Ndamukong Suh's girlfriend timed him.
Ndamukong Suh's girlfriend timed him.
non-registered user wrote:
I think a lot of people would be surprised by how (relatively) slow a lot of pro cyclists are at running. I would say something in the low 15s would still probably rank Pidcock as one of the quicker riders in the bunch.
I'm not surprised how slow pro cyclists are at running and I'm not surprised how slow pro runners are at cycling. Even though there is this correlation in terms of aerobic excellence required to be pro at both sports, the way this manifests itself practically is just way different. I'm sure someone with greater understanding of physiology etc could explain why but it's obscure things like the way that the impacts/traumas of hitting the ground has on muscle fatigue when running that a cyclist never faces and conversely the sole reliance on quadriceps, hamstrings and glutes (very little reliance on force and efficiencies of the soleus and Achilles tendon working together) that is so key in running that a cyclist never faces. Of course that's not to say a pro cyclist can't ever be a great runner and vice versa - it just takes a fair amount of adaption that doesn't just happen overnight.
As for this dude running 13.25? Stop it. As a "serious" athlete he should know better than claiming something like that. Very easy to discredit yourself even if you have some real ability on the bike and on the road.
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
non-registered user wrote:
I think a lot of people would be surprised by how (relatively) slow a lot of pro cyclists are at running. I would say something in the low 15s would still probably rank Pidcock as one of the quicker riders in the bunch.
I'm not surprised how slow pro cyclists are at running and I'm not surprised how slow pro runners are at cycling. ...
It's worth distinguishing a key difference between cycle cross, road riders and runners. I've seen the HR data from elites during a pro CX race, which are about 1 hour, or similar time for an elite half marathon.
Whereas the Half marathon runner and even 5k runner would try to run as evenly paced as possible not going lactic. a CX racer will cross their FTP threshold (similar to lactate threshold) well over 100x per hour. They are used to punishing extremes.
Road riders racing 4-5 hours with 5000m of climbing and/or sprints will also cross lactic threshold far more often then a ultra/marathoner, though not as often as a CX rider.
This is typically why runners initially make crappy CX riders, they don't have the power or lactic tolerance. Mike Woods transitioned well to riding, but he was a miler and used to supra lactic work.
CX riders also run in training, since you have to run/sprint in every CX race., and given that pro cyclists ride tons, maybe 20 hrs/week for Jr, upto 35+ for veteran, they also have the LSD training.
With a visor, a jacket, basketball shorts, and on wet asphalt?? TFOH. No way.
Rusty Woods should weigh in, he's the only one who can break 4 AND ride the Tour.
It's like South African WTS triathlete Richard Murray this past year allegedly breaking 4 in the mile and then running some insane 3k/5k - the guy is no doubt very, very fast, but sorry unless you run on a track, it's hard to buy these GPS runs.
This is Jim Kiler wrote:
Ndamukong Suh's girlfriend timed him.
Did you mean Manti Teo?
RM wrote:
With a visor, a jacket, basketball shorts, and on wet asphalt?? TFOH. No way.
Rusty Woods should weigh in, he's the only one who can break 4 AND ride the Tour.
It's like South African WTS triathlete Richard Murray this past year allegedly breaking 4 in the mile and then running some insane 3k/5k - the guy is no doubt very, very fast, but sorry unless you run on a track, it's hard to buy these GPS runs.
That would be awesome if Woods piped up.
Yea, no way Pidcock ran 1325, maybe not even 1425, but he's a small light powerful guy who would be able to trainup his running pretty quick i'd think.
I just think CXers have better transition to running than runners to do CXing.
Also keep in mind that the triathlete Alex Yee only has a 5k PB of 13:26 and he's considered one of the stronger runners among triathletes. If Pidcock is that good over 5k he should see what he can do in the water and go for triathlon gold as well
RM wrote:
With a visor, a jacket, basketball shorts, and on wet asphalt?? TFOH. No way.
Rusty Woods should weigh in, he's the only one who can break 4 AND ride the Tour.
It's like South African WTS triathlete Richard Murray this past year allegedly breaking 4 in the mile and then running some insane 3k/5k - the guy is no doubt very, very fast, but sorry unless you run on a track, it's hard to buy these GPS runs.
I'll buy it if it's a straight-ish route but not on a lapped course. My watch routinely adds around 10 metres per lap on the track. GPS doesn't cope well with loops, see also Sarah Hall's GPS from the Marathon Project course
How dare anyone other than people here ever demonstrate that running is not a complicated skill!
GPS is extremely precise technology...when you are in an aircraft.
On the ground GPS isn’t accurate and it usually isn’t pure GPS.
James Knox (Quickstep rider, former runner) and Tao Geoghegan Hart (Giro winner, Pidcock's teammate, does some running) both liked Marc Scott's comment. I think it's fair to assume that anyone in the peloton who has any idea of what a 13.25 looks like is laughing at Pidcock right now.
I have been working with a 2d tier pro cyclist who had lost his contract in Japan re Covid. He is still banging out 20 to 25 hours per week while working part time doing a grad year. He was in the top ten during a recent 4 day pro event until he got busted on a climb by Richie Porte and Luke Plapp, just missed to 10 in the final GC . Got dropped eventually to finish 9 mins down at Nats on Sunday. The lad is a very good rider.
I run with his Dad and his brother used to run. This guy has a runner's build and had been doing a few runs recently. Well he has 61 yo me and his 65 yo Dad covered but he isn't quick. Maybe sub 18 if he pushed it. Of course he would soon get under 16 if he did some regular training.
RM wrote:
With a visor, a jacket, basketball shorts, and on wet asphalt?? TFOH. No way.
Rusty Woods should weigh in, he's the only one who can break 4 AND ride the Tour.
It's like South African WTS triathlete Richard Murray this past year allegedly breaking 4 in the mile and then running some insane 3k/5k - the guy is no doubt very, very fast, but sorry unless you run on a track, it's hard to buy these GPS runs.
Woods did mention it, on twitter.
A small part of me thinks that this is a 10/10 troll effort by Pidcock. Maybe he'll claim that anyway, regardless of intent.
Cycling and running fitness is quite different . Mike Woods , the nice pro cyclist from Canada might struggle to break 4:40 now . Maybe not . Surly no where near his college 3:57 PR
crisscrosscountry wrote:
Anyone else notice a lot of endurance athletes from other sports (tris, cyclists, etc.) lately posting strava data or youtube videos of time trials that are absurdly fast? I think almost everyone of these I've seen has been a road TT that is pretty clearly a generous GPS track but are these people so vain that they really can't just head down to the track and run real laps?
Lionel Sanders (pro tri with one of the strongest bikes) did a TT but actually did it on a track and dropped a very reasonable 14:4x I think
but yes, I remember seeing another guy or two do a pretty insane TT
knox harrington wrote:
Cyclists spend more time looking at power than speed, and this kind of error (jaggy, erratic track) doesn't happen often on the bike. Nevertheless, Pidcock should have realized at some point that he had lousy data, and that he wasn't actually running a world class time. Perhaps his ego overruled his common sense. (He is a mega-prodigy on the bike).
Anyway, it looks like the loop where he was doing much of his TT is ~1008 meters:
https://imgur.com/a/F7y2LLtIt's hard to tell because the GPS track is so bad, but it looks like he was running laps between 3:01 and 3:20 until he stopped. I see 4 "hot" laps totaling about 12:45 (he stopped the TT in the middle of lap 5). So, 12:45 for 4032m is 15:49 5k pace, which seems plausible.
I don't doubt that he could be a damn good runner if he wanted to, but no one accidentally runs 5km in 13:25 on a random neighborhood loop, wearing a windbreaker and trainers. Not even Jason Rexing.
Nice deep dive with Rexing! Or even Brandon Moen with Pirate/Cat/Gun girl cheering him on.
Lactate threshold wrote:
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
I'm not surprised how slow pro cyclists are at running and I'm not surprised how slow pro runners are at cycling. ...
It's worth distinguishing a key difference between cycle cross, road riders and runners. I've seen the HR data from elites during a pro CX race, which are about 1 hour, or similar time for an elite half marathon.
Whereas the Half marathon runner and even 5k runner would try to run as evenly paced as possible not going lactic. a CX racer will cross their FTP threshold (similar to lactate threshold) well over 100x per hour. They are used to punishing extremes.
Road riders racing 4-5 hours with 5000m of climbing and/or sprints will also cross lactic threshold far more often then a ultra/marathoner, though not as often as a CX rider.
This is typically why runners initially make crappy CX riders, they don't have the power or lactic tolerance. Mike Woods transitioned well to riding, but he was a miler and used to supra lactic work.
CX riders also run in training, since you have to run/sprint in every CX race., and given that pro cyclists ride tons, maybe 20 hrs/week for Jr, upto 35+ for veteran, they also have the LSD training.
Looking at this from the perspective of a former domestic pro cyclist who runs not exceptionally well now:
The type of effort in a time trial is the most comparable to running, and the absolute key to a 1hr time trial is lactate threshold, whereas in running it seems to be more balanced between lactate and aerobic threshold. (assuming good technique in both sports). Essentially in cycling the musculature used is reliant 100% on muscular contraction, relatively slow movement, and limited muscle groups doing the work. In running you see a large dependence on "springyness" of muscles and tendons, using what is largely plyometric style bounces spread between a few extra muscle groups (hamstrings, hip flexors, calves) firing at a much quicker velocity through a shorter range of motion.
Put together, this means that when a non-specialized athlete performs a 1hr TT, their lactate clearance will be the limiter on a bike, and their aerobic capacity will be their limiter on a run. We know this to be anecdotally true, as we'll often see beginner cyclists comment about how their legs are burning, and beginner runners being so out of breath they can't comment.
mathematics wrote:
Lactate threshold wrote:
It's worth distinguishing a key difference between cycle cross, road riders and runners. I've seen the HR data from elites during a pro CX race, which are about 1 hour, or similar time for an elite half marathon.
Whereas the Half marathon runner and even 5k runner would try to run as evenly paced as possible not going lactic. a CX racer will cross their FTP threshold (similar to lactate threshold) well over 100x per hour. They are used to punishing extremes.
Road riders racing 4-5 hours with 5000m of climbing and/or sprints will also cross lactic threshold far more often then a ultra/marathoner, though not as often as a CX rider.
This is typically why runners initially make crappy CX riders, they don't have the power or lactic tolerance. Mike Woods transitioned well to riding, but he was a miler and used to supra lactic work.
CX riders also run in training, since you have to run/sprint in every CX race., and given that pro cyclists ride tons, maybe 20 hrs/week for Jr, upto 35+ for veteran, they also have the LSD training.
Looking at this from the perspective of a former domestic pro cyclist who runs not exceptionally well now:
The type of effort in a time trial is the most comparable to running, and the absolute key to a 1hr time trial is lactate threshold, whereas in running it seems to be more balanced between lactate and aerobic threshold. (assuming good technique in both sports). Essentially in cycling the musculature used is reliant 100% on muscular contraction, relatively slow movement, and limited muscle groups doing the work. In running you see a large dependence on "springyness" of muscles and tendons, using what is largely plyometric style bounces spread between a few extra muscle groups (hamstrings, hip flexors, calves) firing at a much quicker velocity through a shorter range of motion.
Put together, this means that when a non-specialized athlete performs a 1hr TT, their lactate clearance will be the limiter on a bike, and their aerobic capacity will be their limiter on a run. We know this to be anecdotally true, as we'll often see beginner cyclists comment about how their legs are burning, and beginner runners being so out of breath they can't comment.
You don't know cycling. Muscle "springyness" is just as important as in running. It's called Souplesse. Look it up.
mathematics wrote:
. We know this to be anecdotally true, as we'll often see beginner cyclists comment about how their legs are burning, and beginner runners being so out of breath they can't comment.
I can anecdotally support this statement. I recently got into cycling, and tried to train using my heart rate as a limiter. My legs simply can't sustain the effort on a bike to reach the equivalent heart rate for a tempo run. Conversely, I've been winded the few times I've attempted an easy jog lately (haven't seriously run in a couple years). Hats off to anyone who can excel at both.
Once in a Lifetime wrote:
GPS is extremely precise technology...when you are in an aircraft.
On the ground GPS isn’t accurate and it usually isn’t pure GPS.
Being in the air has nothing to do with it. I have a very accurate GPS receiver that I use for surveying on the ground. It receives and processes additional signal frequencies from the satellites, and also connects in real time via cell connection with fixed base stations so it can calculate corrections. The problem with watches is they use a very cheap, tiny receiver that's bouncing around on your wrist. But they have pretty sophisticated algorithms that take crappy raw data and give you good results, so long as you're not making too many turns or running under lots of trees or tall buildings.
In addition to the tight turns on his loop course, you can see in the video he's running right next to a fence made up of vertical steel slats that's probably causing all kinds of multipath errors (when the GPS signal bounces off a reflective object and then to your watch, instead of taking a direct path). His watch might be able to correct for a normal amount of error but I bet that fence is causing things to go haywire.