From: bhilden@bigriver.Eng.Sun.COM (Bruce Hildenbrand)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles
Subject: Re: TDF climbs... Part II
Date: 24 Jul 1992 07:41:43 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigriver

In article <9207230733.AA21600@hplomg.hpl.hp.com> BRANDT_JOBST/HP1900_01@HPLOMG.HPL.HP.COM writes:
>John Black writes:
>
>> Unfortunately, a lot of these numbers don't really give a true feeling for the
>> climb since, for example, a climb could be 10% for 10km and then 2% for 10km
>> and I would list it as "6% for 20km" which completely loses the killer 10km 10
>> section in the numbers.  But I thought it contained some useful information
>> nonetheless, so I decided to post it.
>
>This is as bad as repeating a rumor you know to be without foundation, the
>information is at least as bad as your example.  The Galibier should show
>a final ascent of 13% on the south and 8% on the north where it masquerades

Jobst, get a clue.  The top of the Galibier is 36km from Briancon and is
a pretty constant grade until the final kilometer which is, by the sign
at the top, 12% not 13%.  So 35 of the 36km are a pretty constant grade
which describes about 97% of the climb.  Sure, there are minor variations
of several percent, but having ridden the climb, I would not say that
there aren't any sections that stand out as any tougher than the other
(except the final 1km of a 36km climb).

Please choose a more valid example next time.

>as the Telegraph for half of its climb.  The same is true of nearly all of
>the climbs listed.  I have not experienced them all but the ones I have
>ridden are completely misleading from this table.

Gee, do you want to back this entirely nebulous statement up with a few
facts.  I own several books, "Atlas Des Cols Des Alps" and "Atlas Des Cols
Des Pyrenees" that give the percentage grade for each kilometer of the climbs
in the regions mentioned in their titles.  Matching the climbs in John's
table with the climbs in this book, I do not see the the grossly misleading
information on "nearly all" the climbs as you purport.  To what do you base
your "nearly all" claim on, since as you state you have not experienced many
of these climbs firsthand?  Is this information based on hearsay, the word of
others or what.  I have books to prove my claim, it appears to me that you
have nothing.

>Classic in this respect is Sonora Pass in California that is extremely steep
>with 20% grades but also an approach of 100 miles from Sonora (city) which
>when averaged results in 7400 ft in 1000 miles.  A real pussycat of a ride
>when seen that way.  Sonora is truly the beginning of the climb with many
>false summits and valleys on the way to the 9600 ft summit.

I have previously dealt with this woesome example of exaggerating figures to
prove a point.

>jobst_brandt@hplabs.hp.com

As I stated previously, I think John was attempting to provide some information
on the Tour de France climbs that would be interesting for net readers.  He
stated his limitations and apprehensions up front and did a very nice job.
For some reason, Jobst has seen to unleash a poorly supported attack on
John's efforts.  Vagaries, exaggerations and untruths have not convinced
me that Jobst has any leg to stand on, I am giving him the benefit of the
doubt and presuming it is jet lag.

Bruce