JV talks, sort of

[burning]

Thanks to jens for the link in RR forum

He went from this:
Froome for a top 5 and world tour point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Wrote by a Cav fan)

To this:

But he's inside the human limit, it's completely fine

 

[Benotti69]

Is Lemond the current standard for clean cycling champions and the way careers have to develop? Not everyone's got the chance to take the shortest road to the top.

If Froome has a Vo2max of 94 then he would've shown a lot more at an earlier stage even at Sky, who were ready to sling him out the door.

 

[JV1973]

Hold it. Froome with a VO2Max of up to 94? If it was that high then he would have tearing it up in his early career. There would be stories about him just like there are about LeMond when he was a junior.

Froome grew up in BFE Africa... what junior races was he supposed to tear up? For a guy with little experience, he did quite well early on. There's a big difference between the progression of a guy that starts racing at 12 and grows up in a cycling country like France and a guy that starts at 17 in Kenya.

Also, Vo2 max is developed, not totally inherited. It is genetic to a degree, but people can develop it. And heres the tricky part: Some people have the genetic capacity for greater improvement over time that others.

So, what you do at 18 isn't indicative of what you do at 27. It can be, but not always.

Just some points to consider.


Also, just to be clear, his vo2 max could be 80 and he could still perform as he does, if he had great efficiency and lactate clearance. Vo2 max isn't a great indicator of much. I shouldn't use it. Sorry.

So, 6 w/kg is something to focus on more concretely. Its what is going into the road.

If vo2 was the best indicator, I should have been better than Lemond. And I wasn't. Ever. even doped.


But, honestly, I don't care. If you guys wanna think Froome dopes, go for it. have at it. I do not care..

Just trying to give you some alternative methods to think on it.

 

[JV1973]

It is time to make it simple.

Time for transparency. Publish your riders numbers. All of them.

If you prove your riders numbers are what is considered clean then when others dont or wont then they will be suspect.

Also LeMond's numbers are considered the maximum of cleanliness, how many LeMonds can there be? So guys like Wiggins, Froome, Hesjedal et al getting to the magic LeMond clean is a joke. These guys are not in the same state never mind fit to ride alongside a guy like LeMond!

Ok, here's all the numbers:

42

 

[Fatclimber]

...
Sastre, I cannot comment on his early career, but my opinion of his 08 Tour victory is generally positive. in 08 AFLD controlled the testing at the Tour and were pushing it very hard. Patrice Clerq and Gilbert Ysern were the principles at ASO and were willing to make hard, but good, choices to clean up the race. I miss those guys. Absolute tragedy they got fired in the UCI vs ASO scuffle. They did everything they could in 08 to test the riders for a fair race. everything.

Anyhow, if we look at the numbers on climbs, Sastre was within acceptable ranges on the climbs, with the exception of Alpe, which he was exceptional and slightly over 6w/kg. So, I can't say anything with certainty, but if forced to bet my life or my son's life on did Sastre dope or not dope in 2008 TdF? I would choose not dope.

And then I would cringe waiting to see if a gun fired.

JV

Wow, that's quite an endorsement of any professional cyclist racing since the 90's. (nice reality check at the end tho). If true, it's sad that quite possibly the only real champion (clean) since Mig started scorching the earth is the quietest, most unnoticed, and most uncelebrated Tour winner.

 

[Benotti69]

Ok, here's all the numbers:

42

As usual, you come on here saying you dont care, but continue to post, giving next to nothing in a sport where doping is the paneagua and yet expect people to believe you when you say the sport is cleanER.

Chapeau JV, chapeau.

How about posting a pic all the TUEs your team presented for GTs.

 

[burning]

Froome grew up in BFE Africa... what junior races was he supposed to tear up? For a guy with little experience, he did quite well early on. There's a big difference between the progression of a guy that starts racing at 12 and grows up in a cycling country like France and a guy that starts at 17 in Kenya.

Also, Vo2 max is developed, not totally inherited. It is genetic to a degree, but people can develop it. And heres the tricky part: Some people have the genetic capacity for greater improvement over time that others.

So, what you do at 18 isn't indicative of what you do at 27. It can be, but not always.

Just some points to consider.


Also, just to be clear, his vo2 max could be 80 and he could still perform as he does, if he had great efficiency and lactate clearance. Vo2 max isn't a great indicator of much. I shouldn't use it. Sorry.

So, 6 w/kg is something to focus on more concretely. Its what is going into the road.

If vo2 was the best indicator, I should have been better than Lemond. And I wasn't. Ever. even doped.


But, honestly, I don't care. If you guys wanna think Froome dopes, go for it. have at it. I do not care..

Just trying to give you some alternative methods to think on it.

I know that I'm not going to change your opinion but that dude achieved nothing for 3.5 years in europe, suddenly exploded and would have won Vuelta if his DS was fairly smart, then doing nothing for roughly 1 year, then completely dominating stage races since TDF 2012.

I really dont find this timeline of performance sensible, but you obviously know better than me and probably have extra information about him

 

[JV1973]

Good post.

A lot were taken aback by Santambrogio's considerable improvements this season. He was still at and around the magic 6w/kg marker. I don't think anyone was surprised when he got caught.

A lot were taken aback by Froome's considerable improvements at the 2011 Vuelta and since then. He has sat at and around the magic 6w/kg marker since then. I don't think many would be surprised if he was to get caught. If he was racing in a high-vis jersey, more would be suspicious.

I could understand someone like Sayer copping a lot more flak than Froome, simply because he isn't tested under the biopassport. But what, really, is the difference between Santa and Froome?

What is humanly possible is not necessarily Froomanly possible.

Your point is quite reasonable. Why did WADA and UCI target Santa heavily, and Froome is not as targeted? Why did all riders applaud Santa getting caught and don't say a word about Froome producing same power?

Totally valid.

I don't have a great explanation for you.

but I'll try:

Santa had a long career in Italian amateurs with good results in shorter stage races and one day events. He's been around for a while. A very coached and maximized talent. When this deviated from the well established mean, considerably, it raised eyebrows. Santa always had good days, he just never had good weeks.

Froome has less of a mean established.

Froome looks like a cat 2 on the bike, but he used to look like a cat 5. He's clearly not maximizing efficiency and hasn't been coached as such from a young age. But he's improving very fast, as he is finally addressing weak spots that wouldn't have been understood and isolated on a team like barloworld, as they would assume this would have occurred at a younger age.

He's always tested like a freak, but I think it was dismissed as anomalous, as he wasn't putting it into the road early on. remember, i tried to get him in 2011, i was just a few days too late, as I wasn't actually in Spain when the vuelta started and i didn't think so much would change in the first few days of vuelta (I was wrong!!!)

Also, he had big issues with parasites earlier in his career. Getting that under control changed him a lot. maybe they were like the spider that bit spiderman? kidding...

Anyhow, short answer is, i don't really know, but my gut says that it's ok and that he's real. But he's the only one who really knows.

 

[Pentacycle]

If Froome has a Vo2max of 94 then he would've shown a lot more at an earlier stage even at Sky, who were ready to sling him out the door.

I'm more interested in raw treshold power(what he supposedly tested in Aigle) but it's pretty hard to get access.

The number JV gave, 42, is a great number that answers a lot of questions, but it doesn't solve this issue..

 

[roundabout]

The guy barely did anything of note in his career and then 1 day he is able to do 6.6 w/kg* for 20 minutes on the road.

There was no gradual development. 1 day it all just clicked into place.

*according to his team

 

[JV1973]

As usual, you come on here saying you dont care, but continue to post, giving next to nothing in a sport where doping is the paneagua and yet expect people to believe you when you say the sport is cleanER.

Chapeau JV, chapeau.

How about posting a pic all the TUEs your team presented for GTs.

You guys have really got to do just some basic research before posting emotionally driven junk like this.

If you looked at MPCC policy and testing methods that run outside of WADA rules, you'd also realize that abuse of cortico TUE's is very unlikely for a team that has serum cortisol measured regularly by MPCC.

 

[JV1973]

The guy barely did anything of note in his career and then 1 day he is able to do 6.6 w/kg for 20 minutes on the road.

There was no gradual development. 1 day it all just clicked into place.

You are right.

As I said above, he's tested that way for a while. No idea why he couldn't do it on the road. I have theories, but who knows, they could be junk. I remember watching him in 2011 tour of california thinking " this guy tests better than anyone in the field, yet he's getting killed"... I should have signed him then!

 

[JV1973]

I know that I'm not going to change your opinion but that dude achieved nothing for 3.5 years in europe, suddenly exploded and would have won Vuelta if his DS was fairly smart, then doing nothing for roughly 1 year, then completely dominating stage races since TDF 2012.

I really dont find this timeline of performance sensible, but you obviously know better than me and probably have extra information about him

My opinion is based on some testing results, gut feeling, and watching this stuff for a long time. the margin for error is LARGE.

I could be wrong. i know that.

 

[taiwan]

Hi JV, what tests of Froome did you conduct/see? When?

 

[Pentacycle]

You are right.

As I said above, he's tested that way for a while. No idea why he couldn't do it on the road. I have theories, but who knows, they could be junk. I remember watching him in 2011 tour of california thinking " this guy tests better than anyone in the field, yet he's getting killed"... I should have signed him then!

Did he also test well in training rides on a mountain? Or did you only have the Aigle lab numbers? I get the idea sometimes those lab tests are very misleading, cause I've seen good testers like Boom and Gesink being killed all year in big races.

Reminds me to ask you if you think Van Baarle can reach the top. It seems you haven't had lots of luck signing consistent Dutch riders. Could he be the exception?

 

[JV1973]

Hi JV, what tests of Froome did you conduct/see? When?

just was given some from his barloworld time. rather crude, old fashioned vo2 tests, but still. i never conducted any myself. i've heard of some big numbers when he was at the cycling center in agile, but i never saw those.

 

[JV1973]

Did he also test well in training rides on a mountain? Or did you only have the Aigle lab numbers? I get the idea sometimes those lab tests are very misleading, cause I've soon good testers like Boom and Gesink being killed all year in big races.

Reminds me to ask you if you think Van Baarle can reach the top. It seems you haven't had lots of luck signing consistent Dutch riders. Could he be the exception?

It's tough to know with Dutch riders, since they have so much help in developing from an early age. So, their progress can be accelerated sometimes.

Dylan appears to be more of a "raw" talent, but there's no way to find out other than to race him.

 

[Alpechraxler]

You guys have really got to do just some basic research before posting emotionally driven junk like this.

If you looked at MPCC policy and testing methods that run outside of WADA rules, you'd also realize that abuse of cortico TUE's is very unlikely for a team that has serum cortisol measured regularly by MPCC.

Hope noone gets a beesting then

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Jv, we will never agree so here is a question. DO you massage your sideburns with common onion and cooking oil(like people massage their moustache in Rajasthan, India) and do you recommend a special kind of shampoo for it?

 

[pmcg76]

JV, just wanted to pull you on a few points.

Froome was racing in South Africa when he was a junior, not Kenya. I am pretty sure that SA has as much of a racing scene as places like Ireland, NZ, Slovakia etc. Sorry but the growing up in Kenya line does not fly as he didn't really start racing until he moved to SA.

You mentioned that 2001 Cycle Sport article re Armstrong numbers, I still have the hard copy of that and indeed read it recently. Sorry but that article seemed to be backing Armstrong more than anything. There is not one subtlety in it that I would have thought you were hinting that Armstrong was doping. Maybe someone reading it knowing the numbers might have said oh, that's BS but your average joe like me didn't have a clue especially at a time when numbers were not as public or relevant as they are now.

I have said before that I am far less cynical than most on here and I give you the benefit of the doubt most time's but I have a very hard time buying the Froome transformation more than anything, regardless of whether he is within the limits or not. As other's have pointed out, the Santa comparison is legit and your explanation of the differences in the two cases is very weak stuff at best. I don't claim to know the in's and out's but your explanation on Froome would not convince me in the slightest.

Just wanted to add that the lack of development because of his background could as easily be applied to someone like Bjarne Riis as he came from a country with little to no cycling culture at the time. Poor Bjarne never got to go a development center in Aigle.

 

[JV1973]

Hope noone gets a beesting then

They'd be out. for sure.

 

[Pentacycle]

It's tough to know with Dutch riders, since they have so much help in developing from an early age. So, their progress can be accelerated sometimes.

Dylan appears to be more of a "raw" talent, but there's no way to find out other than to race him.

What help do you mean? Do they train better than juniors/espoirs from other countries, or do they race too much, perhaps too many flat races?

 

[thehog]

just was given some from his barloworld time. rather crude, old fashioned vo2 tests, but still. i never conducted any myself. i've heard of some big numbers when he was at the cycling center in agile, but i never saw those.

The mysterious "numbers" that's no one has seen.

Sounds like Lance's extra big heart.

JV you really do try and sell ice to the Eskimos.

Give it a rest.

 

[JV1973]

What help do you mean? Do they train better than juniors/espoirs from other countries, or do they race too much, perhaps too many flat races?

The development programs in holland are very good, so the rider at age 21 or so are very close to their maximum potential.

 

[JV1973]

The mysterious "numbers" that's no one has seen.

Sounds like Lance's extra big heart.

JV you really do try and sell ice to the Eskimos.

Give it a rest.

Every guy you've ever seen in the top 5 at the Tour has an extra big heart. left ventricle size is highly correlated to being successful in endurance sports....although not always.

I'm not selling anything. Seriously, I don't care if you disagree. It's totally your choice.