Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[thehog]

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2013/07/froomes-non-published-tdf-power-output-noise-for-people-who-are-pseudoscientists/


A tailwind tiger. Pretty stupid comment, power is power.

Yes. Thank-you. If you contrast with his summary of Contador on Verbier you'll see (or read) the tone. Although he references the distance he doesn't appear to understand that a shorter climb will produce higher numbers. Similarly to Horner on the short climbs of the Vuelta.

Problem being as Tucker is English speaking he gets quoted and re-quoted by the mob.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Yes. Thank-you. If you contrast with his summary of Contador on Verbier you'll see (or read) the tone. Although he references the distance he doesn't appear to understand that a shorter climb will produce higher numbers. Similarly to Horner on the short climbs of the Vuelta.

Problem being as Tucker is English speaking he gets quoted and re-quoted by the mob.

http://www.sportsscientists.com/thread/tour-de-france-analysis/

His analysis looks more like a preview to me.

 

[DirtyWorks]

So 6.2 for 30' is dirty, but 7.0 for 28' is possible clean?

Does that mean that if a rider climbs Alpe d'Huez under 30 minutes, one cannot conclude anything from it???

Remember, the obsession with W/kilo is within a grand tour. So a rider will have so many hours in their legs with more to come while climbing mountains used to generate power data estimates. That's the context for Ferrari and Dr. Tucker's estimates in performance.

Almost 7.0 outside a grand tour for ~25 minutes certainly seems possible, even on "pan y aqua."

Plenty of more knowledgeable quants participating here, so if I'm wrong, please correct me.

 

[Merckx index]

Not really. Just his tone. He's good and all but his writing styled pre-determines the Spanish are dopers (which they are) and provides benefit of the doubt for others. Is more conservative.

Let me dig up some examples otherwise it will be fingernails down a blackboard stuff on this forum

Ah, it’s his tone. I suppose if I say 2 + 2 = 4, but say it in the wrong tone, you will disagree with my conclusion?

A tailwind tiger. Pretty stupid comment, power is power.

The phrase in this passage “historical comparisons” indicates that he’s talking about comparing power meter data—which usually do not need to take into account wind (some versions do)—with older power values that were determined by times up climbs, where wind can be significant. But the passage could have made that a little clearer, I agree.

Remember, the obsession with W/kilo is within a grand tour. So a rider will have so many hours in their legs with more to come while climbing mountains used to generate power data estimates. That's the context for Ferrari and Dr. Tucker's estimates in performance.

Almost 7.0 outside a grand tour for ~25 minutes certainly seems possible, even on "pan y aqua."

Plenty of more knowledgeable quants participating here, so if I'm wrong, please correct me.

Well, sure, it’s harder to put up some power value later in a GT, but that’s irrelevant to curves that show power values given certain values for V02max, efficiency and lactate threshold. Such curves show what’s possible under any conditions, starting with V02max measured in a laboratory. So no, 7.0 watts/kg for 25 minutes should be impossible under any conditions.

 

[Ferminal]

I'm not a fan of Tucker. He's horribly biased. But he does do good work. There is good method to his approach. He treats cyclists from the Mediterranean much differently than his Anglo friends.

Rubbish, he offers little commentary and keeps things very factual. It is a "scientific" approach not to push one argument too far unless what you're presenting is conclusive. You can of course make it conclusive if you include a qualitative analysis but that's not his expertise, it's up to others to work that out for themselves.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

"I remember when we recruited Chris Froome," said Sunderland of the 2013 Tour winner. "We could all see potential was there during testing, but no one could say that they put their hand up and knew he was going to win the Tour de France, I didn't hear anyone say that from the bottom of the organisation to the top. No one knew his full potential."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/orica-greenedge-building-toward-being-grand-tour-contenders

So not necessarily VO2max testing, but there was some testing going on. Be interesting to compare that original testing by the team with what he's putting out now...

 

[gillan1969]

So not necessarily VO2max testing, but there was some testing going on. Be interesting to compare that original testing by the team with what he's putting out now...

yup...I've showed potential as well....Froome on the other hand was off the scale......I'm very surprised that never showed up in the tests

 

[Race Radio]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-2637642/CHRIS-FROOME-EXCLUSIVE-Who-needs-drugs-I-mountains-fuelled-espresso.html

Oh, you guys are going to love this

he enjoys nothing more than catching dinner and delivering it, all Tarzan-like, to his fiancee Michelle.

‘I just thought, I’m going to do things my way. I didn’t want to be like this guy or that guy, who’s tested positive.’

‘It does sap away at you,’ he says. ‘Especially when you are answering the same questions on a daily basis. I can only speak for myself but I do know the mentality has changed in the peloton. It (doping) is not tolerated. Guys are getting angry, and it is not acceptable on any level.
‘I’m sure more questions will come up and it’s a tricky one because how do you show people you are innocent? I can only tell it from my perspective and say that I’m clean and that I work hard for it.’

the whole objective of all our training is to get the numbers as high as possible. And yet once we do that, we are accused of doping.
‘At some point, people have to realise that the sport is progressing. Our training techniques are getting better. Nutrition is getting better. Our equipment is getting better. The numbers should therefore be getting better.

it’s got to be impossible to slip through the cracks of the anti-doping system — the way it is at the moment. With blood passports, with out-of-competition controls that weren’t around to the same level previously, it’s really difficult.
‘Last year alone, it was over 50 tests for me,

 

[hrotha]

That's just sad.

By the way, didn't Rogers just say he was welcome back with open arms? Even admitting his clen was probably due to contamination, he's still an unrepentant doper. And of course, the tests have only got worse the last couple of years.

 

[Miburo]

Is that an old Armstrong interview?

 

[GuyIncognito]

the whole objective of all our training is to get the numbers as high as possible. And yet once we do that, we are accused of doping.

He's right. Why should we accuse Pourseyedi of doping just because he put out over 7w/kg on Mount Fuji yesterday? I'm sure he worked very hard for those numbers!

 

[Walkman]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-2637642/CHRIS-FROOME-EXCLUSIVE-Who-needs-drugs-I-mountains-fuelled-espresso.html

the whole objective of all our training is to get the numbers as high as possible. And yet once we do that, we are accused of doping.‘At some point, people have to realise that the sport is progressing. Our training techniques are getting better. Nutrition is getting better. Our equipment is getting better. The numbers should therefore be getting better.

I don't really get this. He is right after all. Increased knowledge of how the body works gives you an advantage over past generations (excluding doping) since you can optimize your training regime. I get that people may not trust the guy, but in my opinion, this is not something he should be flamed for saying.

Unless you feel like he is hiding behind this because it's not going to give you +1 w/kg anytime soon.

it’s got to be impossible to slip through the cracks of the anti-doping system — the way it is at the moment. With blood passports, with out-of-competition controls that weren’t around to the same level previously, it’s really difficult.
‘Last year alone, it was over 50 tests for me,

This is what's bugs me. Remember what Rasmussen said about the 2007 Tour. He drove a freaking freight train right through the anti-doping net. Sure that's 7 years ago, but how much have really changed since then?

 

[Benotti69]

Froome: "Last year alone, it was over 50 tests for me"

He forgot never tested positive.

Doesn't matter if he was tested 365 if he is doing stuff that cannot be picked up by tests!

Testing has always been years behind the dopers.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

The beauty of that 'trainingregime' is it can make the domestique of Morris Possoni at the Brixia Tour a GT winner in 8 weeks. It of course was a weak field.

But lets do a numbers check here.
Brixia Tour 2011 ends 24th of july.
Tour de Pologne, where the Froomster really shone with a beautifull 85th place, started 31st of july, seven days later. How many 'supertrainingsregime' days did he have there? Four? Five?

Tour de Pologne ended the sixth of august 2011, la Vuelta started the 20th of august, thats fourteen days. How many 'supertrainingsregime' days did he have to do inbetween? Ten?

So, we are to believe a - relatively speaking of course - packfodder domestique without a contract for the upcoming season trains four fourteen days and is then defacto the winner of the Vuelta d'Espagna?

Of course that is possible, just like Santa Claus not being a fairytale.

Mmmmmh, tailwind or???

 

[shades1]

He forgot never tested positive.

Doesn't matter if he was tested 365 if he is doing stuff that cannot be picked up by tests!

Testing has always been years behind the dopers.

if he is doing stuff that cannot be detected then the whole peloton are on it as well , singling out froome is ridiculous just because he is number one , it would be no different to the EPO era .

 

[Benotti69]

if he is doing stuff that cannot be detected then the whole peloton are on it as well , singling out froome is ridiculous just because he is number one , it would be no different to the EPO era .

This is the Froome thread.

Yes, i believe most if not all of the peloton are on stuff that is not being tested for during races and mixing their doping during training.

It was ever thus.

 

[Granville57]

if he is doing stuff that cannot be detected then the whole peloton are on it as well

You do realize that that's Benotti69 who you are responding to?

He's not likely to disagree on your assertion.


[edit]
Beaten to the punch!

 

[hrotha]

Benotti's point of view aside, what's with the implied notion that Froome would only be doping if everyone else was too? Is he, like, a natural bastion of integrity?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

‘At some point, people have to realise that the sport is progressing. Our training techniques are getting better. Nutrition is getting better. Our equipment is getting better. The numbers should therefore be getting better.

He still hasn't learnt anything in the last two years, clearly.

During the 2012 Tour he tweeted to say fans had to get it into their heads that performances like his were possible clean. One of the Podium Café editors tweeted him back to say cyclists had to get it into their heads that 25 years of colleagues cheating robbed them of fans with blind faith. Yet he's still parroting the same lines.

Also, of course, while nutrition and sports science does improve, and can improve people's results and performance levels without doping, sure, we're not talking somebody who's made progression; we're talking somebody who one day was looking at losing his contract and taking a bottom level domestique salary at Lampre, and who the next day was close to being the best cyclist in the world. There are problems with this. Does this mean that he was straight up ignoring all the progress and nutrition and so on until that date, then suddenly it clicked and he became awesome? And also, don't we know that Froome hadn't been in a wind tunnel until 2013, which is one of the best known and most common sports science improvement methods, because of the gains better aerodynamics can make you, especially in the contre-le-montre?

 

[roundabout]

Benotti's point of view aside, what's with the implied notion that Froome would only be doping if everyone else was too? Is he, like, a natural bastion of integrity?

where did you get all that from?

 

[Netserk]

where did you get all that from?

I think it was a response to this post:

if he is doing stuff that cannot be detected then the whole peloton are on it as well , singling out froome is ridiculous just because he is number one , it would be no different to the EPO era .

 

[roundabout]

And it would not be how I would read that post

 

[Afrank]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-2637642/CHRIS-FROOME-EXCLUSIVE-Who-needs-drugs-I-mountains-fuelled-espresso.html

Oh, you guys are going to love this

Great, now I have vomit all over my keyboard. Talk about a puff piece.

 

[Nathan12]

He always opens these interviews with that weird harpooning anecdote. Just an observation.

 

[thehog]

Of course that is possible, just like Santa Claus not being a fairytale.

Mmmmmh, tailwind or???

The British flag to Froome's left has been sprayed with anti-tailwind solution as its flying in the other direction. It may look like a side, headwind but its really a tailwind