The Froome Files, test data only thread

[thehog]

2007 data:

The latter, says Swart. What is striking is how similar the two reports, eight years apart, are. Apart from one thing. Froome was 75.6kg: more than 8kg heavier than his current race weight. His body fat was 16.9 per cent. “Frankly, for an elite cyclist that’s chubby,” says Swart. “But he produced better figures: peak power of 540 [15 watts higher than in August 2015], threshold of 420 — we made it 419, so it’s one watt less.” His V02 max in 2007 was 80.2.

“The engine was there all along,” says Swart. “He just lost the fat.”

This was predicted. He had the engine but could not ride a bike in sand shoes......yada yada

Lets keep this thread to discussing the data. What's missing is the length of the tests. That is key. 20mins or 60mins?

 

[thehog]

2007 tests in picture if you can read French:

 

[luckyboy]

This Esquire article is the whole thing, right? Just checking

 

[thehog]

This is the test?

When Froome is ready, Phillip Bell and Matt Furber, senior sports scientists at GSK, and Ken van Someren, the lab’s director of research and development, explain the three tests he’ll undergo. Two submaximal efforts, in cool then hot conditions, will measure his sustainable power. In between, a max test — “the fun one,” says Bell — will determine his VO2 max: his body’s rate of oxygen uptake.

 

[Rollthedice]

2007 tests in picture if you can read French:

It is addressed to Dr. Feelgood Zorzoli. Since nobody managed to find these results except Michelle I suspect she got them from the man himself, the respectable TUE provider.

 

[thehog]

2007 tests in picture if you can read French:

It is addressed to Dr. Feelgood Zorzoli. Since nobody managed to find these results except Michelle I suspect she got them from the man himself, the respectable TUE provider.

It is tue! I didn't notice!

 

[thehog]

No heart rate in the new tests? Max 161 in the 2007?

 

[robin440]

What does this peak power of 7,5 w/kg mean? Is this peak for 5 minutes? That cant be his sprint power

 

[thehog]

No heart rate in the new tests? Max 161 in the 2007?

It doesn't actually.

The Vayer video was a 40 minute effort up Ventoux, week 3 in a GT after 3.5 hours of racing. The 2007 test appears to be a 20 minutes standalone test in a lab.

EPO will bring down heart rate significantly.

Still reading mind you..

 

[Rollthedice]

No heart rate in the new tests? Max 161 in the 2007?

It doesn't actually.

The Vayer video was a 40 minute effort up Ventoux, week 3 in a GT after 3.5 hours of racing. The 2007 test appears to be a 20 minutes standalone test in a lab.

EPO will bring down heart rate significantly.

Still reading mind you..

It was a 242 K stage so he turboed up Ventoux after six hours of racing. Regarding the tests, why they keep lying that Froome was 67 kg at TdF? His tour weight was most likely 66 as he always said it was the target.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re:

From Ross Tucker:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/what-to-expect-from-chris-froomes-physiological-test-data/

I don't quite follow that efficiency is inverse to VO2max. I can understand it at a constant power, that's obvious, but I can't see why it logically follows at maximum effort/threshold/whatever.

There is one study that reported this finding from empirical data IIRC, but I'm not sure it's ever been established that there is a physiological basis suggesting an inverse relationship must exist.

In any case, a couple of years back I wrote a blog post with various charts showing the relationship between aerobic energy yield, VO2max, gross efficiency and fractional utilisation of VO2max:
Looking under the hood

Ross Tucker posted pretty much the same chart today. Back then I considered putting an range shading on them for a GT contender but decided to leave that information in the text instead.

But if I were, I'd say shade the square bounded by VO2maxes of 75-95 ml/kg/min and GEs of 19-25% and this is what that range would look like on the charts for 85% and 90% fractional utilisation of VO2max:

So my conclusion is same as many others - the data are not going to say anything other than what we already know wrt performance, and it won't inform us either way nor likely change opinions about doping status.

 

[Night Rider]

2007 tests in picture if you can read French:

Really rough google translate below. Low max HR 161. 16.9% body fat!

Mr. Doctor
Mario Zorzoli


Enclosed you receive the results of clinical and fitness conducted with Chris Froome young athlete from the center

Anthropometry
size 186cm
weight 75.6kg
12.8kg weight of the fat is 16.9 % of the total body mass
BMI 21

Clinical examination :
Resting heart rate 32 / min
TA: 114/50

Cardiac auscultation showed a breath protosystolique 1/6 non majorises the Valsalva
Auscultation : SP
Abdomen soft, painless, no organomegaly
Neurological Status: SP

Musculoskeletal examination:
This exam is no peculiarity , no appreciable lesion , no muscle imbalance.

Laboratory tests
The exams are in the standard, including ferritin is 82

Exams fitness
Maximum load: 540 watts or 7.14 watts / kg
Maximum heart rate : 161
VO2 MAx : 80.2
Ventilatory threshold : 420 watts or 5.56 watts / kg

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

Good enough to be a pro, but a top pro?

 

[Winterfold]

So those of us who want to believe he was always gifted but just undertrained can continue to believe that, and those of us who notice his weight loss coincided with the appearance of AICAR and other undetectable weight loss endurance enhancing super drugs/peptides/hormones can continue to believe that too.

As you were...

 

[Poursuivant]

88.2 is impressive.

 

[Gloin22]

Re: Re:

Good enough to be a pro, but a top pro?

Yea that's the question! He was in preety poor shape, 17% fat is almost like Betancur 2014/2015 level..which is not good at all..

Honestly Sky could have use delectable weight loss drugs AICAR and the likes etc etc its all possible and can't be disproven, but at least the out of nowhere scenario hopefully gets killed, he definitely had the numbers to make it.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

Good enough to be a pro, but a top pro?

Yea that's the question! He was in preety poor shape, 17% fat is almost like Betancur 2014/2015 level..which is not good at all..

Honestly Sky could have use delectable weight loss drugs AICAR and the likes etc etc its all possible and can't be disproven, but at least the out of nowhere scenario hopefully gets killed, he definitely had the numbers to make it.

Then why didn't he until Lienders came?

It would be meaningful if you found evidence of Froome performing on the road.

PS "numbers to make it"=/ "numbers to ride clean faster than almost anyone ever managed doped"

 

[LeindersGains]

I must admit, I'm quite surprised that Sky released his VO2max. They deserve some credit for that. I excepted 85, but 88.2 is a lot. Only Quintana has a higher number at 90 of the modern cyclists who have released their numbers.

With Quintana and Froome's numbers now out there, I'd like to see the numbers of Contador and Nibali as well.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

I must admit, I'm quite surprised that Sky released his VO2max. They deserve some credit for that. I excepted 85, but 88.2 is a lot. Only Quintana has a higher number at 90 of the modern cyclists who have released their numbers.

With Quintana and Froome's numbers now out there, I'd like to see the numbers of Contador and Nibali as well.

It's not Sky and has nothing to do with Sky.

 

[LeindersGains]

Alright but then Froome.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Well, Froome definitely had higher body fat % back in the day http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Christopher+Froome+UCI+Road+World+Championships+KtubiVuCTb2x.jpg

At least the data isn't blatantly *** this time, unlike those Sky figures after PSM. Skeptical about the 67kg figure at TdF condition, I wouldn't be shocked if he was as low as 65kg

 

[thehog]

Re:

88.2 is impressive.

It was 84 which they estimated 88 at Tour de France racing weight of 67kg.

If you take what we all think his weight is of 64-65kg then Froome would have a V02 max of 95+!

V02 is 84.6. At his Tour de France weight, it would correlate to 88.2.

He looks emaciated (though he has put on almost 3kg in the three weeks since the Tour ended, going from 67 to 69.9kg) but while 61.5kg of his body is lean mass, 6.7kg is pure fat: 9.8 per cent.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Updated with Froome's numbers for 20-40-min power and VO2max, as per cyclingnews article linked below:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froomes-physiological-test-data-released/

 

[Night Rider]

Re:

Well, Froome definitely had higher body fat % back in the day http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Christopher+Froome+UCI+Road+World+Championships+KtubiVuCTb2x.jpg

At least the data isn't blatantly *** this time, unlike those Sky figures after PSM. Skeptical about the 67kg figure at TdF condition, I wouldn't be shocked if he was as low as 65kg

Other than the missing pieces of the puzzle in the article this is the first bit that grabbed my attention. Basically raced the Tour at 8.1% bodyfat. I call BS on that, I would think as low as 5% at stage 1 based on the photos. One of the reasons it would have been good to get the tests done within a few days of the TdF finish.

Would be good to see raw test data.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Updated with Froome's numbers for 20-40-min power and VO2max, as per cyclingnews article linked below:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froomes-physiological-test-data-released/

Thanks Alex. Could you comment on how the test was conducted? Sub maximum testing, yes?