a shame, because he's been riding super strong where wiggins really has not (maybe he's not been pushing it?)  i kinda think wiggins is going to get beaten bad in the giro though, which may dent his belief in taking the tour.

Reminds me of the good old battles between Lemond and Hinault at La Vie Claire team.

Brailford is noticeably silent here.  Can't say it reflects well on any of them, except Froome who should look for another team.  BMC perhaps?

Mark Clifford said:

lennard zinn's first answer in this Q&A is hilarious...

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/04/bikes-and-tech/technical-faq/tech-faq-all-about-carbon-clinchers_284201

he all but calls "richard" a fat fuck. i kinda felt sorry for the guy.

Good lord, the R & A ad "enveloping" VeloNews is an abomination. Make the bad man stop.

Holy SHITE

Jules said:

Holy SHITE

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/has-the-paul-kimmage-defense-fund-disappeared

There goes my $75...

And my $20.....

Funny to think that the UCI Overlord is corrupt.

Actually I think it's a fair argument; it was a "Defend Kimmage" fund not an "attack UCI" fund.

I don't know why he is the one making the unilateral decision.  And it still doesn't explain where the money went.  They have the e.mail addresses of those who donated.  THe people could have been surveyed.

@Wump yeah, should have written it's an interesting argument.  Nothing "fair" about it.

A photographer disassembled his bike (and a bunch of other goodies) and snapped some amazing photos. 

So close yet so far...

http://www.usacycling.org/why-is-weight-so-important-in-cycling.htm

I'm about 9 lbs out, but I think I'll get within 3 lbs of my 'world champion' weight around July-ish.

I have seen myself at the weight that chart puts World Champion me at and I look like an emaciated shell of a human. Also have to skip waaaay too many beers to get to that weight

But I support your effort!

i'm about 2lbs off.  one could conclude, then, that i'm a big poo away from being champion of the world. CHAMPION OF THE WORLD!

at that weight, this is how i felt at every meal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC8gJ0_9o4M (man hiking antarctic leaves food behind to avoid carrying it; video is of him discovering the food he left behind after 86 days alone).

mark, as someone who wrestled in high school (not just with the demons of growing up, but also for the school's team) i can tell you that if you take a 2 lb shit, something came out of you that was supposed to remain inside

Ok, you would-be-world beaters and varmint poopers.  

Yes, these lactate levels appear to be in mmol/L (that is millimoles/liter, or mM as abbreviated in journals that I use).

The table is a little confusing. First two rows are power at the end of the trial - first in total watts and second in watt/kg.

The following rows are the lacate levels in the various groups (AC corresponds to elite amateurs).
The interesting point is that for a given power output, the lactate levels are significantly lower for the pros. Basically, this means that it doesn't hurt as much for them to go fast.

This is consistent with my theory of the effects of training. Repeat - MY THEORY is that one important effect of training is to increase the number and density of capillaries in your muscles so that you can more efficiently deliver oxygen. And equally important, remove CO2. By keeping the muscles bathed in O2, you have less lactate produced.

Furthermore, I believe that after a long Battenkill-like ride, the relatively high, prolonged lactate levels in your muscles is a major contributor to cramping. So that if you were in better 'shape', you would suffer less. Electrolytes etc can't hurt, but they cannot overcome muscles that do not have a sufficient supply of O2 over a long period of time.

(Lactate is the product of anaerobic production of ATP. Basically, as you break down the glucose (6 carbon sugar) to produce the ATP, the first part of the process (called glycolysis) doesn't require any O2. When you get to pyruvate (3 carbon sugar), you have a choice: enter the Krebs cycle to make more ATP (this requires O2), or just make lactate as a byproduct and give up. Stopping short is a really inefficient use of your glucose (only 2 ATP molecules for glycolysis vs. 10 ATP molecules from the Krebs cycle).

Millán, Iñigo San¹; González-Haro, Carlos²; Sagasti, María³

There is a lack of cycling-specific protocols to assess physiological parameters in road cyclists and it is important to develop them to improve testing efficiency for road cyclists.
PURPOSE: To determine through a new protocol and approach the physiological differences between road cyclists of different categories of racing and performance.
METHODS: 70 road male cyclists (20 juniors (JC), 20 elite amateurs (AC), 20 UCI Pro Tour professionals (PC), and 10 world class professional cyclists (WPC)). WPC group was composed of podium finishers at any of the Grand Tours (Tour de France, Italy and Spain), World Champions and winners of any UCI Pro Tour league race. All groups performed a new protocol test on a cyclergometer: Initial workload: 2 W·kg-1 with increments of 0.5 W·kg-1 every 10 min-1 until exhaustion. Blood lactate concentration ([La-]) was measured at the end of each stage to determine [La-] corresponding to each W·kg-1 workload. Maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) and peak power output (Wmax) were obtained at the end of the test. Physiological variables among the groups were analyzed using one-way ANOVA.
RESULTS: Significant differences in absolute and relative Wmax were observed between all groups.
At workloads expressed in W·kg-1, [La-] was significantly lower in those cyclists with the highest level of competition and performance.
CONCLUSION: [La-] at a given W·kg-1 workload, measured through our new protocol, is a good discrimination factor between road cyclists of different levels and categories. This variable has not been studied in the past, and opens a new perspective for the study of physiological adaptation to endurance exercise.

dstokes said:

This is consistent with my theory of the effects of training. Repeat - MY THEORY is that one important effect of training is to increase the number and density of capillaries in your muscles so that you can more efficiently deliver oxygen. And equally important, remove CO2. By keeping the muscles bathed in O2, you have less lactate produced.

Furthermore, I believe that after a long Battenkill-like ride, the relatively high, prolonged lactate levels in your muscles is a major contributor to cramping. So that if you were in better 'shape', you would suffer less. Electrolytes etc can't hurt, but they cannot overcome muscles that do not have a sufficient supply of O2 over a long period of time.

(Lactate is the product of anaerobic production of ATP. Basically, as you break down the glucose (6 carbon sugar) to produce the ATP, the first part of the process (called glycolysis) doesn't require any O2. When you get to pyruvate (3 carbon sugar), you have a choice: enter the Krebs cycle to make more ATP (this requires O2), or just make lactate as a byproduct and give up. Stopping short is a really inefficient use of your glucose (only 2 ATP molecules for glycolysis vs. 10 ATP molecules from the Krebs cycle).

My understanding is that the goal (or gold) is to metabolize Lactate (the fuel) as efficiently as possible so that the muscles can use the fuel "at hand" and not rely on the liver's glycogen store which is much slower.

Lactate is not fuel. It is a waste product from pyruvate. The goal is to not make it in the first place, but to use O2 to take the pyruvate into the Krebs cycle (also known as the citric acid cycle).

Glucose is the fuel, which comes from breaking down glycogen (basically a polymer of glucose).

If you do make it (inevitable at high efforts), then you want to get rid of it as quickly as possible. It is acidic andthus changes the pH of the tissues and the blood (known as acidosis). Somehow, this makes everything hurt.


You can also use fat, of course, but the bits of fat enter directly into the Krebs cycle and don't contribute to any lactate buildup. However, you need O2 to burn fat, explaining why you can't sprint very well once you bonk. Bonk defined as using up all your glycogen.

"one important effect of training is to increase the number and density of capillaries in your muscles so that you can more efficiently deliver oxygen. And equally important, remove CO2. By keeping the muscles bathed in O2, you have less lactate produced."

I agree with that but it's a bit simplistic: if you do go above your threshold where byproducts are built up faster than they are removed, you tap into glycogen stores and engage anerobic metabolism including increased lactate production and experience the symptoms associated with that. agreed.

However, physiological adaptations such as angiogenesis (the growth of blood vessels) surounding muscle fibers aren't the only ones that occur. Mitochondrial changes confer a major advantage when examining the benefits of training, whether it's due to an increase of the enzymes involved in the respiratory pathways, the size of the organelle or the amount of them present.

Also, genetic changes in muscle fiber types occur but I assume this to be a longer adaptation to training than the others I mentioned.

While clearing metabolites including lactate is important, I think it's more important to increase efficiency of aerobic respiration and prevent the engagement of anaerobic processes before they are suscitated.