Frédéric Grappe analysis of Froome data

Frédéric Grappe analysis of Froome data

Requires its own thread.

Team Sky releases Froome's power data - http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-releases-froomes-power-data

First observation: His power drops off normally

"The relationship between power and time is similar to what is known and is observed in all the riders that have been established in the record power profile (RPP)," Grappe told Equipe.

"It shows, for example, a significant and normal power reduction of 60 watts (0.88 w/kg) between twenty and sixty minutes efforts. On average an athlete loses fifty watts in this time interval. The RPP that Froome has over two years does not seem to show any abnormality in its fundamental structure. In other words, the power data of the last two years is consistent with the profile that it represents. The performances he made on Ax 3 Domaines and Ventoux were to be expected in view of his PPR. During the last two years, his profile has not changed. It appears that the potential that he has today is similar to the one he had in 2011."
Frédéric Grappe on anti-doping and Armstrong - http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/results/2001/feb01/feb09news.shtml

La Francaise des Jeux trainer, Frédéric Grappe, has come out in support of Lance Armstrong, after doping accusations have been leveled at him and the U.S. Postal team. In an in depth interview with L'Equipe, Grappe said that Armstrong's results have come through hard work and not hard drugs, despite the climate of suspicion that still surrounds cycling (especially in France) at the moment.

Grappe started by saying that to fight doping in general, the role of a good trainer is paramount. They must be able to set a program that will not over-tax their riders but keep them in top shape for a certain competition period. Some top riders already do this, although they are subsequently criticised by fans for not riding the whole season at their best. Not everyone can be an Eddy Merckx.

"A great many riders spend their time during the week at home unsupervised," said Grappe. "The trade is so difficult that sometimes they are mentally quite low, in a state of weakness. In these moments of great loneliness one could suppose that a very influential person could propose things to a rider. I know this for a fact...I do not blame the riders, but the system because it would only take a few things to change it."

Grappe believes that doctors are given too much status by the FFC and the UCI, compared with trainers such as himself who know the riders. "It is necessary to work from the base and to develop riders with quality supervision from teams...to offer the riders a true 'alternative' to doping."
 
It shows, for example, a significant and normal power reduction of 60 watts (0.88 w/kg) between twenty and sixty minutes efforts. On average an athlete loses fifty watts in this time interval. The RPP that Froome has over two years does not seem to show any abnormality in its fundamental structure.
Is there any evidence that doping changes that, or must change it? I don’t think so. So why bring it up? What relevance does it have?

The extremely high maximal aerobic power (efforts of five minutes) confirms that he has an extraordinary high aerobic potential, which means he has a V02 max (this has never been measured in the laboratory by his team) close to the limits of known physiological science."
Why has it never been measured in the laboratory? Wouldn’t that be one value that a team evaluating Froome’s potential might want to know? And why doesn't Grappe provide his own rough estimate of this value, to indicate whether it might in fact be beyond any previously recorded values?

His average weight over the two years is 68 kg (in the morning) with less than 900g variations. This shows that the power he develops over two years is relatively stable when expressed in watts per kilogram (W/kg), a very important indication of the performances he has shown."
Does this include off-season measurements?

It is evident that to be able to operate with a power profile near 100% of his maximum, Chris Froome must have excellent ability to recovery between stages.
Which is one thing doping is known to enhance very well.

The real problem with the analysis, though, is very simple: it doesn’t extend to the period of time before Froome became a dominant GT rider. Since he has been dominant since the Vuelta 2011, it’s hardly surprising that his power numbers throughout that period are high and consistent. Providing values from before 2011 would be critical to the second phase in my suggested use of power values as an indicator or warning sign of doping.

Maybe we should turn it around. Given that the analysis is only for the past two years, what kind of power value findings might have suggested doping? Offhand, I can’t think of any, except very large fluctuations in power. But again, since he has been consistently dominant, we don’t expect that.

What Grappe at least might have done is compare Froome’s power values with those of known dopers in the past. This is how we can begin to address the question of how much Froome might be pushing the envelope of what has been considered physiologically possible. This corresponds to the first phase in my suggested use of power values. But since Grappe apparently has not released any actual numbers, even that can’t be evaluated.
 
Aug 18, 2009
4,993
1
0
Ok.
FTP - CP20 = 60W
FTP - CP20 = ~8% (FTP)
=> ~8% (FTP) = 60W
=> FTP = 60W ÷ 8% = 750W

Discuss :cool:
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
ShrubberyBlue said:
No, it doesn't.
I think it does otherwise it will get lost in all the trolling by sky fans obfuscating threds just like Armstrongs minions.

That Grappe failed on Armstrong really begs the question why did Brailsford or L'Equipe get this guy to do it? Obfuscation on the part of both, one on behalf of ASO the other for his team.

Does he still work for FDJ; if so they my want to cancel the contract!
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,826
0
0
Grappe did not say the data indicates cleanliness. Please get that through your skull. He simply notes that the data he has seen, starting with the 2011 Vuelta, is consistent and implies an exceptional VO2 and excellent recovery. There's no speculation from Grappe as to whether Froome's aerobic power and day-day recovery was achieved clean or doped.
 
thehog said:
Requires its own thread.

Frédéric Grappe on anti-doping and Armstrong - http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/results/2001/feb01/feb09news.shtml
I remember how outraged I was when I read his LA apology in l'Equipe in those days.
I guess he was on LA's payroll as an advisor of some sort.

Anyway, Brailsford would never have shown the data to Vayer, He is much safer with Grappe who seems to always have had trouble with numbers.

Would you by any chance remember where Froome's power profile was shown?.
Either on this website or on a link I found on cyclingnews. I printed it but can't find it.

We have this :
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QlklucnWgJs/UBL0z8u4MpI/AAAAAAAAARA/5yfDjR-GNkY/s1600/froome_ITT_vuelta.jpg

We should all copy it before it disappears from the web.
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,826
0
0
@fredgrappe
Ai-je une seule fois évoqué le fait qu'il n'est pas dopé ? Les données analysées ne permet pas de le dire. Je dois rester très honnête...

@fredgrappe
La question qu'il faut davantage se poser c'est plutôt de savoir quel était son profil avant 2011 ? Et là, je n'en sait rien...

google translate:

@ fredgrappe
I once mentioned that he is not doped? The data analyzed does not say. I have to be very honest ...

@ fredgrappe
The question we must ask is more rather know what his profile before 2011? And then I know nothing ...
 
Aug 19, 2012
386
0
0
just a PR trick with l'equipe

im sure brailsford knows quite well wada don't take data and make pronouncements of cleanliness

if he's straight why does he make *** up
 
Aug 19, 2012
386
0
0
Tyler'sTwin said:
@fredgrappe
Ai-je une seule fois évoqué le fait qu'il n'est pas dopé ? Les données analysées ne permet pas de le dire. Je dois rester très honnête...

@fredgrappe
La question qu'il faut davantage se poser c'est plutôt de savoir quel était son profil avant 2011 ? Et là, je n'en sait rien...

google translate:

@ fredgrappe
I once mentioned that he is not doped? The data analyzed does not say. I have to be very honest ...

@ fredgrappe
The question we must ask is more rather know what his profile before 2011? And then I know nothing ...
i smell trouble
 
Feb 15, 2013
176
0
0
Here's a slightly more natural translation:

"Have I said one single time that he is not doped? The data analysed do not suffice to reach that conclusion. I must be very honest...

...The question we must ask is: what was his profile before 2011? And I know nothing of that..."
 
Aug 19, 2012
386
0
0
could get tricky if the question is asked about more data

surely it wont be a problem?

i mean he said he needed help to clear team sky
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Le breton said:
shown?.
Either on this website or on a link I found on cyclingnews. I printed it but can't find it.

We have this :
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QlklucnWgJs/UBL0z8u4MpI/AAAAAAAAARA/5yfDjR-GNkY/s1600/froome_ITT_vuelta.jpg

We should all copy it before it disappears from the web.
Well, according to Hunter Allen, his FTP is now 10% higher than that. A grand tour podium finisher increasing his FTP by 10%? Interesting.

If you want confirmation on Froome's current power output, you could always look at Cyclingpeaks website and compare the power output to some other guys on Ventoux: http://home.trainingpeaks.com/races/2013-tour-de-france.aspx

Oh, wait. That day seems to missing? Weird, that...

The release of data is so contrived it's beyond comical. If Froome is clean, he should be pretty mad at his team director for being such an obvious liar, because he's making Froome look guilty by association. Whether it's the "chemotherapy-like side affects" of an antibiotic, hiring a doping doctor because of a swannie dying from an infection disease, the faux outrage that Michael Barry was doping (or that Yates had tested positive), or releasing Froome's data since AFTER he suddenly became good... at this point Brailsford has less credibility than Johan. Obviously they'll do whatever it takes to win and they have the money to do it.

Since it appears Froome has gained 10% power from the 2011 Vuelta, it would be interesting to see just how much power he's gain from when they first began getting data on him. My guess is that he's increased about 20% or so. I think anyone who's ridden a bike competitively knows just how ridiculous the whole thing is.
 
131313 said:
Well, according to Hunter Allen, his FTP is now 10% higher than that. A grand tour podium finisher increasing his FTP by 10%? Interesting.

If you want confirmation on Froome's current power output, you could always look at Cyclingpeaks website and compare the power output to some other guys on Ventoux: http://home.trainingpeaks.com/races/2013-tour-de-france.aspx

Oh, wait. That day seems to missing? Weird, that...

The release of data is so contrived it's beyond comical. If Froome is clean, he should be pretty mad at his team director for being such an obvious liar, because he's making Froome look guilty by association. Whether it's the "chemotherapy-like side affects" of an antibiotic, hiring a doping doctor because of a swannie dying from an infection disease, the faux outrage that Michael Barry was doping (or that Yates had tested positive), or releasing Froome's data since AFTER he suddenly became good... at this point Brailsford has less credibility than Johan. Obviously they'll do whatever it takes to win and they have the money to do it.

Since it appears Froome has gained 10% power from the 2011 Vuelta, it would be interesting to see just how much power he's gain from when they first began getting data on him. My guess is that he's increased about 20% or so. I think anyone who's ridden a bike competitively knows just how ridiculous the whole thing is.

Shocking. Just shocking.
 
Best case scenario is that this release puts more pressure on Sky to release the full data. The trusted non-pseudoscientist says no conclusions can be drawn about doping, and he needs more data. Sky thought they shrugged off the pressure, its now just a little more focused
 
That power file is deceptive. The average was more like 420w. There are a bunch of huge drop offs for periods of time, particularly the last 5-8 minutes that bring the average way down and just over half way.

The first 15-20 minutes shows his real power at a more steady state.

I think Flecha throws more flags than Froome. Ridiculous power. And he isn't the team leader.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
zigmeister said:
That power file is deceptive. The average was more like 420w.
No, it's not. NP for the ride is 411. So, that's the upper bound, and often NP can overstate things a little bit. It's definitely not "like 420W".
 
Mr Grappe & SKY:

where are the "numbers"?
Where are the "blood profiles"?
Where are the "training files"?
Where are the "Vo2Max results"?
Where are the "medical records on his bilharzia treatment"?
Where are the "test files when Froome was hired by SKY"?

until all that data is made publicly available, this "attempt" to clear Froome from any guilt is as legit as all the testing done on Armstrong by Catlin to prove his innocence: A MERE "PR" STUNT
 
Jan 18, 2013
113
3
8,835
During the last two years, his profile has not changed. It appears that the potential that he has today is similar to the one he had in 2011."

Grappe you are a joke, it is precisely his profile during the last 2 years, what makes him suspicious.

Why SKY didn't release data from 2010???????????

You know why, everybody know why, Brailsford fancies himself very smart, he is just a pretender.
 
hfer07 said:
Mr Grappe & SKY:

where are the "numbers"?
Where are the "blood profiles"?
Where are the "training files"?
Where are the "Vo2Max results"?
Where are the "medical records on his bilharzia treatment"?
Where are the "test files when Froome was hired by SKY"?

until all that data is made publicly available, this "attempt" to clear Froome from any guilt is as legit as all the testing done on Armstrong by Catlin to prove his innocence: A MERE "PR" STUNT
He admits on Twitter that the analysis didn't conclude much.

Brailsford has used it to his PR advantage though.

Here's a slightly more natural translation:

"Have I said one single time that he is not doped? The data analysed do not suffice to reach that conclusion. I must be very honest...

...The question we must ask is: what was his profile before 2011? And I know nothing of that..."
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY