> These days, it is an entirely different prospect, with vast sums spent on custom-built food trucks, personalised nutrition apps and meticulously planned meal regimes all in the name of performance enhancement.
> For the nutritionists and chefs tasked with providing sustenance to power their team's riders over 2,170 miles in the coming weeks there are principally two dilemmas [...]
> The answers are gleaned from a year-round process that begins in December during pre- season training.
You know that it has become the Sport Of The 0.0001% when...
With things like banning any equipment including clothing and shoes... Or with cycling giving one standard mass manufactured piece. And then a pile of standard replacement parts and standard tools. All bought from cheapest supplier randomly distributed to participants.
That aside, regarding cycling, standard mass manufactured piece? In one size that all have to fit to?
Naa...
And the reason why is the pro game makes a lot of money on endorsements. If a top pro is forced to use a club that is different from what amateurs need then the gravy train could stop.
But yes, golf is really hard and for amateurs the innovations help make the game more enjoyable. But for pros it’s just too much.
> I was allowed a modern click shifter and modern disk brakes
Doubt you'd see a bike equipped with anything else at the Tour.
I'm not at top level and never will be. If I want to go faster there are many things I can do that are more effective than playing what my bike is made out of.
of course the above is a guess, if someone makes such a frame I may try it and decide it is worth it.
Similarly in football, by studying your opponents in previous matches, so that you can identify weaknesses during the match, even if playing in isolation.
From a bit of reading, it sounds like there's a fairly widespread impression (or at least suspicion of) cheating. And that enforcement is quite weak, because the authorities care more about preventing public scandal than about preventing actual cheating.
Yet, at the Olympics, the gear is the same for everyone.
Btw, I can't remember where, but I heard that, in the old editions of the Tour de France not all gears were allowed, shifters for example weren't allowed even though they were available to amateurs.
If your times are, say, 20% or more above the absolute top times for a given course, you've got a long way to go by improving yourself - on just about any bike whatsoever. The super expensive parts make low single digit differences.
At the top level of any sport and in the top race or competition of that sport, it is going to represent the pinnacle of that sport.
It depends on the culture as well. From what I read about China, they're constantly scouting primary schools for Olympic talent, so you can come from any background and reach the top in a sport that would be limited to wealthier people in other countries.
You need talent as a kid. You need money to fund travel and equipment (either from mom & dad, or the local academy/development squad, or donors). You need to find a coach who can get the most out of your genetics AND find a path for you to go pro. And on and on.
> From what I read about China, they're constantly scouting primary schools for Olympic talent, so you can come from any background and reach the top in a sport that would be limited to wealthier people in other countries.
This is what wealthy countries do as well. Most wealthy nations have programs to identify and develop top-level athletes. An obvious example being the very lucrative scholarships offered at American universities.
> Not so long ago, the professional cycling world's approach to fuelling was remarkably basic.
> Options for riders barely extended beyond a monotonous menu of pasta, rice or whatever fare that night's hotel kitchen decided to serve up.
> These days, it is an entirely different prospect, with vast sums spent on...
But I think most accessible sport is running. You just need some shoes. Open the door and you are good to go (run). For games like football you also need the ball, playground and other people.
Anyone can pick up a bike and start training and racing in competitions and be talent scouted in the same way that you would in football, it’s what happens here in Australia.
Yes a football is cheaper than a bike, but it’s not 0.0001% type stuff like Formula 1. Where you legitimately need to pay millions just to get a look in.
Theres plenty of people on $8,000 bikes I pass on my 8 year old bike worth $2,000.
Otoh, around me, $100 gets you a circa 1980 road bike off craigslist. That'll do fine. I'm seeing a much more recent road bike for $500, if you don't like old stuff because it's old. Plenty of more expensive stuff too. I like the early 1980s bikes because road bikes were in fashion and there were a lot of makes competing and quality (of surviving bikes) is pretty good. Later, mountain bikes started trending, there was consolidation and I don't feel that those bikes are as good on the road as a general rule.
At the other side, I tried climbing the same hill at same power with my 2017 bike and with my 2023 bike. There was a 4% of difference in the time, probably because better wheels and improved position.
Anyone can learn a bunch of gymnastic moves, too. But last I heard, "Olympic Gymnast" implies a >1k hour/year training regimen, starting at an extremely young age.
Most of the cyclists are white, yes, for me this is an issue (and I am white), but what I like is that there are now many from Colombia (because of the mountains there? And probably also some cycling culture), a few days ago a cyclist from Eritrea won a TdF stage.. it's slowly getting more diverse.
-- https://www.roadtrips.com/blog/the-most-watched-sporting-eve...
An (American) NFL team has 53 "active" players (plus a practice squad, plus ...), and plays a 5-month season. And has a lot of "maintain a major stadium"-type expenses, which (my guess) cycling teams don't have.
Based on your figures, and trying to scale...no, the cycling team budgets really aren't peanuts by comparison.
NFL Data: https://shareholder.broadridge.com/pdf/2022-packers-annual-r...
The season is longer than tour de france, that's just the most prestigious tour. There are other tours and other races. It's about 8 months long.
And I don't really think how long the season is has any relevance. You still train and need your apparatus whole year round.
The stadium stuff also doesn't really work in the favor of nfl. A pro team makes no money on tickets or concessions, and has to travel the world with their gear instead of a few states away.
Cycling teams have all kinds of expenses too. True, they don't have to maintain a major stadium. But hey do have cars to assist the riders with food, drinks, spare tires, spare bikes if needed (sometimes multiple types of bike for some of the riders); team busses with showers, more food, meeting room (I think they also have washing machines in them, to provide the riders with clean clothing every day in a stage race); a service course for all the equipment, and to adjust and fix the bikes. Plus personnel to equip all those, plus personnel along the road with more food and drinks, and in some races also with spare wheels. Pro teams often participate in multiple races at the same time, so they need all that equipment times two or three. These days many teams haul mattresses along on stage races, to guarantee good sleep for the riders. All of that stuff, and the people involved, need to be transported to each race on time, sometimes to the other end of the world.
I don't know how that compares with say an NFL team, but I do know my head starts to hurt when I think about how to organize all of that (and more; I most likely forgot some stuff) throughout the year.
The financial part of the report I linked shows the NFL team spending $40M/year on their stadium & other facilities. And similar-ish amounts in several other non-player-compensation expense categories.
(Yes, I wish that report's financials were far more detailed.)
The tour de france is 3 1/2 weeks, the cycling season is much longer.
This year's UCI World Tour season runs from January 16 to October 20. Where are you getting "3 1/2 week season" from?
For example, Greg LeMond won the TdF in 1990. In 1991 he came 7th, and then never completed it again. There is some complication here because of the hunting accident he suffered in '87, but he also said "The speeds were faster and riders that I had easily outperformed were now dropping me", and the guy who won in 1991 was Indurain who was basically the first mega-doper.
Without EPO and blood doping becoming prevalent, does Greg LeMond compete for a few more years? Do other guys with similar talent who aren't willing to dope also make it to that top level. I think the answer is probably yes, and so all those guys who doped are responsible for excluding those clean athletes from the top level.
Fixed. Cycling has one of the strictest out-of-competition testing regimens. Which isn't to say doping doesn't exist - it does, no question - only that it's WAY better now than during the Armstrong era.
Some details... https://lanternerouge.com/2023/03/26/how-clean-is-cycling-an...
The point is to not die or be in a wheelchair by the time you’re 60
It's the same reason there's a minimum weight for bikes used in the race: people tend to disregard security when making lighter bikes, and the cost of experiments means that some competitors exit the sport because they can't compete on funding.
But, I also view anti-doping measures as more of a safety issue than a fairness issue (maybe 60/40-ish). First priority - prevent athletes (and their coaches/sponsors) killing or crippling themselves with chemicals. Second order - guarantee some baseline level of fairness (because without it, the fans go elsewhere).
This isn't really different than rules in motor racing. Gotta keep the drivers safe first, and keep the race entertaining (nobody outside Italy wants to see two Ferraris dominate every F1 GP).
Asthma meds for cycling, some of which are steroids, are one of the more popular examples:
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/the-truth-abo...
Two out of three factors have to be present to ban a drug:
- be performance enhancing - present a health risk - violate the spirit of sport
The third one is a bit harder to define but there is a WADA code defining the spirit of sport.
Most banned drugs are banned because of the first two.
> - be performance enhancing - present a health risk - violate the spirit of sport
There also are drugs banned that mask the use of performance enhancing drugs. You could call that “violate the spirit of the sport”, but that’s so vague a term it could cover anything.
EPO and other red-cell increasing drugs provide a massive gain for endurance athletes (runners, cyclists, XC skiing). Steroids are a massive gain for strength athletes (sprinters/athletics, contact sports).
Both can be used "safely" or "unsafely" depending on dosage, combinations with other drugs, etc.
I don't know what the story is like for EPO and other red-cell increasing drugs. Would be curious to hear yours and a few others' understanding of the cost/benefit.
Yes, doping, blah blah we get it. But the logistics of TdF is insane. With a new city every day, things need to move fast and preparations start early. For instance Uno-X team has a small trailer with 800 kgs of ice they travel around with, after having trouble sourcing enough ice in the small villages they stay at.
Actually having your own chef source stuff is one way to avoid accidental doping scandals.
I've read the Velochef book and like the recipes there. One thing I've never appreciated before is how hard it is to actually get this amount of calories down. Especially since much of it must be consumed on the bike so needs to be easy to transport/store/eat on the fly. And eating while working out can be tough on the stomach. EDB finally got his break through when they managed to nail a nutrition he didn't get cramps from eating.
I meant to write EBH, Edvald Boasson-Hagen. I probably should've spelled it out, but the Velochef book is by the Team Sky chef, the team of EBH.
Given Henrik Orre is Norwegian, I thought about EBH but it was still far from EDB... All is good now!
No matter what happen and where the race goes.
Glucose monitoring is banned during races, but I guess that is why you don't see some cyclist collapsing like as 15 years ago is because they understand their glucose levels.
For sure, doping it's still a fear, but these guys cannot climb Galibier at that speed only with storoids/drugs, it's insane the effort that they did over the year.
When I started the general guidance seemed to be about 200 calories (50g of carbs) per hour during training and races. I followed that or a little above for a long time, and constantly had problems both physically and cognitively near the end of races.
It took about a year to get used to fueling heavier (for me...about 400 calories per hour or 100g). Lots of figuring out digestion and timing and sources and other factors. But once I got there it was transformative...I could push much harder for much longer without a deep bonk and recovery was faster. More importantly, my ability to think/plan/make decisions at the end of races was orders of magnitude better.
I'd bet if you went to an aid station around 80 miles on a 100mile ultra marathon you could pretty reliably identify who had been on the 200cal end of the spectrum and who had been on the 400 + end.
These days I cram haribo and peanut butter M&Ms, although I think the latter are more useful for multiday things.
Edit: I did the math on that risotto cake recipe and it comes out to about 2500kcal for the batch, for me that comes out to calories for ~5-6 hours of riding.
I did a similar ride a few years ago, I mixed gels, energy bars with bananas, nuts, sandwichs, nuts and pastries bought along the way.
900-1000 calories might mean that in is optimal - but think about eating a full meal from mcdonalds every hour while massively extering yourself.
Training your gut matters and I've never seen anything that suggests much beyond 400 calories per hour is possible during meaningful exertion.
The tricky word there is average. If Tadej can absorb an extra 5 grams per liter, then you should give Tadej an extra five grams per liter. If Jonas can absorb 2 grams less per liter than the average then you should give him that serving.
These race results come down to mere seconds per hundred miles, for cyclists that are averaging 20 miles an hour. Any 1% difference is going into the training regimen.
if i personally use gatorade for endurance exercise, i'll just cramp up after 90 minutes and not be able to ride normally. if i use a high salt mix instead, this isn't an issue whatsoever. I'm sure the exact same is true about food itself. remember that for the tour de france, last years time difference between the winner (Vingegaard) and the second (Pogadcar) was 8 minutes out of 82h 05' 42", aka only 0.16% faster overall. every single sub-percentage matters here.
there are tons of products that cater to this. the one i've been using is https://www.precisionhydration.com/ which is cheaper and more tailored than gatorade (i have no affiliation to them).
It's funny that Precision uses almost exactly the same bottle as Nuun.
People forget that. They just follow "salt is killing you" advice, meanwhile I sweat salt like it's water. Last race I did had the sense to add salty potato chips to their rest stops... I didn't cramp up.
Meanwhile Gatorade is absolute trash for electrolyte maintenance for someone like myself.
The limits aren't wrt water absorption, but gut tolerance of sugar.
I get about 100g of sugar into a bottle by doing roughly 50:50 Gatorade and maltodextrin, and then throwing in some extra Na an K salt if it's going to be hot. Although with the super hi carb stuff you should make sure that you have some plain water as well - it sucks to be super thirsty but only have carb drink on the bike.
Gatorade’s ingredients list shows sucrose (glucose+fructose) and dextrose (glucose).
Maltodextrin is isotonic in a 6x stronger solution than fructose and glucose. This means you need to drink meaningfully less water during a race to digest maltodextrin. So do we want all maltodextrin? Nope! Fructose can be absorbed by a separate pathway, which is less efficient, but increases your total intake of carbohydrates into the bloodstream.
So you’re probably not going to see Tour de France teams giving their riders Gatorade. You want more maltodextrin and less glucose.
It turns out though that maltodextrin didn't exist in manufactured quantities until the mid 1970's, which was after Gatorade was a national brand. That they never changed their formula is disappointing but maybe not surprising (especially after Quaker Oats bought them in '83)
But none of the 'sports drinks' that Coca Cola and friends were pumping out in the 90's had maltodextrin in them to my knowledge. It was just more sucrose and glucose, so its star fell a bit more recently.
Do you know when the isotonic research was done? I don't have any recollection of that being even mentioned in the tests I talked about.
Also maltodextrins are made from wheat in Europe and a problem for celiacs.
I don’t think modern professional cyclists even can ride at 20 miles an hour ;-)
20 miles an hour didn’t win you the Tour de France in 1950. Nowadays, with better tech, better training, and shorter stages, you have to do over 25 miles an hour to win it, and the last rider in the general classification easily is within 10% of that.
The Tour de France did 124miles on its first day this year. Through mountains.
Many amateur cyclists have a 100 mile single day even or 150-300 mile multi day event as their yearly goal. And they can’t push the sort of power for the duration that a pro can. Something less than 75% as much power for less than half as long per day. And for days instead of weeks.
Nutrition doesn't matter for rides up to 15 miles, and you can improvise almost anything for rides up to 40 miles. More (or particularly hilly courses, etc.) and it becomes very important to get the amount you eat and drink right.
It also said that doping made a 20% difference, so either none of the current competitors are doping or all of them are.
The drafting effect in cycling means that a clean cyclist can finish very closely behind a doped cyclist
https://www.amazon.com/Boyd-Fighter-Pilot-Who-Changed/dp/031...
from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_classification:
Riders who finish in the same group are awarded the same time, with possible subtractions due to time bonuses. Two riders are said to have finished in the same group if the gap between them is less than three seconds. A crash or mechanical incident in the final 3 kilometres of a stage that finishes without a categorised climb usually means that riders thus affected are considered to have finished as part of the group they were with at the 3 km mark, so long as they finish the stage.
see https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/tour-de-france/2024/sta...
Did anyone else feel like there was more drama around the end of the Indurain era?
I feel like doping could show up as more intense struggles for first without necessarily increasing the spread of placing. Also people who drop out don’t count right?
The way I heard it, the don't use doping to improve their performance. They use it so they can train longer and more intensely than they would be able to without it.
Eat. Race. Win. https://www.amazon.com/Eat-Race-Win-Season-1/dp/B086HVQ5RB
Related, Unchained (https://www.netflix.com/title/81153133) has been an interesting view into the race although food isn't discussed at all.
Before Eat. Race. Win. I had this entirely uninformed idea the food the riders ate would be incredibly streamlined and controlled - I was thinking something like Soylent and protein powder and supplements. To see them chowing down on "normal" food and drinking alcohol (at all) was surprising for me.
Some riders used to drink during races too. Freddy Maertens was able to do it and still win [2].
[1] https://www.atwistedspoke.com/sepp-kuss-champagne-supernova/
Riders are tested a lot and have to provide year-round whereabouts for random testing. They also have a frequently updated blood passport to detect sudden changes in values caused by PEDs. It can never be fully waterproof, but at least serious efforts are made.
Ghost in the Machine [1] is a great podcast on this topic.
[1] https://play.pocketcasts.com/discover/podcast/de6ba1d0-9132-...
Give me a bike that looks like a normal bike and gives mere mortals like me an extra 5 mph (power law makes that a lot worse for pros).
But if you're analyzing old races how do you get a conviction? You can't.
No it wasn't. Wheels spin through crashes all the time.
Some people will try, and some scandals will happen, sure. But it is not a widespread problem and is unlikely to become one.
See here, for example: https://velo.outsideonline.com/road/road-racing/tour-de-fran...
Plus if your lieutenant uses a motor in order to pull you up to the front, then your bike is clean.
I only caught the end of that wheel change when I realized the mechanic was holding a Milwaukee cordless and Bob(?) was talking about it.
https://www.uci.org/pressrelease/uci-reveals-technological-f...
One of the problems is that bikes can be made so light with unobtainium that there are rules in place requiring a minimum weight so that poorer teams can compete. So if you make a bike that's 10 lbs you have to stick weights into it to bring it up to spec. What else could you put in that bike besides chunks of iron pipe?
Is that like parole where they check in, or is it like house arrest where you have an ankle monitor?
But they didn't actually say how and when she was DQed, just that she missed the Tokyo Olympics due to breaking the whereabouts clause. There are clearly favorites at the trials and if someone 'should' have gone I could see announcers making the speculative leap.
(Having to file your whereabouts is horrendous, by the way. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/athletes-support-personnel/provi...:
“RTP athletes are required to provide the following whereabouts information on a quarterly basis:
- Home address, email address and phone number
- An address for overnight accommodations
- Regular activities, such as training, work, and school, the locations and the times of these activities
- Competition schedules and locations
- A 60-minute time slot for each day where they’ll be available and accessible for testing and liable for a potential ‘missed test’“
That “60-minute time slot” sounds somewhat reasonable, but (https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/2022-03/At_a_Gl...): “And remember, athlete can be tested anytime and anywhere – not just in their 60-minute time slot!”
Miss a plane? Plane delayed? You may have to inform your doping agency. A loved one suddenly ends up in hospital? Before you rush to go there, report where you’ll be.
More likely you're young, mad fit, and have some energy you want to burn off with a friend. You've heard about the Olympic Village.
No way do I want to tell some official whose apartment I'm visiting.
If I remember correctly, these rules were changed after the Armstrong scandal where he would be scheduled for testing, he would say he was at his house in Texas. The testing folks would show up and he just wouldn't answer the door and wait until they left so they couldn't test him. It was one of the ways he was able to dope on a set schedule, all the while being able to maintain he was being tested more than any other athlete - when in reality, he was just avoiding being tested.
It seems like a lot has changed since his scandal and several others that followed and they've really clamped down on what you're saying, changes in blood values and getting suspended if you cannot be reached for testing.
Hard to believe it took a scandal for that to be a rule.
On a side note: much harder today to not be available/found than it was 30 odd years ago.
One problem with the system is that it relies on countries being strict with their athletes, which they aren't incentivized to do. Also, it's easy to "be available" but not get tested by going somewhere remote for a height camp for a few weeks.
Lizzy Banks goes into great detail about her experince with doping control and trying to overturn a positive result due to a contamination. It's a long read, but if you're a fan of the sport it's super interesting. https://lizzybanks.co.uk/
It was also discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40612281
I think pectin is easier on the stomach than insoluble fiber, but I have a lot of gaps in this part of my knowledge.
The cheeseburger calls to us all. Some of us are just "better" at resisting the call.
One my trainers when I was in college told me that when you crave foods, its not your lack of willpower, its actually your body telling you it needs certain nutrients. He told me when you crave chocolate its because your body needs carbs, so if you get some carbs, your chocolate cravings will go away.
I'm guessing the idea you crave a cheeseburger is the same thing, his body was in need of complex carbs and protein?
This is purely anecdotal evidence of this, but in my experience as an endurance athlete (soccer, cycling, adventure racing) its seems to work. When I've craved chocolate, I just eat some toast or chips or drink some Mt. Dew (a lot of people have no idea how many carbs are in soda) and the desire for something chocolatey goes away.
As others have pointed out in the thread, everybody is different, but in my case, this idea seems to be accurate.
One year I bumped into a friend of a friend at the checkin for a 3 day bike tour and we decided to 1) ride together and 2) see how fast we could do it. Short rests, riding hard, drafting the entire way. All day, in the Labor Day sun.
On day two after we pulled up to the stopping point, we got set up and then crawled back on our bikes to ride to the other side of this small college town to find the Dairy Queen for a bacon cheeseburger. It's not the best tasting beef I've ever had (that was in New Orleans), but it was the best tasting burger.
He had yelled "CHEESEBURGER!" as a rally cry.
There's certainly circumstantial evidence that's true.
This whole thread really underlines how little I understand about a lot of this. :D
That’s some top-notch nominative determinism.
TRAINING TIME(HOURS)x60=CARBS(GRAMS)
Aren’t they trying to maximize calories?
Start with series 1, even though it's 2 years out of date. They explain how the sport works, and they skip over this in series 2. It's important information.