Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[doolols]

It definitely looked like the blue salbutamol inhaler as he lifts it to his mouth, and his index finger is on the top of the inhaler, which is how you would use it in that situation.

But, since it has been mentioned before, and since it looks like EIA (coughing), and since it's allowed in the rules, maybe we should move on? (Edit: and since it has no effect on performance)

 

[doolols]

Oh, and since (at the time) Sky were at the front of the peloton, there is a camera moto positioned there permanently, so he wouldn't know whether he was on camera or not.

And are we sure that Tweet from Michelle Cound is actually true? These 'screenshots' can be faked. I'm sure I saw some phone texts from a dog the other day.

 

[bewildered]

Surely if Froome has asthma we would have seen him use an inhaler before now?

I don't accept the business insider article claiming he pulled out of the USA Pro Challenge 2013 due to asthma.

i am going to post this article again as it seems to have been missed. http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/aug/26/chris-froome-us-pro-challenge-illness

'feeling ill' and 'a bit under the weather' (Direct quotes from Dan Hunt, team Sky sporting director) does not mean asthma imo

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

When Froome is out of the saddle, attacking, I'd give it at least 20% savings for anyone on his wheel. The speed and the added draft of a standing rider more than make up for the gradient.

And they were not going that slow when they were pushing it.

20% does feel rather high, except maybe for very short uphill sprints.

If I recall Chris Boardman's explanations during the Tour coverage correctly, then at TT speed, 80%-90% of the energy expended is to overcome air resistance. This is at ~50kmh. On a typical alpine climb, horizontal speed is in the low 20s kmh (say ~25kmh), so the air resistance factor is reduced to (25/50)^3 = 1/8, ie approx 10% of total power generated.

Thus, there's simply not enough air resistance in play vs gravity to give much of a saving from drafting on a typical alpine climb.

I'd have thought the major benefit to a rival from Froome's surges would simply be that it's an inefficient way to go uphill, thus reducing any performance advantage that Froome may have.

 

[JimmyFingers]

If it was an inhaler its legal, unless he has more than 16 puffs, no TUE required, and lets not go down the route of speculating it was xenon, that's just daft. Riders aren't doping mid-race when there are cameras everywhere, not just the motos, but spectators also.

 

[red_flanders]

Exactly, Armstrong had only to beat Zulle. On the way to Sestriere he attacked once and got away immediately. Slightly overestimated himself to Piau-Engaly, but you know that I'm sure.
And I've watched just about every bike race that's televised since I'm 5 years old, to clear that up.

@flanders, what's wrong with at least once trying to wave Contador through, you see this sort of stuff happen almost everyday. It was worth a try, and he didn't insist on it. and yes he was leader before the stage by a mindblowing 8 seconds, there's no reason at all of course to try and increase that gap.

I'm not trying to portray Froome as a master-tactician here, far from it, I've seen Alpe d'Huez last year too. But again I simply fail to see how that was so bad yesterday, if he had continued pulling Contador at full speed after his first attack only to risk running into a counter at some point, now that would've been bad.

He had just attacked him really hard, dropped everyone else, turned around and saw to his dismay that AC was still there. Why on earth would anyone pull through in that situation? You see, sitting on the front means you can't see the attacks coming. That's why it's really really dumb to sit on the front in a small group and tow people. You're asking to be attacked.

You see people ask others to pull through when there is some possibility of them having a reason to work together. None existed in this case. Dumb or arrogant or both, I can't quite say. I'm going with both.

As for the rest, already explained.

 

[red_flanders]

Exactly, Armstrong had only to beat Zulle. On the way to Sestriere he attacked once and got away immediately. Slightly overestimated himself to Piau-Engaly, but you know that I'm sure.
And I've watched just about every bike race that's televised since I'm 5 years old, to clear that up.

@flanders, what's wrong with at least once trying to wave Contador through, you see this sort of stuff happen almost everyday. It was worth a try, and he didn't insist on it. and yes he was leader before the stage by a mindblowing 8 seconds, there's no reason at all of course to try and increase that gap.

I'm not trying to portray Froome as a master-tactician here, far from it, I've seen Alpe d'Huez last year too. But again I simply fail to see how that was so bad yesterday, if he had continued pulling Contador at full speed after his first attack only to risk running into a counter at some point, now that would've been bad.

He had just attacked him, dropped everyone else, turned around and saw to his dismay that AC was still there. Why on earth would anyone pull through in that situation? You don't go to the front and wait for someone to attack you again from behind. Unless you're Froome.

It shows he is utterly clueless about race tactics.

As for the rest, already explained.

 

[doolols]

He had just attacked him really hard, dropped everyone else, turned around and saw to his dismay that AC was still there. Why on earth would anyone pull through in that situation?

Because they'd dropped Nibali, and he might have thought Contador would want to make sure Nibs stayed behind?

Really, there's so much anti-Froome rhetoric on here. According to the clinic, everything he does is wrong, can't work, shouldn't work, it's now it's done, etc etc - except he seems to keep winning. Strange that.

 

[MartinGT]

A rather mixed statement here

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/froome-sky-respond-inhaler-video-125751

 

[red_flanders]

Because they'd dropped Nibali, and he might have thought Contador would want to make sure Nibs stayed behind?

Really, there's so much anti-Froome rhetoric on here. According to the clinic, everything he does is wrong, can't work, shouldn't work, it's now it's done, etc etc - except he seems to keep winning. Strange that.

Don't be ridiculous. You don't come around 3 seconds after some guy who has been pounding you in the mountains for the last couple of years just attacked you with all he had.

He does what he does. Sorry it's so dumb, but really it's not the clinic's fault. Stop the whining.

 

[MartinGT]

The team said that Froome’s medicine is approved by cycling’s governing body, the UCI, and does not require a TUE

BUT

Many athletes have TUEs for salbutamol due to exercise enduced asthma

 

[Dear Wiggo]

You see people ask others to pull through when there is some possibility of them having a reason to work together. None existed in this case. Dumb or arrogant or both, I can't quite say. I'm going with both.

Froome's subsequent Cat 4 racing up the climb proved that it was no head game attempt - he simply does not know how to race a bike efficiently or intelligently. I am going with dumb.

If you have the biggest hammer, just hit things as hard as you can.

 

[Netserk]

With a hammer like Froome's, every problem is a nail.

 

[deValtos]

Why is his medicine approved without a TUE ?

Isn't that exactly what a TUE is supposed to be for ...

Or is it not a banned substance ? Just medicine ?

 

[thirteen]

Cycling Weekly has this:

Sky's leader was filmed puffing on an asthma inhaler during stage two of the Criterium du Dauphine
- Twitter storm after gif file was circulated
- Partner Michelle Cound responds to #trolls

at least Sky has finally said something...

 

[MartinGT]

Cycling Weekly has this:


at least Sky has finally said something...

Aye because we know that its gospel once they speak.

 

[doolols]

Stop the whining.

Sorry. I didn't realise that yours is the only opinion allowed on here. Fairly typical of the rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth, anti-Froome brigade. Don't discuss the post, attempt to ridicule the poster. I get it.

 

[lllludo]

Riders aren't doping mid-race when there are cameras everywhere, not just the motos, but spectators also.

Some riders drank energizers (stronger than 2 expresso+ honey), took pills or did inject themselves at the end of races, some riders did the same at the finish in the middle of journalists, just before antidoping controls.
Read books. Everything is possible.

 

[zigmeister]

BUT

Stupid article...contradicts itself...a simple read of the WADA code is in order for people.

Why is his medicine approved without a TUE ?

Isn't that exactly what a TUE is supposed to be for ...

Or is it not a banned substance ? Just medicine ?

See above, not sure why people are so lazy and don't know how to Google. No TUE is required.


"S3. BETA-2 AGONISTS
All beta-2 agonists, including all optical isomers (e.g. d- and l-) where relevant, are prohibited except inhaled salbutamol (maximum 1600 micrograms over 24 hours), inhaled formoterol (maximum delivered dose 54 micrograms over 24 hours) and salmeterol when taken by inhalation in accordance with the manufacturers’ recommended therapeutic regimen.
The 2014 Prohibited List
11 September 2013
5
The presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is presumed not to be an intended therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding unless the Athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of the use of the therapeutic inhaled dose up to the maximum indicated above."


Froome's performance is so over the top...who knows what is going on. But I just took a photo of one of my inhalers...so unusual for a cyclist to have asthma.

 

[thehog]

BUT

Better to have a TUE than not. In case you amp 17 puffs in a day, yes? That would make good sense.

That's zero tolerance for you.

And mental note for Walsh to add into the revised edition.

 

[red_flanders]

Why is his medicine approved without a TUE ?

Isn't that exactly what a TUE is supposed to be for ...

Or is it not a banned substance ? Just medicine ?

Because that particular asthma med taken at relatively low levels is said to have no performance enhancing effect.

 

[red_flanders]

Sorry. I didn't realise that yours is the only opinion allowed on here. Fairly typical of the rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth, anti-Froome brigade. Don't discuss the post, attempt to ridicule the poster. I get it.

I am happy to discuss tactics with you, and your opinion is of course at least as valid as mine.

However, when you start attacking the clinic as a whole for being "anti-Froom" it's off topic whining. That's just a fact.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Because that particular asthma med taken at relatively low levels is said to have no performance enhancing effect.

Slight refining, it has no performance enhancing effect in non-asthmatics.

For someone mid asthma attack, or when they feel a constriction starting, it can have a huge effect, by allowing the breathe normally.

 

[zigmeister]

I say this is complete BS...performance baseline is relative. We have discussed this in the PED thread.

If you can't even ride, and need some medicine, then are able to compete...I call that serious performance enhancement. From ZERO to, I am king of the mountain.

It might not improve performance for somebody that doesn't have asthma, and takes the medicine. But it certainly helps many to be able to compete. Same argument can be made for testosterone.



European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology
May 1996, Volume 73, Issue 3-4, pp 364-368

"Abstract:

The effect of salbutamol (S) on cycling performance was examined in 15 highly trained non-asthmatic male cyclists. A double-blind, randomized cross-over design was used with S or placebo (P) administered using a metered-dose inhaler and a spacer device 20 min before each testing session. The S dose was 400 μg (four puffs), which is twice the normal therapeutic level. Subjects were habituated to all the laboratory procedures in the week prior to actual data collection. The subjects performed four tests under S and P conditions on separate days over 2 weeks. These included measurement of maximal O2 uptake (V˙O2max) (cycle ergometry) with assessment of pulmonary function before and after, a submaximal (90% of ventilatory threshold) square-wave work transition from a base of unloaded cycling, a 60-s modified Wingate test, and a simulated 20 km time trial. No significant differences were observed in any of the dependent variables related to aerobic endurance or cycling performance between the S and P conditions. These results support other findings that an acute dose (400 μg) of S has no performance-enhancing properties."


I haven't been able to find a study where they do a baseline of asthmatics, then give them an inhaler, and test them again.

 

[red_flanders]

Slight refining, it has no performance enhancing effect in non-asthmatics.

For someone mid asthma attack, or when they feel a constriction starting, it can have a huge effect, by allowing the breathe normally.

Yes, of course. Good clarification.