Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1175 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Remember when training was the new racing? Well, racing is the new racing.
Team Sky are firm believers in structured training at altitude but Froome admitted there is nothing better than hard racing to get ready for what is likely to be a very aggressive Giro d'Italia.

"You can't train like this, that's for sure. This is really valuable training," he said suddenly coming across as a physiological luddite.
Funnily (well, it's not that funny, not really) Froome has taken the opposite track to his erstwhile team-mate Wiggo:
According to My Time the secret of Sky and Wiggins' success is neither pill nor potion, but the realisation that training is more important than racing (something the Wiggins who wrote In Pursuit of Glory disagreed with, he then saying "You can never quite replicate the competitiveness of a Tour in training."). Sequestering themselves in Tenerife and putting in harder days training than they would have achieved had they raced is, for Team Sky, this year's version of cadence or extract of cherry oil or iPod pillows.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
juiced up out his nut on asthma treatment, and still cant win a stage this year, shame on the Dawg
asthma treatment if your towing the SDB line.......weight loss for the rest of us
Or performance enhancement: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10912897
When four subjects complaining about adverse side effects were excluded from the analysis, the increase in endurance time (729 +/- 1,007 s or 29%) was statistically significant (P <-0.05). Salbutamol did not affect VO2, respiratory exchange ratio, heart rate, and plasma free fatty acid and glycerol concentration during exercise; plasma lactate and potassium concentrations were increased (P < 0.05).

Seems a double edge sword if it increases lactate ?
 
Re: Re:

bigcog said:
red_flanders said:
gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
juiced up out his nut on asthma treatment, and still cant win a stage this year, shame on the Dawg
asthma treatment if your towing the SDB line.......weight loss for the rest of us
Or performance enhancement: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10912897
When four subjects complaining about adverse side effects were excluded from the analysis, the increase in endurance time (729 +/- 1,007 s or 29%) was statistically significant (P <-0.05). Salbutamol did not affect VO2, respiratory exchange ratio, heart rate, and plasma free fatty acid and glycerol concentration during exercise; plasma lactate and potassium concentrations were increased (P < 0.05).

Seems a double edge sword if it increases lactate ?
Depending on how much and the individual I'd assume. Seems to be testing well in the field...
 
Re: Re:

bigcog said:
red_flanders said:
gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
juiced up out his nut on asthma treatment, and still cant win a stage this year, shame on the Dawg
asthma treatment if your towing the SDB line.......weight loss for the rest of us
Or performance enhancement: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10912897
When four subjects complaining about adverse side effects were excluded from the analysis, the increase in endurance time (729 +/- 1,007 s or 29%) was statistically significant (P <-0.05). Salbutamol did not affect VO2, respiratory exchange ratio, heart rate, and plasma free fatty acid and glycerol concentration during exercise; plasma lactate and potassium concentrations were increased (P < 0.05).

Seems a double edge sword if it increases lactate ?
Increased lactate could be due to longer time till exhaustion.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
bigcog said:
red_flanders said:
gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
juiced up out his nut on asthma treatment, and still cant win a stage this year, shame on the Dawg
asthma treatment if your towing the SDB line.......weight loss for the rest of us
Or performance enhancement: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10912897
When four subjects complaining about adverse side effects were excluded from the analysis, the increase in endurance time (729 +/- 1,007 s or 29%) was statistically significant (P <-0.05). Salbutamol did not affect VO2, respiratory exchange ratio, heart rate, and plasma free fatty acid and glycerol concentration during exercise; plasma lactate and potassium concentrations were increased (P < 0.05).

Seems a double edge sword if it increases lactate ?
Increased lactate could be due to longer time till exhaustion.
True, good point.
 
:cool:

The technical difference between lactate and lactic acid is chemical. Lactate is lactic acid, missing one proton. To be an acid, a substance must be able to donate a hydrogen ion; when lactic acid donates its proton, it becomes its conjugate base, or lactate. ... But, the body produces and uses lactate -- not lactic acid.
 
But, the body produces and uses lactate -- not lactic acid.
That's a little misleading. Lactic acid has a pKa of about 4, which means at physiological pH, around 7.5, it exists mostly in the lactate form. So it's not really a matter of which form the body produces and uses as which form is favored at physiological pH.

Ned Boulting on his first meeting with Froome (from The Cycling Anthology, Vol. 3):

He ghosted into a reception area strewn with sofas—his arrival unheralded, his introductions meek. He struck me as a little awkward and very shy: young, and immensely, incalculably, irredeemably out of place. This, I calculated in a split second, was no bike rider. This was a schoolboy, a choirboy, a reluctant boy scout, with the badges for Plant Identification, and none for Physical Prowess. This was the pale, asthmatic (there is no evidence to suggest he has asthma) kid who was excused from PE on the grounds of a persistent cold. This was the kid who’d forgotten his gym kit (there in evidence to prove he has ever forgotten his gym kit). Not—quite emphatically not—a future winner of the Tour de France.
https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=dv7JAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT20&lpg=PT20&dq=barloworld+asthma&source=bl&ots=F9gXHNihII&sig=RS-a4ZvcRA3nWWWu1-BN-gu_ZYo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwik98rAl8raAhVMlZQKHUuJAtM4ChDoAQglMAA#v=onepage&q=barloworld%20asthma&f=false

This meeting took place during the 2008 TDF that Froome rode, and the book was published in January 2014, five months before Froome was spotted using an inhaler during a race, and the public became aware for the first time that he had, or claimed to have, asthma. So at this time a journalist who was following cycling—and who would continue to follow Froome—thought he looked asthmatic, that disorder was actually on his mind, but noted there was no evidence that he had it. Even when the author actually got around to publishing his account of the meeting, more than five years later, he noted the lack of evidence. Not proof that Froome didn’t—just like the fact that his BW teammate Cummings had a TUE for salbutamol when they were required, and Froome, according to Fancy Bears as well as all his own public statements, did not. But very interesting, especially in light of the fact that it was reported that 76/180 riders in the 2008 TDF had TUEs for asthma or some other health problem:

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/casper-named-as-fifth-tour-de-france-positive-93733

I would have thought a thorough journalist would have asked Froome if he had a TUE for asthma, before writing that there was no evidence that he had asthma. But maybe that's just me. I'm just weird in that way. I also think a journalist should ask Froome why FB found no TUE for salbutamol, that some journalist should have found out his USG back in December, and that some journalist with a light inside his or her brain would have asked Lappartient whether in fact Froome received and rejected an Acceptance of Consequences letter. But obviously, those are not the kind of questions journalists ask.

I guess it makes sense. Keep the public in the dark as much as possible, so they'll keep following the media, hoping that some blindingly obvious questions are eventually asked.
 
Merckx index said:
I would have thought a thorough journalist would have asked Froome if he had a TUE for asthma, before writing that there was no evidence that he had asthma.
How does an athlete secure a TUE to use Salbutamol or other treatments for asthma?
According to WADA’s TUE physician guidelines for asthma, it is recommended that all athletes who may be prescribed asthma medications seek a clear diagnosis from a respiratory specialist. They should also undergo the appropriate tests to optimize management and to exclude other possible diagnoses. This is mandatory if a TUE is being sought to prescribe a systemic glucocorticoid (GC) in-competition or a prohibited inhaled beta-2 agonist (such as Salbutamol) in- and out-of-competition.

The medical file required to support an application for an asthma TUE must include the following details:

– A complete medical history as described and clinical examination with specific focus on the respiratory system;

– A spirometry report with flow volume curve;

– If airway obstruction is present, the spirometry will be repeated after inhalation of a short-acting beta-2 agonist to demonstrate the reversibility of bronchoconstriction;

– In the absence of reversible airway obstruction, a bronchial provocation test is required to establish the presence of airway hyperresponsiveness;

– Exact name, speciality and contact details of examining physician;

– If the athlete reapplies for a TUE that has expired, the application should include the documents that confirm the initial diagnosis as well as the reports and pulmonary function tests from regular asthma follow-up visit.

http://www.velonews.com/2017/12/news/explainer-salbutamol-asthma-and-what-comes-next-for-froome_453676
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Prudhomme confident Froome will be resolved before TdF

Flat earth society better start drafting the "Froome the winner even though he's banned" memo ;)

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/apr/22/chris-fromme-salbutamol-case-tour-de-france

'Christian Prudhomme, the Tour de France organiser, says he is confident that Chris Froome’s salbutamol case will be resolved one way or another before this year’s race starting on 7 July. Speaking before the start of the Liège-Bastogne-Liège Classic, Prudhomme said: “I have said since December that we need a rapid solution. The statements of the president of the UCI indicate that there will certainly be an answer before the Tour de France. I have absolute confidence in the UCI to do that." '
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
"Meanwhile, sources in Italy have indicated the Giro organisers do not feel it is likely that a ruling will be made on the Froome case while the race is actually in progress."
 
Re:

Wiggo's Package said:
"Meanwhile, sources in Italy have indicated the Giro organisers do not feel it is likely that a ruling will be made on the Froome case while the race is actually in progress."
Great news, WP; thanks for that.

Vegni must be breathing a sigh of relief. He knows on which side his bread is buttered. He doesn't want to bring his race into disrepute with some mid race fiasco.

Ride on!
 
Re: Re:

Alpe73 said:
Wiggo's Package said:
"Meanwhile, sources in Italy have indicated the Giro organisers do not feel it is likely that a ruling will be made on the Froome case while the race is actually in progress."
Great news, WP; thanks for that.

Vegni must be breathing a sigh of relief. He knows on which side his bread is buttered. He doesn't want to bring his race into disrepute with some mid race fiasco.

Ride on!
...every day our hapless hero rides is a fiasco
 
Re: Re:

gillan1969 said:
Alpe73 said:
Wiggo's Package said:
"Meanwhile, sources in Italy have indicated the Giro organisers do not feel it is likely that a ruling will be made on the Froome case while the race is actually in progress."
Great news, WP; thanks for that.

Vegni must be breathing a sigh of relief. He knows on which side his bread is buttered. He doesn't want to bring his race into disrepute with some mid race fiasco.

Ride on!
...every day our hapless hero rides is a fiasco
No worries, mate; you'll get used it.
 
It’s not really news that Prudhomme thinks that Froome’s case will be settled before the TDF. I share that belief, but it’s just an opinion, and nothing I’m aware of that’s happened recently makes that opinion more likely to be true than it was since, say, February, when the involvement of the Tribunal was announced. It would be news if someone directly involved in the case, particularly Haas, said it would be settled by the Tour.

And of course there will almost definitely be no announcement during the Giro. If Haas comes to his decision during that period, I expect him to wait till after the race is over, rather than disrupt it with the announcement of a ban which would mean Froome would have to be pulled immediately. Even if Froome is exonerated—which I very much doubt—I don’t think it would be announced during the Giro. Though it would instantly reassure everyone that his results would count, the news would dominate discussion. Instead of talking about Froome’s performance and his position in the race, everything would be about the decision: there would be calls for him to publish the case, and many would argue that the decision was a sham, all the more so if Froome as likely said he had no plans to publish the decision. No matter whether he did or didn’t, there’s no way that discussion of the decision wouldn’t go on for weeks. So on the whole, I don’t see how the public reaction even to exoneration would not detract from the race.

At this point, I expect a decision in the middle of June. It can’t come right after the Giro, or people will definitely believe it was purposely delayed till then. And if Froome is given a proactive ban, which seems likely, delaying the decision until after the Giro would definitely be perceived as favoritism, since his results would then stand. Assuming it is a proactive ban, the decision has to come long enough after the Giro so that it appears that it couldn’t have been reached during that race.

For just that reason, the least controversial ban would be a retroactive one, say nine months, that ended in June. It would mean any results would be stripped, and since Froome very likely will at least podium if not win the Giro, Vegni and co. would not be happy. But at least Froome would lose the results, and there would be no talk of how the timing of the decision favored him.
 
Re: Re:

Alpe73 said:
gillan1969 said:
Alpe73 said:
Wiggo's Package said:
"Meanwhile, sources in Italy have indicated the Giro organisers do not feel it is likely that a ruling will be made on the Froome case while the race is actually in progress."
Great news, WP; thanks for that.

Vegni must be breathing a sigh of relief. He knows on which side his bread is buttered. He doesn't want to bring his race into disrepute with some mid race fiasco.

Ride on!
...every day our hapless hero rides is a fiasco
No worries, mate; you'll get used it.
at least the new fiascos are better than previous.....ungainly 200rpm seated attacks easily countered are how I'd like to remember him :)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY