Too Tech wrote:
Pass me the kombucha wrote: I could tell you it took me 260 average watts for 4.5 hours to finish a UCI race in the top 10 last year, but you don't know my weight, it's irrelevant. But if I told my coach it was a 5000+kj day we can replicate those training loads in practice in different ways. I'm never going to replicate that type of "breakaway" power solo in practice. It just doesn't happen. But we can work on burning high kj to prepare for the work load. When it's "intervals" we use strictly watts if that makes you happy to hear.What do you think of Phinney's take that the overblown technical aspects of cycling is ruining the sport? (In the sense that it make training less enjoyable.)
Phinney isn't a bad guy, but I think he was overwhelmed with BMC, the pressure to perform and OCH (who is his dad's friend). He crashed hard on lookout mountain a few years back, he was really pushing that decent. I think since then, he kind of realized how fortunate he was, and how professional cycling takes away from the beauty of what cycling represents when you're in a very controlled environment. Think Mary Cain in NOP.
At the top level everything is about diet, science, and technology (but not on all teams). Each team has it's own level of control. Other than TJ and Joey, he didn't have a ton of American's on that team, and he was kind of soul searching. I think he found a great fit on Garmin.
As to the technical aspect comments. I could be wrong, but I think he was maybe lashing out at a lot of different things to scapegoat his own situation. I think we need to embrace technology. Aerodynamics matter so much, along with the little watts that can add up with minuscule changes. If you don't like it, don't be a TT specialist. Sadly, that's his path, and I hope he finds much success.