Time trials are known as the race of truth, as they were thought to be the purest test in cycling of human strength and skill. Riders can’t rely on their teammates, drafting in a peloton, or race savvy. In the last twenty years, science and data analytics are increasingly teaching us that there are dozens of other variables that influence the outcome of a time trial that reach far beyond power output. The 2023 Tour de France time trial, which was billed as a battle between two of cycling titans, Tadej Pogacar and Jonas Vingegaard, provided an example of how influential aerodynamics, planning, and cornering are in the race. Prior to the time trial, the riders appeared equal in strength on every terrain. Then, Vingegaard beat Pogacar in the time trial by the largest margin in recent history. He not only distanced himself from Pogacar in the General Classification but also struck a blow to Pogacar’s often supreme confidence. Immediately, after the finish Vingegaard said he had the best legs of his life. But, it wasn’t just his legs that won him the race. The race would have been much closer if Pogacar, and his team of coaches, hadn’t missed some opportunities for marginal gains and miscalculated technically and tactically.
The Tour time trial was not only a race of physical strength. On a sinuous technical course it was also a test of skill, knowledge of the course and mental preparation. Out of the starting gate, Vingegaard was clearly faster into the first corner. Accelerating down the ramp, he attacked the course, cutting each corner to within centimetres of the curbs like a F1 car driver , while Pogacar eased into the course, perhaps, assuming the race would be won or lost on the fifteen final kilometres which climbed to the finish. It was clear that Vingegaard had memorized every corner of the course, knew which corners he could flow through in his aero bars, and like a co-pilot to a rally driver he was likely also being reminded of what was coming over his race radio. He had clearly developed his technical skills and comfort on his time trial bike to ride through the corners at high speeds.
Over a decade ago, while I was racing with Team High Road at the Tour of Switzerland, our coach and analyst Sebastian Weber, placed video cameras on several of the faster more technical corners on the time trial course. He filmed all of us entering and exiting the corners and then overlaid our images with the rider who won so we could watch trajectory, braking, and speed differentials. The contrasts were shocking. Some riders on our team lost ten seconds in one corner to the winner. Not only was raw time lost in the corner but so was momentum, which means the rider has to produce more power to re-accelerate. The accumulation of those small accelerations is taxing and, obviously, affects the final outcome as they are using more energy. Any cyclist has felt the effects of momentum and how fluidity carries a rider further with less effort. If we overlaid Pogacar and Vingegaard’s images, I would bet Pogacar was losing seconds to Vingegaard on every corner, of which there were many.
Not only was Vingegaard faster through the corners but he also descended faster. Speed differentials on descents may not feel like much to the cyclist but the difference between 60 and 75 km/h is significant in time.
Since Greg Lemond stunned the world to beat Laurent Fignon in the final time trial of the 1989 Tour de France to win the overall classification by 8 seconds, cyclists have been increasingly aware of the benefits of aerodynamics. Lemond clearly won because he used aerodynamic handlebars and a tear dropped aero helmet while Fignon didn’t. Lemond’s position on his bike won him the race, not his raw power. Ultimately, a cyclist’s greatest competitor is the wind–a cyclist who can slice through the air quickest has a clear advantage over the rest. Aerodynamic gains can often be much greater than physical gains. Teams now spend countless hours and dollars trying to make a cyclist move more quickly through the air within the rules laid out by the UCI, the sport’s governing body. The knowledge of aerodynamics is one of the clear reasons the peloton is moving faster than ever. If a rider, team and their equipment suppliers are not constantly searching for and applying marginal gains, they are quickly left behind in the aerodynamic race.
Pogacar was one of few riders in the top ten who opted to change bikes at the base of the climb, jumping off his much more aerodynamic time trail bike on to a lighter road bike that put him in a more upright position. He also removed his helmet visor in an effort to better cool himself on the climb. Not only did he lose roughly 15 seconds changing bikes and removing his visor, but he also lost significant momentum when he slowed and restarted. And, it’s never easy to recapture speed and fluidity once a cyclist’s rhythm is disrupted.
Aerodynamics influences the speed of a cyclist, and outweighs overall weight on a climb, at speeds of over 15 kilometers an hour. On the climb, both riders stayed at over 20 km/h and it was clear over the last section of the course that Pogacar was at a significant disadvantage on the road bike as he was sitting upright while Vingegaard pierced the air on his time trial bike. It appeared that any marginal gains from the lighter bike were outweighed by the bike change, the elimination of the helmet visor and overall reduction in aerodynamic efficiency in the final kilometres of the race.
Analysts will be calculating gains and losses, so we will soon have an accurate idea of how much Pogacar lost due to his equipment choices. Those losses will be significant, as they were when Lemond beat Fignon 34 years ago. That defeat plagued Fignon’s confidence for the rest of his career and he was unable to win a fourth Tour de France.
A good piece of writing Michael. The many marginal gains provided by streamlining the bike and rider have resulted in significantly faster speeds in both amateur and pro races. How much farther can these elements be modified until the UCI steps in to ‘level the playing field’?