Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[AICA ribonucleotide]

Re: Re:

I've long regarded the Vuelta as a doper's race (just look at some recent winners). If testing is lax during the Vuelta, did Sky put Froome on a special "push the envelope" programme for the race, to see what would happen?

This is an important question that I've never been able to answer satisfactorily.

I see two main possibilities:
a) Froome was put on the A-team program for the Vuelta because Wiggins, who needed to salvage his season, needed mountain domestiques. After all, Sky only had Löfkvist, Possoni and Cioni as passable climbers. But no matter how much Wiggins needed him, it would be an odd and risky move. After all, it didn't look like he was staying in the team.
b) Froome did his own thang for the 2011 Vuelta and, when proven to be a superresponder, was accepted into the A-team and his program was further refined for 2012.

All in all, I think b would be more likely. But it's still a tricky one, and it certainly undermines the team doping vibe.

How about this from left field. Froome refused to get on the programme until he found out his contract would not be renewed and no other team wanted him.

 

[GreasyMonkey]

Re: Re:

I don't think it's as simple as just losing weight artificially in Froome's case.

Its both, the weightloss and the A star program. And I do think he could have had a blizharia for one year. And then his racing program was not ideal for about 4 years at Barloworld under Corti then at Sky.

All of those things added up to a skewed perspective.

How about http://cyclingtips.com.au/2013/04/oxygen-in-a-pill-the-next-big-thing-in-sports-doping/

The timeline of the development fits quite nicely with the 2011 Vuelta "miracle", and the "Kenyan vampire worms" story makes it pretty easy to account for fluctuations in Hb, HCT, etc.

Anybody know what the "half-life" of this drug is?

Two riders caught with it so far this year, but to quote David Plowman " Anti-doping only catches the dopey dopers".....

 

[BYOP88]

Re: Re:

I've long regarded the Vuelta as a doper's race (just look at some recent winners). If testing is lax during the Vuelta, did Sky put Froome on a special "push the envelope" programme for the race, to see what would happen?

This is an important question that I've never been able to answer satisfactorily.

I see two main possibilities:
a) Froome was put on the A-team program for the Vuelta because Wiggins, who needed to salvage his season, needed mountain domestiques. After all, Sky only had Löfkvist, Possoni and Cioni as passable climbers. But no matter how much Wiggins needed him, it would be an odd and risky move. After all, it didn't look like he was staying in the team.
b) Froome did his own thang for the 2011 Vuelta and, when proven to be a superresponder, was accepted into the A-team and his program was further refined for 2012.

All in all, I think b would be more likely. But it's still a tricky one, and it certainly undermines the team doping vibe.

How about this from left field. Froome refused to get on the programme until he found out his contract would not be renewed and no other team wanted him.

I think Lampre were interested in signing him before he transformed.

 

[flying_plum]

I've always wondered this about the bilharzia thing - if the wee worms were eating his red blood cells, his count must have been way down and, I would have thought, been anaemic. As someone who has suffered with anaemia on and off, doing anything can be a challenge, certainly getting up in the morning, and just doing...well, anything. This is something I would have thought a sports team, with all their medical staff, would have picked up and investigated. Of course, you'd actually have to have the disease for this to be the case, but have Sky ever tried to explain how they managed to not notice that one of their riders was ill (even if, so they claim, at the time, they didn't know what it was)?

(oh...and hello )

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re:

I've always wondered this about the bilharzia thing - if the wee worms were eating his red blood cells, his count must have been way down and, I would have thought, been anaemic. As someone who has suffered with anaemia on and off, doing anything can be a challenge, certainly getting up in the morning, and just doing...well, anything. This is something I would have thought a sports team, with all their medical staff, would have picked up and investigated. Of course, you'd actually have to have the disease for this to be the case, but have Sky ever tried to explain how they managed to not notice that one of their riders was ill (even if, so they claim, at the time, they didn't know what it was)?

(oh...and hello )

Hello!

Anemia really isn't a prominent symptom of the disease. Worms like Schisto that cause Bilharzia are good at establishing a low level chronic infection that can sometimes be non-clinical (not totally dissimilar to how HIV works). Therefore, there are a lot of RBCs and not a lot of parasite, so the effect on oxygen carrying capacity isn't very large. The symptoms are more often a result of the patients' immune system attacking the tissue where the worms are located.

 

[flying_plum]

Re: Re:

Hello!

Anemia really isn't a prominent symptom of the disease. Worms like Schisto that cause Bilharzia are good at establishing a low level chronic infection that can sometimes be non-clinical (not totally dissimilar to how HIV works). Therefore, there are a lot of RBCs and not a lot of parasite, so the effect on oxygen carrying capacity isn't very large. The symptoms are more often a result of the patients' immune system attacking the tissue where the worms are located.

Thank you. The reason I asked, is because there was a documentary on the Froome-the-wunderkind the other day, and in discussing the Bilharzia his explanation of it mainly focused on the red blood cells. I'd forgotten that, and it set me thinking about it again, since I've recently been told off my doctor for being anaemic, and it had always niggled me at the time. I guess *if* you were just run down a lot, then that might just not be noticed/put down to you being a bit of a weakling...if it happened at all, and isn't just a handy excuse.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

I've always wondered this about the bilharzia thing - if the wee worms were eating his red blood cells, his count must have been way down and, I would have thought, been anaemic. As someone who has suffered with anaemia on and off, doing anything can be a challenge, certainly getting up in the morning, and just doing...well, anything. This is something I would have thought a sports team, with all their medical staff, would have picked up and investigated. Of course, you'd actually have to have the disease for this to be the case, but have Sky ever tried to explain how they managed to not notice that one of their riders was ill (even if, so they claim, at the time, they didn't know what it was)?

(oh...and hello )

Froome's Bilharzia has been discussed at length in this thread. He has given varying accounts to when he got it, how long he had it, the treatment, how he got is a second time etc etc.....suffice to say most don't believe his story of Bilharzia, as you say it raises so many questions about his health his blood values, team not picking it up on tests, UCI not seeing huge discrepancies in his blood values for ABP etc etc

 

[Dalakhani]

Re: Re:

How about this from left field. Froome refused to get on the programme until he found out his contract would not be renewed and no other team wanted him.

Didn't Garmin want him?

 

[djpbaltimore]

Chronic infections will typically make you feel run down and fatigued. Witness Venus Williams and her battle with Sjogren's syndrome. Froome's description is not inaccurate, but is misleading due to a matter of scale. I would be surprised if Froome understands much about the infection beyond the cursory 'feeds on RBC' spiel. Schisto is really common in Africa, so I don't doubt that he had it. I do doubt whether it really explains 'the transformation'.

 

[Dalakhani]

Re: Re:

b) Froome did his own thang for the 2011 Vuelta and, when proven to be a superresponder, was accepted into the A-team and his program was further refined for 2012.

My long-held suspicion is that Sky has a centralised programme:

#1: They leaders are like robots coming off an assembly line - Wiggins, Froome, Ports, Thomas.

#2: The domestiques are stronger than most team leaders, able to spend ages on the front while burning up opponents who are shielded from the wind.

#3: They all seemed to initially improve around the same time (after the hiring of Leinders).

#4: Brailsford is a control freak.

#5: They seem really confident they're not going to get caught.

 

[flying_plum]

Re: Re:

Froome's Bilharzia has been discussed at length in this thread. He has given varying accounts to when he got it, how long he had it, the treatment, how he got is a second time etc etc.....suffice to say most don't believe his story of Bilharzia, as you say it raises so many questions about his health his blood values, team not picking it up on tests, UCI not seeing huge discrepancies in his blood values for ABP etc etc

Apologies, I didn't mean to rehash old discussions - I have read most of this thread (I've been hanging about for a couple of years, but never registered because I never really had anything to add). Anyway, I'll go back to lurking and not asking stupid questions

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

Apologies, I didn't mean to rehash old discussions - I have read most of this thread (I've been hanging about for a couple of years, but never registered because I never really had anything to add). Anyway, I'll go back to lurking and not asking stupid questions

There's no need to go back to lurking unless you feel more comfortable that way. You can ask stupid questions, that's certainly not against forum rules.

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

People are only going ''faster' because the doping methods got better, i.e. if you think a combination of equipment & training improvements will give clean riders now the same performance levels as super charged EPO extraterrestrials from merely 20 years ago, I'm afraid you're way off the mark.

Maybe you can enlighten us how so called clean riders with their methods aka 'marginal gains', which Sky lied about inventing, are beating EPO times.

All these clean guys riding for dirty teams, dirty doctors, dirty soignuers, dirty DSs etc can beat EPO fueled times! Sure, that is why Tinkoff have a unicorn on their logo.

I will enlighten you.

AGAIN: We probably have to go back to 1991 to notice any non-dopers on the list of fastest times ever. That's 24 years ago. I repeat 24 years ago. Are you expecting that one of the better climbers anno 2015 will climb slower than that ?

In 1991 41:02 Jean-Francois Bernard 20.18 km/h. Now more than 2 decades later Quintana is what? 2.5 minute faster. Nothing strange with that.

Some people here a completey brainwashed and cant see things from 2 sides anymore.

Sorry there was nothing enlightening in that! 24 years explains what exactly?

What makes Quintana able to climb faster? What natural evolution made riders go faster uphill? Rounder wheels?[/quote][/quote]''What natural evolution made riders go faster uphill" ??

Seriously ?

I have read some of your posts lately and I hope this is one of your worst.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Re: Re:

I'm not "pissed off", but I find it lame. Many people will forever call the winner a cheat (clinic). Froome seems to get more of it than others though. If he's a cheat then so are the rest. No my head isn't in the sand, but its not up my ars either.

Go and look at the palmares of this years top 4 protagonists..spot the odd one out

then compare and contrast with SKYs other GT winner...another odd one out

that's basically why he gets more of it.......they may all be cheats but he is the only one we have to suspend rationale thought for.........

although to be fair I could compile quite a list...........

There is a reason why Bjarne Riis is/was seen as a total over the top EPO - goat, same counds for Froome. There is a rule in cycling: dont overdo it.

 

[Saint Unix]

Re: Re:

There is a reason why Bjarne Riis is/was seen as a total over the top EPO - goat, same counds for Froome. There is a rule in cycling: dont overdo it.

Nice one.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Re: Re:

There is a reason why Bjarne Riis is/was seen as a total over the top EPO - goat, same counds for Froome. There is a rule in cycling: dont overdo it.

Nice one.

Yeah, I have been reading a lot of Brit press lately, playing with words seems to be very popular.

 

[FroomehasneverdopedX]

quintana = smaller, meaning smaller skeleton, smaller organs = lighter weight

however disadvantage on itt

 

[galibier]

Re:

no, Froome always doped, like the rest of Sky. everyone dopes. The big changer was the weightloss, and the recovery doping during races, with the medical support, most likely transfusions, or minimum of Edgar microdosing.

The only reason Sky outperformed was, they were all for one, and one for all, a superior team, and a superior support staff and medical team. And this starts in October. The planning and starting is not June. Its 8 months earlier.

Froome at the 2011 Vuelta was playing for his spot, and he got on the lipotropin or the weightloss peptide whatever it is, and rendered about 7* kg of functional muscle mass from his physique. did not he get the late call up (prolly was lobbying hard for the 9th man, and put it all on the line)

*** what is so astounding, as sans dope, his 71kg was functional muscle mass, but he rendered about 6kg, and still put out the same power. Obviously his legs and upperbody and face were much much leaner. But before, they had no surplus weight.

= #NOTNORMAL

I'm not sure I understand correctly. Are you saying you reckon he was doping all along at Sky and it's only because he lost ~7kg coming in to the Vuelta that he suddenly performed like he'd never performed before?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

quintana = smaller, meaning smaller skeleton, smaller organs = lighter weight

however disadvantage on itt

Agreed. that lighter weight is more efficiently proportioned to muscle vs dead weight like ligaments and tendons and bone and skin.

i'd be interested in the difference in heat generation he has to deal with vs surface area for heat shunting but not sure on the formula for that comparison with the heavier but also larger surface area'd froome. This relates to absolute power generation.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":3lrk9kgq]
Maybe you can enlighten us how so called clean riders with their methods aka 'marginal gains', which Sky lied about inventing, are beating EPO times.

All these clean guys riding for dirty teams, dirty doctors, dirty soignuers, dirty DSs etc can beat EPO fueled times! Sure, that is why Tinkoff have a unicorn on their logo.

I will enlighten you.

AGAIN: We probably have to go back to 1991 to notice any non-dopers on the list of fastest times ever. That's 24 years ago. I repeat 24 years ago. Are you expecting that one of the better climbers anno 2015 will climb slower than that ?

In 1991 41:02 Jean-Francois Bernard 20.18 km/h. Now more than 2 decades later Quintana is what? 2.5 minute faster. Nothing strange with that.

Some people here a completey brainwashed and cant see things from 2 sides anymore.

Sorry there was nothing enlightening in that! 24 years explains what exactly?

What makes Quintana able to climb faster? What natural evolution made riders go faster uphill? Rounder wheels?[/quote][/quote]''What natural evolution made riders go faster uphill" ??

Seriously ?

I have read some of your posts lately and I hope this is one of your worst.[/quote]

Instead of answering, you make a personal attack. Seriously?

 

[Cycle Chic]

It must be killing Murdoch that the British public dont give a hoot about plastic brit Froome. He has no connection to this country at all - rides for a british team but never steps foot in the country.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

It must be killing Murdoch that the British public dont give a hoot about plastic brit Froome. He has no connection to this country at all - rides for a british team but never steps foot in the country.

Rupert Murdoch has dual Australian / American citizenship, I am pretty sure, and was born here in Melbourne.

I personally don't think he gives a flying fat rat's tail.

 

[del1962]

Re:

It must be killing Murdoch that the British public dont give a hoot about plastic brit Froome. He has no connection to this country at all - rides for a british team but never steps foot in the country.

Nah seen him in Yorkshire in 2014

More seriously I have no idea how much time he spends in Britain, however from Guardian

“I would say it’s a bit early to say 100% but I think that could potentially be on the cards, certainly,” said Froome upon his return to London.

His parents/grand parents where British so he feels British,

 

[TheSpud]

Re:

It must be killing Murdoch that the British public dont give a hoot about plastic brit Froome. He has no connection to this country at all - rides for a british team but never steps foot in the country.

I dont think Murdoch will give a ***. Sky is such a small proportion of News Corp it probably wont really register with him. They do get good TV advertising / coverage out of it regardless of whether Froome steps foot on British soil or not.

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

It must be killing Murdoch that the British public dont give a hoot about plastic brit Froome. He has no connection to this country at all - rides for a british team but never steps foot in the country.

Nah seen him in Yorkshire in 2014

More seriously I have no idea how much time he spends in Britain, however from Guardian

“I would say it’s a bit early to say 100% but I think that could potentially be on the cards, certainly,” said Froome upon his return to London.

His parents/grand parents where British so he feels British,

He's more British than Wiggins as both his parents are from the UK, whereas Wiggins' dad was from Australia. Both were born outside of the UK, although from memory Wiggins moved back here when he was 3 (or something).