Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

Page 691 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Should this thread be shut down?

  • No

    Votes: 10 35.7%
  • No

    Votes: 24 85.7%

  • Total voters
    28
  • Poll closed .
Pray tell.

At any rate, the fact that he can't be even remotely a factor leads me to conclude, either he was an invention or his injuries were so bad that there was no chance of recovery. In the latter case, how then was he able to hoodwinck his sponsors?
No thanks. It’s all been discussed ad nauseum in another part of the forum. Enough reading there for a week.

He has a long history of making things up and putting them out in the public for the credulous to consume. It’s quite possible he did the same with ISN, and it’s quite possible he didn’t know. Or a combo of the two. We certainly won’t ever get the straight story from him.
 
No thanks. It’s all been discussed ad nauseum in another part of the forum. Enough reading there for a week.

He has a long history of making things up and putting them out in the public for the credulous to consume. It’s quite possible he did the same with ISN, and it’s quite possible he didn’t know. Or a combo of the two. We certainly won’t ever get the straight story from him.
He wrote a nice book. Of course if you believe to know a different "truth", there's no point in reading it, right?
 
The notion that sky somehow revolutionized training is not credible. Everyone knows there are no silver bullets, at least this side of the clinic. Building fatigue resistance is the key, and it takes time and volume. It's all about managing overall load on the razor's edge, so that the riders attain the best possible combination of, and level in, race specific attributes, and do not fall off the cliff a la wile e coyote while trying. Maybe, maybe, sky beat the others in just this till, say, 2018 or so - and this was because of their "scientific" approach and not because of the rider material. But I am not sure, and at a gunpoint would not accept this explanation.

Now, several philosophies about how this is to be achieved exist amongst teams and trainers. Many seem to work. For those interested, take a look at the long thread linked below, which contains batches of data from several riders mined from Strava. Long rides "with intense stuff" to generate high stress levels dominate. Also amongst riders in teams that kick sky in the teeth these days. Fairly mundane, and sensible, approach given the goal. Also very close to the parabled sky volcano camp sessions.

The point being, microscopic attention to detail does not emerge from this admittedly limited but quite likely representative enough data set.

 
The notion that sky somehow revolutionized training is not credible. Everyone knows there are no silver bullets, at least this side of the clinic. Building fatigue resistance is the key, and it takes time and volume. It's all about managing overall load on the razor's edge, so that the riders attain the best possible combination of, and level in, race specific attributes, and do not fall off the cliff a la wile e coyote while trying. Maybe, maybe, sky beat the others in just this till, say, 2018 or so - and this was because of their "scientific" approach and not because of the rider material. But I am not sure, and at a gunpoint would not accept this explanation.

Now, several philosophies about how this is to be achieved exist amongst teams and trainers. Many seem to work. For those interested, take a look at the long thread linked below, which contains batches of data from several riders mined from Strava. Long rides "with intense stuff" to generate high stress levels dominate. Also amongst riders in teams that kick sky in the teeth these days. Fairly mundane, and sensible, approach given the goal. Also very close to the parabled sky volcano camp sessions.

The point being, microscopic attention to detail does not emerge from this admittedly limited but quite likely representative enough data set.

So from what you say it seems like a combo of longue duree intensity with adequite recovery in between. With the data available, I suppose they could push athletes harder then they would have to go at the Tour, say, but manage recovery better to eventually raise the numbers; such that when they face the real thing they are either accustomed to dealing with it perfectly or can even push harder. I mean theoretically, no?

Of course, this presupposes that the athletes can handle the intensity and stress to rebound without going over the cliff like Wile E. Coyote.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan
Sir Bradley Wiggins on his latest podcast: "Chris Froome, you would have to say this is probably his last opportunity to win a fifth Tour and that new generation is coming through."

I think you'll find that "new generation" came though two years ago at least Brad, but thanks for using the words "opportunity" "Tour" and "Chris Froome" in the same sentence...........We could all use a laugh at this time.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY