Recent content by function

An example of a moderator using their position to bolster their opinion, unfortunately in this case it hinders the discussion and was directed to a new user. Not very welcoming. http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1198218&postcount=1534

Gilbert got close, 2008 Het Volk

He may be doped to the gills, but what i noted about Stage 6 of T-A was that Nibali wasn't interested in the stage but needed the manpower to gain extra time. If you look earlier in the stage he was weaving all over the road to get up the steep pitches. Here is a shot just as he's about to cut...

Related and posted for entertainment (i hold no opinion of Dr Coyle) purposes.. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/magazine/creating-the-all-terrain-human.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&ref=magazine And amusingly, an Armstrong link to keep it on topic

Do you honestly believe your comments were neither spamming nor trolling? The evidence is there for all to see, I'll leave it at that.

I'm not talking about the validity of either method, i'm talking about the commenting style (spamming) by you in Frank's thread and Frank in your thread. Do you not see the similarities? Whether one is a coach or not does not give one free reign to carpet bomb threads.

You are a proponent of a specific tool/methodology, as is he.

It's odd that Fergie et al essentially do the same spamming in other threads with no consequence. It was clear that frank was just returning the favour.

The paper is Zorzoli & Rossi 2010 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21204287

The below link covers that graph as well as commenting on the reduced power outputs, not mean outputs as you mentioned earlier, but during key points when the contendors would be riding hard. http://www.sportsscientists.com/2011/03/biological-passport-effective-fight-or.html

Good post, i pretty much agree with your sentiments.

That's an interesting post and since lemond was an early adopter of the SRM it would be interesting to see how he'd respond to it. One thing that would also be interesting is to nail down lemond's efficiency too as he clearly was an outlier specimen. Thanks for the link!

Lemond could do 450-460W for 1hr fully rested; http://bikeraceinfo.com/oralhistory/lemond.html

Calm down and do some reading, i wasn't called on anything because i did not posit anything, if you take a breather and check poster names before replying you'll have better success. My *opinion* on Lemond is that he was clean, but i have nothing to prove that.

Those requirements are impossible to meet and i suspect you know it, when have there ever been (multiple even!) scientific studies on the effects of doping on actively racing cyclists in GTs? Further, in your particular case, the entire peloton since you would need to determine the cleanliness...