Low-Key: Bohlman-On Orbit best times

I first discovered the particular joys of Bohlman-On Orbit-Bohlman in 1995 when I rode Bill Bushnell's spectacular "Mr Bill's Nightmare", then part of the Sequoia Century. I don't think there's more than a handful of harder climbs at its distance in the US.

There's three major ways up the hill:
  • Stay on Bohlman: this is clearly the easiest route. Don't take it for granted, however, as it's still brutally steep.
  • Take the On-Orbit "shortcut": a substantially increased dose of pain. On Orbit is truly brutal. 13.2% over 2 km, 14.2% over 1 km, 15.9% over 500 m, 21.8% over 200 m, 24% peak. Which of these numbers speaks more to the pain? I don't know: I think all, actually. 21.8% over 200 meters is a much different experience as part of a longer climb than it would be, for example, as a few steep blocks in San Francisco, although that would also be tough. I rode Filbert Street, which is 32% over 68 meters. I think the two segments may be comparable. Fresh legs are huge.
  • Bohlman-Norton-Kittridge-Quickert-On Orbit-Bohlman: a lot less complicated than it sounds: basically one left turn onto Norton, then keep going up. I've never climbed this route all the way, only previewing the bottom. I missed this year's Low-Key since I was in Colorado at a cousin's wedding. Difficulty-wise, it seems roughly comparable to Bohlman-On Orbit-Bohlman.
Bohlman-Norton-Kittridge-Quickert-On Orbit-Bohlman

Every year I've been directly involved with the climbs we've selected On Orbit. In 1998 when I was in Austin the plan was to stay on Bohlman for variety, but the climb was rained out that year. I view that as On Orbit not at all pleased about being snubbed. It was also canceled in 2006 due to rain the night before.

I've got nice memories of the first time we did this climb in the first year of the series. Tyler Heerwagen, the stronger rider, was burdened in his 39-23. Every time the road would steepen, he'd pull away, only to slump over to scrape what little recovery he could salvage from the reduced grade sections. I, on the other hand had a 39-28, and was able to hold back a bit on the steep sections, then spin up to recatch him on the flatter segments. Finally he succumbed to his repeated intervals, and I was able to spin away.

Since, I've climbed it in a 39-25, and wouldn't want to try a 23. A preferred weapon of choice is a 34-26. That's similar to a 39-29. But really using an MTB-double would be even faster.

Anyway, here's the Low-Key records from the two routes we've used up this one:

Bohlman - On Orbit
Men
rank year(wk) name                 time  %median
   1 1997(8)  Tracy Colwell        24:56 143.316
   2 1997(8)  Eric Albrecht        25:58 137.612
   3 1996(6)  Tracy Colwell        26:13 138.525
   4 1997(8)  Miguel F. Aznar      26:42 133.833
   5 2007(3)  Tim Clark            26:51 132.837
   6 1997(8)  Michael Podgorski    27:24 130.414
   7 1995(9)  Dan Connelly         27:27 122.713
   8 2007(3)  Thomas Novikoff      28:04 127.078
   9 1997(8)  Kevin Fox            28:10 126.864
  10 1997(8)  Matt Dubbersly       28:16 126.415
  11 2007(3)  Michael Grundmann    28:26 125.44 
  12 2007(3)  Eric Balfus          28:44 124.13 
  13 1997(8)  Troy Soares          28:49 124.002
  14 2007(3)  Carl A. Nielson      28:57 123.201
  15 1996(6)  Daniel Connelly      29:06 124.8  
  16 1997(8)  Dickie Brock         29:09 122.584
  17 2007(3)  Ammon Skidmore       29:10 122.286
  18 2007(3)  Greg McQuaid         29:12 122.146
  19 1996(6)  Jim Johnston         29:14 124.23 
  19 2007(3)  Rupert Brauch        29:14 122.007

Women
rank year(wk) name                 time  %median
   1 1995(9)  Brenda Heerwagen     33:18 106.747
   2 2007(3)  Anny Henry           35:03 122.777
   3 1996(6)  Kristen Neubauer     35:31 115.486
   3 1996(6)  Holly Harris         35:31 115.486
   5 1995(9)  Liz Benishin         35:32 100    
   6 1997(8)  Julie Colwell        35:44 127.425
   7 1996(6)  Liz Benishin         36:36 112.067
   8 1997(8)  Cornezia Fletcher    36:53 123.452
   9 2007(3)  Irene Franklin       37:24 115.062
  10 1997(8)  Mary Caragio         37:28 121.53 
  11 1997(8)  Caroline Stronck     37:51 120.299
  12 2007(3)  Margie Biddick       39:03 110.201
  13 1996(6)  Cheryl Herms         41:01 100    
  14 1996(6)  Phyllis Olrich       41:59 97.6975
  15 1997(8)  Phyllis Olrich       42:26 107.306
  16 2007(3)  Alison Chaiken       43:02 100    
  17 1996(6)  Pat Baenen           43:32 94.219 
  18 1997(8)  Sherri Mulroe        43:47 103.997
  19 1997(8)  Joy Shaffer          44:01 103.446
  20 1996(6)  Julie Colwell        44:40 91.8284

Mixed Tandem
rank year(wk) name                 time  %median
   1 1997(8)  Liz Borra            41:55 85.2485
   1 1997(8)  Mike Jensen          41:55 85.2485

Runner
rank year(wk) name                 time  %median
   1 1996(6)  Gary Gellin          34:53 104.109

Bohlman-Norton-Kittridge-Quickert-On Orbit-Bohlman
Men
rank year(wk) name                 time  %median
   1 2009(6)  Scott Frake          26:54 129.244
   2 2009(6)  Carl Nielson         28:05 123.798
   3 2009(6)  Tim Clark            28:36 121.562
   4 2009(6)  Tom Gardin           28:42 121.138
   5 2009(6)  Laurent Pfertzel     29:15 118.86 
   6 2009(6)  Rune Dahl            29:16 118.793
   7 2009(6)  Rich Hill            29:25 118.187
   8 2009(6)  Bill Davis           29:36 117.455
   9 2009(6)  Jacob Berkman        29:37 117.389
  10 2009(6)  Bruce Gardner        30:08 115.376
  11 2009(6)  Brian Edwards        30:09 115.312
  12 2009(6)  Andy Brisnehan       30:19 114.678
  13 2009(6)  Ron Brunner          30:50 112.757
  14 2009(6)  John Walker          30:51 112.696
  15 2009(6)  Christian Paquet     31:15 111.253
  15 2009(6)  Mike Schuster        31:15 111.253
  17 2009(6)  Nathan Cauffman      31:33 110.195
  18 2009(6)  Jeff Farnsworth      31:51 109.158
  19 2009(6)  Scott Martin         32:03 108.476
  19 2009(6)  Evan Paull           32:03 108.476

Women
rank year(wk) name                 time  %median
   1 2009(6)  Christy Cowley       37:06 121.249
   2 2009(6)  Laura Hipp           39:30 113.882
   3 2009(6)  Karis McFarlane      44:59 100    
   4 2009(6)  Laura Egley          45:01 99.926 
   5 2009(6)  Lisa Emmerich        50:47 88.5789

Comments

Anonymous said…
I've got a 30-27 and I don't want to trade.
December 26, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Marin Avenue (Berkeley)

Image
On Saturday, I got an email from Tim telling letting me know that Murphy's Spring Classics was going to start up Marin Ave. I'd missed that. Murphy announces his courses the day before, and indeed it was already well into the night before when the course announcement went out. I'd skipped over the details, jumping straight to middle and end games. Marin? I laughed at the irony, because not long before when he'd told me he was choosing to repeat the Nifty Twn Fifty which we'd done together last year versus selecting Murphy Mack's Stage Mullett two-day, I responded I didn't think I had it in me to ride Marin Ave two years in succession. Well, so much for that. I was committed, so I went downstairs to swap my 11-26 cassette for my Recon 12-27. The name is easily overlooked: "Marin Ave" fails to strike the same impression as, for example, "Redwood Gulch" or "China Grade". But among those in the know, Marin Ave is infamous i
Read more

hummingbird feeder physics

Image
I couldn't figure out how the hummingbird feeder worked. Why didn't it overflow? Forces need to balance, of course. Neglecting surface tension, there liquid level is higher in the inner reservoir than in the feeding chamber, so there must be a corresponding pressure difference. Suppose the pressure in the inner chamber were zero. Then the column height difference would need to be atmospheric pressure / (density of liquid × gravity). But this is over 9 meters! Obviously the height difference is only approximately 1% of this. So the pressure difference inside versus outside is only approximately 1%. The inside is only slightly below atmosphere. So air is getting in. How? Does it diffuse through the liquid? If this were the dominant mechanism, it wouldn't take long for the pressure inside to go from 99% to 99.3%, for example, which should be plenty to push the column of liquid down in the inside chamber and thus push liquid out through the holes. It would over
Read more

Gallium Pro geometry

Image
On Caltrain yesterday, I was surprised to see among the usual set of commuting bikes a SRAM Red-equipped Argon Gallium Pro. The bike immediately stole your attention. The design was one which has been trending: clear-coated carbon with plenty of text detail so the viewer is sure to realize he's gazing upon the result of advanced, proprietary engineering and not at yet another paint job on the same old OEM frames being pumped out of the same old Taiwanese factories. But it worked: the bottom bracket area was huge, the downtube a large-diameter "inverted Kamm tail" design seemingly designed to maximize wind resistance, the top tube a broad, eccentric shape which screamed "vertically compliant yet torsionally stiff". All it lacked were the pencil-think seat stays Cervelo popularized, but this was a machine designed for stiffness over anything else. It seemed dramatic overkill, since the bike was small (the Argon "XS" I suspect). There wasn't muc
Read more