JV talks, sort of

[frenchfry]

The test is how quick a rider can use an inhaler without the TV camera catching him.................

This indeed is what I find intriguing, more than the inhaler itself.

It really looked to me like he was trying to hide his action. Something to hide?

 

[jens_attacks]

he and michelle love trolling. no idea why but they really do, some people are like that

see what i'm talking about?

Michelle Cound @michellecound · 3h
This looks like reason enough to support #Portugal #WorldCup2014

by the way, hey michelle avid reader of these forums. and probably chris has some fun too when bored.

 

[del1962]

see what i'm talking about?

Michelle Cound @michellecound · 3h
This looks like reason enough to support #Portugal #WorldCup2014

by the way, hey michelle avid reader of these forums. and probably chris has some fun too when bored.

Very different body type from Froomey though

 

[jens_attacks]

michelle no doubt the most fascinating character of cycling world since edita rumsas

 

[Merckx index]

Good post, however this point may not be accurate. I think you used VAM to calculate w/kg, not a super accurate method. IIRC Armstrong said he did 495 watts when he set the previous record.

Yes, but it wouldn’t be that far off. According to a link I posted earlier, Armstrong probably started 12 km from the top. At 7% gradient, that is 840 m, and if he did 30:45, that is about 1640 VAM or just 6.1 watts/kg. Nowhere remotely close to the 6.85 claimed by Ferrrari, or whatever it might come out with LA’s weight and 495 watts. If you assume 13 km, it comes out to about 6.6, which is close enough, but as far as I can tell the climb has traditionally not been timed from that far out.

What really bothers me is that people throw out these times without specifying exactly what the climb was. It makes no sense to list times of other elite riders of the past unless there is a well-established starting point that everyone uses. In fact, no one seems to know where anyone started, except the riders themselves.

What does not make sense is what an outlier the Froome and Porte times are compared to all of their other performances. 30:09 is Pantani level stuff. While Froome has had some very questionable performances this is on another level.

As Jens and Flanders have pointed out, it is not supported by facts.

Was Froome (with Porte) just making all this up? Maybe, given how reluctant they’ve been to release any power data, I did find it quite surprising that Froome would give both a time and a number. OTOH, given how sensitive Sky has been to critics, you’d think they wouldn’t make something up, taking the risk that they might be exposed as lying later.

 

[Granville57]

Interesting comments by JV on Froome, but some things he missed:

1) Porte was nearly as fast as Froome up Madone, so if Froome is an absolute, never-seen-before freak, with > 90 V02max, 90% lactate threshold, 23-24% efficiency, so is Porte. If the odds that Froome is are miniscule, what are the odds that both are?

This deserves highlighting for the next time JV pops in.

 

[Race Radio]

Yes, but it wouldn’t be that far off. According to a link I posted earlier, Armstrong probably started 12 km from the top. At 7% gradient, that is 840 m, and if he did 30:45, that is about 1640 VAM or just 6.1 watts/kg. Nowhere remotely close to the 6.85 claimed by Ferrrari, or whatever it might come out with LA’s weight and 495 watts. If you assume 13 km, it comes out to about 6.6, which is close enough, but as far as I can tell the climb has traditionally not been timed from that far out.

What really bothers me is that people throw out these times without specifying exactly what the climb was. It makes no sense to list times of other elite riders of the past unless there is a well-established starting point that everyone uses. In fact, no one seems to know where anyone started, except the riders themselves.



Was Froome (with Porte) just making all this up? Maybe, given how reluctant they’ve been to release any power data, I did find it quite surprising that Froome would give both a time and a number. OTOH, given how sensitive Sky has been to critics, you’d think they wouldn’t make something up, taking the risk that they might be exposed as lying later.

Armstrong has been pretty clear about it

So when I say I beat his record by 45 seconds… but I also cranked out 495 watts for more than 30 minutes

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/page/features/?id=83743#.U58wa5RdWSo

Given Froome's lower weight (66kg) his claimed watts make sense. What does not make sense is he has never done anything close to that in competition AND he dropped 2 minutes from his time in 2 weeks.

It does not make sense.

 

[the sceptic]

Armstrong has been pretty clear about it


http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/page/features/?id=83743#.U58wa5RdWSo

Given Froome's lower weight (66kg) his claimed watts make sense. What does not make sense is he has never done anything close to that in competition AND he dropped 2 minutes from his time in 2 weeks.

It does not make sense.

Maybe he had a tailwind?

 

[Race Radio]

Maybe he had a tailwind?

Then his watts would be lower......but you knew that

Troll on

 

[proffate]

I actually think those are very good ideas. Yes, the racing would be less predictable...whether that increases fans or decreases, I'm not sure... i think that also has the effect of lowering the cost to run a team bringing it more in line with realistic commercial sponsorship valuations for cycling, as opposed to the current environment which is less and less commercial and more and more Billionaire plaything driven.

but more teams = less TV time for each = reduced sponsorship valuation (?)

 

[the sceptic]

Then his watts would be lower......but you knew that

Troll on

but we know that Froome came close to Armstrong on many climbs in the tour. Maybe the watts are higher because madone is not in the middle of a gt?

 

[Race Radio]

but we know that Froome came close to Armstrong on many climbs in the tour. Maybe the watts are higher because madone is not in the middle of a gt?

In this case he did not "Come close" he beat him, significantly, with the various race related elements eliminated. We are also not dealing with calculations of watts but actual numbers direct from the riders mouths.

Froome is claiming he did 6.95 w/kg for 30:09. That is huge. Pantani level.

 

[Granville57]

Maybe the watts are higher because madone is not in the middle of a gt?

I was under the impression that Armstrong's times are NOT based on what he did during the Tour, but during training preparation just prior to the Tour.

I'm curious to know just where and when (originally) Armstrong's times were made public.

 

[gooner]

I was under the impression that Armstrong's times are NOT based on what he did during the Tour, but during training preparation just prior to the Tour.

I'm curious to know just where and when (originally) Armstrong's times were made public.

It's a long while back but if I'm not mistaken from my recollection, I think it might have been in his first book.

 

[Race Radio]

I was under the impression that Armstrong's times are NOT based on what he did during the Tour, but during training preparation just prior to the Tour.

I'm curious to know just where and when (originally) Armstrong's times were made public.

Multiple times. Books and interviews like this one

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/page/features/?id=83743#.U58wa5RdWSo

Watts – time and watts. And really watts are a much better indication than time because time can be affected by temperature, by wind, by humidity, by pavement surface – a lot of things. But the record is a record of time. So when I say I beat his record by 45 seconds… but I also cranked out 495 watts for more than 30 minutes so…laughs…I knew we were in a good position.

 

[Merckx index]

Armstrong has been pretty clear about it


http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/page/features/?id=83743#.U58wa5RdWSo

I'm not questioning what LA said, I'm pointing out that what he said doesn't jibe with the actual climb. The Pez story you link to is not quite accurate. It says:

The Madone is a 12 km climb from sea level to 927 metres. Lance established the record on the climb in 1999 with a time of 30:47. Lance continues, recalling the events leading up to his first tour win like it was yesterday…

The peak is 927 m, more or less, but sea level is actually nearly 15 km away. LA and other riders actually began from the inland village of Les Castagnins:

Lance Armstrong’s route officially begins in the village of Les Castagnins…From the Promenade du Soleil in Menton, take the D22 inland sign posted for Sainte-Agnès. After 1 km take the D22 left along Route de Sainte-Agnès. The road winds out of Menton to the little village of Les Castagnins. 300 m beyond the supermarket, just across the little bridge is where Lance Armstrong and Tony Romingers would have started their stopwatches.

This link shows the elevation profile. From Castagnins it is 12 km to peak, with a rise of about 850 m.

So again, a time of 30:45 indicates a power of about 6.1 watts/kg.

 

[Granville57]

Multiple times. Books and interviews like this one

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/page/features/?id=83743#.U58wa5RdWSo

Thanks. But not to belabor this point too much, it seems that these times are, more or less, things that are just talked about, i.e. thrown around in conversation, as opposed to these guys posting the definitive details of their records in some more official or more well documented manner. Would that be a fair or accurate assessment?


Btw, that interview has to be the most egregious example of "fan with a typewriter" I have ever seen. It's a stunning reminder of just how strong a hold Armstrong use to have on the media. Unreal.

 

[Race Radio]

So again, a time of 30:45 indicates a power of about 6.1 watts/kg.

So again, his claim of 495 watts for 30:45 indicates a power of 6.95 w/kg. One of the good things about having an SRM, it eliminates the variables that a timed climb can have. Armstrong, and Ferrari, have made this 6.95 w/kg claim for years. Now Froome is making the same claim in a very public manner.

Perhaps one of the them is lying

 

[Beech Mtn]

About that adaptive physiology stuff - maybe we should define what we mean by that?

&#8220]there was only one reason for that[/B]. At Festina I saw the riders producing 70mL/kg in November then 90mL/kg before the Tour de France and that was only down to the products. For the power outputs, the increases were the same.”

Source

OK, in the space of a month/few months, you pretty much can't have such improvement without attributing it to doping. While I'll concede that you can probably have some improvements in some things over longer periods of time, that still doesn't account for Froome's drastic improvement from Poland to the 2011 Vuelta.

So what do we mean exactly by "crazy adaptive physiology," and what's the hypothesis for explaining CF's transformation?

 

[Race Radio]

Thanks. But not to belabor this point too much, it seems that these times are, more or less, things that are just talked about, i.e. thrown around in conversation, as opposed to these guys posting the definitive details of their records in some more official or more well documented manner. Would that be a fair or accurate assessment?


Btw, that interview has to be the most egregious example of "fan with a typewriter" I have ever seen. It's a stunning reminder of just how strong a hold Armstrong use to have on the media. Unreal.

While they have not posted their SRM files they have detailed what the readings were for 30 minutes.

The times do not matter, the Watts do. Both Armstrong and Froome are claiming 6.95 w/kg for 30 minutes. Not normal.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

While they have not posted their SRM files they have detailed what the readings were for 30 minutes.

The times do not matter, the Watts do. Both Armstrong and Froome are claiming 6.95 w/kg for 30 minutes. Not normal.

Since when do you believe Armstrong weighed 71 kg!? You've spent years claiming the weight loss was BS and his actual weight was around 75 kg. Ferrari told Coyle LA's TdF weight was 74-75 kg. He climbed the madone @ 495 W prior to the -99 Dauphine if I'm not mistaken, so probably above Tour weight.

 

[blackcat]

So again, his claim of 495 watts for 30:45 indicates a power of 6.95 w/kg. One of the good things about having an SRM, it eliminates the variables that a timed climb can have. Armstrong, and Ferrari, have made this 6.95 w/kg claim for years. Now Froome is making the same claim in a very public manner.

Perhaps one of the them is lying

warning: first time in the world where Armstrong has actually won a truth telling competition with a liar! congrats Lance, you can have one of your maillot jaunes back. And i'll even shout you a dance at Yellow Rose

 

[zigmeister]

So again, his claim of 495 watts for 30:45 indicates a power of 6.95 w/kg. One of the good things about having an SRM, it eliminates the variables that a timed climb can have. Armstrong, and Ferrari, have made this 6.95 w/kg claim for years. Now Froome is making the same claim in a very public manner.

Perhaps one of the them is lying

Tom Danielson has made such similar claims in the past. Assuming he was doped during that period. I think the references are in his thread on the forum. Years ago, I forget the exact number Danielson was pulling out of his a-s-s, but either he was lying, or the EPO valve was wide open...we know the latter now.

JV can speak of Danielson amazing responsive performances as we all know.

 

[thehog]

Okay, while normally highly supportive of you, I'll toss a tomato.

As a longtime believer in such notions as gravity, physics, conservation of energy, and diminishing returns, this is my new favorite code expression.

Taking the word right off the page, this is just crazy.

Dave.

Knowing JV speaks in riddles and with a sense of irony I don't doubt when he uses a term like "crazy adaptive physiology" he actually means "doping".

Considering that JV is under a different set of circumstances than anonymous forum posters it is his only real way of saying "the guy is a super freak and is most likely doping".

He just can't come out and say "Froome is doping". Not possible.

I'm sure if you shared a bottle of merlot with JV after glass 2 he'd just smile and say, "yeah, he's friggin doping!".

But you'll never get a press statement to that effect. Why would someone cause themselves that much trouble? JV only remembers too well the vindictiveness of McQuaid so he's not going to get on the wrong side of the Cookson Family and find Dan Martin all of sudden has a Passport letter to explain.

I'm sure when Froome finally gets popped JV will say he knew all along

 

[hrotha]

Then why go out of his way to clarify, explicitly and unambiguously, that he thinks Froome is clean?