|
Post by mgtimothy on Jun 9, 2006 16:45:47 GMT 8
just curious... in stage bike races, i always see climbs labelled as category numbers? what determines a climb's category? what does it mean, exactly?
|
|
|
Post by king on Jun 9, 2006 17:00:04 GMT 8
generally it's elevation gained over a certain distance.
Googled result:
"Mountain stages include climbs categorized by number, ranging from 4 (easiest) to 1 (hardest). The most difficult climbs are so steep, they're beyond categorizing, or hors categorie.
Categorizing climbs is objective and subjective. The length of the climb, the difference in altitude from the bottom to the top, its average grade and steepest grade, and where the climb is positioned in the stage are all important factors. The elevation of the climb's summit and the width and condition of the road are also contributing factors.
Certain general guidelines dictate how climbs are categorized, but race directors in different races rate climbs differently. Even year to year in the Tour de France, discrepancies occur.
In general terms, Category 4 climbs are short and easy. Category 3 climbs last approximately 5 kilometers (3.1 miles), have an average grade of 5 percent, and ascend 150 meters (500 feet). Category 2 climbs are the same length or longer at an 8 percent grade and ascend 500 meters (1,600 feet). Category 1 climbs last 20 kilometers (12.4 miles) with an average 6 percent grade and ascend 1,500 meters. Beyond category climbs include an altitude difference of at least 1,000 meters (3,280 feet) from start to finish and have an average grade of at least 7 percent. A 1 percent grade means a road ascends 1 meter (3.28 feet) for every 100 meters (328 feet) it advances."
|
|
|
Post by mgtimothy on Jun 9, 2006 17:54:51 GMT 8
nice... so that puts The Wall (~3% grade) at Category 4 0_o
|
|
|
Post by radical1962 on Jun 9, 2006 18:27:04 GMT 8
According to Bud's site. The Wall is 250m high over 2300meters = 10.8% .... is this correct? 10% percent gradient lang and the wall...
|
|
|
Post by mgtimothy on Jun 10, 2006 17:01:50 GMT 8
ah ok. wrong info. where did i get that 3%? ^_^
|
|
|
Post by Dragunov on Jun 10, 2006 20:23:28 GMT 8
ah ok. wrong info. where did i get that 3%? ^_^ climb climb climb mountain goat : ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by dayuhan on Jun 14, 2006 8:56:34 GMT 8
Seems to me that these grades are for road conditions... in mt. biking, the surface is at least as important as the distance and gradient. Climbing on a rough, rocky surface (something we do a lot in Sagada) can be much more demanding than even a steep long climb on smooth stuff. You can't just find a cadence and grind up, you have to actively choose a line and attack many sections with added momentum to carry over rough stuff.
I don't know it there is a climb rating system for mt. bikes, but if there is, surface conditions would have to be a major factor.
|
|
|
Post by cobym on Jun 15, 2006 11:33:58 GMT 8
10%! That's steep na. In contrast, Tagaytay-Talisay (dirt road) is a 600m ascent across 12km = 5% gradient lang.
|
|
|
Post by arcireyes on Jun 15, 2006 13:02:05 GMT 8
mga sirs,
for reference purpose only, how do we categorize:
1. The Wall
2. Sierra Madre (from Mang Vics-Sierra Madre Hotel)
3. Antipolo 1 (from Masinag Market - Flying V)
4. Antipolo 2 (from Morong - Flying V)
5. Tagaytay Standard Route ( Aguinaldo Highway via Dasma-Silang)
just curious.
peace!!!
arci
|
|