Grappe wants Contador to release physiological data

[hrotha]

Hey, Brajkovic gained over 9000W between the Dauphiné and the Tour.

 

[scribe]

Hey, Brajkovic gained over 9000W between the Dauphiné and the Tour.

And that was to kick-start the team bus so that it could get back to the hotel.

 

[Merckx index]

OK, show me the power numbers from AC 1 week before the TdF started vs his numbers in the DL. That's right, they don't exist in the public domain. And, if he was sick then how can he be better than when he wasn't sick 2 weeks before? Surely you aren't giving this clown a pass with this interpretation.

This Grappe is talking out of his backside. I don't disagree that AC was better in the tour than the DL, but it is impossible to say how much by looking at a TV.

As I said or implied before, Grappe doesn't know how much Bert improved from the DL to the Tour. The 10% figure was probably thrown out, as you or someone else said, just to get attention. But just because he maybe inflated the estimate doesn't mean there isn't an arguable point here. The rider who couldn't drop Brak showed little resemblance to the one who dominated everyone but Schleck a little later.

In fact, we could look at the times up the mountains in these two races and probably come up with some reasonably good estimates of power output. They in fact already exist for the TDF, and maybe for the DL, too. They probably aren't going to show a 10% improvement, but they will show a relatively large increase. Either that, or Brak suffered a tremendous decrease in performance in the Tour.

 

[Nick C.]

Has he explained why Brak wasn't dropping everyone and winning the Tour if he and the Dauphine are to be benchmarks????

 

[Altitude]

Has he explained why Brak wasn't dropping everyone and winning the Tour if he and the Dauphine are to be benchmarks????

Read the article. That is what he's questioning-- why was Brajkovič able to match Contador in the Dauphine and come nowhere close in the Tour

 

[peloton]

Read the article. That is what he's questioning-- why was Brajkovič able to match Contador in the Dauphine and come nowhere close in the Tour

Because Brajkovic was in peak form at the Dauphine, that was his big season goal, he was never supposed to ride the Tour, until Zubeldia broke his wrist...

 

[Nick C.]

Read the article. That is what he's questioning-- why was Brajkovič able to match Contador in the Dauphine and come nowhere close in the Tour

Why just Contador??? Contador was not the only one at the Dauphine who did better than Braki at the Tour. Maybe its Braki who needs to be looked at. These "drunk guy at a bar" type of crusaders/publicity hounds make it more difficult for any serious people trying to fight doping.

 

[scribe]

Because Brajkovic was in peak form at the Dauphine, that was his big season goal, he was never supposed to ride the Tour, until Zubeldia broke his wrist...

He was also not supposed to bust his nuts in the tour. Partly because he is riding in support, and partly that they might have been saving him for the Vuelta, and partly because you don't want to over-ride a younger horse.

Why is this stuff so difficult for guys to figure out?

 

[Angliru]

Read the article. That is what he's questioning-- why was Brajkovič able to match Contador in the Dauphine and come nowhere close in the Tour

How can they even make an estimation on Brajkovic's form compared to Contador's (at the Tour) when one was riding for himself and the other was riding in support of a rider who was on the downward slope of his career?

 

[Escarabajo]

I'd like to see that data for everyone. Of course Contador is suspect due to his positive, but his form build-ups don't strike me as suspect, especially when compared to the likes of Andy Schleck (although all we know about peaking and improving your form at the pro level from years of watching cycling might well be determined by doping).

Still, while I believe it's short-sighted to focus con Contador for this particular thing, I don't think it's hypocritical or anything, as Contador has actually tested positive.

+1.

My point too.

 

[jae2460]

Yeah, watch the race again buddy. Brajko never dropped Contador in a mountain stages, just sucked wheels while Contador attacked and outsprinted Brajko for the stage win.

Brajko won the Dauphine in the time trial. Not the mountains.

I saw the race clearly, my friend. I did not state that Brajko "dropped Contador in a mountain stage..." I stated he was clearly superior to Contador, which he was--that's why he won the race.
Contador threw everything he had at Brakjovic and the young guy was pure class and rode a perfect, defensive race. Brajkovic would have been a moron to have attacked Contador on a climb because he didn't need to attack; he was wearing yellow.
It's not fair to try to take anything away from Brajkovic's victory. He was a class act in that race.
Now, if Brajkovic's chain would have slipped like Andy's, then perhaps Contador could have won the Dauphine too. But, unfortunately for him, that was not the case.

 

[shouldawouldacoulda]

Isn't the idea of training that you go all out or pretty close? I think if Bert could have beaten Brak he would have, but he just didn't have it. Yet after just two weeks of training, he suddenly is far better than anyone but AS.

No not really, or kind of sort of. If you are using an event for training you may do a couple of things:

1) Go into it tired. At the tail end of a large training block, so you are overloading yourself in your training. You are far from fresh and won't race your best - in fact you could totally suck if you overcook it too much. You would be going all out - like you say above, but your all out isn't giving you 100% of what you're capable of .

2) Hold back. You want to get some race pace, and maybe do some 100% all out effort tests, but not go too deep through the entire stage race. You meter your efforts in the race. In this case you are training, but not going all out like you say above.

I have no clue what Contador was or wasn't doing at the Dauphine. But in either scenario above I could see him putting up numbers that look pretty 'off' what he'd do in the Tour.

 

[Altitude]

Because Brajkovic was in peak form at the Dauphine, that was his big season goal, he was never supposed to ride the Tour, until Zubeldia broke his wrist...

Okay, tell that to Grappe. I was just answering Nick C's question

 

[ChrisE]

As I said or implied before, Grappe doesn't know how much Bert improved from the DL to the Tour. The 10% figure was probably thrown out, as you or someone else said, just to get attention. But just because he maybe inflated the estimate doesn't mean there isn't an arguable point here. The rider who couldn't drop Brak showed little resemblance to the one who dominated everyone but Schleck a little later.

In fact, we could look at the times up the mountains in these two races and probably come up with some reasonably good estimates of power output. They in fact already exist for the TDF, and maybe for the DL, too. They probably aren't going to show a 10% improvement, but they will show a relatively large increase. Either that, or Brak suffered a tremendous decrease in performance in the Tour.

OK, stop the presses! This Grappe clown just made a point that a rider peaking for the tour is not as strong 2 weeks...errrrr 1 month or something before the tour. 10% even! I hope the Lemond defenders don't read too much into this.

Maybe the CN stenographers can give AC's brother a front page article for counterpoint. Maybe bring in the chef to offer his opinion as well.

 

[acoggan]

OK, show me the power numbers from AC 1 week before the TdF started vs his numbers in the DL.

I don't know Contador's power just before or during the Tour, but I do know Brakjovic's power up l'Alpe at the Dauphine. Based on that (and retrospectively watching TV coverage of the stage), I would say that Contador performed much better there than many (e.g., Grappe) seem to think.

Of course, this is almost meaningless when it comes to answering the question of who may have doped when, but it does at least indirectly relate to claim that Contador's performance improved by 10% between the two races.

 

[ChrisE]

I don't know Contador's power just before or during the Tour, but I do know Brakjovic's power up l'Alpe at the Dauphine. Based on that (and retrospectively watching TV coverage of the stage), I would say that Contador performed much better there than many (e.g., Grappe) seem to think.

Of course, this is almost meaningless when it comes to answering the question of who may have doped when, but it does at least indirectly relate to claim that Contador's performance improved by 10% between the two races.

What were Brak's power numbers in the DL on that stage? Thanks.

That doesn't explain Grappe's inability to read a calendar, though.

 

[El Pistolero]

I saw the race clearly, my friend. I did not state that Brajko "dropped Contador in a mountain stage..." I stated he was clearly superior to Contador, which he was--that's why he won the race.
Contador threw everything he had at Brakjovic and the young guy was pure class and rode a perfect, defensive race. Brajkovic would have been a moron to have attacked Contador on a climb because he didn't need to attack; he was wearing yellow.
It's not fair to try to take anything away from Brajkovic's victory. He was a class act in that race.
Now, if Brajkovic's chain would have slipped like Andy's, then perhaps Contador could have won the Dauphine too. But, unfortunately for him, that was not the case.

He was clearly superior to Contador for one day. All other days Contador was better

One week stage races are usually won in a time trial. Where as the Tour is mostly won in the mountains.

I'm not taking away anything away from Brajko's victory, he just wasn't a better climber even in the Dauphine.

 

[acoggan]

What were Brak's power numbers in the DL on that stage?

Sorry, but it would be unethical of me to share them w/o permission, which I do not have.

 

[ChrisE]

Sorry, but it would be unethical of me to share them w/o permission, which I do not have.

I understand. I know Horner's were public from the tour, so I though maybe Braks were out there and that RS was publishing them or something.

We could pick apart Schleck's performance leading up to the tour and make even bigger statements. We could pick apart anybody's over the last 20years, where peaking for the tour was common instead of racing all year long at a high level.

I guess my problem is CN putting this out there with no follow up or critical questions about WTH this guy is saying. I should be used to it by now in the media in general, but being critical of lazy stenography is a pet peeve of mine I guess.

 

[python]

I don't know Contador's power just before or during the Tour, but I do know Brakjovic's power up l'Alpe at the Dauphine. Based on that (and retrospectively watching TV coverage of the stage), I would say that Contador performed much better there than many (e.g., Grappe) seem to think.

Of course, this is almost meaningless when it comes to answering the question of who may have doped when, but it does at least indirectly relate to claim that Contador's performance improved by 10% between the two races.

to put it simply, you think grappe overestimated ?

 

[maltiv]

If Contador's "jump in form" from Dauphine to the TDF was suspicious, then what about Menchov's jump in form?

 

[python]

so it looks like pulled the 10% out of his xxxxxx and then tells everyone he won't provide the details.

 

[Le breton]

Quote:
Originally Posted by acoggan
I don't know Contador's power just before or during the Tour, but I do know Brakjovic's power up l'Alpe at the Dauphine. Based on that (and retrospectively watching TV coverage of the stage), I would say that Contador performed much better there than many (e.g., Grappe) seem to think.

Of course, this is almost meaningless when it comes to answering the question of who may have doped when, but it does at least indirectly relate to claim that Contador's performance improved by 10% between the two races.

to put it simply, you think grappe overestimated ?

Grappe is quite successful at selling books and is probably well qualified as a coach, however, everything I have read by him in the papers, starting in L'Equipe in 2004, proves to me that he is seriously challenged when it comes to physics or math.
The same could possibly be said about Antoine Vayer, but at least Vayer can always fall back on Fédéric Portoleau when he needs some hard figures.

 

[lean mean &green]

maybe i need an ethics lesson?

Sorry, but it would be unethical of me to share them w/o permission, which I do not have.

your ethics seem to be selective. it's unethical to share the data w/o permission, a point on which i agree. however, if you're going to discredit grappe in a public forum such as this you would need said data to do so otherwise it would be unethical. to go a step further, if you don't have permission to speak freely about the data then you shouldn't really be speaking publicly about having access to the data at all. in this case we're supposed to just believe one of two oracles, grappe who won't talk specifics or andy coggan who won't discuss specifics. both of your contributions to this discussion are, well....worthless.

 

[Le breton]

.....
however, if you're going to discredit grappe in a public forum

Yes Andy, Grappe is big enough to discredit Frédéric all by himself don't have to do it for him.