Originally Posted by
terrymorse
But heavier riders are at a distinct disadvantage, because VO2max is negatively correlated to body mass -- even when looking at lean body mass.
Generally, absolute power increases with lean body mass, but not as rapidly as VO2max (and thus power-to-weight ratio) decreases with lean body mass.
Yes, there are exceptions. There are always a few who win the genetic lottery and fall outside the norms.
Absolutely. Just as we can make assumptions on the flat, we can make assumptions on the climbs too re heavy vs light, big vs small.
My point is that while we have these assumptions, and that there is some basis in truth, there are so many variables that nothing should be taken as an absolute when there are so many variables that affect performance. Body composition, muscle-type etc etc - so much genetics to work through too that dictate and work with power, W/kg, CDa, V02M etc etc.
Some folks have a natural genetic build-up that will always be really hard to match for others. I'm small and relatively light and in good shape. This alone doesn't make me a great climber. I know plenty of much heavier, larger riders who I can't compete on a long climb with. Similarly, I can beat them on the flat. Go figure! But, I am a better climber than a lot of heavy guys. And there are heavy guys who I can't keep up with on the flat.
It's almost like using BMI for ideal weight; BMI is a great generalising tool - as we are using absolute power on flat with wind here - but get down to specifics and personalisation at an individual level vs group and it is far from the whole picture and throws up a lot of anomalies.
