Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[xcleigh]

Prove it. Post a single link that backs this claim up.

Come on Try this link

http://www.google.co.uk, top entry.


You're welcome, always a pleasure, never a chore!

 

[Krebs cycle]

Let me reiterate:

a. you cannot guess someone's efficiency based on their ability to win an IP

Yes this is correct, but it is only one 3rd of the equation which you got wrong because you dismissed the importance of VO2max.

b. you cannot guess somsone's FTP based on their ability to win an IP

The bit in bold is CORRECT.

This is WRONG WRONG WRONG. If you know how much power someone can produce over 4min then you can predict with a high degree of accuracy how much power they can sustain for 40min.
If you cannot understand or refuse to even try to understand the relevance that the critical power model has to this discussion then I cannot help you. That IS the physiological explanation.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Prove it. Post a single link that backs this claim up.

In this post which is right at the very beginning of the discussion I was already alluding to the fact that there is cross over from track endurance to road cycling.....

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=942964&postcount=2459

here is a post dated from over a month ago when I first mentioned the critical power model....

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=950758&highlight=critical#post950758

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Everyone calm down, please. It is possible to disagree and remain polite.

Susan

 

[Krebs cycle]

As is weight uphill and a combination of weight and height in a flat TT. Your "explanation" is too simplistic to explain anything about Brad's GT (uphill and TT) ability based on IP results.

The calculation was merely to explain the relevance of VO2max, nothing more, nothing less.

But even here you are wrong because I expressed the VO2max in relative terms (ie: per kg of bodyweight) and that is VERY important to hill climbing ability.

VO2max is also extremely important for IP performance and LT is also highly relevant to IP performance because when you sustain supramaximal power output, then the higher your FTP then the slower you accumulate H+ and Pi which both contribute to muscle fatigue either directly or indirectly.

We also know that efficiency and VO2max appear to be inversely related - so saying "assume efficiency is the same" seems remiss of someone with a PhD in exercise physiology.

In fact, efficiency is more important than VO2max, correct?

What seems remiss is the fact that you couldn't grasp the meaning of the words "for now". Surely I should not have to explain that I am aware efficiency is not the same in ALL people? After all I did link you to a review article on the topic.

The importance of efficiency depends entirely on the other 2 factors. If you are comparing 2 world class cyclists with very similar VO2max and %LT, then it will be the most important factor that separates the two. However gross efficiency in cycling has been found to have a small range between 18-22%, so for a given combination of VO2max and %LT, then only small differences in power can be achieved due to efficiency, whereas for a given level of efficiency the range of VO2max and %LT combinations in world class cyclists is higher.

 

[The Hitch]

From what i understand of the last 2 pages, Bradley wiggins, the most suspicious rider in the peloton who at the very least with his.comments in the last few years has quite.clearly moved towards a pro doping, stance, has now been proven clean because the team that just slaved for him the tdf by riding the entire last 2 weeks of the tour on the front, including the sprints and mountain stages, after subbing a few tt specialists for some Colombian climbers, lost a ttt by 10 seconds, having led at halfway.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

I'm impressed someone can actually write "Wiggins, through his comments, has clearly moved to a pro-doping stance" without their internal sense check calling them up on it.

 

[hrotha]

I'm impressed someone can actually write "Wiggins, through his comments, has clearly moved to a pro-doping stance" without their internal sense check calling them up on it.

Wiggins is pro-Armstrong
Armstrong is embodied dope
Ergo, Wiggins is pro-dope
QED

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

I don't doubt everyone here is convinced of what they believe, but as a simple matter of reality, Wiggins' stance is that he does not dope and gets really angry if anyone suggests he does.

It's just not what 'pro-doping' means to anyone outside the clinic.

 

[sniper]

I'm impressed someone can actually write "Wiggins, through his comments, has clearly moved to a pro-doping stance" without their internal sense check calling them up on it.

i think "moved to a pro-doping stance" is still mildly put.
what about: "Wiggins, through his comments, has straightforwardly admitted he's doped to the eyeballs without feeling a shred of shame or remorse."

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

i think "moved to a pro-doping stance" is still mildly put.
what about: "Wiggins, through his comments, has straightforwardly admitted he's doped to the eyeballs without feeling a shred of shame or remorse."

Almost precisely the point.

People around here seem to retrofit their certainty that he is doping, to a belief that he is openly doping and deliberately making it clear.

Which just isn't happening.

Anyhow, carry on.

 

[Cerberus]

I don't doubt everyone here is convinced of what they believe, but as a simple matter of reality, Wiggins' stance is that he does not dope and gets really angry if anyone suggests he does.

It's just not what 'pro-doping' means to anyone outside the clinic.

He used to hold the position that no team which had contacts to a dodgy doctor should be invited to the Tour. Now he is comfortable riding on such a team. That's certainly moving away from an anti-doping stance.

He also said five year ago that he wouldn't blame people for questioning the tour winner for the next 5-7 years. Now most certainly blames people for questioning the Tour winner(though in fairness it's easy to explain this as simple hypocrisy).

 

[The Hitch]

Obviously he claims not to dope, but i said he has moved towards a pro doping position in as far as he is with every day more and more taking the side of those who think doping is ok.

Not only has he, as hrotha mentions gone from serial hater of anyone with any suspicion of doping, to legitimizing everything Armstrong (and hog who he didnt seem to like much) has done, he also has more importantly gone from demanding a total ban on suspicious doctors on the world Tour, and expulsion from the TDF for any team with them, to having absolutely no problem working with multiple such doctors himself.

And he has gone from wanting open discussion about the subject of doping, especially as regards tdf winners, to outright contempt for anyone who breathes a word about it.

That seems to me to be someone moving from 1 end of a spectrum to another.

 

[will10]

whether a performance is.possible.for a top bike.rider and.whether a performance.is.possible for Bradley wiggins, or anyone who at 27 was.struggling that much with gt racing, are 2 totally different questions.

+1

After Kohl got popped on CERA he said he couldn't finish top 10 in a GT clean. Neither could I. I haven't got the necessary physiology. That doesn't mean the likes of Nibali, Pinot etc. couldn't do it clean, it just means I and Bernhard couldn't. Could Bradley?

 

[The Hitch]

Almost precisely the point.

People around here seem to retrofit their certainty that he is doping, to a belief that he is openly doping and deliberately making it clear.

Which just isn't happening.

Anyhow, carry on.

no one said he deliberately does anything. Whatever the motivations and reasons for his comments and changes of heart, I think we see a pattern in wiggos comments over the years not generally seen with riders that aren't so in love with their own voice.

 

[Bicycle]

For me the use of Majorca as the training camp automatically raises suspicions. Combine this with the stellar performance and one has to wonder...

 

[Mr Pumpy]

So where should they train? P1ss-wet freezing cold Britain where there are no mountains?

 

[Mr Pumpy]

Wiggins is pro-Armstrong
Armstrong is embodied dope
Ergo, Wiggins is pro-dope
QED

Someone earlier accused me of having no sense of humour, but even I can see that this is comedy gold

 

[Catwhoorg]

I the JV talks thread, JV himself pointed out that Brad derived far more aerobic power than is typical for an IP rider.

Big engine, shown by physiological testing from someone who did have access to the data

 

[the big ring]

This is WRONG WRONG WRONG. If you know how much power someone can produce over 4min then you can predict with a high degree of accuracy how much power they can sustain for 40min.
If you cannot understand or refuse to even try to understand the relevance that the critical power model has to this discussion then I cannot help you. That IS the physiological explanation.

So go ahead. Bradley wiggins sustained 570W for 4:15. What's his FTP? And to what degree of accuracy are you claiming. Pretend I'm really good at math and I can understand any formulae / working you present.

ETA: I am still amazed you can predict a trend based on one value.

 

[the big ring]

Yes this is correct, but it is only one 3rd of the equation which you got wrong because you dismissed the importance of VO2max.

I did nothing of the sort. I simply stated, as several studies have shown, that lactate threshold is a better indicator of performance than VO2 max.

 

[the big ring]

Can you explain why a world class pursuit rider cannot become a world class road time trialist and why a world class road time trialist cannot become a GC contender?

Can you explain when Brad Wiggins became a world class road time trialist?

 

[xcleigh]

I did nothing of the sort. I simply stated, as several studies have shown, that lactate threshold is a better indicator of performance than VO2 max.

Holding you to your own standards, any links to these studies please?

 

[the big ring]

Holding you to your own standards, any links to these studies please?

Basically, VO2max indicates your potential, whilst aerobic threshold indicates your current level of fitness (or the amount of VO2 max power you can sustain for a prolonged period - typically 1 hour).

http://www.jssm.org/vol2/n1/4/v2n1-4pdf.pdf

In endurance sports, it has been suggested that AT
might be a better indicatorof aerobic endurance than
VO2max, as AT may change without changes in
VO2max (Allen et al ., 1985;Bishop et al., 1998)

Not a study, but a good summary of the concepts: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/predictors-of-endurance-training-performance.html

This guy says the same thing, but does not link to studies, and this paper is not a journal-published study either.

http://www.runhilaryrun.ca/Images/LA_TH_VO2.pdf

 

[Mr.38%]

For me the use of Majorca as the training camp automatically raises suspicions. Combine this with the stellar performance and one has to wonder...

What an emberrassing statement. During many months there appear to be more pros from any category than cyclo-tourists on the island. If those WADA peeps would want to carry out as many controls as possible in the shortest amount of time (and during a phase very much prone to doping) it would be right there.