Recent content by Cerberus

  1. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Ah, ok, I think I see the argument beng made now. It's about using VOmax as a possible doping indicator. I though the argument made was that a high VO-max somehow could have explained Froome, which confused me. You realize that VOmax is only one factor in endurance sports, not the whole...
  2. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    But this is basically the argument about an implausible performance jump that many including myself have been making. If Froome was shown to have a very high VOmax it wouldn't and shouldn't convince anybody he was clean because that high VOmax could be the result of doping, right?
  3. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Can I ask about the VOmax thing discussed a few pages back? Why would Froome having a VOmax of 94 explain anything? Doesn't EPO improve performance exactly because it improves VOmax?
  4. C

    Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

    I'm pretty sure that what he meant was "Well, duh! The only way you're going to lose weight is through calorie deficit." He mashed up the terms "calorie deficit" and "carb restriction".
  5. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Listen, Comparing Einstein and Froome is clearly stupid on any number of levels, but please don't try to demonstrate this fact by using the "humans use only a small part of our brains" myth. It makes every part of my brain hurt. Humans use all of our brains, we just don't use it all at the...
  6. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Some might use the "eyeball test" to mean power and performance estimates, but the discussion I was replying to was basically about just looking at the performance and seeing it as incredible, which really is BS.
  7. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Well the "eyeball test" is very inaccurate and heavilly subject to viewer bias, that's a fact. Of cause the more scientific test of power and performance gives the same result as your eyball test (and mine).
  8. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Hmm, I'm sensing the vile stench of sarcasm. :p
  9. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Not 100% perhaps, but I think it would be rather hard for Sky to manufacture convincing false data and it would open up a huge risk if other top riders released their data. Say Froome releases his power meter and weight and they look plausible (clearly the calculations done are a bit off...
  10. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    You're way overinterpreting some coughing and some supposed paleness. Things that mess with you lungs are not likely to be performance enhancing - not in cycling. As I've said manuy times before, just because he's almost certainly doping doesn't mean that everything he does is related to the doping
  11. C

    Andy Coggan discussion thread

    It is of cause you priviledge to deposit you judgement in the hand of someone else, but in the real world evidence is evidence. If the antidoping authorities convict somone it doesn't actually prove that they're guilty and if the authorities do not convict them it doesn't prove that the evidence...
  12. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Cause he's less doped or having a bad year. See that was easy. Back to the topic.
  13. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    besides if his climbing speed for the last 15 k is physiologically implausible implausible (I'm sure som calculation will be along before to long) then they're implausible, no matter how slowly he took the previous 5 of the climb. You can't magically store up speed. You do of cause have to be...
  14. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    I 'suppose' that is true in a way.
  15. C

    Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

    Sure, there propably is some sort of none-zero probability that Froom is clean. I just don't think it's very high. Out of curiosity do you know what '' marks around a word is supposed to mean?