Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[BYOP88]

it says that you should subtract 5% from your 20 minute effort to get your FTP. Do you disagree with that? If so, why?

Because it makes his boy Froome look bad. I'm sure if those numbers made Froome look believable he'd agree with the system.

 

[RownhamHill]

Adding a bit more analysis: Mid-season, 2011, Froome improved his time trial speed by an average of (6.4-1.7 = 4.7) 4.7 seconds per kilometer as compared to his rivals. If he normally rides at ~50 km/hr (3600 seconds / 50 km = 72 seconds/km), then 4.7 s/km represents a 4.7/72 x 100% = 6.5% improvement in speed.

Put into perspective, this is roughly equivalent to a change in power of (1.065)^3 = 1.20, or 20%. Let that sink in. He improved his power output by an average of 20%...

Donkey to racehorse, indeed.

John Swanson

Sorry not sure your logic follows perfectly there - he improved his time trial speed compared to his rivals, but your data is silent on whether that is because Froome sped up, or his rivals slowed down (or a combination of both). You're assuming it was all down to Froome improving his speed - and hence extrapolating the equivalence to a 20% rise in power, but if you made a different assumption - the pack slowed down - then it could be down to a 0% rise in power, no?

I don't actually think that second case is true by the way, just pointing out it's a conclusion that the data you've presented supports in equal measure to the conclusion you've drawn. I know every time trial is different, but is the sample big enough to compare Froome's average speeds in absolute terms over time?

 

[the sceptic]

Because it makes his boy Froome look bad. I'm sure if those numbers made Froome look believable he'd agree with the system.

yes 6.0w/kg was the holy grail of all sky fans in 2012. Funny how it has now become pseudo-science.

 

[EnacheV]

yes 6.0w/kg was the holy grail of all sky fans in 2012. Funny how it has now become pseudo-science.

For me it was always pseudo science. That's why nobody gets banned based on those numbers.

And pretending that you don't understand that i don't contest the numbers (except if its a troll like Vayer) but the interpretations of what cause those numbers it's pretty funny.

 

[roundabout]

He only just nudged Wiggins in the 2011 Vuelta TT. But that Wiggins was slightly underpowered due to injury. Wiggins is doing around 450W in a TT, and they are roughly the same shape / weight, so m^2 frontal area may be in the ballpark also.

What gets me is Froome's aero has not even been checked in the wind tunnel. :?

I think the years in the pursuit position give Wiggins an advantage in generating power in the TT, where clearly Froome climbs better, but yes, their power is probably around the same: 440-450W.

Froome did 406 watts in that TT. Seemed a tad low, but that what it says

http://www.trainingpeaks.com/av/Z3JDD63H2UVGP77YSXNITPULAE

 

[EnacheV]

Froome did 406 watts in that TT. Seemed a tad low, but that what it says

http://www.trainingpeaks.com/av/Z3JDD63H2UVGP77YSXNITPULAE

lol

so superhuman

i guess few posters here just make up random numbers to fit their beliefs ?

edit: i see was pretty hot that day. it seems he puts up good performances in hot weather.

 

[the sceptic]

lol

so superhuman

did you already forget that you dont believe in numbers and that its all pseudo-science to you?

 

[roundabout]

Well, that was the beta version of Froome 2.0. There's ample reason to suggest that he has improved since then.

 

[Catwhoorg]

2013 Tour stage 11: 33 km (similar sort of profile, not identical but fairly close)
Loses 12 secs to Tony Martin

Scale it to the same distance (linearly) that's 18 secs compared to the 59 secs over 48 km in the Vuelta 2011.


The difference between Froome and Tony gets (very roughly) ~1 sec/km narrower between 2011 and 2013.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

http://www.kurtkinetic.com/test-training-zones-i-50-l-en.html

Think you're d1cking me around again. Where does your link provide the basis for

Originally Posted by the sceptic
6.7 - 5% is 6,3w/kg.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

2013 Tour stage 11: 33 km (similar sort of profile, not identical but fairly close)
Loses 12 secs to Tony Martin

Scale it to the same distance (linearly) that's 18 secs compared to the 59 secs over 48 km in the Vuelta 2011.


The difference between Froome and Tony gets (very roughly) ~1 sec/km narrower between 2011 and 2013.

Tony Martin prepared for his showdown with Froome in hospital after stage 1. Maybe this had something to do with Martin's 2013 ride?

 

[the sceptic]

Think you're d1cking me around again. Where does your link provide the basis for

you want a link to my calculator?

 

[Ventoux Boar]

you want a link to my calculator?

I see. Looks like you're repeating someones made up numbers. Fair enough. Forgive me if I don't take your word for it.

 

[Catwhoorg]

True on Tony.
Stage 1 last year was just nasty in terms of injuries. I really hope the same situation doesn't occur on the road to Harrogate. The same sort of pressure on the sprinters teams will be there.

Out of the 2011 Vuelta top 10, those are the only 2 we can directly compare in the 2103 tour top 10. Much lower and any comparison is hopelessly invalid as really trying versus coasting comes into play.

Maybe the other comparison would be Mollema. 2013 33 km 2:05 from Tony (1:53 from Froome). 2011 48 km 3.09 from Tony (2:10 from Froome) .
(6th and 4th on the GC so trying hard in each case, but obviously not quite the same level of ITT performer)

Scale the 2013 time to 48 km (2:44), and Froome gets a under 1 sec/km faster than Mollema.

 

[The Hitch]

2013 Tour stage 11: 33 km (similar sort of profile, not identical but fairly close)
Loses 12 secs to Tony Martin

Scale it to the same distance (linearly) that's 18 secs compared to the 59 secs over 48 km in the Vuelta 2011.


The difference between Froome and Tony gets (very roughly) ~1 sec/km narrower between 2011 and 2013.

IIRC the wind turned for the gc guys giving them a headwind.

 

[the sceptic]

I see. Looks like you're repeating someones made up numbers. Fair enough. Forgive me if I don't take your word for it.

VN: Some have suggested that your power calculations are off, that they are founded on incomplete information, or that they are overly simplistic. How do you respond to that?
AAV: They are accurate. There are many people making these calculations across the world, and we all come to a similar conclusion. I also have friends within the peloton, riders who have reached out to me, and who help me with my calculations. For example, to calculate Froome’s numbers in Oman, a rider who finished very close to him gave us his power meter files. So that way, we can make direct and indirect calculations.

VN: But there must be some margin of error?
AV: They are very accurate. They can be off by one percent. People who say that our numbers are off do not understand what we are doing, or they say it to make us lose credibility. The calculations are accurate. Believe me, I would love to see a Tour raced at 10 watts less. That would be a fantastic Tour!

If you think Vayer are pulling those numbers out of thin air then you are wrong.

 

[Catwhoorg]

IIRC the wind turned for the gc guys giving them a headwind.

Grrrrr


I guess that shows how hard it is to make these comparisons.

 

[Mellow Velo]

If you think Vayer are pulling those numbers out of thin air then you are wrong.

I going to break my duck here, because for once the debate is about something tangible.

That does say 6.7w/kg for 9 minutes, right?
Presumably from when Froome attacked, to the top?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that really so not normal?

I ask for a reason.
Here are some other numbers, not guesstimated, but direct from source, from that same stage and climb.

Leopold König ‏@LeopoldKonig · 5h
Flat tyre at the bottom of Green Mountain? Did 7watts/kg to chase back for 10mins and suddenly I saw 3km to go)#badluck#perfectteam

https://twitter.com/LeopoldKonig

Why hasn't Vayer commented or used these figures to get his message across, assuming he isn't working to an agenda?

 

[webbie146]

I going to break my duck here, because for once the debate is about something tangible.

That does say 6.7w/kg for 9 minutes, right?
Presumably from when Froome attacked, to the top?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that really so not normal?

I ask for a reason.
Here are some other numbers, not guesstimated, but direct from source, from that same stage and climb.

Leopold König ‏@LeopoldKonig · 5h
Flat tyre at the bottom of Green Mountain? Did 7watts/kg to chase back for 10mins and suddenly I saw 3km to go)#badluck#perfectteam

https://twitter.com/LeopoldKonig

Why hasn't Vayer commented or used these figures to get his message across, assuming he isn't working to an agenda?

6.7watts/kg is the average power output for the whole climb.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

a rider who finished very close to him gave us his power meter files

But not close enough to trigger the red alert? Maybe just amber then.

Any peer reviewed science behind Vayer's thresholds? It's not normal for scientists to burnish their objectivity by bellowing like George Galloway.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Re-posting here as it seems more appropriate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everyone is talking about Froome, so I thought I'd head on over to http://www.procyclingstats.com to do a bit of analysis. I started with the premise that ITT results are usually a good indicator of a rider's capabilities. So I took all the ITT results from 2007 to 2014 and put them into a spreadsheet. I excluded short prologues and races like Commonwealth games where the field is artificially restricted.

Using that data, I calculated two things. First was how many seconds per kilometer he lagged by in each race. The second was his relative ranking. I.e., if he placed 20th out of 200 racers, that gives him a 20/200 = top 10% of riders ranking. To say that I was shocked by the results is a vast understatement. Please check out the following:

From 2007 to Romandie, 2011:
Froome lost by an average 6.4 seconds/km and had an average placing of 27.6%. His best performance during that time was a loss of 3.3 s/km and 11% ranking.

From Tour de Suisse, 2011 to present:
Froome lost by an average 1.7 seconds/km and had an average placing of 4.7%. Excluding a single bad performance in Romandie (2012), his worst performance during that period was a loss of 1.9 s/km and a ranking of 6.5%. (!!!)

I'll post the raw numbers in a bit. But until then... Wow. Just wow.

John Swanson

Raw data:
2007 - 2011 (Romandie)

Loss per km (s) Placing (%)

3.4 11.0%
3.8 18.8%
4.0 18.9%
5.4 18.3%
7.1 60.7%
3.3 11.0%
17.5 25.3%
9.8 60.2%
4.1 16.8%
5.2 35.5%
6.4 27.6%

2011 TdS to Present

1.9 6.5%
1.5 1.1%
1.0 1.6%
1.5 1.3%
0.9 1.1%
1.7 3.5%
6.2 29.3%
0.0 0.6%
0.4 1.1%
1.6 1.7%
1.8 2.6%
1.7 5.6%
1.7 4.7%


Anyone else see a difference!? Holy transformation.

John Swanson

Adding a bit more analysis: Mid-season, 2011, Froome improved his time trial speed by an average of (6.4-1.7 = 4.7) 4.7 seconds per kilometer as compared to his rivals. If he normally rides at ~50 km/hr (3600 seconds / 50 km = 72 seconds/km), then 4.7 s/km represents a 4.7/72 x 100% = 6.5% improvement in speed.

Put into perspective, this is roughly equivalent to a change in power of (1.065)^3 = 1.20, or 20%. Let that sink in. He improved his power output by an average of 20%...

Donkey to racehorse, indeed.

John Swanson

Science is indeed cool, thanks for bothering John.

 

[Mellow Velo]

6.7watts/kg is the average power output for the whole climb.

That's why I asked.
In that tweet he specified 9 minutes, which seemed to relate to his power calculation. Otherwise why mention it, what does it signify?
(hence my assumption that it was from the start of attack to the finish)

In a follow up tweet he gave the climb time of 18 and a half minutes,
but didn't related it to his 6.7w/kg figure.

Has he clarified this figure in interview?
Much appreciated if there is a link.

 

[jens_attacks]

I going to break my duck here, because for once the debate is about something tangible.

That does say 6.7w/kg for 9 minutes, right?
Presumably from when Froome attacked, to the top?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that really so not normal?

I ask for a reason.
Here are some other numbers, not guesstimated, but direct from source, from that same stage and climb.

Leopold König ‏@LeopoldKonig · 5h
Flat tyre at the bottom of Green Mountain? Did 7watts/kg to chase back for 10mins and suddenly I saw 3km to go)#badluck#perfectteam

https://twitter.com/LeopoldKonig

Why hasn't Vayer commented or used these figures to get his message across, assuming he isn't working to an agenda?

6,7 for 18 minutes, i don't find it so tremendous. the thing is well we are only in february. i think for the caliber of the rider which froomey is, he can go 7 w/kg + for 20 minutes in july. like contador did on verbier

papy peraud did something like 6,6 w/kg on faron this year for the same period of time as chris. so why a tdf champ can't do even better?


can you blame a rider because he goes fast? no you can't. he's not even paid by our money like the politicians we choose. that's his job to go from point a to point b as fast as possible. my only wish is that he will do that without dropping dead after. that's why i think health officials should be named instead of anti-doping in all the races.

 

[del1962]

6.7watts/kg is the average power output for the whole climb.

I thought Vetooo estimated as 6.5 - 6.6 w/kg

 

[webbie146]

That's why I asked.
In that tweet he specified 9 minutes, which seemed to relate to his power calculation. Otherwise why mention it, what does it signify?
(hence my assumption that it was from the start of attack to the finish)

In a follow up tweet he gave the climb time of 18 and a half minutes,
but didn't related it to his 6.7w/kg figure.

Has he clarified this figure in interview?
Much appreciated if there is a link.

Ah I see what u mean now. It might have been calculated from the point of attack, but I doubt that. 6.7 for 9 min is not that out the world.

6,7 for 18 minutes, i don't find it so tremendous. the thing is well we are only in february. i think for the caliber of the rider which froomey is, he can go 7 w/kg + for 20 minutes in july. like contador did on verbier

papy peraud did something like 6,6 w/kg on faron this year for the same period of time as chris. so why a tdf champ can't do even better?


can you blame a rider because he goes fast? no you can't. he's not even paid by our money like the politicians we choose. that's his job to go from point a to point b as fast as possible. my only wish is that he will do that without dropping dead after. that's why i think health officials should be named instead of anti-doping in all the races.

Yea Froome did around 6.6/6.7kg for around 40 min on the Madone just before the tdf