Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Ripper]

Again: Yes in my opinion Wiggins is suspicious since he finished 4th at the TdF in 2009 at age 29. No one saw that coming, no one.

Whereas Froome's transformation was evident before it occurred?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

If that is not a carbon copy of Froome you can call me Manolo.

Froome 2009 that is.

 

[Ney the Viking]

wrong thread, sorry

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I'm excited!

1 day to the Dawg going full ***!

LOL.
Anyway, i surely hope so.
Otherwise Schleck, Evans and others will try to ride backwards again like two years ago, when Vanendert won two stages.
So for the fun of it, Sky/Froome should spare us another boring opening mountain stage weekend.
Please, please go full *** or whatever it´s called. Yeah.

 

[thehog]

LOL.
Anyway, i surely hope so.
Otherwise Schleck, Evans and others will try to ride backwards again like two years ago, when Vanendert won two stages.
So for the fun of it, Sky/Froome should spare us another boring opening mountain stage weekend.
Please, please go full *** or whatever it´s called. Yeah.

T-1!

Countdown to the Dawg sticking his elbows out as far as possible.

Fingers crossed for the Dawg gesturing at Contador then riding off to win by 3 minutes.

Porte will be best supporting actor. Should seem him get in the gnome position and rip the peloton apart.

Tour should be over this time tomorrow

 

[zalacain]

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013...-on-why-froome-wont-release-power-data_293771

 

[the sceptic]

It’s an interesting question. There is so much pseudo science out there right now. If you release the data, there are very few people who can properly interpret and understand that data. All you’re going to do is create is a lot of noise for people who are pseudo scientists. You can even write magazines about it. They’re so wide of the mark in what they’re doing, it’s quite scary. You can do anything with stats. You can use that with a cynical view.

Only team sky scientists can interpret the data the correct way

At some point in time, people have to accept that performances are going to move forward. If we always hold back, and say, here is some data from people who were doping, then if we draw a line, we can then deduce that anyone crossing that line must also be doping. Well, that’s false. They do not have to be doping, because the whole human race moves forward. At some point in time, clean performances will surpass the doped performances in the past. You cannot use that as a rule to say that means that they are doping.

The human race has evolved in the last 10 years

Brentford already making excuses for when Dawg blows everyone away in the tour?

 

[ThirdWorld]

right now froome is preparing his stoof with the little porte... tomorrow the comedy show will be great.

I am already with my ticket and the popcorn...

 

[LaFlorecita]

T-1!

Countdown to the Dawg sticking his elbows out as far as possible.

Fingers crossed for the Dawg gesturing at Contador then riding off to win by 3 minutes.

Porte will be best supporting actor. Should seem him get in the gnome position and rip the peloton apart.

Tour should be over this time tomorrow

It will be fun. And clean. Oh it's gonna be great I can hardly wait.

 

[The Chicken]

"They do not have to be doping, because the whole human race moves forward."

LMFAOOOOO That's comedy right there.

 

[BigBoat]

Here's what we know based on the direct quotes and facts we have:

- Froome did the Madone in a time between 32 and 33 minutes;
- According to Kerrison, at one stage Froome did the ride using aero bars (possibly the same ride, but we can't be sure);
- Froome weighs approximately 67kg;
- Armstrong did his record time of 30:45 using a road bike;
- The Madone is 13.6km long at an average gradient of 6.7%.

Ignoring possible wind effects, which could be positive or negative, here's what this all translates to:

If Froome was using aero bars during his quickest time, his power output would have been between 6.25 and 6.35 W/kg. If he was using a normal road bike, his power output would have been between 6.4 and 6.55 W/kg.

When Armstrong did his best time, his power output would have been around the 7 W/kg mark.

Considering Froome would have been doing the climb fresh, and not after 5+ hours of a Tour de France, these values are within the physiologically possible range and around what we'll see from a few riders in the first ITT. If Froome is 24% efficient and was riding at 90% of his maximum effort, this performance predicts a VO2max of around 84-85 ml/kg/min. Very, very good, as you'd expect, but plausible.

Good graph, I was waiting for somebody to do this.

 

[Galic Ho]

... and DiLuca did win everything, so did Pantani. OTOH, do we know when they started to dope?
On "podiumcafe" there was a interesting article about Pantani. Basically it is assumed there, his whole career was made of doping. Right from the beginning.

That is the general assumption with the Pirate. Product of epo. Started young. Won young. Died young. It's a tale that should be remembered and never ignored. It cost a man his life far too early

You caught me: I havn´t found a pic of Gerdemann pre Tour 2009. But i remember very well how i was shocked of his look. More thin than ever. I thought this guy came right off 30 years in prison. He was wayyy over the line in reducing weight. He was always skinny, but that was brutal...

I don't think you are quite understanding Foxy how thin some of the current crop of riders are getting. As Mr 38% showed, Linus to my recollection, was always a healthy weight. Especially at Milram. I remember his efforts. He tried very hard and got nowhere. Then he joined Leopard Trek. Did I like that? Not really, but he was simply a domestique. Did you ever hear talk of him supposedly being followed around the Tour by a camera crew documenting the whole race to show he'd raced clean? Did they do a segment on that in Germany? I always wanted to know if it was carried through.

The fact Linus has practically disappeared from the planet...yeah. I think that says enough. As for the Chicken and Andy Schleck. They were skinny men from the start. Okay Rasmussen lost some weight. But not well on the 10 kilos Froome and Wiggins lost. Not even close. Andy was a skinny mofo in his first year as a pro. You can make a case for Franck losing some weight in post 2006 Alpe d'Huez, but that is it. Seriously, you haven't noticed the alarming number of 6 foot plus cyclists losing lots of weight? Froome, Wiggins, Gesink, Kloden (yes he is lighter than ever), Zubeldia, Hesjedal just to name a few. How about those Sky track boys, especially Geraint Thomas? That ain't normal.

Anyway, the discussion is going in circles. Some believe in Sky/Froome, some not. I am in the middle. They are on the same page as everyone else, and have yet to be caught...

Fair enough. You're entitled to that stance. The whole skinny argument in favour of Froome...it just sounds off coming from you.

IMO people aren't meant to be that skinny, that tall and still so darn dominant and powerful. Think back to the Lance days. Everyone had big legs. People were built like Vino. More like Evans is now. The lighter guys were Purito's build. Now we have stick figures everywhere. Bigger guys like Thor and Spartacus are rare. Those guys who were similar transform ala Wiggins and beat everyone.

Don't forget Foxxy...pro athletes already have sub 10% body fat levels. They lose muscle mass. You can't point a finger and choose to lose it like that from a specific region. Yet the Sky riders do and are more dominant than ever. It doesn't add up physiologically.

 

[goggalor]

It’s an interesting question. There is so much pseudo science out there right now. If you release the data, there are very few people who can properly interpret and understand that data. All you’re going to do is create is a lot of noise for people who are pseudo scientists. You can even write magazines about it. They’re so wide of the mark in what they’re doing, it’s quite scary. You can do anything with stats. You can use that with a cynical view.

Only team sky scientists can interpret the data the correct way

Funny how Brailsford is having a go at pseudo science now. Mood lighting anyone? Not to mention the hordes of "sports scientists" working for WT teams.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Agree. Nothing is certain. I never said i am sure if Froome/Sky is clean. All i say again and again: Sky is no worse than others. They have yet to be linked to any doping scandal....
Sky has the best riders under contract. They have the biggest payroll. They should dominate. Everything else would be not normal. All the riders that lead the train had their T-20 GT results with other teams (except Froome )....

Not this again. Sky has the best riders under contract? Really? How many of "the best riders" were that before they transformed with Sky? Porte had his 7th in the Giro, but that was losing 5 minutes a day in the mountains to the guys he now rides rings around. Froome had nothing.

See, that's what's weird. Not that Christian Knees is still a good domestique, not that Vasil Kiryienka can pull the peloton for long stints. But that guys who, on the evidence of a few years ago, should be down the food chain, are not just leading the team, but lording it over the whole péloton. When they were looking at potential British winners of the Tour de France when setting up the team, Froome was decidedly NOT 1st on the list. And in the Team Sky priorities list in 2010 I'd be surprised if he cracked the top 20. Yet here we are.

 

[Benotti69]

The latest piece of BS to come from Brailsford when interviewed about Froome.

At some point in time, clean performances will surpass the doped performances in the past.

Maybe the clean performances will suspass those who rode on super heavy, compared to todays bikes, and for longer, wearing heavy woollen clothing etc etc but we have to go back far....

How did they make Froome into such a GC contender from nowhere?

That'll will never be answered by anything other than PEDs.

 

[Benotti69]

Funny how Brailsford is having a go at pseudo science now. Mood lighting anyone? Not to mention the hordes of "sports scientists" working for WT teams.

Not too mention how many docs they need for saddle sores!

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

T-1!

Countdown to the Dawg sticking his elbows out as far as possible.

Fingers crossed for the Dawg gesturing at Contador then riding off to win by 3 minutes.

Porte will be best supporting actor. Should seem him get in the gnome position and rip the peloton apart.

Tour should be over this time tomorrow

T-1... It´s getting funnier. Porte as supporting actor. LMAO.

Anyway, better this way than the dullness of 2011 when AS and AC looked very hard at each other. That one reminded me of the movie "The Men Who Stare at Goats". Please not again such a non-show when the Schlecklets begun to accelerate after crossing the finish line...

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I don't think you are quite understanding Foxy how thin some of the current crop of riders are getting. As Mr 38% showed, Linus to my recollection, was always a healthy weight. Especially at Milram. I remember his efforts. He tried very hard and got nowhere. Then he joined Leopard Trek. Did I like that? Not really, but he was simply a domestique. Did you ever hear talk of him supposedly being followed around the Tour by a camera crew documenting the whole race to show he'd raced clean? Did they do a segment on that in Germany? I always wanted to know if it was carried through.

May b/c they are all thin now, it just don´t catch my eye anymore. But back in 2009 i was shocked `bout Linus. He really looked sick...
No they didn´t took his offer to control him 24/7. German press is like press around the world. Only bad news sell. Especially since cycling became the punching ball over here to shift attention away from all the other dirty sports (like soccer game fixing and heavy use of painkillers, doping, etc.).
So a non doping story in cycling just didn´t met the agenda in germany...

IMO people aren't meant to be that skinny, that tall and still so darn dominant and powerful. Think back to the Lance days. Everyone had big legs. People were built like Vino. More like Evans is now. The lighter guys were Purito's build. Now we have stick figures everywhere. Bigger guys like Thor and Spartacus are rare. Those guys who were similar transform ala Wiggins and beat everyone.

Don't forget Foxxy...pro athletes already have sub 10% body fat levels. They lose muscle mass. You can't point a finger and choose to lose it like that from a specific region. Yet the Sky riders do and are more dominant than ever. It doesn't add up physiologically.

Sure, pro sports isn´t healthy at all... I remember Bo Jackson and Jerry Rice both having body fat at 2%. They still could compete at the highest level. OTOH, it´s almost 100% sure the were on drugs. I mean it´s the NFL.

Still, what i say is that Sky isn´t doing worse things than others.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Not this again. Sky has the best riders under contract? Really? How many of "the best riders" were that before they transformed with Sky? Porte had his 7th in the Giro, but that was losing 5 minutes a day in the mountains to the guys he now rides rings around. Froome had nothing.

See, that's what's weird. Not that Christian Knees is still a good domestique, not that Vasil Kiryienka can pull the peloton for long stints. But that guys who, on the evidence of a few years ago, should be down the food chain, are not just leading the team, but lording it over the whole péloton. When they were looking at potential British winners of the Tour de France when setting up the team, Froome was decidedly NOT 1st on the list. And in the Team Sky priorities list in 2010 I'd be surprised if he cracked the top 20. Yet here we are.

Sky-2012-TdF-Supporting-Cast/Train:
(assuming Froome should have been the leader back then too)
Wiggins (3rd TdF w/GAR the clean team)
EBH (super talent since erarly, big timer at Columbia)
Knees (T20-TdF w/Milram)
Porte (7th-Giro w/SAX, i give you the benefit of the doubt and add him the 14 mins he gained in the breakaway stage = still good for 13th that year)
Rogers (two T10 in GT´s w/Columbia)
Sivtsov (three T20 in GT´s w/Columbia)

That is no less than 5 riders who would be the sole GT-Rider w/other teams & one super domestique.

Sky-2013-TdF-Supporting-Cast/Train:
EBH (see 2012)
Kiryienka (T20 in GT w/GCE, finsihing btw. 25th-37th another four times w/different teams. Very solid climber before joining Sky)
Lopez Garcia (T20 in GT w/GCE, hovering around 40th in another 5 GT´s. Very solid domestique over the years)
Porte (see 2012)
Sivtsov (see 2012)

That is 5 riders who can lead the train up the mountains. Even Jens Voigt (for AS in 2011) could do it before he had to give in 10 km from the finish.
Anyway, there should be no surprise if 5 riders lead Froome until the last mountain in each stage...

And all those riders "were made" before joining Sky. They can´t be blamed then.

Add in Kennaugh and GThomas, let the fireworks begin (hopefully).

Now you tell me which teams field better squads.

 

[Ferminal]

Are you suggesting those who rode for the evil Spanish team doped before joining Sky? Outrageous!

 

[Ripper]

T-1!

Countdown to the Dawg sticking his elbows out as far as possible.

Fingers crossed for the Dawg gesturing at Contador then riding off to win by 3 minutes.

Porte will be best supporting actor. Should seem him get in the gnome position and rip the peloton apart.

Tour should be over this time tomorrow

Porte to be riding 'tempo', smiling while dropping many of the world's best. Contador and/or Purito will try a suicide attack, but Porte will drag them back, then Froome to launch a solo test. One of two things happen, he gaps everyone and just drills it. Or they latch back on and he toys with them, winning the sprint but perhaps not too much time. He knows he can destroy bert in a TT, so perhaps his strategy will depend on who is close

 

[DirtyWorks]

The latest piece of BS to come from Brailsford when interviewed about Froome....

Hilarious. He's losing touch. Next comes adopting Brunyeel slogans. As someone mentioned, he's reaching Brunyeelsford personality much faster than I thought.

If they let the Dog off the chain tomorrow then it will be ridiculous and stupid, crazy early. Porte and Froome should come in looking fresh with more stressed GC contenders. Sunday Sky moves the Dog and Porte into 3-5th position with an amazing display of power. The ITT will probably be the last interesting day.

 

[Ripper]

Hilarious. He's losing touch. Next comes adopting Brunyeel slogans. As someone mentioned, he's reaching Brunyeelsford personality much faster than I thought.

If they let the Dog off the chain tomorrow then it will be ridiculous and stupid, crazy early. Porte and Froome should come in looking fresh with more stressed GC contenders. Sunday Sky moves the Dog and Porte into 3-5th position with an amazing display of power. The ITT will probably be the last interesting day.

We might as well win

 

[frenchfry]

T-1!

Countdown to the Dawg sticking his elbows out as far as possible.

Fingers crossed for the Dawg gesturing at Contador then riding off to win by 3 minutes.

Porte will be best supporting actor. Should seem him get in the gnome position and rip the peloton apart.

Tour should be over this time tomorrow

The Dawg was spotted at Carrefour warming up for the climbs by pushing a shopping cart around the parking lot at high speeds. Marginal gains and all that. He is ready.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

the Apostel according to Dave

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013...-on-why-froome-wont-release-power-data_293771

There is so much pseudo science out there right now. If you release the data, there are very few people who can properly interpret and understand that data.

Yes, it is really difficult for a noob like Brailsfraud to look at a graph and calculate averages, peak moments, intervals. Really difficult. Only the Sky scientists can read them properly so they can translate it for the Brailsfraud to backwards Cockney.

Steve the inner monkey Peters fully agrees here.

All you’re going to do is create is a lot of noise for people who are pseudo scientists. You can even write magazines about it.

Looks like the mentioning of Froomedawg in 21 Counts caused a little stir with the aliens.

There is a fruitful area of debate and opportunity in terms of what power data could provide, I am very pro-that, but just releasing it in general is not the right way to go.

So, why release data from you Italian domestique in the Giro? Just for PR.

And now for the killer:

At some point in time, people have to accept that performances are going to move forward. If we always hold back, and say, here is some data from people who were doping, then if we draw a line, we can then deduce that anyone crossing that line must also be doping. Well, that’s false. They do not have to be doping, because the whole human race moves forward. At some point in time, clean performances will surpass the doped performances in the past.

Charles Darwin would disagree, must be a pseudo scientist too.

Ax 3 Domaines here we come, Skybots are goooooooo.

Maybe the clean performances will suspass those who rode on super heavy, compared to todays bikes, and for longer, wearing heavy woollen clothing etc etc but we have to go back far....

Herrera's bike was of course 16 kiloos.