Comments on: The Death of the Pure Climber http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/ Pro Cycling News, Commentary and Special Features Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:45:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Fashion http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-19339 Fashion Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:19:18 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-19339 I'm a visiting tutor at Goldsmiths University, London, and am around the editorial board of an online discussion board for market specialists. I’m a visiting tutor at Goldsmiths University, London, and am around the editorial board of an online discussion board for market specialists.

]]> By: le grimpeur – The grimpeur in decline? http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-15519 le grimpeur – The grimpeur in decline? Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:20:26 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-15519 [...] recent debate hosted by Cosmo Catalano on climbers in cycling raised two important questions: firstly, is there such a thing as a pure [...] [...] recent debate hosted by Cosmo Catalano on climbers in cycling raised two important questions: firstly, is there such a thing as a pure [...]

]]> By: cosmo http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-14880 cosmo Thu, 14 Jan 2010 03:05:28 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-14880 @Guy: thanks for chipping in. I like the definition—I think it comes closest to the notion I had in my head. @Big Mikey, Rainbow: Pantani's '98 win was a pretty classic example of a "pure" climber spotting a weakness in a rival's armor (Ullrich never did like the rain) and taking the Tour. Heras, doping conviction aside (he competed against plenty of other dopers—Rumsas, Nozal, Mancebo etc) still won a fistful of Vueltas. Simoni also has a couple Giros. I think it's definitely still possible for a good climber to win a Grand Tour. As I see it, what's stopped the climbers at the TdF is that, since Landis '06, no real Tour favorites have cracked. Part of that may be the safe, negative racing that rainbow mentioned, but I feel like it's only a matter of time until it happens again. @Guy: thanks for chipping in. I like the definition—I think it comes closest to the notion I had in my head.

@Big Mikey, Rainbow: Pantani’s ’98 win was a pretty classic example of a “pure” climber spotting a weakness in a rival’s armor (Ullrich never did like the rain) and taking the Tour.

Heras, doping conviction aside (he competed against plenty of other dopers—Rumsas, Nozal, Mancebo etc) still won a fistful of Vueltas. Simoni also has a couple Giros. I think it’s definitely still possible for a good climber to win a Grand Tour.

As I see it, what’s stopped the climbers at the TdF is that, since Landis ’06, no real Tour favorites have cracked. Part of that may be the safe, negative racing that rainbow mentioned, but I feel like it’s only a matter of time until it happens again.

]]> By: Big Mikey http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-14866 Big Mikey Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:33:10 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-14866 The notion of a pure climber is a logical fallacy in the sport today. The requirements to win a GT are to be able to climb in the top 5-8 riders in the peleton on a consistent basis, and to time trial in the top 5-8 riders on a consistent basis. Rujano, during that Giro, was unstoppable. But likely juiced, remember he came from almost nowhere to do that and that's usually a sign that someone is doping. The only way a "pure" climber wins a GT are if the contenders' teams aren't strong or focused enough to pull back dangerous breaks. Heras, Mayo and others are/were gifted climbers, but have no realistic ability to win a grand tour against the likes of Armstrong, Menchov, the Schlecks, etc., who owe speed to mostly power, as opposed to low mass. The notion of a pure climber is a logical fallacy in the sport today. The requirements to win a GT are to be able to climb in the top 5-8 riders in the peleton on a consistent basis, and to time trial in the top 5-8 riders on a consistent basis. Rujano, during that Giro, was unstoppable. But likely juiced, remember he came from almost nowhere to do that and that’s usually a sign that someone is doping. The only way a “pure” climber wins a GT are if the contenders’ teams aren’t strong or focused enough to pull back dangerous breaks.

Heras, Mayo and others are/were gifted climbers, but have no realistic ability to win a grand tour against the likes of Armstrong, Menchov, the Schlecks, etc., who owe speed to mostly power, as opposed to low mass.

]]> By: joe http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-14858 joe Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:03:52 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-14858 When I look at Contador and the Schlecks, they look like climbers who have set their goals for the GC When I look at Contador and the Schlecks, they look like climbers who have set their goals for the GC

]]> By: rainbow http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-14857 rainbow Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:53:44 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-14857 I don’t think the pure climber really exists; the impure climber appears to be all we are left with. The devolution of race tactics away from the strength of the individual to the power of the team and brains trust ‘following’ (? Sic) has eliminated the opportunity for such a elite species to exist let alone prevail. The only place that such a creature may dwell is in the minds of its proponents, and the mouths of fools judging from the accolade spouting individuals we’ve been bestowed with in the recent years. I could peel of dozens of platitudes exemplifying th shortcomings and fragility of the pure climber. But their names, demises and some early deaths, are enough for us to ponder on to answer the question of the existence of the “Pure Climber”. I don’t think the pure climber really exists; the impure climber appears to be all we are left with. The devolution of race tactics away from the strength of the individual to the power of the team and brains trust ‘following’ (? Sic) has eliminated the opportunity for such a elite species to exist let alone prevail. The only place that such a creature may dwell is in the minds of its proponents, and the mouths of fools judging from the accolade spouting individuals we’ve been bestowed with in the recent years. I could peel of dozens of platitudes exemplifying th shortcomings and fragility of the pure climber. But their names, demises and some early deaths, are enough for us to ponder on to answer the question of the existence of the “Pure Climber”.

]]> By: Guy http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-14856 Guy Tue, 12 Jan 2010 04:20:16 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-14856 Thanks for the invitation to contribute! Gosh, always a nuanced question, but in my mind the pure climbers are the riders that win many mountain stages off the front and only ever rarely win the Grand Tours (though many famous ones have done so). They duke it out for the mountain points and leave the flatlanders wallowing - unless those flatlanders can also hold their own (Anquetil, Hinault, Fignon, LeMond). Now, one could be mischievous and say that no pure climbers have been competitive since about 1991 (as Lucho Herrera said, "when I saw riders with fat asses climbing like airplanes, that's when I knew...") given blood doping. Or one could say that current pure climbers are only now coming back into their own, but are still having to contend with riders that are much better trained in the mountains (there are several training theories on this). As for Armstrong, he seems to be the exception that proves or disproves any rule... Thanks for the invitation to contribute!
Gosh, always a nuanced question, but in my mind the pure climbers are the riders that win many mountain stages off the front and only ever rarely win the Grand Tours (though many famous ones have done so). They duke it out for the mountain points and leave the flatlanders wallowing – unless those flatlanders can also hold their own (Anquetil, Hinault, Fignon, LeMond).
Now, one could be mischievous and say that no pure climbers have been competitive since about 1991 (as Lucho Herrera said, “when I saw riders with fat asses climbing like airplanes, that’s when I knew…”) given blood doping. Or one could say that current pure climbers are only now coming back into their own, but are still having to contend with riders that are much better trained in the mountains (there are several training theories on this).
As for Armstrong, he seems to be the exception that proves or disproves any rule…

]]> By: Sebastian http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-14854 Sebastian Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:44:16 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-14854 I think there are also examples of "pure" climbers who didn't use that out-of-the-saddle style. Delgado, for instance, usually climbed sitting down and gripping his bars near the center. (I may be wrong, of course, since all I have to go on is that highly edited John Tesh coverage!) I think the high-cadence, quick-burst style may partly reflect the necessities of the post-USPS era, in which the burden is on the climbers to gain all of their gaps in the final few kilometers of a stage. Back in the days of Gaul and Bahomontes, "pure climbers" usually were guys who could crest multiple mountain passes alone off the front -- not that many of them couldn't also do the Contador dance if necessary. I think there are also examples of “pure” climbers who didn’t use that out-of-the-saddle style. Delgado, for instance, usually climbed sitting down and gripping his bars near the center. (I may be wrong, of course, since all I have to go on is that highly edited John Tesh coverage!)

I think the high-cadence, quick-burst style may partly reflect the necessities of the post-USPS era, in which the burden is on the climbers to gain all of their gaps in the final few kilometers of a stage. Back in the days of Gaul and Bahomontes, “pure climbers” usually were guys who could crest multiple mountain passes alone off the front — not that many of them couldn’t also do the Contador dance if necessary.

]]> By: cosmo http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-14851 cosmo Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:11:48 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-14851 Well, that's another thing I've never been too clear on. I've always assumed it as a climbing specialist, the sort of person that the best GC riders could limit their losses to, but never touch in the hills. I think your second definition plays a big part of that, because as far as I can tell, you need that ease of acceleration to try and open those gaps and leave the race behind on the highest pitches. That said, I don't think Armstrong really fits the bill—I remember him complaining about Mayo's tempo changes on L'Alpe back in '03. He always seemed to make one big attack, and then settle into his tempo, where as Contador, if I remember 2007 correctly, made repeated punches during his (moot) battle with Rasmussen. The names I usually see dropped after the apellation are Gaul, Pantani, Bahamontes and Mayo. I'll bet <a href="http://le-grimpeur.net" rel="nofollow">Le Grimpeur</a> could cook up a better definition for the term. Well, that’s another thing I’ve never been too clear on. I’ve always assumed it as a climbing specialist, the sort of person that the best GC riders could limit their losses to, but never touch in the hills.

I think your second definition plays a big part of that, because as far as I can tell, you need that ease of acceleration to try and open those gaps and leave the race behind on the highest pitches.

That said, I don’t think Armstrong really fits the bill—I remember him complaining about Mayo’s tempo changes on L’Alpe back in ’03. He always seemed to make one big attack, and then settle into his tempo, where as Contador, if I remember 2007 correctly, made repeated punches during his (moot) battle with Rasmussen.

The names I usually see dropped after the apellation are Gaul, Pantani, Bahamontes and Mayo. I’ll bet Le Grimpeur could cook up a better definition for the term.

]]> By: Sebastian http://cyclocosm.com/2010/01/the-death-of-the-pure-climber/comment-page-1/#comment-14850 Sebastian Mon, 11 Jan 2010 23:55:50 +0000 http://cyclocosm.com/?p=2919#comment-14850 Hmm -- what do we mean by a "pure" climber here? Do we mean someone whose only skill is climbing and who therefore has to build a Tour victory on mountaintop victories alone? Or do we mean someone who climbs with a certain "pure" style, i.e. with high cadence and sudden accelerations instead of with brute power (à la Indurain and Ullrich)? The second definition seems more meaningful to me, and it would seem to put Contador (and even pre-"Tired of Being Tired" Armstrong) into the category of pure climbers. Hmm — what do we mean by a “pure” climber here? Do we mean someone whose only skill is climbing and who therefore has to build a Tour victory on mountaintop victories alone? Or do we mean someone who climbs with a certain “pure” style, i.e. with high cadence and sudden accelerations instead of with brute power (à la Indurain and Ullrich)? The second definition seems more meaningful to me, and it would seem to put Contador (and even pre-”Tired of Being Tired” Armstrong) into the category of pure climbers.

]]>