Sky/Froome Talk Only (No Way Sky Are Cleans?)

[Don't be late Pedro]

Indurain and Pantani, if he were still alive, might have a minor quibble with that statement. Armstrong could have easily done a double if he thought there was enough profit in it to care.

A new drug or new doping method gives a massive advantage to the early adopters. We saw it with CERA when a handful of riders were just killing it in a way we have not seen since the early 90s before everyone began using EPO. We saw it in 2000-2002 with USPS switching to blood transfusions. I think what we are seeing now is a new form of doping. To point to minor tweaks in the training of already fully developed pros as a reason for astonishing leaps in performance is ludicrous.

That would seem a reasonable hypothesis.

I assume when you say 'minor quibble' that is because they would have done their doubles of the back of EPO rather than blood doping?

I would also argue that it is possible for fully developed pros to make leaps due to changes in training. However, for them all to be in the same team is... somewhat less likely.

 

[Ferminal]

Bilharziastrong coming to a foundation near you.

Shame on you, Froome is nothing like Armstrong.

 

[BroDeal]

I assume when you say 'minor quibble' that is because they would have done their doubles of the back of EPO rather than blood doping?

I guess it depends on whether you want to define blood doping as use of EPO and transfusions or just transfusions. The transfusion era was dominated by Amrstrong and Ullrich, both of whom had countries and teams that did not give a damn about the Giro. In 2005 Basso was the strongest at the Giro and would have won if he had not gotten sick; at the Tour he was super strong.

I would also argue that it is possible for fully developed pros to make leaps due to changes in training. However, for them all to be in the same team is... somewhat less likely.

I would argue that it is not possible. Performance is an asymptotic curve that flattens out at a rider's physiological potential. A rider's potential changes with age, reaching a high point in the twenty-seven to twenty-nine range then declining in the years afterward. Most of the gains come quickly and easily. After a rider has been training like a pro for a few years, with 30,000km of training per year along with racing at the highest level, the rider will be so close to his potential that there is simply not much to gain,

Yes, multiple riders on the same team making a leap is even less plausible. In Sky's case, not only do we see a nobody like Froome making a huge leap, but Wiggins made the leap on what should have been the backside of his career, after the age he should have peaked.

 

[BroDeal]

Shame on you, Froome is nothing like Armstrong.

True. Before Armstrong's transformation he actually showed talent in one day races and had palmares Froome could only dream about.

 

[blackcat]

True. Before Armstrong's transformation he actually showed talent in one day races and had palmares Froome could only dream about.

think you are underrating froome.

Clinic has tended to underrate Armstrong too. We dont know his organic talent. he did start in triathlon. but he was a mighty cyclist, there must be some native potential. (heiro or libertine want evidence on tri and armstong?*see my take below)

froome, i think he has been underrated. never put in context, the mtb'er from kenya/south africa, thru john robertson's teams. his first tour was very impressive. think he was elligble to rude the u23 world championships in the chrono that year. if you look at his results in the two chronos in his tour debut, and compare those perfomances to malori gretsch and meyer (Varese chrono), and the opinion on froome may be significantly different.

but no doubt Froome, like Wiggins, is on that O2 vector technique, and weightloss aids.

but if everyone at the pointy end is doping, why do we single out froomie? I am a big supporter of froomie.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

I would argue that it is not possible. Performance is an asymptotic curve that flattens out at a rider's physiological potential. A rider's potential changes with age, reaching a high point in the twenty-seven to twenty-nine range then declining in the years afterward. Most of the gains come quickly and easily. After a rider has been training like a pro for a few years, with 30,000km of training per year along with racing at the highest level, the rider will be so close to his potential that there is simply not much to gain,

That curve and hence limit is going to be a function of the rider and his training. His if his approach changes so would that curve. In some cases maybe not so much but in others it could vary a lot. For Wiggins his 2009 tour is a defining moment. If you assume he could do that clean then it shows that his potential was not close to being realised previously. If you don't believe it was then it is most likely the change comes from doping.

 

[blackcat]

*re: tri and armstong. anecdotal whisper.

yes, it could be chinese whispers.

but Armstrong is anything if he aint a sociopath. to think if a possibility existed, and he was not pursuing it, is fanciful (sorry). I remember a Professor Yesalis opinion piece in a major broadsheet around 2007. I think it was a paper of record like WaPo or NYT. he said, and his domain/faculty is health science and steroids one of his research areas. anyway, the theme of the aticle on PEDs was the normalisation of enhancement and pharmaceuticals in sport, and it is not plausible that there are unique individuals, and outliers who succeed within this environment, without the buy-in to the culture. it is like a barrier to entry.

the other athletes, are rejected at the door, the choose the other pill, that is the placebo of rejecting the culture and going off to regular society.

 

[blackcat]

Marco Pantani took a special potion which turned him into Marco Pantani, never mind Froome. Dunno about him being a pile of cr@p before, but look at his pre 2011 results and choose your own term. He's a different rider. Anyway blackcat maintains he's always had talent so his input would be appreciated.

No one knows Froome. __HE__ could always ride_______________________

could always climb AND tt.

Few other could always do both. Evans is one. Andy S another. Contador manifeslty so.

33rd in the first chrono in the 2008 Tour.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2008/stage-4/results

16th in the final 2008 Tour chrono
http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2008/stage-20/results

31st in the Queen Stage of the 2008 Tour with Barlo, was he working for Consta Sioutsou? Probably.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2008/stage-17/results

Brailsford thought in 2009 he could be a GC rider for the Tour.

Only few can naturally do both from the gun. He is one of the few who can chrono and climb.

_________, and change nationality, under come under Brailsford's evil orbit.

here is what I posted in another thread:

actually Froome is not a surprise. Came second to a very high calibre Chinese chrono rider MA Haijun in the B worlds in about 2005 or 06. Rode two very good chronos in the 2008 Tour, or might have been 2009. Was the final Barlo tour.

Came top 20 in both.

There is an ignorance about Wiggins tt ability. They call him a specialist. But even when he was a trackie, even riding chronos in u23, he never was on a worlds podium, never winning. He has won some 2.1 French chronos, like Dunkirk or something. Wiggins was never a chrono rider. He could not even beat Kloden in the 8km tt in London Tour prologue. Canc put about 20 seconds into him.

Go back and see Froome's first Tour de France. Manifest ability and potential.

Dare say if he rode the u23 World tt, that year, think he was only 22, he would have podiumed, or perhaps won, pending the cours.e

Guy can ride a chrono if u know your race results for the past decade. Aus pundits like Keenan and McKenzie dont know. Keeno easily best Anglophone knowledge, but he would not be au fait with Frroomes first Tour, even tho he probably was working then for the Tour. Think Froome came top 20 in both chronos. I had researched it years back.

Apart from all the Wiggins propaganda. Brailsford has two hopes, perhaps 3 for GC, cos he has seeen and knows by ROTE their ergo results, and blood results for lactic etc.

Dimspace wont know this.

It is not the Kennaugh bro elder. But he is my third option above.

It is Froome and G.

Thomas and Frrome. See about 3 years back, when Froome wanted to change his nationality for UCI purposes to GB.

See Brailsford's comments. He said words to the effect of GC Tour.

And I know a coach of a rider on Sky. He said ALL EYES TO G.

Thomas and Froome are the riders. Kennaugh is the option at the end of this decade.

Tour is won on the nub of the needle. Even seeing what Papp writes, and saying Rumsas was SOOOO talented in grandfondos. Sure. They ALL are that talented. But the doctor and the alchemist make a rider into a Tour winner.

Evans always had the talent, and was one of the few riders in the peloton with that natural ability of pro peloton bell curve end. But. He had to up his program, and roll the dice. Finally.

G Thomas.
Froome.
6 years Kennaugh.

Dont go to Dimspace. He does not have the inside mail from Brailsord. This is their commercial inconfidence planning. I dont know it. I only used a few tenuous bites to piece it together.

 

[blackcat]

my comment on Andy Shleck always could tt, well, this would be shown up as wrong now. his first Giro where he came second on GC. he timetrialled very well. more than competent. with much potential.

 

[blackcat]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15116&highlight=froome

 

[blackcat]

and this is the post of mine on wiggins being a fantastic timetrialer a myth borne from the dearth of pursuiting depth on the track.

dimspace
nah... a bit.. but they all signed him, with the exception of linda mccartney, to try and win time trials, or win the prologue in a tour.. thats all they wanted for him.. he was part time for all of those teams..

of all those above he barely trained with any of them.. he spent most of the year training on the track and turned up to do some time trials for them (and to be fair he won a few ).. i would be willing to bet half the guys on the cofidis or F de J teams wouldnt have even recognised him if they had bumped into him..

His loyalty all the way thorugh has been to DB and british cycling..

as far as i know at none of those teams was he offered a new contract (linda mccartney went bust obviously), and the garmin one is the first one hes broken.. so yes, hes been loyal..
just cos hes had loads of teams, doesnt mean hes disloyal, if none of them offer him a contract renewal whats a guy to do.. :?

hey Dimspace

he has won Dunkirk tt in 2006 when he took the year off the track. He won a l'Avenir prologue circa '04 with CA I think. Or the previous year. I think he has won only one other chrono, without checking.

This was when I was building the case that Wiggo indulged this year.

But I am backing him for 10 and 11 to still have a bit up his sleeve. And until Cancellara has lost 8 kgs, Wiggo is about the only one who could topple Contador, by defending in the mountains. Andy Schleck is a damn good chrono rider for a grimpeur, and so is Gesink, albeit a level below Schleck. But they need 90 seconds on Contador. Wiggo can take back 60 in the final chrono with the appropriate medical program that matches StrongArm, Schleck and Contador. I still think he has a fair bit of improvement up his sleeve.

And dont count Commonwealth Games medals. They dont count. To shallow a pool. Maybe the win, if the field is complete, but often good riders are in Europe. Hendo and Roulston are never showing.
_________________

 

[blackcat]

That curve and hence limit is going to be a function of the rider and his training. His if his approach changes so would that curve. In some cases maybe not so much but in others it could vary a lot. For Wiggins his 2009 tour is a defining moment. If you assume he could do that clean then it shows that his potential was not close to being realised previously. If you don't believe it was then it is most likely the change comes from doping.

my economic argument on wiggins, has never got traction.

why would he have ridden on 50k GBP and trying to raise a family from the time he was at linda mac, if he could have earnt 1million euro per?

he is a solid rider no doubt. he has talent no doubt. could never climb tho. could not ride one day races or the road.

Clean Tour Winner at 34? like Brodeal said, 27=29 peak, male natural hormone levels recede in their mid twenties.

Evans and Wiggins winning at 34/35. not normal

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

but if everyone at the pointy end is doping, why do we single out froomie? I am a big supporter of froomie.

No, you're not really a supporter of anything. You're just trolling. And you've admitted it.

Underrating Froome? The guy couldn't climb in a straight line and now he's a world beater? Whatever.

 

[The Hitch]

think he was elligble to rude the u23 world championships in the chrono that year.

Of all the - "and this is why Froome always had it in him to win the Tour" arguments, this one i think takes the cake.

Though - "he stayed with Menchov for 5 minutes in the 08 tour", from mastersracer, is up there, and "there are no roads in kenya, so he was always going to get a delayed superboost at 25" , from del1962, takes some beating - "he was eligible to to ride the chrono, for the u23 worlds" well, its a miracle Saxobank went with the Schlecks for the 2009 tour rather than signing up Froome to as undisputed leader.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

my economic argument on wiggins, has never got traction.

why would he have ridden on 50k GBP and trying to raise a family from the time he was at linda mac, if he could have earnt 1million euro per?

It has traction with me, I've even repeated it, but it's a hard sell to the people who defend Wiggins' pursuit palmares.

The thing that gets me is I can't find a single report where Wiggins actually tried to compete on the road - as a road racer. He did some TTs in minor races, and that green-jersey level l'Avenir break away but actual road racing: nothing.

Does anyone have ANY links or race reports where Wiggins, in a PT or WT race actually tried to race? Ever?

 

[The Hitch]

my comment on Andy Shleck always could tt, well, this would be shown up as wrong now. his first Giro where he came second on GC. he timetrialled very well. more than competent. with much potential.

Since you seem to be talking to yourself, dont mind my brief observation. Since you are talking about posts you made regarding tt ability, your comment about how Sagan tts better than Indurain, worth a giggle.

 

[BroDeal]

It has traction with me, I've even repeated it, but it's a hard sell to the people who defend Wiggins' pursuit palmares.

The thing that gets me is I can't find a single report where Wiggins actually tried to compete on the road - as a road racer. He did some TTs in minor races, and that green-jersey level l'Avenir break away but actual road racing: nothing.

Does anyone have ANY links or race reports where Wiggins, in a PT or WT race actually tried to race? Ever?

That is what the Martin Armchair crowd would have you believe: He raced for nearly ten years on the road but never took it seriously. You would think that at some point during all those years one of the teams paying him would have demanded he do something with his time other than drink and muss up his hair.

 

[IndianCyclist]

I would argue that it is not possible. Performance is an asymptotic curve that flattens out at a rider's physiological potential. A rider's potential changes with age, reaching a high point in the twenty-seven to twenty-nine range then declining in the years afterward. Most of the gains come quickly and easily. After a rider has been training like a pro for a few years, with 30,000km of training per year along with racing at the highest level, the rider will be so close to his potential that there is simply not much to gain,

Yes, multiple riders on the same team making a leap is even less plausible. In Sky's case, not only do we see a nobody like Froome making a huge leap, but Wiggins made the leap on what should have been the backside of his career, after the age he should have peaked.

Performance as in aerobic power only is asymptotic. The age at which decline starts is mostly 32-33 years with VO2 max and HGH/testosterone production decreasing. The gains in aerobic power are very difficult to achieve it may take 6 months of grueling training to go from 400 watts to 420 watts. But this actual gain does not evolve slowly over time. It comes in spurts. One fine day you decide to go for 420 watts and you find that you can do it. Its all about finding out the maximum. Most times the riders are pushed to the limit only in races that too in certain situations. I give you the case of Voeckler.
Most changes in performance that we see in the races are due to changes in weight and how long can one sustain the maximum aerobic power as well as anaerobic power for attacks. Wiggins brought over the methods of Garmin to develop a TTer into a GT contender to Sky. Sky have honed that to perfection and added their anaerobic training to it as a result you have some superb climbers. But look at the failure of their method with their classics riders and even in climbers they have not succeeded with everybody. However the cost of doing that is probably very high in pain and unappetizing nutrition.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Most changes in performance that we see in the races are due to changes in weight and how long can one sustain the maximum aerobic power as well as anaerobic power for attacks. Wiggins brought over the methods of Garmin to develop a TTer into a GT contender to Sky.

You almost sounded believable.

Alas, you have missed the post by JV (the team manager of Garmin) saying Rod Ellingworth coached Wiggins to 4th at the 2009 TdF. Wiggins did pretty much nothing with Garmin. Nothing at all. Rod Ellingworth is a BC / Sky employee. Wiggins brought the Sky method to Sky, and then bombed out, completely, in 2010. Your theory is completely up the creek without a paddle.

Furthermore, I think you will find Wiggins was a 2nd tier TTer over any distance greater than about 10km. He was a prologue guy, but even then couldn't match the big boys.

Please don't talk about pain and nutrition. Club riders train painfully (I did this morning) - you can't differentiate Sky from other pro teams based on how much pain they experience in training. It's not even worth bringing up, let alone claiming to be able to measure it. Here's a saying to put that right in the bin: It never gets any easier, you just go faster.

Everyone hurts.

 

[blackcat]

No, you're not really a supporter of anything. You're just trolling. And you've admitted it.

Underrating Froome? The guy couldn't climb in a straight line and now he's a world beater? Whatever.

BS Moose. read my posts. I had compiled the most backgound stats on Foomie, putting this in perspective.

I contest your comment on trolling. THIS, is NOT the case. yeah, i'm indignat.

for this post, you are wrong. you could take 1000 other of my posts, and be correct in your assumption i am trolling. albeit goodnatured.

not in this case however.

 

[Ripper]

BS Moose. read my posts. I had compiled the most backgound stats on Foomie, putting this in perspective.

I contest your comment on trolling. THIS, is NOT the case. yeah, i'm indignat.

for this post, you are wrong. you could take 1000 other of my posts, and be correct in your assumption i am trolling. albeit goodnatured.

not in this case however.

Your current sig is a troll

Look, Froomster is doin' it big time and the reason why he's getting flack is because there has been very little graded progression. The results he's posted and where is now are a huge jump, which is one reason why he gets the negative.

All this said, I would not call Froomorama without talent.

But Sky bothers the sh!t out of me. Basically the same vein as USPS.

Too much smoke. Way too much smoke.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Too much smoke. Way too much smoke.

And where there's smoke there is probably Wiggins... having a cig.

 

[blackcat]

Your current sig is a troll

Look, Froomster is doin' it big time and the reason why he's getting flack is because there has been very little graded progression. The results he's posted and where is now are a huge jump, which is one reason why he gets the negative.

All this said, I would not call Froomorama without talent.

But Sky bothers the sh!t out of me. Basically the same vein as USPS.

Too much smoke. Way too much smoke.

well, i just changed my signature about 5 mins ago. if you mean the dailypeloton almuni, u make a better case they were the trolls, and i am called them

i changed before. but miraculous coincidence, well, not hume miracle, rhetoric

 

[blackcat]

And where there's smoke there is probably Wiggins... having a cig.

heheheh good post

 

[Ripper]

And where there's smoke there is probably Wiggins... having a cig.

But he just bites it, it's for the look, he don't light it.

Sorry, could not resist linking it to a song.

You're right. Smoking a cig ... and giving everyone the bird.