Wattage showdown

[quote=fishboy,May 12 2008, 07:57 AM]1- Yes. Was waiting till the dust settled on Wattage for a consensus to be reached (if that is possible!). All that will happen in the end is that we should be able to say it is 95% or 99% certain that the aero differences do exist between these helmets, and the variation is not occurring by chance.
2 - No idea, but that banner seems to chase me around transitions.
[right][snapback]400604[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Wattage debate has degenerated into a smackdown between Robert Chung and Andy Coggan. Billed as the prize fight of the non tunnel aero testing methods, I'm not sure its going to help ...

[quote]Andy Coggan
More options May 17, 12:37 am
From: Andy Coggan
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 07:37:06 -0700 (PDT)

On May 15, 11:57 pm, Robert Chung wrote:

> On May 15, 8:28 pm, Andy Coggan wrote:

> > So why did you essentially dispute me when I said that it wasn't?

> Cuz I can?

Well, hmmm. You can't possibly mean that you'd abuse your position of
authority to imply that you can do things that you can't actually do.
So, you must mean that you think that calculating a pseudo-elevation
profile allows you to identify sources of variability in ways that
can't be accomplished by other means. Assuming that's correct, I'm all
ears...in fact, why not start with my wife's velodrome tests, and tell
us all exactly why her power-vs-speed relationship varied slightly
across the different efforts?

Andy Coggan [/quote]