Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[mastersracer]

"Doctors discovered the rather obscure virus and quickly prescribed treatments that kill just about everything in the body, similar to chemotherapy."

Sounds so like Lance's story, guess you just have to kill yourself first hen get a brand new reborn.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012...e-battles-parasite-media-cars-expelled_230162

could this be SKY's new trick, we all know some chemo drugs can makes you completely wasted losing dramatic weight in a matter of weeks, and no anti doping agency will bother to test those drugs. Just pure speculation

thanks - that was the funniest post I've read in a long time.

 

[maxmartin]

Maybe SKY discovered this trick while treating Froom, so why not try this on other climbing members too? Technically chemo drugs or what ever used for treating parasite are not PED. Didn't SKY's upward trajectory coincide with the Froom's parasite discovery?

 

[thehog]

Where did the 1/5 of a clean rider come from?

Exacty! That was Basso... he thought about doping

 

[sittingbison]

Regards riders who have gone from no were to top dog:
Miguel Endurain jumps out as a modern example:
1984: Withdrew (age = 20)
1985: Withdrew, 4th stage (age = 21)
1986: Withdrew, 8th stage (age = 22)
1987: 97th (age = 23)
1988: 47th (age = 24)
1989: 17th (age = 25)
1990: 10th (age = 26)
1991: 1st (age = 27)
1992: 1st (age = 28)
1993: 1st (age = 29)
1994: 1st (age = 30)
1995: 1st (age = 31)
1996: 11th (age = 32)

In fact his progression looks pretty normal when taking his age into account

 

[sittingbison]

Except, the one bit of evidence that exists. There's a key distinction that gets lost - type 1. evidence: evidence that a rider is clean vs. type 2. evidence: evidence that a rider is doping....There is very little type 2 evidence (the traditional evidence for doping). Power files provide type 2 evidence. They do not provide evidence that a rider is clean, since we do have type 1 evidence for what a specific rider's clean power numbers look like. However, the power files for the 2012 Tour are not type 2 evidence that any rider is doping. Rogers, Porte, Froome, and Wiggins are not producing physiologically suspect power if you make the assumption that they are typical protour riders...

MR, you keep conveniently ignoring the issue that an enormous number of athletes have either confessed to doping, or been found guilty and sanctioned, without ever failing a test, and that Rogers Porte and Froome have never before performed like this (driving the peleton every day in the mountains) and are repeatedly cracking and dropping the entire peleton except for Evans, Nibali and VDB2. It doesn't matter what numbers are used, (and after 20 years of systematic doping the numbers are skewed anyway), these guys are decimating the best riders in the world with ease.

 

[_frost]

Maybe SKY discovered this trick while treating Froom, so why not try this on other climbing members too? Technically chemo drugs or what ever used for treating parasite are not PED. Didn't SKY's upward trajectory coincide with the Froom's parasite discovery?

I dunno about the big world but back here in barbarian periphery we still have some rare individuals able to lose weight without drugs.

 

[the big ring]

I dunno about the big world but back here in barbarian periphery we still have some rare individuals able to lose weight without drugs.

Do you have an example of how an Olympic level pursuiter with <10% bodyfat loses >10% of his body weight?

Whilst increasing flat TT power / speed?

 

[Bonkstrong]

Yes Wiggins has gone against the trend and done so in the most dominating fashion of all time to prove his cleanliness!

Words fail me...

 

[Benotti69]

Probably something to do with a bunch of 'experts' in the clinic that would say it was evidence of doping even if it was actually the opposite. I think Wiggins probably has enough crap to deal with in terms of doping accusations without a bunch of amateur hematologists giving him grief. Reality is there is a panel of actual experts that decide if there is evidence of doping or not.

Plenty of professional experts out there, Caitlin and Ashenden to name 2 who can tell us amateurs whether or not his numbers are real

 

[blackcat]

I personally have no problem with being suspicious, what I think is ridiculous though is basing your suspicions on fairy tales such as "most dominating fashion of all time".

I guess Fignon winning by 10min in 1984 (pre-EPO) was not dominating enough for you, whereas the biggest dominator of all time gets dropped in the mtns by Nibali and his own team mate.


manual roll eyes

edit: surely LA was the most dominant of all time? Team Sky have a LOOOOOONG way to go before we get there. If Wiggins wins 3 in a row and starts blitzing Contador and Shleck in the next few yrs, then I would be much more inclined to believe that he is doping. But until then, I'll reserve judgment and give him the benefit of the doubt.

the peloton and individual teams are at a lower threshold.

think about a topline Trek Nissan, with Levi, Klodi, Shleckx2 Canc,

etc etc. sky would be no match for them with a peak USPS.

So we are seeing Sky slay them (the peloton) in a year, where the threshold of the peloton is waaay down. Still juiced, but MUCH lower threshold.

cheers

 

[hrotha]

In fact his progression looks pretty normal when taking his age into account

He was also a domestique for Delgado in some of those earlier Tours.

But that's not the point. The theory is that, in a cleanish field (ie. pre-EPO), GT talent shows early. I believe Darryl is underestimating the climbing potential Indurain had shown in one-week races in his first few years as a pro, but he's definitely right to say he didn't show GT potential early on.

That changed with EPO, not only because you could make contenders out of riders not suited for GTs (Riis, Armstrong), but also because, as a young rider, whether you used EPO or not, you'd be facing a peloton full of people who had taken advantage of EPO-fueled training and racing for years, thus making it harder to climb up the ladder. That's the theory anyway. That last bit wouldn't apply to Indurain, though, as he was already a mature rider by the time EPO first showed up, and we can't rule him out as a pioneer user.

 

[_frost]

Do you have an example of how an Olympic level pursuiter with <10% bodyfat loses >10% of his body weight?

Whilst increasing flat TT power / speed?

You must forgive me, I only watch cycling in July so I must have missed some threads that explain the mechanism how losing body weight leads to loss of sustainable aerobic power?

 

[red_death]

Do you have an example of how an Olympic level pursuiter with <10% bodyfat loses >10% of his body weight?

Whilst increasing flat TT power / speed?

Sure, you lose some more fat and you drop some muscle. Say he dropped 5% body fat then some of the weight loss of 7-8kg would have been that fat and the rest would have been muscle.

Power as a ratio is not necessarily a problem - peak output may be lower (less muscle) but that is compensated for by lower mass to move. That is before even talking about the effects of training on the muscles.

 

[taiwan]

Sure, you lose some more fat and you drop some muscle. Say he dropped 5% body fat then some of the weight loss of 7-8kg would have been that fat and the rest would have been muscle.

Power as a ratio is not necessarily a problem - peak output may be lower (less muscle) but that is compensated for by lower mass to move. That is before even talking about the effects of training on the muscles.

Not a sports scientist, but I don't think this is true - otherwise Andy Schleck might be a Tour winner by now.

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

You must forgive me, I only watch cycling in July so I must have missed some threads that explain the mechanism how losing body weight leads to loss of sustainable aerobic power?

It is the 10% weight loss in an individual with an already very low body fat % that is the giveaway - this means the weight loss must have included a serious amount of muscle.

Look at Cancellara's physique - the large muscle mass goes a long way to explain his power on the flat. (and also his lack of climbing ability)

 

[red_death]

The theory is that, in a cleanish field (ie. pre-EPO), GT talent shows early.

Apart from being irrelevant for someone who didn't focus on stage racing early in their career.

I would say another theory is that endurance athletes mature later and that their peak tends to be late 20s to mid 30s. Certainly true for many distance runners and fell runners.

That isn't to say that some young riders won't show early promise - there are always exceptions.

 

[Caruut]

Not a sports scientist, but I don't think this is true - otherwise Andy Schleck might be a Tour winner by now.

On the flat, weight means nothing, apart from how quickly you get up to speed. Power-to-frontal surface area is the key. Frontal surface area isn't going to change much with weight, so this means that his power has remained more or less constant throughout his transformation from an ugly trackie caterpillar to a beautiful yellow butterfly.

So, did Wiggins win multiple gold medals 10kg overweight?

 

[red_death]

It is the 10% weight loss in an individual with an already very low body fat % that is the giveaway - this means the weight loss must have included a serious amount of muscle.

Look at Cancellara's physique - the large muscle mass goes a long way to explain his power on the flat. (and also his lack of climbing ability)

Giveaway of what? BW has lost weight and is much leaner than he was on the track so there has clearly been some loss of both fat and muscle - we don't how much of each.

As I said before it is a delicate balance between loss of mass vs loss of power and it will still be individual. I don't see how you can make comparisons with other riders physiologically (eg A Schleck) as you don't have enough info - you assume that because AS and BW are roughly the same height/mass then the performance should be similar which is clearly nonsense. AS is still a more explosive climber and BW is a better TTer.

We don't know FC's body fat % but we do know he is 10-13 kg heavier than BW. How much could he shed and still retain enough power to win TTs - we don't know because that has never been his focus? I would still put money on a fully fit FC (or TM) beating BW in a flat 40-50km TT, but it is far from the impossibility (that some would have you believe) that BW could beat FC.

 

[Von Mises]

But that's not the point. The theory is that, in a cleanish field (ie. pre-EPO), GT talent shows early.

The problem is that EPO-era has screwed this picture and continues to screw it even after its end (if EPO-era has ended of course). Clean (or cleanish) rider in dirty peloton cannot show his talent early, but if peloton becomes cleaner, their talent shows (though they are not young anymore). I am not saying it is true, but it is one possibility to explain some late boomers from recent years (Voeckler, Hesjedal etc).

 

[red_death]

So, did Wiggins win multiple gold medals 10kg overweight?

The answer is we don't know. IIRC the last time he rode the team pursuit was at the Feb 2011 Manchester World Cup and he certainly put in some impressive stints despite already having lost at least 7-8kg.

 

[taiwan]

Giveaway of what? BW has lost weight and is much leaner than he was on the track so there has clearly been some loss of both fat and muscle - we don't how much of each.

As I said before it is a delicate balance between loss of mass vs loss of power and it will still be individual. I don't see how you can make comparisons with other riders physiologically (eg A Schleck) as you don't have enough info - you assume that because AS and BW are roughly the same height/mass then the performance should be similar which is clearly nonsense. AS is still a more explosive climber and BW is a better TTer.

We don't know FC's body fat % but we do know he is 10-13 kg heavier than BW. How much could he shed and still retain enough power to win TTs - we don't know because that has never been his focus? I would still put money on a fully fit FC (or TM) beating BW in a flat 40-50km TT, but it is far from the impossibility (that some would have you believe) that BW could beat FC.

My point about Andy Schleck was that if lower power was compensated for by lower bodyweight, then those with the best power to weight i.e. the best climbers would automatically be the best TTists which is not the case. As Caruut says, apart from when accelerating, bodyweight will have a tiny effect (at best) on your speed for a particular power on the flat. So long TTs are all about having the highest absolute power output.

 

[hrotha]

The problem is that EPO-era has screwed this picture and continues to screw it even after its end (if EPO-era has ended of course). Clean (or cleanish) rider in dirty peloton cannot show his talent early, but if peloton becomes cleaner, their talent shows (though they are not young anymore). I am not saying it is true, but it is one possibility to explain some late boomers from recent years (Voeckler, Hesjedal etc).

Aye, that I agree with. Just like it's very hard to assess the real talent for riders who broke out around 1990, when EPO existed but was not widespread, it's very hard to assess the real talent of riders who are breaking out now.

However, breaking out late is not synonymous with having ridden clean before that. Consider Vande Velde.

 

[iZnoGouD]

My point about Andy Schleck was that if lower power was compensated for by lower bodyweight, then those with the best power to weight i.e. the best climbers would automatically be the best TTists which is not the case. As Caruut says, apart from when accelerating, bodyweight will have a tiny effect (at best) on your speed for a particular power on the flat. So long TTs are all about having the highest absolute power output.

there is something else in TT cuz guys with 440 watts FTP (Baby Schleck) lose to guys with 400 watts FTP

 

[taiwan]

there is something else in TT cuz guys with 440 watts FTP (Baby Schleck) lose to guys with 400 watts FTP

Yeah technique/position is a factor. I was just picking up on the claim that if you lose weight then the power loss will automatically be compensated for.

If it were fat you were losing that would be different, but we're talking about a professional road rider and WC pursuit rider having 8kg of flab to shed.

 

[red_death]

My point about Andy Schleck was that if lower power was compensated for by lower bodyweight, then those with the best power to weight i.e. the best climbers would automatically be the best TTists which is not the case. As Caruut says, apart from when accelerating, bodyweight will have a tiny effect (at best) on your speed for a particular power on the flat. So long TTs are all about having the highest absolute power output.

You are reading my point backwards - I am not saying that those with the best power to weight will necessarily be the best TTers. I am saying that for an individual physiology you can lose some weight without necessarily punishing your TT'ing ability too much.

Surely long TT is about aerobic endurance not highest absolute power output.