Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Krebs cycle]

Right so the improvement was gradual as in the offseason 2008/9. I thought gradual was meant as in over a long period of time. Sry reading comprehension fail.

Hooray! yet another member of the C-Fedds with all of the analytical capacity of a poodle.

You ignored my whole post and focused on the one little bit about 2008/09 and then you took it completely out of context.

11 months (end of olympics to start of Tdf) is easily long enough to lose 7-10kgs. Easily long enough to improve W/kg. For the next 4yrs thereafter, you know like the period 2008-2012 that I mentioned in my post, there has been a gradual improvement. 4 YEARS.

 

[Turner29]

I found it difficult to continue reading after you claimed that pursuiters do not require endurance. The statement renders most of your points irrelevant.

Put simply, performance at a world class level in pursuiting requires a leaning towards type 1 muscle composition.

Not the kind of endurance required for a Grand Tour. Perhaps you should read some of the points you consider irrelevant.

More important, post some data, as I did, and not your uneducated opinions.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Taiwan, I wouldn't bother. Krebs makes it up as he goes along. It's hard to nail a moving target.

cry me a river. Most 1st yr phys ed students can grasp what I'm talking about. If you can't then I can't help you.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Not the kind of endurance required for a Grand Tour. Perhaps you should read some of the points you consider irrelevant.

More important, post some data, as I did, and not your uneducated opinions.

Don't jump on the bandwagon dude. You evidently know more about physiology than some of the trolls around here, but you made some assumptions in your post earlier that were incorrect, specifically the bit about high VO2max and high % type II fibres. Learn and understand what MAOD is first then read the following.....

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8223521
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8776208
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8803505
http://jp.physoc.org/content/586/1/35.long

 

[DirtyWorks]

... Wiggins could have been better at climbing from 2004-08, IF HE WAS LIGHTER, and IF HE FOCUSED HIS TRAINING on being a road racer and better climber, but he wasn't and he didn't.

I will give you 30 pct. Chance you are right about wiggo. I'll give you 10 pct, chance for a similar no-dope story for the rest of the Sky train.

What happens to your story when former Sky riders get AAF's? Or years from now their doping program reaches a mass audience?

Agree that you will examine the process by which you came to a such a bad conclusion. You then need to acknowledge in *great* detail how mostly right most of us were.

 

[Ferminal]

So if we assume that when Wiggins did well in an ITT he was "road focused", why didn't he go on to do well in those rouleur races?

Endurance, tactics?

 

[Turner29]

Don't jump on the bandwagon dude. You evidently know more about physiology than some of the trolls around here, but you made some assumptions in your post earlier that were incorrect, specifically the bit about high VO2max and high % type II fibres. Learn and understand what MAOD is first then read the following.....

I very much understand MAOD. Perhaps I should have been both clearer on relative vs. absolute comparison and should have been more specific in details. I certainly agree that compared to a pure sprinter, pursuit cyclists require a measure of endurance and I apologize for any ambiguity on my part.

From a MAOD, the following expresses my examples:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2072841

"MAOD (in O2 equivalents-ml.kg-1) was higher for the sprinters (78) and middle distance runners (74) than for the long distance runners (56) and control subjects (56) (P less than or equal to 0.05), indicating a greater anaerobic capacity for the former two groups."

Keep in mind MAOD does not well predict endurance performances of greater than an hour, perhaps even less than that.

Reading your citations, I see no inconsistency with anything I stated.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8223521

"The highest significant correlations were found among IP4000 and the following: VO2max (ml.kg-2/3.min-1; r = -0.79), power output at lactate threshold (Wthla)"

Confirms my point about high power and high VO2 max...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8776208

"The findings of this study demonstrate that sprint cyclists can fully express their anaerobic capacity within an event specific 70 s all-out test and that these cyclists progressively decrease their anaerobic capacity during a 120 s, 115% VO2max (mean time = 210 s) or 300 s test, despite giving all-out efforts. Conversely, track endurance cyclists achieve their highest mean score during an event specific 300 s test and their lowest during a 70 s test. "

Consistent with my statements on the characteristics of sprinters...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8803505

"The laboratory parameter that showed the highest correlation with the maximal cycling speed in the velodrome was maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) expressed per unit of body mass (r = 0.93)."

The test was over 2.2 km and as expected for this distance, speed (and indirectly power) would strongly correlate to VO2 max. However, over longer durations, as Horowitz et al found, for individuals of matched VO2 max, power (and indirectly speed) correlates to percent Type I muscle fibers.

http://jp.physoc.org/content/586/1/35.long

"Gross mechanical efficiency when endurance-trained cyclists generate 300 W can vary from 18.5 to 23.5% and it appears that more than one-half of this variability is related to the percentage of type I (slow twitch) muscle fibres of the vastus lateralis muscle (Coyle et al. 1992). The efficiency with which the chemical energy of ATP hydrolysis is converted to physical work depends greatly on the velocity of sarcomere and muscle fibre shortening. Type I (slow twitch) fibres display greater mechanical efficiency when cycling at cadences of 60–120 r.p.m. Therefore, it is not surprising that elite endurance cyclists typically possess a higher percentage of type I muscle fibres, given that they are more efficient"

and

"The concepts above and in Fig. 2 suggest that and lactate threshold interact to determine how long a given rate of aerobic and anaerobic metabolism can be sustained (i.e. performance ) and efficiency then determines how much speed or power (i.e. performance velocity) can be achieved at a given amount of energy consumption. "

What allows for a high lactate threshold?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7372524
http://jap.physiology.org/content/64/6/2622.short
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21552162

Please note in the later the comment about "hyperoxic training" which I was going to talk about as a possible new "scientific" method of training..

 

[Krebs cycle]

I will give you 30 pct. Chance you are right about wiggo. I'll give you 10 pct, chance for a similar no-dope story for the rest of the Sky train.

What happens to your story when former Sky riders get AAF's? Or years from now their doping program reaches a mass audience?

Agree that you will examine the process by which you came to a such a bad conclusion. You then need to acknowledge in *great* detail how mostly right most of us were.

Well this is the whole crux of the debate isn't it? The transition that we've seen Wiggins go through could indeed be the result of doping, but my point (and those of Dr Ross Tucker evidently) are that it doesn't have to be. It can also be explained by realistic elite cyclist physiology, but quite a few people in here are vociferously rejecting that possibility and so they are convinced it is impossible to achieve naturally, and hence Sky must be doping.

This is the big difference between Sky and USPS. The feats of LA could not be explained by realistic physiological limits to human performance, those of Wiggins and Froome can.

 

[D-Queued]

Well this is the whole crux of the debate isn't it? The transition that we've seen Wiggins go through could indeed be the result of doping, but my point (and those of Dr Ross Tucker evidently) are that it doesn't have to be. It can also be explained by realistic elite cyclist physiology, but quite a few people in here are vociferously rejecting that possibility and so they are convinced it is impossible to achieve naturally, and hence Sky must be doping.

This is the big difference between Sky and USPS. The feats of LA could not be explained by realistic physiological limits to human performance, those of Wiggins and Froome can.

Can you explain the extra 3 or 400 watts out of Cavendish today?

Dave.

 

[Turner29]

Well this is the whole crux of the debate isn't it? The transition that we've seen Wiggins go through could indeed be the result of doping, but my point (and those of Dr Ross Tucker evidently) are that it doesn't have to be. It can also be explained by realistic elite cyclist physiology, but quite a few people in here are vociferously rejecting that possibility and so they are convinced it is impossible to achieve naturally, and hence Sky must be doping.

This is the big difference between Sky and USPS. The feats of LA could not be explained by realistic physiological limits to human performance, those of Wiggins and Froome can.

Actually, to all this I agree with you and I cannot dismiss the possibility that due to a combination of very high VO2 max, weight loss, targeted training and reduced doping by adversaries that possibly Wiggins did not "dope" to achieve his current level of success.

Has he done so on water and Hammer Gel? NO.

 

[Turner29]

Hyperoxic training does intrigue me...

 

[Krebs cycle]

Hyperoxic training does intrigue me...

Me too. There is a serious lack of studies in the literature, but it is gaining in popularity. I can tell you something though, the US track cycling team was using it back in the 80s but they got things wrong and did too much high intensity work and ended up getting overtrained through lack of recovery.

I think hyperoxia can be periodised correctly. In fact I am deadly keen on doing some research with it later this year.

 

[Ripper]

Oh my folks, this is a Sky thread, not just a Wiggins one.

Jeez

 

[Turner29]

Me too. There is a serious lack of studies in the literature, but it is gaining in popularity. I can tell you something though, the US track cycling team was using it back in the 80s but they got things wrong and did too much high intensity work and ended up getting overtrained through lack of recovery.

I think hyperoxia can be periodised correctly. In fact I am deadly keen on doing some research with it later this year.

Are we friends now after clearing up some misunderstands?

 

[Franklin]

It's funny when the views of the clinic (eyepopping performances) are supported by two GT winners still active. Their characteristics have been "incredible and "laughable".

But hmmm... what do they know?

And Krebs, you love experts. Ferrari suggests their Vam is at the really high end due to the cadences displayed. But well, what does Ferrari know, huh?

 

[Ripper]

Me too. There is a serious lack of studies in the literature, but it is gaining in popularity. I can tell you something though, the US track cycling team was using it back in the 80s but they got things wrong and did too much high intensity work and ended up getting overtrained through lack of recovery.

I think hyperoxia can be periodised correctly. In fact I am deadly keen on doing some research with it later this year.

Indeed hyperoxic training looks pretty interesting. I find the types of hypoxic training are also interesting - there is low O2 content (e.g. altitude) and then the devices that actually have you breathing 'used air' (increased carbon dioxide). Obviously very different mechanisms of impact.

 

[Turner29]

Hyperoxic training does intrigue me...

Here is what I am thinking. A combination of blood doping, hypoxic exposure and plasma volume manipulation can still safely be accomplished preceding a Grand Tour. For practical considerations, these are not possible after commencement.

However, hyperoxic exposure, since it is not banned, can be performed during a Tour, as "maintenance."

 

[Krebs cycle]

Are we friends now after clearing up some misunderstands?

lol you are like a breath of fresh air after some of the inanity I've endured in here recently. We are definitely on the same pro team

 

[Maxiton]

Can you explain the extra 3 or 400 watts out of Cavendish today?

Dave.

Yeah, I noticed that myself. He caught up with and passed the others in the sprint like they were on a recovery ride. It was beyond even what he normally does.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Yeah, I noticed that myself. He caught up with and passed the others in the sprint like they were on a recovery ride. It was beyond even what he normally does.

He was well rested from riding tempo on the front for the first 2 climbs in the last few mountain stages. He burned off most of the other sprinters, but I am sure that is normal for a pudgy little sprinter because I remember watching Zabel do it and he wasn't even pudgy.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Can you explain the extra 3 or 400 watts out of Cavendish today?

Dave.

umm der, he obviously put a motor in his frame today just like cancellara did that time.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

He caught up with and passed the others in the sprint like they were on a recovery ride. It was beyond even what he normally does.

Exactly - well beyond the norm. How many times has Cav ever out sprinted LL Sanchez and Nic Roache? Yet he overtook both. In the same race. And they were both rested from being in the break as well. It just does not add up.

 

[TubularBills]

For those that don't stray from the sanctity of the clinic, over in Pro-cycling their debating Knighting Wiggins & Brailsford...

I am sure Wiggins will be knighted along Brailsford.

Brailsford for service to both British track & road cycling.

Wiggins for Tour and Track as well.

Chris Hoy got knighted, I can see Wiggins knighted soon too.

Personally, I'd start with Cavendish - who just received (in my opinion deservedly) the L'Equipe Best Tour Sprinter of All Time last week, preceding 22.

Sir Wiggins

 

[DirtyWorks]

Well this is the whole crux of the debate isn't it? The transition that we've seen Wiggins go through could indeed be the result of doping...

The most important part is that when the AAF's/doping program stories break, I'll be requesting a detailed mea culpa from you.

There's the rest of the extraterrestrial performances from the Sky train that are very difficult to explain. This is one of the fundamental problems with Sky's performance. You won't be plain wrong about this one either, but it's just not likely.

 

[Krebs cycle]

The most important part is that when the AAF's/doping program stories break, I'll be requesting a detailed mea culpa from you.

There's the rest of the extraterrestrial performances from the Sky train that are very difficult to explain. This is one of the fundamental problems with Sky's performance. You won't be plain wrong about this one either, but it's just not likely.

And when years go by and we hear nothing of Wiggins' nor Rogers nor Porte's doping scandals I will hunt you down for my $500. Froome is the only one I won't bet on because I don't know enough about his background to make an informed judgement.

And Krebs, you love experts. Ferrari suggests their Vam is at the really high end due to the cadences displayed. But well, what does Ferrari know, huh?

LOL this is comedy central gold! Its why I've been coming back here this week. You guys are such great entertainment value.

You spend years frothing at the mouth about Dr Evil and anyone whoever met his long lost nephews 2nd cousins next door neighbours chimp pets former lover, but as soon as the discredited and banned doc, who is named as a central player in the biggest sporting fraud in history, says something you think supports your baseless opinion, suddenly you latch onto it like a puppy dog. Hilarious!!! High cadence and fast vam? Sounds a bit like something Lance used to say innit? Here we go again with the Lance fanboys perpetuating the myth

Personally, I wouldn't trust a single word Ferrari says.