Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

The rest points out your lack of actual understanding of aerodynamics bud. Feel free to refute.

Refute what? You have nothing.
...bud.

You didn't know (except I now told you) that pointy tailed helmets shouldn't be tipped up like that.

You said it made his head position look better. lolnope. I looked at it and thought - makes him less aero.

You've been spouting like you're the aerodynamics king here. Seems you've been found out yeah?

 

[Catwhoorg]

Re: Re:

https://youtu.be/GLQ05Zwm_Eg?t=12m41s

Noticeably smoother stroke even at significantly higher cadence than AC doing his side drop thing, and jerking the pedals at a lower cadence. Froomes power transfer is almost flawless here. Even when standing. Fact.

Plebs can't get over the upper body movement, and the meme lives on.

Almost flawless? Are you kidding? Elbows out; hips swaying; head swinging from side to side, looking down at his stem; poor hand position...he looks like a three-legged pig on a treadmill.

The only thing impressive about that, is that he made fools of people who could actually ride, while looking like a 50yr-old fat guy on a weekend ride.

Seriously, you're either trolling or you DKWTFYTA.

So you are saying I can expect a Team Sky call up in 2018 or so ?
Make the tour team the following year...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

https://youtu.be/GLQ05Zwm_Eg?t=12m41s

Noticeably smoother stroke even at significantly higher cadence than AC doing his side drop thing, and jerking the pedals at a lower cadence. Froomes power transfer is almost flawless here. Even when standing. Fact.

Plebs can't get over the upper body movement, and the meme lives on.

Almost flawless? Are you kidding? Elbows out; hips swaying; head swinging from side to side, looking down at his stem; poor hand position...he looks like a three-legged pig on a treadmill.

The only thing impressive about that, is that he made fools of people who could actually ride, while looking like a 50yr-old fat guy on a weekend ride.

Seriously, you're either trolling or you DKWTFYTA.

So you are saying I can expect a Team Sky call up in 2018 or so ?
Make the tour team the following year...

Depends how professional you're prepared to be...

Do you know how to wash your hands?

Do you know where your towel is?

Oh wait. Sorry, wrong science fiction story.

 

[Supimilian]

Re: Re:

The rest points out your lack of actual understanding of aerodynamics bud. Feel free to refute.

Refute what? You have nothing.
...bud.

You didn't know (except I now told you) that pointy tailed helmets shouldn't be tipped up like that.

You said it made his head position look better. lolnope. I looked at it and thought - makes him less aero.

You've been spouting like you're the aerodynamics king here. Seems you've been found out yeah?

When? This is hardly cutting edge stuff.

pointy tailed helmets shouldn't be tipped up like that.

Literally what?
Are you implying I ever claimed that you're supposed to point the helmet like that
It makes his torso appear more horizontal than it is when he puts his head down like that (it momentarily is, but it's obviously not a net gain overall). That was the point.

Why don't you tell us what you think is Froome's biggest clue to doping?

The same as 99% of people here think. The insane performance jump in 2011.

 

[Supimilian]

Re: Re:

https://youtu.be/GLQ05Zwm_Eg?t=12m41s

Noticeably smoother stroke even at significantly higher cadence than AC doing his side drop thing, and jerking the pedals at a lower cadence. Froomes power transfer is almost flawless here. Even when standing. Fact.

Plebs can't get over the upper body movement, and the meme lives on.

Almost flawless? Are you kidding? Elbows out; hips swaying; head swinging from side to side, looking down at his stem; poor hand position...he looks like a three-legged pig on a treadmill.

The only thing impressive about that, is that he made fools of people who could actually ride, while looking like a 50yr-old fat guy on a weekend ride.

Seriously, you're either trolling or you DKWTFYTA.

You are just making the same point.
Those are mostly irrelevant as long as he is comfortable enough and the power transfer is smooth. Talking "Hand position" as if it's a factor in and of itself when talking about pedaling efficiency...
And the watching of the stem. That's 5 Watts right there, am I right?
Embarrassing.

 

[Merckx index]

Re:

https://youtu.be/GLQ05Zwm_Eg?t=12m41s

Noticeably smoother stroke even at significantly higher cadence than AC doing his side drop thing, and jerking the pedals at a lower cadence. Froomes power transfer is almost flawless here. Even when standing. Fact.

Plebs can't get over the upper body movement, and the meme lives on.

You're comparing Froome seated vs. Contador standing, of course Contador moves around more. When they are both seated (e.g., around 14:15), Contador looks smoother to me (it's just an opinion, notice I don't pretend to be objective like you), and his elbows are not as far out as Froome's (I would call that much a fact). The reason Froome is at higher cadence is because when seated he can't push as high a gear as when standing. Also take a look at Froome nearer the end of the stage, when he starts to roll around more on his bike.

If you want to make the claim that Froome wastes less energy, you actually have to measure their energy output before and after transfer to the pedals. You really can't draw that conclusion just from watching them. E.g., while it's obviously true Contador moves more side to side while standing on his pedals, he may also transfer more energy to the pedals by not having his legs bent so severely as they are when in seated position, and by having the weight of his upper body, which is constantly in motion and therefore taking advantage of inertia, also transferred to the pedals. A seated position also generally transfers more load to the CV system, bringing in inefficiencies in blood flow into the picture.

I wouldn't pretend to answer this question about who is wasting more energy, but neither can you on the basis of what you've posted so far.

 

[Berzin]

The bickering between Dear Wiggo and Supimilian stops now. Any more posts where either of you two quote each other will be deleted.

 

[Supimilian]

Re: Re:

https://youtu.be/GLQ05Zwm_Eg?t=12m41s

Noticeably smoother stroke even at significantly higher cadence than AC doing his side drop thing, and jerking the pedals at a lower cadence. Froomes power transfer is almost flawless here. Even when standing. Fact.

Plebs can't get over the upper body movement, and the meme lives on.

You're comparing Froome seated vs. Contador standing, of course Contador moves around more. When they are both seated (e.g., around 14:15), Contador looks smoother to me (it's just an opinion, notice I don't pretend to be objective like you), and his elbows are not as far out as Froome's (I would call that much a fact). The reason Froome is at higher cadence is because when seated he can't push as high a gear as when standing. Also take a look at Froome nearer the end of the stage, when he starts to roll around more on his bike.

If you want to make the claim that Froome wastes less energy, you actually have to measure their energy output before and after transfer to the pedals. You really can't draw that conclusion just from watching them. E.g., while it's obviously true Contador moves more side to side while standing on his pedals, he may also transfer more energy to the pedals by not having his legs bent so severely as they are when in seated position, and by having the weight of his upper body, which is constantly in motion and therefore taking advantage of inertia, also transferred to the pedals. A seated position also generally transfers more load to the CV system, bringing in inefficiencies in blood flow into the picture.

I wouldn't pretend to answer this question about who is wasting more energy, but neither can you on the basis of what you've posted so far.

Standing more in itself is as good as always more demanding power wise. And he is smoother at the pedal the few times he is standing as well. Just admitting he isn't clearly inferior is a huge improvement from the delusions that he is terribly wasteful with the technique lol
And he is still more effective here, but this discussion is starting to sidetrack the thread a bit much. Some will never agree no matter how blatantly obvious it is

 

[danielovichdk2]

you cannot, by any chance, measure power-output or the lack there of, by looking at a movie or static images. You have no valid data on how these guys perform best and at what angle on their bikes. It's laughable what you're trying to solve.

Sure, it gives you a lot of assumptions, but that's like guessing at who wins the tour.

please, think before you start naive discussions like that. Without any data from these athletes you have nothing but a wild and crazy guess.

 

[Angliru]

Re: Re:

Could you please elaborate on Froome and Contador's TT positions beyond "Is not! Is too!"?

vs.

This is typical positions for those two when being tired in a TT. From the front because that's where it matters. It's the torso position and angle. More distance from seat to top of shoulders vertically=more surface area under => more drag. Froome is also narrower relative to his size.
Imagine a ski jumper position where the front of the torso is trying to catch the air to get lift. The opposite is obviously the objective here.
Compare these two in this, you will get it consistently favoring Froome. And it's blatantly obvious visually in stills like these.
This should not be necessary to point out to a serious fan that has followed the sport for a while, but there you go.

Actually Froome's legs are wider apart than Contador's. From this photo I can't see where you believe Froome's upper torso position overall is any narrower than Contador's or vice versa.

 

[Supimilian]

you cannot, by any chance, measure power-output or the lack there of, by looking at a movie or static images. You have no valid data on how these guys perform best and at what angle on their bikes. It's laughable what you're trying to solve.

Sure, it gives you a lot of assumptions, but that's like guessing at who wins the tour.

please, think before you start naive discussions like that. Without any data from these athletes you have nothing but a wild and crazy guess.

This is factually wrong.
One can absolutely visually observe applied power by observing movement generally.
The stills are for the aerodynamics. You can absolutely assess aerodynamic qualities visually. Of course not exact numbers, but that is not really relevant.

 

[Angliru]

Re: Re:

using 2 self selected snap shots to try and prove a point is absolute horsesh!t, and i dont' disagree with your premise.

I agree with you somewhat. Two snapshots is not proof, but I cant be bothered posting 75 comparisons, and you will generally find the same tendencies when comparing these two, like stated. So the point is still valid.

You will see what you want to see in any photo comparison. It is quite far from valid.

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

So: lolnope.

Try again.

Is that your standard answer now?

C'mon Dear Wiggo - lighten the atmosphere. Play the game and reply "lolnope, try again"

 

[Supimilian]

Re: Re:

using 2 self selected snap shots to try and prove a point is absolute horsesh!t, and i dont' disagree with your premise.

I agree with you somewhat. Two snapshots is not proof, but I cant be bothered posting 75 comparisons, and you will generally find the same tendencies when comparing these two, like stated. So the point is still valid.

You will see what you want to see in any photo comparison. It is quite far from valid.

Are you trying to bait me to draw lines ?
You can't estimate whats aero visually...
Then how do the haters know the position is such an abomination (functionally) then?

 

[danielovichdk2]

One can absolutely visually observe applied power by observing movement.

Please enlighten me on this. How can you observe, by looking at a picture or movie, the amount of watts being outputted ? What is the formula for that calculation ?

 

[Supimilian]

One can absolutely visually observe applied power by observing movement.

Please enlighten me on this. How can you observe, by looking at a picture or movie, the amount of watts being outputted ? What is the formula for that calculation ?

Generally: you can observe change in kinetic energy. Kinetic energy difference over time is power. Hence you can observe Power transfer.
That's not really what this is about though.

The key here is having a consistent and smooth transfer for optimal efficiency. That is why "pedaling squares" and jerking the pedals is not good technique and will not optimize your transfer of total power from the body to the pedals and then wheels. Basically you want a constant angular momentum for the pedal around the axis.
The point was about loss and efficiency, not exact estimates of power.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

About the TT position, Froome's position being aero, does not exclude Contador's from being aero too.
Nothing wrong with this TT position

Alberto Staring At Stem Shocker!

He's getting a close look

 

[No_Balls]

Example of change in kinetic energy:

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

https://youtu.be/GLQ05Zwm_Eg?t=12m41s

Noticeably smoother stroke even at significantly higher cadence than AC doing his side drop thing, and jerking the pedals at a lower cadence. Froomes power transfer is almost flawless here. Even when standing. Fact.

Plebs can't get over the upper body movement, and the meme lives on.

You're comparing Froome seated vs. Contador standing, of course Contador moves around more. When they are both seated (e.g., around 14:15), Contador looks smoother to me (it's just an opinion, notice I don't pretend to be objective like you), and his elbows are not as far out as Froome's (I would call that much a fact). The reason Froome is at higher cadence is because when seated he can't push as high a gear as when standing. Also take a look at Froome nearer the end of the stage, when he starts to roll around more on his bike.

If you want to make the claim that Froome wastes less energy, you actually have to measure their energy output before and after transfer to the pedals. You really can't draw that conclusion just from watching them. E.g., while it's obviously true Contador moves more side to side while standing on his pedals, he may also transfer more energy to the pedals by not having his legs bent so severely as they are when in seated position, and by having the weight of his upper body, which is constantly in motion and therefore taking advantage of inertia, also transferred to the pedals. A seated position also generally transfers more load to the CV system, bringing in inefficiencies in blood flow into the picture.

I wouldn't pretend to answer this question about who is wasting more energy, but neither can you on the basis of what you've posted so far.

Good post

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Elbows like chicken wings.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

pointy tailed helmets shouldn't be tipped up like that.

Literally what?
Are you implying I ever claimed that you're supposed to point the helmet like that
It makes his torso appear more horizontal than it is when he puts his head down like that (it momentarily is, but it's obviously not a net gain overall). That was the point.

To be fair to you, indeed you never claimed it was a more aero position

 

[Walkman]

Re: Re:

Wiggins said 2010 was a result of poor focus. He was on the pub drinking and didn't put in the effort required to perform and thus the results dropped. But this is just all lies, right?

lolnope.

Try again.

Not sure what you are getting at?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rzmXvHHQzcs#t=380

But I guess this is also doping related, because everything Wiggins-related is about doping? But, would you mind explaining how with your extensive knowledge?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

One can absolutely visually observe applied power by observing movement.

Please enlighten me on this. How can you observe, by looking at a picture or movie, the amount of watts being outputted ? What is the formula for that calculation ?

you need marginal brains for that, don't try it at home

 

[ebandit]

fair

Elbows like chicken wings.

to be fair..........why do you think da dawg has such skinny arms? mass has been

surgically removed to reduce drag coefficient........a marginal gain not employed

by less dedicated riders

Mark L

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Sure, and other riders with bizarre, even ugly styles have been good climbers over the years - Fernando Escartín, Francisco Mancebo, Juan Mauricio Soler - but one of the issues with those "unorthodox" styles is that a lot of the "classical" styles are so effective because they're the most effective ways of changing up and down pace fluidly, enabling energy to not be wasted and resulting in less effort being expended. Quintana, for example, is aided by his general poker-faced expressionlessness, but when he changes up and down the tempo it looks effortless, fluid and graceful, no wasted energy. Froome even more so than those mentioned above, owing to his crazy high-cadence seated attacking and legs akimbo style (notwithstanding that none of them posted results of his level either), looks highly inefficient and wasteful of energy. Which makes his dominance even more egregious, because you then imagine, how good could he be if he wasn't wasting all this surplus power on his crawling-over-the-bike technique? And he time trials like a spider with its front legs raised, yet is almost able to match the world's best when he's on form - how good could he be if he had the almost perfect TT position of Martin? At least with Wiggins, when he was stomping the TTs, you could see why - he had a perfect flat back, minimal frontal area, absolutely no upper body movement. When Froome TTs up there with the specialists, it's hard to compute - how does he put that much power out while riding in such an efficient position?

Chris Froome's transformation back in 2011 always reminds me of another guy who was able to stomp everybody due to seemingly limitless ability to put the power down despite a wasteful, inefficient technique that many purists were mortified by. His name was Johann "Juanito" Mühlegg and his fairytale ended exactly the way you expect. I've never been able to unsee that.

Horner style is full potato. But still not as bad as Pantani power wise.
My point is the technique of Froome is not even a secondary issue or an indicator as with some of the guys mentioned. It is not really bad for anything except the peace of mind of any observer with some concept of aesthetics. The elbows, the head tilt, the stemgazing. It's literally nothing power wise, going uphill especially. Even Contador has some more suspect habits, jerky cadence, much worse than Froome and... sideways bending of his back(NOT good). And his TT position is objectively worse. Nibali is a technical god though. Quintana is also flawless uphill. Ricco was also not wasting all that much uphill in my view.

And then a good discussion with more quality posts came along between many users, until it went back to attacks useless/zilch-informative time wasting posts like this (the baiting started before with "lolnope" etc.):

To clarify: I have little or no issue with Froome's riding style per se. I have posted a pic of him on aero bars of a TT bike on a set of rollers - not something people can just walk in off the street and do, IME / IMO.

This pissing match anti-Contador pro-Froome is utter BS though - you can't possibly know that stuff.

On the bike Froome looks ugly. That's undeniable. His stem staring is remarkable.

His performance though - that's fricken alien.

Straight up ignorant thing to say.
And the power is crazy and suspect, no one is denying that.

Not as ignorant as seriously posting "tense upper body". Dude. Chill out. No one believes you. No one. Because you are not believable and cannot possibly know if his body in that photo is tense or not.

You said:

More tense upper body. Looking down in this shot makes his head position look lower than it usually is. It looks better than it usually is from him in this photo. But still worse.

Which outs you as clueless and generally making sht up.
1. You cannot possibly know his upper body is tense
2. Anyone with a modicum of aero experience knows a pointy tail pointed up is worse aerodynamically, yet in your wisdom and vast TT experience, you chose only to say it makes his head look lower. Not that it's aerodynamically suicide.

Ya know? Ya kind outed yourself there bud.

To the bolded: How can you know that DW? I liked the points Supimilian made, I also liked the ones of LS. So please don´t speak for me (and the others who looked after the points made, especially the Vuelta vid where you could see how AC and Froome compare).
So don´t again confuse your opinions with the opinions of others.