Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[harryh]

So the measured (Stages) power was 414W.

https://twitter.com/oufeh

 

[Tommy79]

So that's one motorbike, when he was on his way to retire anyway. What were the other cases? He clearly used the plural.

 

[hrotha]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

Dude, just look at the data with an open mind. It's quite obviously manipulated.

Although I suppose it *was* predictable that Sky wouldn't truly go with transparency.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

Froome had reported knee problems, and was abandoning. Apparently.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/racing/giro-ditalia/froome-disqualified-from-giro-ditalia-60517

 

[Dalakhani]

Re: Re:

Can Froome have a smaller average W/kg and still finishing ahead of Gesink?

Possibly.

If Gesink rode more of the climb on his own and Froome rode more in the wheels, then you could argue that Gesink could put out more watts, but be going slower due to wind/air resistance. (Assuming identical weights.)

Also, if Gesink was heavier than Froome, then he could still finish behind, even if he put out slightly more watts.

So it's not as simple as more w/kg = less time to climb. Efficiency has to be taken into consideration.

IMO, the first things the analysts have to do are

(A) ensure they're doing a like for like comparison - i.e. start the measurements from the same point on the climb and adjust for different measuring methods.

and

(B) ensure they have reliable weights for both riders.

Once you have that, it shouldn't be too hard for the experts (not for me!) to see if Sky's numbers are credible. (I assume we all trust Gesink's.)

And, from there, we'll have an idea if this was an extraordinary wattage, or something that's believable.

 

[ice&fire]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

The data has been contrasted with comparable data already available before the "they're lying" statement. But you're not reading. How predictable.

 

[Jagartrott]

This data release raises more questions than it answers.
Does Sky have bikes & gear that are lightyears ahead of competitors so that they can pump out less W/kg than them and still gain minutes? Where are the journalists being critical?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

So Sky publish data that don't in fact make any sense.
Fan reaction? Unblinking swallowing without a skerrick of critical thought.

Critical thinkers point out the preposterous nature of the data:
eg: Froome 5.79 W/kg finishes ~1:30 ahead of Gesink @ 5.93W/kg (ie removing weight as a variable)

Fan reaction: man them critical thinkers are haters.

So, so sad.

 

[blackcat]

Froome had reported knee problems, and was abandoning. Apparently.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/racing/giro-ditalia/froome-disqualified-from-giro-ditalia-60517

plausible. but not necessarily the truth. ofcourse, not riding for GC, but that prompts the question, could he have pulled aside and waited for the sag wagon save inflaming his injury

 

[ice&fire]

Re:

This data release raises more questions than it answers.
Does Sky have bikes & gear that are lightyears ahead of competitors so that they can pump out less W/kg than them and still gain minutes? Where are the journalists being critical?

Don't expect journalists to become experts in number crunching and biomecanics overnight. Sometimes they can't even deal with the basic time computations of your everyday GC standings.

 

[TheSpud]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

So Sky publish data that don't in fact make any sense.
Fan reaction? Unblinking swallowing without a skerrick of critical thought.

Critical thinkers point out the preposterous nature of the data:
eg: Froome 5.79 W/kg finishes ~1:30 ahead of Gesink @ 5.93W/kg (ie removing weight as a variable)

Fan reaction: man them critical thinkers are haters.

So, so sad.

And it doesn't make sense for what reason? Because it's different from / lower than Gesinks yet he still beat him? Doesn't support the normal view on here so therefore Sky must be lying. So so sad.

 

[veji11]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

The thing is they publish data and the very first line is a caveat "oh btw, because of the chainrings he uses, he needs 6% less power for the same speed, so drop 6% of the power meter and you get the following readings yada yada yada...".

I mean come on ! Wouldn't all riders be using the same chainrings if it gave 6% bonus !

The powerdata loses all value with this caveat, it becomes unreadable unless one can conclusively demonstrate the effect of the chainring, and it leads to a simple question than : if this chainring is potentially magical, and furthermore if its level of magicality depends on the style of pedalling you have meaning all riders aren't equal regarding its uses, shouldn't it be banned ?

This is basically the only even remotely conclusive element one can get from this published "data"....

 

[veji11]

Re:

This data release raises more questions than it answers.
Does Sky have bikes & gear that are lightyears ahead of competitors so that they can pump out less W/kg than them and still gain minutes? Where are the journalists being critical?

exactly, we might not be talking doping but more "technological advantages", like a rifle against a musket... it reminds me of the super trackbikes team UK had for the London olympic games : At some point it might not be cheating, but it is an unlevel playing field : Cycling isn't formula one where people accept that if the Ferrari car is better one year, well it wins even if the pilot is a donkey...

 

[Tommy79]

Froome had reported knee problems, and was abandoning. Apparently.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/racing/giro-ditalia/froome-disqualified-from-giro-ditalia-60517

plausible. but not necessarily the truth. ofcourse, not riding for GC, but that prompts the question, could he have pulled aside and waited for the sag wagon save inflaming his injury

He was trying to get up to the soigneur at the top of the Mortirolo.

Why lie?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

So Sky publish data that don't in fact make any sense.
Fan reaction? Unblinking swallowing without a skerrick of critical thought.

Critical thinkers point out the preposterous nature of the data:
eg: Froome 5.79 W/kg finishes ~1:30 ahead of Gesink @ 5.93W/kg (ie removing weight as a variable)

Fan reaction: man them critical thinkers are haters.

So, so sad.

And it doesn't make sense for what reason? Because it's different from / lower than Gesinks yet he still beat him? Doesn't support the normal view on here so therefore Sky must be lying. So so sad.

What's sad is you think it's fine that (exaggerated for emphasis) a rider doing 5W/kg can beat a rider doing 6W/kg up a hill.

The unadulterated value is 6.1W/kg.

Fancy a doper massaging his data to appear clean-ish.

Now where have I seen that before....

 

[TheSpud]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

The data has been contrasted with comparable data already available before the "they're lying" statement. But you're not reading. How predictable.

In which posts were the comparisons done - in the ones about scales and sugar bags, or the one where it just said Sky were lying without anything to back up the comment?

 

[hrotha]

If you ignore their caveat, you get the same figure the experts calculated, which lines up perfectly well with the performances of everybody else in terms of watts/kg and time lost.

In other words, their Osymetric chainrings do not cause their power meters to overstimate power output by as much as 6%, and they definitely don't give you 6% extra power for free either (I've found some references, including by Ferrari, to Richie Porte having reverted to normal chainrings, which he wouldn't have done if they actually worked like that).

Which means they're telling the truth.

 

[simoni]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

So Sky publish data that don't in fact make any sense.
Fan reaction? Unblinking swallowing without a skerrick of critical thought.

Critical thinkers point out the preposterous nature of the data:
eg: Froome 5.79 W/kg finishes ~1:30 ahead of Gesink @ 5.93W/kg (ie removing weight as a variable)

Fan reaction: man them critical thinkers are haters.

So, so sad.

No agenda here other than a liking for forming conclusions based on verifiable facts where possible. Have Gesink's measurements been subject to the same level of scrutiny as Froome's? (distance of climb covered, power meter used, cranks etc. etc.)? What error do we think both measurements are subject to?

 

[TomekA]

Re:

Does Sky have bikes & gear that are lightyears ahead of competitors

I was wondering that too. I think bikes are the area where Sky team has the biggest advantage.

 

[Benotti69]

Please forgive the spud, he has just been mashed by sky's numbers for Froome.

Antoine VAYER ‏@festinaboy 5m5 minutes

We got plenty real riders SRM files from riders in La planche des belles filles. 5.78 w/kg for Froome: Big Laugh !

These Osymettric rings are so good, yet so few riders use them........Wiggins stopped using them they were too good.Didn't need the extra Osymetricness for his hour record

 

[panache]

He reported that he was 66kg in 2013. In 2015, he is 67.5 kg? Not taking his competition as seriously this year?
6% for oval chainrings. Is that a known constant?
If drafting makes his w/kg believable, what does that say about Richie Porte and G Thomas?
Nairo wasn't capable of matching 5.7 w/kg?

 

[simoni]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

The thing is they publish data and the very first line is a caveat "oh btw, because of the chainrings he uses, he needs 6% less power for the same speed, so drop 6% of the power meter and you get the following readings yada yada yada...".

Thats not what he said. "We know power Osymetric chainrings (used by Froome) over estimate power by about 6 per cent."

I personally have no clue how credible that figure is. But I do know (from reading stuff by other posters far more knowledgable than me) that cranks don't mysteriously provide you with extra power.

 

[blackcat]

So SKY publish data, and the reaction on here? "They're lying". how predictable ...

So Sky publish data that don't in fact make any sense.
Fan reaction? Unblinking swallowing without a skerrick of critical thought.

Critical thinkers point out the preposterous nature of the data:
eg: Froome 5.79 W/kg finishes ~1:30 ahead of Gesink @ 5.93W/kg (ie removing weight as a variable)

Fan reaction: man them critical thinkers are haters.

So, so sad.

try suspension of disbelief dear wiggo

 

[meat puppet]

Re:

And this is why half-transparency is worse than no transparency.

Yes, agreed. But then again, Sky clearly knows how to play this. Again, they got in before the curve by releasing what I think is a bogus figure, allegedly around 5,8w/kg for PSM (as per Inrng tweet). Only Gesink clocked in at 5,8w/kg and with a time deficit of around 1min30 to Froome. So clearly they cannot have had identical w/kg. But no one cares about Gesink, obviously, in the real world. So the figure will, in practice, attain the status of being truthful, as it makes the rounds in the media. And this is of course all that counts.

Only full transparency could prevent such moves. Also this data point is a pixel. The interesting thing is how to explain the transformation.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

He reported that he was 66kg in 2013. In 2015, he is 67.5 kg? Not taking his competition as seriously this year?
6% for oval chainrings. Is that a known constant?
If drafting makes his w/kg believable, what does that say about Richie Porte and G Thomas?
Nairo wasn't capable of matching 5.7 w/kg?

Smaller riders get better draft.