Re: Re:
I hope the argument here isn't that training methods are so quick to evolve that they account for clean riders being able to beat riders using EPO microdosing and other methods, because that's nonsensical. Did Froome find a new training method in fall of 2011 which completely changed him as a rider and then never find any more gains?
Or are we back to Bilharzia to explain that.
Potential hires is only key in that you don't even have to hire the guy to know.gazr99 said:Potential hires being the key phrase. For example, When Tinkoff signed Michael Rogers they would have seen his data but not Froome's or Wiggins.red_flanders said:Per JV on this forum, he sees the exact data and physiological parameters of potential hires.gazr99 said:Does the rider take the data with them or does it belong to the team? Yes of course riders will tell their new team training methods but trying to gain a competitive advantage through training methods is still an aim, as the team would have benefitted from this training for at least a year before the rider left.red_flanders said:You all get that with every transfer, the other teams see rider data and get information about other riders right? Yet people lap up this "competitive advantage" stuff like it's a real difference maker. The fact is that every other team knows exactly what training methods and power numbers the other teams use/have at this point.
But good folks found a reason to believe and keep the facts shielded. That's what PR does, it tells people the lies they want to hear.
The methods of training and diet are constantly evolving/changing, so S&C coaches are always trying to find out what the opposition are doing and how they benefit.
Say if Sky introduced something new this year, how would the other teams know about it?
If Sky are doing something new this year, it explains nothing about the previous 4+ years.
Simple answer here is obvious.
My point about changing methods is that they are constantly evolving/changing, so a rider could go to another team say what he did the previous year at a rival team, but then the rival team may evolve the training in the new season. Training methods very rarely stay the exact same for more than two years at most
I hope the argument here isn't that training methods are so quick to evolve that they account for clean riders being able to beat riders using EPO microdosing and other methods, because that's nonsensical. Did Froome find a new training method in fall of 2011 which completely changed him as a rider and then never find any more gains?
Or are we back to Bilharzia to explain that.