On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 16:00:24 -0800 (PST), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 5:23:30 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 2:49:00 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 10:20:59 AM UTC-6, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 11:06:03 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > > > And yet another try at impressing me. Two years ago I was sprinting though yellow lights at 39 mph at 75.
>> > > No you weren't, that's just another lie. You might have hit 39KPH on a downhill though a yellow light...._maybe_.
>> > For fun I did a Google search using "speed of sprinters in Tour de France" and it produced the following:
>> > "A sprinter stays shielded from the wind by his team until the last few seconds when they begin their sprint to the line. When they eventually come out from their teammates' slipstream for the final sprint they can achieve speeds of 70 kmh."
>> >
>> > 70 kmh equals about 43.68 mph. So the fastest bicycle sprinters on the face of the earth at their peak prime age of 25-30 years old, are able to hit 43 mph. So isn't it very possible and likely that 75 year old Tommy boy can hit 39 mph? 90% as good as the fastest bicycle sprinters on earth? Just like Tommy boy can run a 4 minute 27 second mile. 90% as good as a 4 minute mile runner. Or run the 100 meter sprint in 11 seconds. Usain Bolt and a few others run the 100 meter sprint in a hair under 10 seconds. So 11 seconds is about 90% as good as the fastest runners on earth. Tommy boy can do this, no problem.
>> Russell, I know that you have this real problem with numbers. You continue to show it again and again. On a bicycle with a person as large as I am on a 60-62 cm bike, the amount of power to achieve 43 1/2 mph is 335 watts. The 39 mph speed I quoted would be 100 watts below that. A Tour de France sprint is for 200 meters and that for a light is 50 meters.
>>
>
>Needless to say of course, you are wrong wrong wrong. Ha Ha. Shocker.
>https://cyclingtips.com/2019/04/mathieu-van-der-poel-power-watts-amstel-gold/
>At the end of the link it has the following:
>"Lead-out: 27 seconds at 662 W (average speed: 35.5 mph/57kph)
>Sprint: 16 seconds at 1,200 W (Max power: 1400 W, average speed: 39.7 mph/64kph)"
>This is Mathieu Van der Poel in April 2019. Article says he is 6 feet and 165 pounds.
>
>So you think your much heavier weight and bigger size and 50 years older can go 43.5 mph with 335 watts. And Van der Poel takes 1200 watts to go 39.7 mph. I would reason that the smaller, lighter Van der Poel would not need 4 times more power watts to go 4 mph less fast than you. Something not adding up right here. And you say to go 39 mph, like Van der Poel did, only takes 235 watts. One fifth as much power.
>
>Now you do try to shift the subject and make things up. Like you always do. By throwing in the Tour sprint is 200 meters and your stoplight sprint is 50 meters. OK. Using the data I posted above of the sprint being 16 seconds and the average speed being 39.7 mph. And some math which I know is way beyond you. We get the following. 3600 seconds per hour. Bike speed of 64 kmh. We get about 17.78 meters traveled per second. So multiply that by the 16 seconds of the sprint and we get 284 meters traveled. Very close to your 200 meter number you threw in there. At an average of 1200 Watts and maximum spike of 1400 Watts of power output. But your claim of traveling one fifth, one sixth, as far distance and using, needing, one fifth, one sixth as much power (235 watts) does not add up at all.
>

Unfortunately you just don't understand. You see, Tommy's got one of
those blue skin suits with the big red "S" on the chest and as soon as
he puts it on, why, he is faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful
than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings with a single bound!"
https://tinyurl.com/4sc7r8kz
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 7:00:27 PM UTC-5, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 5:23:30 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 2:49:00 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 10:20:59 AM UTC-6, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 11:06:03 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > And yet another try at impressing me. Two years ago I was sprinting though yellow lights at 39 mph at 75.
> > > > No you weren't, that's just another lie. You might have hit 39KPH on a downhill though a yellow light...._maybe_.
> > > For fun I did a Google search using "speed of sprinters in Tour de France" and it produced the following:
> > > "A sprinter stays shielded from the wind by his team until the last few seconds when they begin their sprint to the line. When they eventually come out from their teammates' slipstream for the final sprint they can achieve speeds of 70 kmh."
> > >
> > > 70 kmh equals about 43.68 mph. So the fastest bicycle sprinters on the face of the earth at their peak prime age of 25-30 years old, are able to hit 43 mph. So isn't it very possible and likely that 75 year old Tommy boy can hit 39 mph? 90% as good as the fastest bicycle sprinters on earth? Just like Tommy boy can run a 4 minute 27 second mile. 90% as good as a 4 minute mile runner. Or run the 100 meter sprint in 11 seconds. Usain Bolt and a few others run the 100 meter sprint in a hair under 10 seconds. So 11 seconds is about 90% as good as the fastest runners on earth. Tommy boy can do this, no problem.
> > Russell, I know that you have this real problem with numbers. You continue to show it again and again. On a bicycle with a person as large as I am on a 60-62 cm bike, the amount of power to achieve 43 1/2 mph is 335 watts.. The 39 mph speed I quoted would be 100 watts below that. A Tour de France sprint is for 200 meters and that for a light is 50 meters.
> >
> Needless to say of course, you are wrong wrong wrong. Ha Ha. Shocker.
> https://cyclingtips.com/2019/04/mathieu-van-der-poel-power-watts-amstel-gold/
> At the end of the link it has the following:
> "Lead-out: 27 seconds at 662 W (average speed: 35.5 mph/57kph)
> Sprint: 16 seconds at 1,200 W (Max power: 1400 W, average speed: 39.7 mph/64kph)"
> This is Mathieu Van der Poel in April 2019. Article says he is 6 feet and 165 pounds.
>
> So you think your much heavier weight and bigger size and 50 years older can go 43.5 mph with 335 watts. And Van der Poel takes 1200 watts to go 39.7 mph. I would reason that the smaller, lighter Van der Poel would not need 4 times more power watts to go 4 mph less fast than you. Something not adding up right here. And you say to go 39 mph, like Van der Poel did, only takes 235 watts. One fifth as much power.

I'm guessing he got "the amount of power to achieve 43 1/2 mph is 335 watts" from the same sources as "a supermajority of Democrats was elected to Congress in 2006"

>
> Now you do try to shift the subject and make things up. Like you always do. By throwing in the Tour sprint is 200 meters and your stoplight sprint is 50 meters. OK. Using the data I posted above of the sprint being 16 seconds and the average speed being 39.7 mph. And some math which I know is way beyond you. We get the following. 3600 seconds per hour. Bike speed of 64 kmh. We get about 17.78 meters traveled per second. So multiply that by the 16 seconds of the sprint and we get 284 meters traveled. Very close to your 200 meter number you threw in there. At an average of 1200 Watts and maximum spike of 1400 Watts of power output. But your claim of traveling one fifth, one sixth, as far distance and using, needing, one fifth, one sixth as much power (235 watts) does not add up at all.
> > You talked about having an education but seem unable to show the slightest understanding of the application of science to anything. Exactly why is that?

On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 4:00:27 PM UTC-8, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 5:23:30 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 2:49:00 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 10:20:59 AM UTC-6, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 11:06:03 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > And yet another try at impressing me. Two years ago I was sprinting though yellow lights at 39 mph at 75.
> > > > No you weren't, that's just another lie. You might have hit 39KPH on a downhill though a yellow light...._maybe_.
> > > For fun I did a Google search using "speed of sprinters in Tour de France" and it produced the following:
> > > "A sprinter stays shielded from the wind by his team until the last few seconds when they begin their sprint to the line. When they eventually come out from their teammates' slipstream for the final sprint they can achieve speeds of 70 kmh."
> > >
> > > 70 kmh equals about 43.68 mph. So the fastest bicycle sprinters on the face of the earth at their peak prime age of 25-30 years old, are able to hit 43 mph. So isn't it very possible and likely that 75 year old Tommy boy can hit 39 mph? 90% as good as the fastest bicycle sprinters on earth? Just like Tommy boy can run a 4 minute 27 second mile. 90% as good as a 4 minute mile runner. Or run the 100 meter sprint in 11 seconds. Usain Bolt and a few others run the 100 meter sprint in a hair under 10 seconds. So 11 seconds is about 90% as good as the fastest runners on earth. Tommy boy can do this, no problem.
> > Russell, I know that you have this real problem with numbers. You continue to show it again and again. On a bicycle with a person as large as I am on a 60-62 cm bike, the amount of power to achieve 43 1/2 mph is 335 watts.. The 39 mph speed I quoted would be 100 watts below that. A Tour de France sprint is for 200 meters and that for a light is 50 meters.
> >
> Needless to say of course, you are wrong wrong wrong. Ha Ha. Shocker.
> https://cyclingtips.com/2019/04/mathieu-van-der-poel-power-watts-amstel-gold/
> At the end of the link it has the following:
> "Lead-out: 27 seconds at 662 W (average speed: 35.5 mph/57kph)
> Sprint: 16 seconds at 1,200 W (Max power: 1400 W, average speed: 39.7 mph/64kph)"
> This is Mathieu Van der Poel in April 2019. Article says he is 6 feet and 165 pounds.
>
> So you think your much heavier weight and bigger size and 50 years older can go 43.5 mph with 335 watts. And Van der Poel takes 1200 watts to go 39.7 mph. I would reason that the smaller, lighter Van der Poel would not need 4 times more power watts to go 4 mph less fast than you. Something not adding up right here. And you say to go 39 mph, like Van der Poel did, only takes 235 watts. One fifth as much power.
>
> Now you do try to shift the subject and make things up. Like you always do. By throwing in the Tour sprint is 200 meters and your stoplight sprint is 50 meters. OK. Using the data I posted above of the sprint being 16 seconds and the average speed being 39.7 mph. And some math which I know is way beyond you. We get the following. 3600 seconds per hour. Bike speed of 64 kmh. We get about 17.78 meters traveled per second. So multiply that by the 16 seconds of the sprint and we get 284 meters traveled. Very close to your 200 meter number you threw in there. At an average of 1200 Watts and maximum spike of 1400 Watts of power output. But your claim of traveling one fifth, one sixth, as far distance and using, needing, one fifth, one sixth as much power (235 watts) does not add up at all.
> > You talked about having an education but seem unable to show the slightest understanding of the application of science to anything. Exactly why is that?

Why do you continue to show you don't understand anything? Acceleration from the usual 90degree turn in the leadup to a Tour sprint is entirely different from the acceleration from drafting a car across a changing yellow light and starting from 30 mph. But you and your little gang of four can pretend that you actually know something about something. I especially like comments from John who has never ridden a sports bike but comments on them with the familiarity of Van der Poel.

On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 12:45:16 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 4:00:27 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 5:23:30 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 2:49:00 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 10:20:59 AM UTC-6, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 11:06:03 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > And yet another try at impressing me. Two years ago I was sprinting though yellow lights at 39 mph at 75.
> > > > > No you weren't, that's just another lie. You might have hit 39KPH on a downhill though a yellow light...._maybe_.
> > > > For fun I did a Google search using "speed of sprinters in Tour de France" and it produced the following:
> > > > "A sprinter stays shielded from the wind by his team until the last few seconds when they begin their sprint to the line. When they eventually come out from their teammates' slipstream for the final sprint they can achieve speeds of 70 kmh."
> > > >
> > > > 70 kmh equals about 43.68 mph. So the fastest bicycle sprinters on the face of the earth at their peak prime age of 25-30 years old, are able to hit 43 mph. So isn't it very possible and likely that 75 year old Tommy boy can hit 39 mph? 90% as good as the fastest bicycle sprinters on earth? Just like Tommy boy can run a 4 minute 27 second mile. 90% as good as a 4 minute mile runner. Or run the 100 meter sprint in 11 seconds. Usain Bolt and a few others run the 100 meter sprint in a hair under 10 seconds. So 11 seconds is about 90% as good as the fastest runners on earth. Tommy boy can do this, no problem.
> > > Russell, I know that you have this real problem with numbers. You continue to show it again and again. On a bicycle with a person as large as I am on a 60-62 cm bike, the amount of power to achieve 43 1/2 mph is 335 watts. The 39 mph speed I quoted would be 100 watts below that. A Tour de France sprint is for 200 meters and that for a light is 50 meters.
> > >
> > Needless to say of course, you are wrong wrong wrong. Ha Ha. Shocker.
> > https://cyclingtips.com/2019/04/mathieu-van-der-poel-power-watts-amstel-gold/
> > At the end of the link it has the following:
> > "Lead-out: 27 seconds at 662 W (average speed: 35.5 mph/57kph)
> > Sprint: 16 seconds at 1,200 W (Max power: 1400 W, average speed: 39.7 mph/64kph)"
> > This is Mathieu Van der Poel in April 2019. Article says he is 6 feet and 165 pounds.
> >
> > So you think your much heavier weight and bigger size and 50 years older can go 43.5 mph with 335 watts. And Van der Poel takes 1200 watts to go 39.7 mph. I would reason that the smaller, lighter Van der Poel would not need 4 times more power watts to go 4 mph less fast than you. Something not adding up right here. And you say to go 39 mph, like Van der Poel did, only takes 235 watts. One fifth as much power.
> >
> > Now you do try to shift the subject and make things up. Like you always do. By throwing in the Tour sprint is 200 meters and your stoplight sprint is 50 meters. OK. Using the data I posted above of the sprint being 16 seconds and the average speed being 39.7 mph. And some math which I know is way beyond you. We get the following. 3600 seconds per hour. Bike speed of 64 kmh. We get about 17.78 meters traveled per second. So multiply that by the 16 seconds of the sprint and we get 284 meters traveled. Very close to your 200 meter number you threw in there. At an average of 1200 Watts and maximum spike of 1400 Watts of power output. But your claim of traveling one fifth, one sixth, as far distance and using, needing, one fifth, one sixth as much power (235 watts) does not add up at all.
> > > You talked about having an education but seem unable to show the slightest understanding of the application of science to anything. Exactly why is that?
> Why do you continue to show you don't understand anything? Acceleration from the usual 90degree turn in the leadup to a Tour sprint

So now the usual tour sprint is from a 90 degree corner. Sure sparky. (very clearly tommy has never paid attention to a grand tour sprint stage). If you really think this is true, it should be pretty easy for you to pull up the stage maps from any of the most recent editions and show how the majority of them have 90 degree corners before the final acceleration into the sprint. Go ahead sparky, prove us wrong.

> is entirely different from the acceleration from drafting a car across a changing yellow light and starting from 30 mph.

oh, so now it wasn't you sprinting, it was you drafting. Moving the goalposts duly noted. I will concede, it might only take 235 watts to draft a car at 40, but that isn't sprinting.

> But you and your little gang of four can pretend that you actually know something about something.

Clearly more than you, insisting you were sprinting though a stop light at 40 mph, only now to admit now you were drafting. It was probably downhill too, with a tailwind. And no, I don't believe you've ever drafted a vehicle at 40.

> I especially like comments from John who has never ridden a sports bike but comments on them with the familiarity of Van der Poel.

ridden a "sports bike"? yeah, I guess that's a common term for a racing bike amoung those who actually race. Kind of like "light lines" is a common term used by AT&T technicians.

Gawd yer stupid. Shut the fuck up.

On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 12:23:46 PM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 12:45:16 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 4:00:27 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 5:23:30 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 2:49:00 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 10:20:59 AM UTC-6, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 11:06:03 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > And yet another try at impressing me. Two years ago I was sprinting though yellow lights at 39 mph at 75.
> > > > > > No you weren't, that's just another lie. You might have hit 39KPH on a downhill though a yellow light...._maybe_.
> > > > > For fun I did a Google search using "speed of sprinters in Tour de France" and it produced the following:
> > > > > "A sprinter stays shielded from the wind by his team until the last few seconds when they begin their sprint to the line. When they eventually come out from their teammates' slipstream for the final sprint they can achieve speeds of 70 kmh."
> > > > >
> > > > > 70 kmh equals about 43.68 mph. So the fastest bicycle sprinters on the face of the earth at their peak prime age of 25-30 years old, are able to hit 43 mph. So isn't it very possible and likely that 75 year old Tommy boy can hit 39 mph? 90% as good as the fastest bicycle sprinters on earth? Just like Tommy boy can run a 4 minute 27 second mile. 90% as good as a 4 minute mile runner. Or run the 100 meter sprint in 11 seconds. Usain Bolt and a few others run the 100 meter sprint in a hair under 10 seconds. So 11 seconds is about 90% as good as the fastest runners on earth. Tommy boy can do this, no problem.
> > > > Russell, I know that you have this real problem with numbers. You continue to show it again and again. On a bicycle with a person as large as I am on a 60-62 cm bike, the amount of power to achieve 43 1/2 mph is 335 watts. The 39 mph speed I quoted would be 100 watts below that. A Tour de France sprint is for 200 meters and that for a light is 50 meters.
> > > >
> > > Needless to say of course, you are wrong wrong wrong. Ha Ha. Shocker.
> > > https://cyclingtips.com/2019/04/mathieu-van-der-poel-power-watts-amstel-gold/
> > > At the end of the link it has the following:
> > > "Lead-out: 27 seconds at 662 W (average speed: 35.5 mph/57kph)
> > > Sprint: 16 seconds at 1,200 W (Max power: 1400 W, average speed: 39.7 mph/64kph)"
> > > This is Mathieu Van der Poel in April 2019. Article says he is 6 feet and 165 pounds.
> > >
> > > So you think your much heavier weight and bigger size and 50 years older can go 43.5 mph with 335 watts. And Van der Poel takes 1200 watts to go 39.7 mph. I would reason that the smaller, lighter Van der Poel would not need 4 times more power watts to go 4 mph less fast than you. Something not adding up right here. And you say to go 39 mph, like Van der Poel did, only takes 235 watts. One fifth as much power.
> > >
> > > Now you do try to shift the subject and make things up. Like you always do. By throwing in the Tour sprint is 200 meters and your stoplight sprint is 50 meters. OK. Using the data I posted above of the sprint being 16 seconds and the average speed being 39.7 mph. And some math which I know is way beyond you. We get the following. 3600 seconds per hour. Bike speed of 64 kmh. We get about 17.78 meters traveled per second. So multiply that by the 16 seconds of the sprint and we get 284 meters traveled. Very close to your 200 meter number you threw in there. At an average of 1200 Watts and maximum spike of 1400 Watts of power output. But your claim of traveling one fifth, one sixth, as far distance and using, needing, one fifth, one sixth as much power (235 watts) does not add up at all.
> > > > You talked about having an education but seem unable to show the slightest understanding of the application of science to anything. Exactly why is that?
> > Why do you continue to show you don't understand anything? Acceleration from the usual 90degree turn in the leadup to a Tour sprint
> So now the usual tour sprint is from a 90 degree corner. Sure sparky. (very clearly tommy has never paid attention to a grand tour sprint stage). If you really think this is true, it should be pretty easy for you to pull up the stage maps from any of the most recent editions and show how the majority of them have 90 degree corners before the final acceleration into the sprint. Go ahead sparky, prove us wrong.
> > is entirely different from the acceleration from drafting a car across a changing yellow light and starting from 30 mph.
> oh, so now it wasn't you sprinting, it was you drafting. Moving the goalposts duly noted. I will concede, it might only take 235 watts to draft a car at 40, but that isn't sprinting.
> > But you and your little gang of four can pretend that you actually know something about something.
> Clearly more than you, insisting you were sprinting though a stop light at 40 mph, only now to admit now you were drafting. It was probably downhill too, with a tailwind. And no, I don't believe you've ever drafted a vehicle at 40.
> > I especially like comments from John who has never ridden a sports bike but comments on them with the familiarity of Van der Poel.
> ridden a "sports bike"? yeah, I guess that's a common term for a racing bike amoung those who actually race. Kind of like "light lines" is a common term used by AT&T technicians.
>
> Gawd yer stupid. Shut the fuck up.
You don't know shit about racing. Show us your results. Dead last ain't racing. It's being a flunky.

On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 4:08:38 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 12:23:46 PM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 12:45:16 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 4:00:27 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 5:23:30 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 2:49:00 PM UTC-8, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 10:20:59 AM UTC-6, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 11:06:03 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > And yet another try at impressing me. Two years ago I was sprinting though yellow lights at 39 mph at 75.
> > > > > > > No you weren't, that's just another lie. You might have hit 39KPH on a downhill though a yellow light...._maybe_.
> > > > > > For fun I did a Google search using "speed of sprinters in Tour de France" and it produced the following:
> > > > > > "A sprinter stays shielded from the wind by his team until the last few seconds when they begin their sprint to the line. When they eventually come out from their teammates' slipstream for the final sprint they can achieve speeds of 70 kmh."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 70 kmh equals about 43.68 mph. So the fastest bicycle sprinters on the face of the earth at their peak prime age of 25-30 years old, are able to hit 43 mph. So isn't it very possible and likely that 75 year old Tommy boy can hit 39 mph? 90% as good as the fastest bicycle sprinters on earth? Just like Tommy boy can run a 4 minute 27 second mile. 90% as good as a 4 minute mile runner. Or run the 100 meter sprint in 11 seconds. Usain Bolt and a few others run the 100 meter sprint in a hair under 10 seconds. So 11 seconds is about 90% as good as the fastest runners on earth. Tommy boy can do this, no problem.
> > > > > Russell, I know that you have this real problem with numbers. You continue to show it again and again. On a bicycle with a person as large as I am on a 60-62 cm bike, the amount of power to achieve 43 1/2 mph is 335 watts. The 39 mph speed I quoted would be 100 watts below that. A Tour de France sprint is for 200 meters and that for a light is 50 meters.
> > > > >
> > > > Needless to say of course, you are wrong wrong wrong. Ha Ha. Shocker.
> > > > https://cyclingtips.com/2019/04/mathieu-van-der-poel-power-watts-amstel-gold/
> > > > At the end of the link it has the following:
> > > > "Lead-out: 27 seconds at 662 W (average speed: 35.5 mph/57kph)
> > > > Sprint: 16 seconds at 1,200 W (Max power: 1400 W, average speed: 39..7 mph/64kph)"
> > > > This is Mathieu Van der Poel in April 2019. Article says he is 6 feet and 165 pounds.
> > > >
> > > > So you think your much heavier weight and bigger size and 50 years older can go 43.5 mph with 335 watts. And Van der Poel takes 1200 watts to go 39.7 mph. I would reason that the smaller, lighter Van der Poel would not need 4 times more power watts to go 4 mph less fast than you. Something not adding up right here. And you say to go 39 mph, like Van der Poel did, only takes 235 watts. One fifth as much power.
> > > >
> > > > Now you do try to shift the subject and make things up. Like you always do. By throwing in the Tour sprint is 200 meters and your stoplight sprint is 50 meters. OK. Using the data I posted above of the sprint being 16 seconds and the average speed being 39.7 mph. And some math which I know is way beyond you. We get the following. 3600 seconds per hour. Bike speed of 64 kmh. We get about 17.78 meters traveled per second. So multiply that by the 16 seconds of the sprint and we get 284 meters traveled. Very close to your 200 meter number you threw in there. At an average of 1200 Watts and maximum spike of 1400 Watts of power output. But your claim of traveling one fifth, one sixth, as far distance and using, needing, one fifth, one sixth as much power (235 watts) does not add up at all.
> > > > > You talked about having an education but seem unable to show the slightest understanding of the application of science to anything. Exactly why is that?
> > > Why do you continue to show you don't understand anything? Acceleration from the usual 90degree turn in the leadup to a Tour sprint
> > So now the usual tour sprint is from a 90 degree corner. Sure sparky. (very clearly tommy has never paid attention to a grand tour sprint stage). If you really think this is true, it should be pretty easy for you to pull up the stage maps from any of the most recent editions and show how the majority of them have 90 degree corners before the final acceleration into the sprint. Go ahead sparky, prove us wrong.
> > > is entirely different from the acceleration from drafting a car across a changing yellow light and starting from 30 mph.
> > oh, so now it wasn't you sprinting, it was you drafting. Moving the goalposts duly noted. I will concede, it might only take 235 watts to draft a car at 40, but that isn't sprinting.
> > > But you and your little gang of four can pretend that you actually know something about something.
> > Clearly more than you, insisting you were sprinting though a stop light at 40 mph, only now to admit now you were drafting. It was probably downhill too, with a tailwind. And no, I don't believe you've ever drafted a vehicle at 40.
> > > I especially like comments from John who has never ridden a sports bike but comments on them with the familiarity of Van der Poel.
> > ridden a "sports bike"? yeah, I guess that's a common term for a racing bike amoung those who actually race. Kind of like "light lines" is a common term used by AT&T technicians.
> >
> > Gawd yer stupid. Shut the fuck up.
>
> You don't know shit about racing. Show us your results. Dead last ain't racing. It's being a flunky.

Thank you for admitting you were wrong with your claim that tour sprints normally start from a 90 degree corner and that you were actually drafting, not sprint, when you hit 39.

I've already posted several strava links of some of my races. BTW - no shame in being DFL.
https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/1499/lanterne-rouge-at-the-tour-de-france
It beats the hell out of your tall tales of out climbing groups of young strong 30 year olds, only to claim later that you have a respiratory disability that prevents you from wearing a N95 mask because you can't breathe.

You seem to need to be reminded that cycling is a team sport. Racing is mixing it up to affect the outcome of a race. A domestique often comes in last.. They may have set the pace in an echelon on a windy course to shatter the field so their leader was in the front group, or pace them back to a break after a mechanical, or simply go on a long break to snag sprint points if their leader was winning the points competition and need to make sure a rival team didn't narrow the advantage. Racers aren't only the winners. Racers are the riders that help make the winners. I can guarantee I've developed more lasting friendships and earned respect just from my 35 years of cycling than you have from all aspects of your life combined, not to mention A successful career spending over ten years at two different companies.
This is why you've never held a job for more than a year and were always given the shit jobs in the airforce- you have no concept of working in collaboration and appreciating the success of the team over your own recognization. Bouncing from job to job every other year isn't a sucessful carrer, it's being tossed out when they could no longer stand your bullshit, you selfish little prick.

Shut the fuck up tommy.