Re:
cnc-it said:
Btw Le Mond wasn't my example but as someone brought him up I would say that his method of preparing for the Tour was hardly scientific..battle through the Giro and hope for the best..not really a tailored scientific training program like they are using at Sky! If Froome is the phenomenon he is supposed to be then it's quite feasible he can better Le Mond's performances with a modern scientific training approach! An approach that Sky don't want to give away to the public and press even though Paul Kimmage has suggested they should do.
We dont know what sky do. They talk a lot of crap. They slam other teams as amateurs through Walsh as their mouthpiece. Sky have told plenty of lies that we know of.
I would not think that because Sky say they do something it makes a difference.
But to dismiss LeMonds training as basic is unfair. LeMond paid attention to lots of stuff at his time. LeMond was an innovator when he raced. I guess he paid attention to all aspects of his racing, not just some fancy handlebars, but nutrition, training etc....
The only difference in Sky's approach, imo, than other teams is they have the cash to look better, but behind the facade, they pretty much the same as every other team.
Remember year 1 for Sky when they were the lantern rouge of the peloton? What was the reaction? Get experience people from the world of pro cycling in, Leinders, Yates, Knaven, DeJongh, Jullich, Rogers etc etc. So when they could not do it their way, they went old school. Not seen anything different in Sky's approach, except they control the Brit media.
Rest of the world knows Froome is a doper and Sky are a doping team.