Different types of hills

[Citius]

Any idea what proportion of the best climbers are tall? I'm not arguing, just curious, because I always thought my height was a disadvantage for climbing.

No idea on the proportions. Height isn't a consideration though, but weight is - or more specifically, power to weight - usually expressed as watts per kilo, or w/kg.

 

[Dogtrousers]

No idea on the proportions. Height isn't a consideration though, but weight is - or more specifically, power to weight - usually expressed as watts per kilo, or w/kg.

A 6'3" rider writes: Booo. Stop bursting my bubble. I liked the excuse that height was a disadvantage.

 

[nickyboy]

No idea on the proportions. Height isn't a consideration though, but weight is - or more specifically, power to weight - usually expressed as watts per kilo, or w/kg.

There is some general physiological advantage in being unusually short as a climber. The size of one's cardiovascular system (which broadly equates to power when the rider is fully trained) does not vary in proportion to one's height but overall weight does. Shorter riders have smaller cardio systems, as you would expect, but not proportionately smaller. Therefore the power/weight equation naturally favours the shorter rider

 

[Dec66]

There is some general physiological advantage in being unusually short as a climber. The size of one's cardiovascular system (which broadly equates to power when the rider is fully trained) does not vary in proportion to one's height but overall weight does. Shorter riders have smaller cardio systems, as you would expect, but not proportionately smaller. Therefore the power/weight equation naturally favours the shorter rider

Unless the short rider weighs 15 stone?

Sooooo many variables...

 

[martint235]

You'll never be a "grimpeur", and it'll always hurt... But eventually you'll get up them a bit quicker and not be so wiped out at the top.

A 6'3" rider writes: Booo. Stop bursting my bubble. I liked the excuse that height was a disadvantage.

I'm 6'6" and close to 17 stone but I'd like to think I'm not too shabby at going up hill. I'd say I'm a lot better at it than I am at sprinting and a million times better at it than I am at going downhill.

 

[Sbudge]

I'm 6'6" and close to 17 stone but I'd like to think I'm not too shabby at going up hill. I'd say I'm a lot better at it than I am at sprinting and a million times better at it than I am at going downhill.

I'm strictly average height & weight but I'm hopeless riding uphill (though I love running up them bizarrely), OK sprinting and pretty reasonable downhill. I suspect the downhill bit is more bike than me though.

 

[Dogtrousers]

In the interests of stupidity:

Tall bloke. Rubbish climber:

Short bloke. Grimpeur par excellence

 

[Dec66]

I'm 6'6" and close to 17 stone but I'd like to think I'm not too shabby at going up hill. I'd say I'm a lot better at it than I am at sprinting and a million times better at it than I am at going downhill.

I'm guessing someone who's 6' 6" and 13 stone would get up quicker than you, though, if we assume you have the same VO2 max, THHR, watts/kg, etc?

Merely based on your muscle density, the fuel it would burn, and thus the lactic build up you would encounter in comparison to our straw man?

I'm not the worst climber in the world by any means (and, like you, I'm better on the way up than the way down), but I'm more of a "puncheur" than a "grimpeur" and would expect to concede ground to someone physically similar to myself who weighs a stone less.

 

[Dec66]

In the interests of stupidity:

Tall bloke. Rubbish climber:

Short bloke. Grimpeur par excellence

Both favouring "race fit", though

 

[Ajax Bay]

The size of one's cardiovascular system (which broadly equates to power when the rider is fully trained) does not vary in proportion to one's height but overall weight does.

Rewriting what you said @nickyboy : "cardiovascular system broadly equates to power when the rider is fully trained"
Think more work is required on this. Don't think you can use 'equates' not even moderated by 'broadly'. Probably OK if when you say 'power' maybe you mean power at FPT. Many other elements to power production. And as we've heard from @blazed on a different thread (or is it this one, I've lost track) his power is best in small doses - a rider with quality CV and 'fully trained' would be able to maintain albeit lower levels of power for longer.

Sooooo many variables...

 

[nickyboy]

Rewriting what you said @nickyboy : "cardiovascular system broadly equates to power when the rider is fully trained"
Think more work is required on this. Don't think you can use 'equates' not even moderated by 'broadly'. Probably OK if when you say 'power' maybe you mean power at FPT. Many other elements to power production. And as we've heard from @blazed on a different thread (or is it this one, I've lost track) his power is best in small doses - a rider with quality CV and 'fully trained' would be able to maintain albeit lower levels of power for longer.

I'm taking as many variable out of this so we can concentrate on what we're talking about. I would say that a 5' cyclist will be an inherently faster climber than a 6' climber. Assuming same physique, same training, same natural ability etc etc. Reasoning is that the CV system of the 5' guy is not 5/6 the capacity of the 6' guy but his weight is.

Of course there are outliers. But it surely can't be a coincidence that a lot of the elite climbers are short guys can it?

 

[Dec66]

I'm taking as many variable out of this so we can concentrate on what we're talking about. I would say that a 5' cyclist will be an inherently faster climber than a 6' climber. Assuming same physique, same training, same natural ability etc etc. Reasoning is that the CV system of the 5' guy is not 5/6 the capacity of the 6' guy but his weight is.

Of course there are outliers. But it surely can't be a coincidence that a lot of the elite climbers are short guys can it?

I don't know, what would be the effect of the CV system compared to the extra torque generated by the proportionately longer levers?

Sooooo many variables

Just to throw this in the mix: Federico Bahamontes was about 6', tall for his era, and not a bad climber.

 

[Citius]

But it surely can't be a coincidence that a lot of the elite climbers are short guys can it?

Not even sure if that's true. Pantani was short, and so were the Columbians, but the majority of TdF KoM winners (or alternatively, GC contenders) tend to be of average height, or above average height in some cases.

 

[martint235]

I'm guessing someone who's 6' 6" and 13 stone would get up quicker than you, though, if we assume you have the same VO2 max, THHR, watts/kg, etc?

Merely based on your muscle density, the fuel it would burn, and thus the lactic build up you would encounter in comparison to our straw man?

I'm not the worst climber in the world by any means (and, like you, I'm better on the way up than the way down), but I'm more of a "puncheur" than a "grimpeur" and would expect to concede ground to someone physically similar to myself who weighs a stone less.

I don't know enough about it. I've never been in a proper race and just go on what I see on group rides. The people who are quicker than me uphills are the ones who don't look like they should be able to climb at all while I pass all the whippet like riders comfortably.

 

[Ajax Bay]

concentrate on what we're talking about.

If you look I stayed away from the 'short people are better climbers' argument; I considered the relationship between CV and power.