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

[SundayRider]

Dunno, 1.90 and 69kg is very, very thin, that's what I'd weigh if I had 0% body fat...no actually I'd weigh 72kg!

Well if you go on a fair few football teams websites the footballers and cyclists weights/heights are often quite similar (obviously there are exceptions!) yet the cyclists look a lot thinner.

 

[SundayRider]

Funniest post in a long time. The oldies down the womens institute could have concluded that !!

glad you appreciate my humour.

 

[webvan]

Well if you go on a fair few football teams websites the footballers and cyclists weights/heights are often quite similar (obviously there are exceptions!) yet the cyclists look a lot thinner.

70kg for 1m90 ? Can't be! Well I looked up Peter Crouch and he's 2m01 and...70kg, wow, I find that hard to believe! On the other hand Ibrahimovic is 1m95 for 84kg...or 95kg depending on who you believe, looks more like 95kg to me.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

This one could also be posted in the Wiggins Cadence topic but I seem not to be able to find it.

There is this thing:
http://www.cyclingpowerlab.com/ProRaceAnalysis.aspx

Tour de France 2012
prologue

1 Fabian Cancellara (Swi) RadioShack-Nissan (1.86,82) 0:07:13 0.22 511Watts 6.23w/k 2320
2 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Sky Procycling (1.9,69) 0:07:20 0.227 489watts 7.08w/k 2154
3 Sylvain Chavanel (Fra) Omega Pharma-QuickStep (1.82,70) 0:07:20 0.221 479 6.84 2169
4 Tejay van Garderen (USA) BMC Racing Team (1.85,69) 0:07:23 0.223 474 6.86 2122
5 Edvald Boasson Hagen (Nor) Sky Procycling (1.81,73) 0:07:24 0.219 467 6.4 2134
6 Brett Lancaster (Aus) Orica GreenEdge Cycling Team (1.88,78) 0:07:24 0.223 479 6.14 2150
7 Patrick Gretsch (Ger) Argos - Shimano (1.87,69) 0:07:25 0.225 470 6.82 2094
8 Denis Menchov (Rus) Katusha Team (1.8,65) 0:07:26 0.221 458 7.04 2071
9 Philippe Gilbert (Bel) BMC Racing Team (1.79,67) 0:07:26 0.22 457 6.82 2081
10 Andriy Grivko (Ukr) Astana Pro Team (1.8,67) 0:07:28 0.22 453 6.76 2056
11 Christopher Froome (GBr) Sky Procycling (1.86,69) 0:07:29 0.224 458 6.64 2046
36 Richie Porte (Aus) Sky Procycling (1.72,62) 0:07:35 0.216 423 6.83


Tour de France second TT
1 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Sky Procycling (1.9,69) 1:04:13 0.227 479watts 6.95w/k 2114
2 Christopher Froome (GBr) Sky Procycling (1.86,69) 1:05:29 0.224 451watts 6.53w/k 2013
3 Luis Leon Sanchez Gil (Spa) Rabobank Cycling Team (?,?) 1:06:03
4 Peter Velits (Svk) Omega Pharma-QuickStep (1.81,65) 1:06:15 0.222 430 6.62 1941
5 Richie Porte (Aus) Sky Procycling (1.72,62) 1:06:38 0.216 413 6.66 1909
6 Patrick Gretsch (Ger) Argos - Shimano (1.87,69) 1:06:41 0.225 431 6.25 1919
7 Tejay van Garderen (USA) BMC Racing Team (1.85,69) 1:06:47 0.223 427 6.19 1914
8 Vasili Kiryienka (Blr) Movistar Team (1.83,72) 1:06:59 0.221 423 5.87 1914
9 Rein Taaramae (Est) Cofidis, Le Credit En Ligne (1.86,70) 1:07:03 0.224 424 6.06 1897
28 Denis Menchov (Rus) Katusha Team (1.8,65) 1:08:41 0.221 391 6.01 1768

Assuming these numbers are correct I notice several things.

Wiggins:
* 7 minutes effort: 489watts
* 64 minutes effort: 479watts

Froome:
* 7 minutes effort: 458watts
* 65 minutes effort: 451watts

Van Garderen:
* 7 minutes effort: 474watts
* 67 minutes effort: 427watts

Menchov:
7 minutes effort: 458watts
69 minutes effort: 391watts

Porte:
* 7 minutes effort: 423watts
* 66 minutes effort: 413watts

So, Sky riders loosing at max 2% power over an effort almost 10 fold, other riders clearly loosing 10-15%. the odd duck being the duck from Jose Taus's club, Velits.

Lets move on to the Olympics:
1 Bradley Wiggins (Great Britain) (1.9,69) 0:50:39 0.227 478 6.92
2 Tony Martin (Germany) (1.86,75) 0:51:21 0.222 458 6.11
3 Christopher Froome (Great Britain) (1.86,69) 0:51:47 0.224 446 6.46

And then over to the World TT:
1 Tony Martin (Germany) (1.86,75) 0:58:38 0.222 451 6.01

Since Martin had a mechanical at the prologue that cost him at least 20 to 25 seconds we have no real comparison for his drop of.
45 Tony Martin (Ger) Omega Pharma-QuickStep (1.86,75) 0:07:36 0.222 443watts 5.9

He would have come in around the time of Cancellara, wattage must have been in the 485-495 range.
So, the best TT'er of the last few years also looks to have a dropoff of around 10% on efforts 10 fold a prologue but the Skyboys not?

Such a credible analysis.

Olympics 2012 men's TT

10 Janez Brajkovic (Slovenia) (1.77,60) 0:54:09 0.221 384 6.39 1738

Actual data:

2012 Tour de France - Stage 9: Arc-et-Senans to Besançon 41.5km

Average power 358 W

The nearly 1-hour TT is a good indication of Brajkovic's Functional Threshold Power (FTP) of 358w (5.6 w/kg) [should be 5.9 W/kg]. FTP represents a rider's maximum sustainable power output for a 1-hour maximum effort.

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/races/tour-de-france/2012/stage-9.aspx#.UYLQEEoXGco

Man, Jani must have been in terrible form at the Tour, because it's not like trying to estimate power in a flat TT is freakin ludicrous, right?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Brajkovic at 5,9W/kg is clearly wrong, because you won't get far in the pro levels at less than 100W total power.

If Jani ever signs for Sky, then his weight might actually drop into negative figures.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Man, Jani must have been in terrible form at the Tour, because it's not like trying to estimate power in a flat TT is freakin ludicrous, right?

Guess you missed the word ''assuming'' in my post? And again, I was just looking at the patterns.

Nevertheless, I also found the findings of trainingpeaks of Brajkovic [5.6w/k] interesting.
When you compare that to the file of la Planche des Belle Filles it doesnt't make real sense. I mean, in a 17 minute effort he does 5.8w/k, in a 50 minute effort he does 5.9w/k? Perhaps the gap of several minutes in the SRM file was due to this. Must be. Or, is Brajkovic weight a well kept 'secret', like all riders?

Perhaps you can be of help here, how much power would Brajkovic have needed to go 2 minutes and 26 seconds faster in that time trial?

 

[Franklin]

Guess you missed the word ''assuming'' in my post? And again, I was just looking at the patterns.

Nevertheless, I also found the findings of trainingpeaks of Brajkovic [5.6w/k] interesting.
When you compare that to the file of la Planche des Belle Filles it doesnt't make real sense. I mean, in a 17 minute effort he does 5.8w/k, in a 50 minute effort he does 5.9w/k? Perhaps the gap of several minutes in the SRM file was due to this. Must be. Or, is Brajkovic weight a well kept 'secret', like all riders?

Perhaps you can be of help here, how much power would Brajkovic have needed to go 2 minutes and 26 seconds faster in that time trial?

Or it's really innocuous: perhaps Jani had a virus/cold/muscle/etc. issue.

They aren't robots

 

[Jazasz]

Team Sky doesn't need drugs to be good. They are on their bikes busting their asses 7 hours a day.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

That's nice, hun. I like chocolate because it tastes good.

 

[BYOP88]

That's nice, hun. I like chocolate because it tastes good.

Have you got any evidence to back that claim up?

 

[thehog]

According to the authors, Froome’s performances should elicit more scrutiny than those of Wiggins. Team Sky responded to questions regarding Wiggins and Froome asked by the publication with a statement:

“Both Chris and Bradley have received your email and each has considered their response. They have been asked many times before about their stance on doping and their approach to performance. It’s all already firmly on the record; neither has used banned substances or illegal practices. Team Sky’s approach to conditioning and coaching is also well documented. We know exactly how our riders prepare and perform and the true science behind this. And we have our own accurate data that we can rely on to support this.

“Given the sport’s past, everyone understands why questions are asked and performances constantly debated. It’s understandable but a real shame when good clean rides, that should be admired, are doubted routinely,” the team statement continues. “Quite simply, we’ve had a clear anti-doping stance from the start, are a clean team and our riders have shown that you can win clean.”

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013...oubts-on-performances-past-and-present_290708

 

[thehog]

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013...oubts-on-performances-past-and-present_290708

Do they actually state what...

Team Sky’s approach to conditioning and coaching is also well documented. We know exactly how our riders prepare and perform and the true science behind this. And we have our own accurate data that we can rely on to support this.

“Quite simply, we’ve had a clear anti-doping stance from the start, are a clean team and our riders have shown that you can win clean.”

...is and where did they documented it?

 

[LaFlorecita]

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013...oubts-on-performances-past-and-present_290708

lolz

Sky are pretty funny

Make me LOL all the time

 

[leon7766]

lolz

Sky are pretty funny

Make me LOL all the time

Me too I laugh with joy for all the good Sky are doing for cycling

 

[oldcrank]

Sky are pretty funny
Make me LOL all the time

Brad it particular. His "raffle" joke on the TdF
podium was hilarious. Just what cycling needs,
that lad.

 

[Ripper]

Me too I laugh with joy for all the good Sky are doing for cycling

Good stuff spankster skybot # 182.

Spank on

Spank on

 

[webvan]

DB currently on "France 2" going with the same old "Chris trains really hard"...no one appears to be convinced.

Peddling his idea of giving all the data to an independent panel...

...also suggesting that all TUEs be published...sounds like breach of medical secret, no?

 

[kaffenback]

DB currently on "France 2" going with the same old "Chris trains really hard"...no one appears to be convinced.

Incredible how they keep on trotting that one out, as if the rest of the peloton's training consists of watching Kojak reruns whilst eating tubs of Ben & Jerrys.
It's also pretty insulting to the cycling media who wouldn't mind a little insight into how his training methods have made him so dominant, so quickly.
Yes, he doesn't want to divulge all the marginal gains but come on, this is a crisis for them in PR terms and they need to give something back of substance.

 

[LesDiablesRouges]

It's pretty obvious the game that Sky and Brailsford are playing. Pretend that you're willing to give over your information for independent review, but never actually give it to anyone. Insist you are clean and the results are due training techniques that are superior to everyone else. Can't release the techniques because then everyone would know and SKY would lose their advantage. Etc etc ...

Comes from the same playbook that USPS used.

 

[Ferminal]

...also suggesting that all TUEs be published...sounds like breach of medical secret, no?

Sounds like he's trying to sell them a coloured fish...

 

[Benotti69]

Me too I laugh with joy for all the good Sky are doing for cycling

Sky have done too much good for too many in cycling?

 

[DirtyWorks]

DB currently on "France 2" going with the same old "Chris trains really hard"...no one appears to be convinced.

Peddling his idea of giving all the data to an independent panel...

...also suggesting that all TUEs be published...sounds like breach of medical secret, no?

It means whatever they use on the grand tour squad, they don't need/use a TUE.

 

[doolols]

It's also pretty insulting to the cycling media who wouldn't mind a little insight into how his training methods have made him so dominant, so quickly.

Ha! Sky and British Cycling have invested thousands and thousands, maybe millions, on developing training methods and nutrition. There's no way they're just going to "hand it over".

Yes, he doesn't want to divulge all the marginal gains but come on, this is a crisis for them in PR terms and they need to give something back of substance.

I don't think it's a PR crisis. It's the first TdF since the Armstrong admissions, so the vast majority of the 'normal' (i.e. non-clinic) population would expect there to be lots of questions re: doping. But I would venture to suggest that the general population have no idea if Sky / Froome are doping, but are willing to believe they're not. None of my friends have doubts about their cleanliness.

 

[lemoogle]

Incredible how they keep on trotting that one out, as if the rest of the peloton's training consists of watching Kojak reruns whilst eating tubs of Ben & Jerrys.

Where do I sign?

 

[User Guide]

Incredible how they keep on trotting that one out, as if the rest of the peloton's training consists of watching Kojak reruns whilst eating tubs of Ben & Jerrys.
It's also pretty insulting to the cycling media who wouldn't mind a little insight into how his training methods have made him so dominant, so quickly.
Yes, he doesn't want to divulge all the marginal gains but come on, this is a crisis for them in PR terms and they need to give something back of substance.

Whatever you think of Sky riders cleanliness either individually or collectively.There can be no doubt they caught the peloton out last year.
And its a bit much too say innovation cant be achieved because others are trying hard/smart too.It happens in every field of life/industry etc
Do ferrari spend peanuts in comparison too red bull every year?
Wintel tried between them to make tablet computing a reality Bam apple 1 go and they do it.
Where are nokia now? Motorola?
Marginal gains being real does not = sky is clean
Also all the marginal gains in the world struggles too explain Froome/Porte