Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Race Radio]

What I find most puzzling about his Madone time is it means that he never went anywhere close to full gas at the Tour. Most here thought he was holding back but now it is clear he can do much, much more. In fact over the last 3 years we may have only seen "full gas Froome" 2-3 times.

scary

 

[thehog]

The clean rider doesnt just have to beat one doper, he has to beat a whole bunch of them. Thats the problem. Even if you imagine that Froome is more naturally talented than Armstrong (which is wrong), it still doesnt explain how he can be faster than all the other dopers as well.

Want to know how fast?

From the Contador attack onwards (Ventoux):

Mt Ventoux, last 7.1 km 7.53% :

2000 Armstrong 21'32
2002 Armstrong 20'22
2009 Contador 20'31
2013 Froome 20'04

Froome was also around 25secs slower than Mayo for the last 6.1km!

Mayo doing a ITT and Froome with 225km in his legs.

Which also says ******** when Froome says he wouldn't be where he is if doping was still around. If Froome rode 2000-2007 - the most doped up era of the sport, Froome wouldn't just be competitive, he'd be winning!

 

[jens_attacks]

What I find most puzzling about his Madone time is it means that he never went anywhere close to full gas at the Tour. Most here thought he was holding back but now it is clear he can do much, much more. In fact over the last 3 years we may have only seen "full gas Froome" 2-3 times.

scary

1. i think he might just taking the pisz out of the some people. all these madone records are based just on riders own stories. just like the fishermen's. or ferrari lol.i don't believe any records except if i time them myself.
2.i think he went full gas on bonascre, actually i'm 100% that these were and are his limits. of course that performance came after climbing pailheres at very high speed. a tour de france winner, superb climber like froomey with his ridiculous weight should be able to do a 30 minutes effort at 7 w/kg, fresh.
3.until now, even if i think he's capable, he didn't prove me that he's faster than lance or alberto 2009. of course he might do in this tour.we'll see

 

[blackcat]

Who do you think would win?

not sure. they could do some damage on each other. who is your favourite to win?

 

[TailWindHome]

So...what's the fastest time a clean rider can ever set on the Madone?

How fast defines doping?

 

[jens_attacks]

So...what's the fastest time a clean rider can ever set on the Madone?

How fast defines doping?

my barrier is ten minutes.

 

[Catwhoorg]

What is the length of Madone?

about 30 min [/deadpan]

 

[Merckx index]

@ammattipyoraily Tyler Hamilton, Madone
31/05/2000 | 60.8 kg | 32:32 | Ht 50, Hb 16.4 | 6.45 W/kg

@ammattipyoraily Col de la Madone

Chris Froome 30:09
Richie Porte 30:24
Tom Danielson 30:24
Lance Armstrong 30:45
Tony Rominger 31:30
Tyler Hamilton 32:32

If this is 920 m in 13.3 km, Froome's VAM is about 1830 and it indicates about 6.75 watts/kg. He would have to have an exceptionally high lactate threshold and efficiency as well as V02 max. E.g., assuming a lactate threshold of 90% and an efficiency of 23%, this implies a V02 max of 93-94. This is a 30 min climb, but Ross Tucker at SoS draws the doping line at about 6.3 watts/kg for 30 min.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

If this is 920 m in 13.3 km, Froome's VAM is about 1830 and it indicates about 6.75 watts/kg. He would have to have an exceptionally high lactate threshold and efficiency as well as V02 max. E.g., assuming a lactate threshold of 90% and an efficiency of 23%, this implies a V02 max of 93-94. This is a 30 min climb, but Ross Tucker at SoS draws the doping line at about 6.3 watts/kg for 30 min.

Exactly! And let's be honest here - if he had those numbers naturally, he would have been hitting GT podiums with regularity at age 22.

John Swanson

 

[TailWindHome]

If this is 920 m in 13.3 km, Froome's VAM is about 1830 and it indicates about 6.75 watts/kg. He would have to have an exceptionally high lactate threshold and efficiency as well as V02 max. E.g., assuming a lactate threshold of 90% and an efficiency of 23%, this implies a V02 max of 93-94. This is a 30 min climb, but Ross Tucker at SoS draws the doping line at about 6.3 watts/kg for 30 min.

So...is it possible then to calculate a 'clean' time for a range of bodyweights?

Would it be correct to assume the wattage calculation above assumes a single rider? What is the impact on the calc. if Froome and Porte are riding 2 up?

 

[Nathan12]

So...is it possible then to calculate a 'clean' time for a range of bodyweights?

Would it be correct to assume the wattage calculation above assumes a single rider? What is the impact on the calc. if Froome and Porte are riding 2 up?

The point about their riding on Madone is, as Froome points out in the book, to ride it as a time-trial. Porte went first, then Froome- so there was no drafting.

 

[Spencer the Half Wit]

The clean rider doesnt just have to beat one doper, he has to beat a whole bunch of them. Thats the problem. Even if you imagine that Froome is more naturally talented than Armstrong (which is wrong), it still doesnt explain how he can be faster than all the other dopers as well.

I know that the clean rider would have to beat a load of dopers with different engines, just had a problem with the particular analogy. Do you know Armstrong's and/or Froome's natural talent given that we know Armstrong doped from a very early age and Froome, well I don't know, but it appears he has started on some high octane stuff from 2011 onwards and we know people are different responders?

 

[DirtyWorks]

So...is it possible then to calculate a 'clean' time for a range of bodyweights?

This isn't clever and that's probably intentional.

If he had the power output described, then he would have simply ridden everyone off his wheel, every race, until perhaps a monument or a grand tour where he'd be giving the very best a proper beating. This would have happened in the years before the mysterious 2011 transformation.

Instead, we get still more inconsistencies.

 

[DirtyWorks]

The clean rider doesnt just have to beat one doper, he has to beat a whole bunch of them. Thats the problem. Even if you imagine that Froome is more naturally talented than Armstrong (which is wrong), it still doesnt explain how he can be faster than all the other dopers as well.

Which, brings us to the influence from the federation and the promoter to dramatically improve Armstrong's chances for a win. Different rider, same thing.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Dude grew up riding goat tracks - it aint going to be an issue.

It'll be an issue if he's not at the front. May be an issue for everyone else if he is at the front.

 

[Fagniniwins]

That's shot down by Froome having zero GT talent shown as a youth, unlike every single pre-EPO GT winner

When I said once-in-a-generation "specimen," I meant something akin to "responder" rather than "talent."

He is responding to his training regimen, whatever it consists of, or he wouldn't be winning Grand Tours.

My assertion was more that Armstrong's unique characteristics and preparation enabled him to win in the jet fuel era, while Froome's unique characteristics and preparation allow him to win in this glorious age of clean cycling and wipe the floor with those nasty cheaters.

The modern training techniques and dietary regimes happen to favor Froome in ways previous eras and methods may not have. So why bother achieving anything before the age of 25? "When the time is right, the diamond will reveal itself." Or something.

 

[Benotti69]

It seems Froome and Sky are rubbing the fans noses in it again.

It would appear Cookson is on Sky's side and who would've guessed that

 

[thehook]

Exactly! And let's be honest here - if he had those numbers naturally, he would have been hitting GT podiums with regularity at age 22.

John Swanson

Wow! I always thought Froome was Dirty. But DAMN! When you guys break down those numbers. It is ridiculous!

I believe in riders constantly improving. Training, Nutrition, Better Equipment. But when it is blatant. You have to call it like it is.

 

[Merckx index]

I guess it depends on where you start:

We're not exactly sure where Armstrong started his watch at the bottom of the climb, but in the video above he quoted the climb length as being about 12km which is roughly the distance from the first switchback up to the summit. If we had to guess we'd say that that?s where Armstrong started his efforts too.

The climb itself is quite consistent with a couple of flat spots here and there and an average gradient of a little less than 7%.

If the climb is 840m at 7%, then Froome's power is estimated at a much more believable 6.16 watts/kg. Anyone know where he started?

It's interesting that TD is so high on that list, the same as Porte, and only a handful of seconds behind Froome. He's a known doper, like the others below him on that list, but would any of these guys actually dope for a one shot climb that isn't part of a race, for a training ride? You might a little, but you obviously wouldn't waste a blood bag on a training ride. So maybe those times are for a shorter distance. But if Froome is going to compare his time to those of others, he has to know where everyone started. So if he knows what he's talking about, there must be an established place where all the pros start.

Then again, in the same article quoted above, it says Ferrari expected LA to do the ride in 6.8 watts/kg. He surely couldn't have done that clean. And his stated time for 12 km wouldn't do it. Some things don't add up.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

The L'equipe article says Froome avg 459 W. That's 6.75 W/kg @ his stated Tour weight of 68 kg. However, there's an asterisk saying 459 W is an overestimate due to osymetric chainrings.

Lance allegedly sustained 495 W on the Madone. That would be 6.5-6.6 W/kg at 74-76 kg. I believe this was in -99, some time before the Dauphine where he lost a minute to JV in the Ventoux MTT.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

What I find most puzzling about his Madone time is it means that he never went anywhere close to full gas at the Tour. Most here thought he was holding back but now it is clear he can do much, much more. In fact over the last 3 years we may have only seen "full gas Froome" 2-3 times.

scary

Are you sure? Ferrari in 2004 claimed you need 6.6-6.8 W/kg at threshold to win a GT, yet we don't see estimates that high on finishing climbs in the LA-era (well, maybe a few). Perhaps riders are unable to perform their maximum on the final climb of a mountain stage in the 2nd or 3rd week of a GT? Plus, altitude can be an issue.

 

[red_flanders]

Are you sure? Ferrari in 2004 claimed you need 6.6-6.8 W/kg at threshold to win a GT, yet we don't see estimates that high on finishing climbs in the LA-era (well, maybe a few). Perhaps riders are unable to perform their maximum on the final climb of a mountain stage in the 2nd or 3rd week of a GT? Plus, altitude can be an issue.

I think we're back to the point where you need this level to win a GT again.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

It's interesting that TD is so high on that list, the same as Porte, and only a handful of seconds behind Froome. He's a known doper, like the others below him on that list, but would any of these guys actually dope for a one shot climb that isn't part of a race, for a training ride? You might a little, but you obviously wouldn't waste a blood bag on a training ride.

There's a big difference between coming off a training block with ideal recovery interventions and no dope testing, 100% fresh, and having to perform the same way in week 3 of a Tour de France GC attempt, at the end of a 220+km stage in July's summery heat, with the potential for testing and all the added stress, etc.

The blood bags help in the Tour as it's undetectable, but I think a rested rider coming of that perfect training block on a cooler day is going to be able to do a single effort like this sans blood bags easily.

 

[Dave_1]

Want to know how fast?

From the Contador attack onwards (Ventoux):

Mt Ventoux, last 7.1 km 7.53% :

2000 Armstrong 21'32
2002 Armstrong 20'22
2009 Contador 20'31
2013 Froome 20'04

Froome was also around 25secs slower than Mayo for the last 6.1km!

Mayo doing a ITT and Froome with 225km in his legs.

Which also says ******** when Froome says he wouldn't be where he is if doping was still around. If Froome rode 2000-2007 - the most doped up era of the sport, Froome wouldn't just be competitive, he'd be winning!

Wow. Ventoux road got shorter..only 7km.

 

[meat puppet]

Isnt it rather obvious that froome is nowhere near 68kgs?