The Froome Files, test data only thread

[Merckx index]

Been away, and laptop down on a pseudo-virus scam, so don't have time to catch up on this thread, but I wanted to get back to Froome's numbers. It was reported his maximum power was 7.5 watts/kg, and his power at 4 mM lactate, traditionally the sustainable level, about 6.0 watts/kg or 80% of maximum. But Coggan argues that many riders can sustain power at higher lactate levels. If Froome could sustain 90% of maximum power, that would be 6.75 watts/kg, close to the 6.85 estimated from his Madone climb (and hence no discrepancy between this climb and the laboratory results). Even 85% would be around 6.35-6.40 watts/kg, which is on the order of the record for Alpe D'Huez, by Pantani and LA (and considered by Tucker not possible clean). The published paper may shed more light on this, but it seems that if Froome can actually sustain significantly more than 80% of his maximum power, his output is comparable to that of the best performances during the height of the doping era.

 

[Benotti69]

Ewon Zeilstra ‏@EwonSprokler 3 hours ago

Blocked by @JeroenSwart after asking why Froomes heartrate didnt go up during infmous 2013 Vntoux jump, spinning awy from @albertocontador

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

Been away, and laptop down on a pseudo-virus scam, so don't have time to catch up on this thread, but I wanted to get back to Froome's numbers. It was reported his maximum power was 7.5 watts/kg, and his power at 4 mM lactate, traditionally the sustainable level, about 6.0 watts/kg or 80% of maximum. But Coggan argues that many riders can sustain power at higher lactate levels. If Froome could sustain 90% of maximum power, that would be 6.75 watts/kg, close to the 6.85 estimated from his Madone climb (and hence no discrepancy between this climb and the laboratory results). Even 85% would be around 6.35-6.40 watts/kg, which is on the order of the record for Alpe D'Huez, by Pantani and LA (and considered by Tucker not possible clean). The published paper may shed more light on this, but it seems that if Froome can actually sustain significantly more than 80% of his maximum power, his output is comparable to that of the best performances during the height of the doping era.

sorry your laptop has not been feeling well. Take some antivirus and get some rest.

Thanks for the breakdown on the numbers. I'm not smart enough to understand most of this pysio info but what you have written in the above post puts it out there for the folks like me to comprehend.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

Ewon Zeilstra ‏@EwonSprokler 3 hours ago

Blocked by @JeroenSwart after asking why Froomes heartrate didnt go up during infmous 2013 Vntoux jump, spinning awy from @albertocontador

The Dr. is taking the fishhack walsh's route. Block anyone who questions the margins.

 

[pastronef]

Ken van Someren ‏@kenvansom

With @letour starting this w/e, here's @chrisfroome data from last year's visit to @GSK_HPL - all the best Chris!

http://www.gskhpl.com/news/partnerships/chris-froome-visits-hpl/

 

[CheckMyPecs]

Are we sure those claims of Froomey's heart rate not going up are really true? I mean, even if he was a super-doped Cyclatron, his heart rate should go up when accelerating just because he is yielding more watts.

I am therefore inclined to think it was a data artefact.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Data error with HR straps is entirely possible (and pretty common), as is the fact that HR and power output don't have a great correlation (in particular when riding outdoors) and HR response has a significant time lag to power output (operates with a half life response time in the order of about a minute). HR response is also often moderated further when a rider is fatigued.

These are pretty well known and basic issues one needs to understand when examining HR data and is why its use in training and analysing performance is very limited.

HR is at best redundant and a worst misleading. I'm not even sure why riders with power meters even bother with it.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Data error with HR straps is entirely possible (and pretty common), as is the fact that HR and power output don't have a great correlation (in particular when riding outdoors) and HR response has a significant time lag to power output (operates with a half life response time in the order of about a minute). HR response is also often moderated further when a rider is fatigued.

These are pretty well known and basic issues one needs to understand when examining HR data and is why its use in training and analysing performance is very limited.

HR is at best redundant and a worst misleading. I'm not even sure why riders with power meters even bother with it.

True, the GSK test there was a "error" with the heart rate strap. It slipped off.

However the head units have a buffer whereby when the file is written down from ROM records the heart rate as received. He error rate is negligible.

 

[gillan1969]

Re:

Data error with HR straps is entirely possible (and pretty common), as is the fact that HR and power output don't have a great correlation (in particular when riding outdoors) and HR response has a significant time lag to power output (operates with a half life response time in the order of about a minute). HR response is also often moderated further when a rider is fatigued.

These are pretty well known and basic issues one needs to understand when examining HR data and is why its use in training and analysing performance is very limited.

HR is at best redundant and a worst misleading. I'm not even sure why riders with power meters even bother with it.

but surely other physiological responses do correlate with it? and so its a good reference point to have i.e. why wouldn't you want the data even if you don't use it?

a bit like jereon and the 2007 data, why would he just ask for it anyway to provide a layer of background knowledge...indeed and all the data in between which SKY/Froome have...if Jereon points to the science of SKY then its not as though the data is so unreliable to be discounted...and..if he has found 'interesting' bits then it would surely be of passing interest to that replicated in race conditions??

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

I've no issue with collecting (HR) data. It's the invalid interpretation of said data that's the problem.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

but surely other physiological responses do correlate with it?

I can't think of much of value that HR data is going to provide that you are not already seeing with much greater clarity in the power data, and it going to potentially send one down the wrong analytical lane.

The point here is that people are seeking to use HR data as evidence of doping and that is stretching the analytical limitations of HR data far beyond their snapping point.

I get the desire to be able to pin something on someone but the unfortunate reality is that the real evidence is in their blood or urine (or waste disposal), and that's the fundamental problem as it makes detection more difficult when such testing is neither fast, cheap or logistically straightforward, and hence the risk of doping detection is still too low.

 

[acoggan]

Re: Re:

the head units have a buffer whereby when the file is written down from ROM records the heart rate as received. He error rate is negligible.

I started studying exercise physiology before wireless heart rate monitors were common. We had some lab models, which performed about as well as this:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3580725

Things improved considerably after Polar got into the game, but even 15 y ago errors were not uncommon:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11687776

Now people have moved on to examining the accuracy of such devices for predicting energy expenditure, comparing optical vs. surface electrode measurements, and/or studying combined devices, e.g.:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23175181

To this day, however, the approach can't really be claimed to be perfected, with the noise rejection algorithms used being a particular source of error, especially when heart rate is increasing rapidly (i.e., valid data can often be rejected inappropriately).

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

didn't they have computers back in 2007 at the UCI u23 facility, with hard disks and all? (honest question)

All that exists because the power and heart rate date came from digital sources in a file format (in ASCII format).

The issue not whether there are computers etc. but it does appear Swart is now distancing himself from the 2007 data to the extent that its no longer included in the final summary. To why he didn't want to use it when it really was "the story" is not known to us and very strange. Performance testing on Froome in 2015 is neither here nor there, there was enough data on climbs from races and the leaked Ventoux file to know what Froome does.

The real story which is now the non story is 2007 really for the most part doesn't actually exist in the Froome story.

Nevertheless, good PR, as its made the Esquire print and online magazines with the end line "he just lost the fat", forever set in stone.

Mission accomplished.

Yes, it appears that way. By design? From the Froome's point of view, yes. I think Swart got lead into to be honest but he knows Froome for a long time before the testing and way better than we do to judge the character.

Wait, what?

Jeroen has known Froome for a long time?

I thought he was an independent expert who had no connection. I've seen dozens of articles where Swart talks about Froome and it always gives the impression that Swart is just some random observer commenting on Froome.

If they've been friends since before 2015 then this would be a bit of a conjob.

Is there any evidence that Swart knew Froome better than a causal aquatence prior to the testing?

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

You can ask me about the 2015 data. That's my domain.

It is unfortunate that your name, status as a scientist and quote were used to support a claim that cannot be supported just with the 2015 data.

It happens to be the claim Sky and Froome are most interested in manufacturing public acceptance on, because it demystifies the most suspicious, well known fact about Froome accessible to casual fans.

Job done :surprised:

 

[blackcat]

heh, if economics was the dull science, helen keller sees your cards and raises you.

how did helen know her name was helen

 

[thehog]

I guess the obvious question, considering Froome; "he just lost the fat and the engine was always there", why didn't he win flat stages or similar pre-Sept 2011? or even get close? The Tour of Poland 3 weeks pre-Vuelta would have been prime for such a move.

 

[ontheroad]

It's a genuine mystery how a rider so unhealthily thin can generate such power and goes against all known conventional wisdom. Look at the build of Sagan compared to Froome, Sagan has the body type that makes today's terrain ideal for powering away. Froome on the other hand is a walking corpse yet able to close the gap and then match Sagan and hold off a peloton for 10km. If he was 10 kilos heavier fair enough it would be plausible. But he couldn't do this before the age of 26 when he had the extra weight. He is now up there with the best descenders, roleurs, climbers and by Friday he will burn all the GC guys away in the TT. Truly a modern day phenomenon and the best clean cyclist of all time. Time for Walsh to get another book out of it.

In all seriousness it's sad times for our sport that a character like Froome is completely extracting the urine out of a great sporting event. Even moreso that sky and Brailsford in particular peddle so much psycho babble thinking they can hoodwink Joe public. The tour is in full circus mode once again and Lance is long forgotten. Vive le tour.

 

[ontheroad]

Apologies, the post above is in the incorrect thread and would be better served in the Froome thread itself, not sure how to move it.

I wonder how Dave Brailsford's investigation into the hacking claims are going 12 months down the line. For all the threats and accusations, Sky have been strangely very inactive when it comes to taking legal action. That said, their legal & professional fees came in at a whopping £518k in the most recent set of published accounts. PR and marketing came in at £612k which dwarfed the expenditure on sports science and medical expenses. Peculiar for a team putting so much emphasis on science and the benefits of marginal gains.

Here is what Brailsford said after the Ventoux files were released last year:



Sir Dave Brailsford is concerned Team Sky has been the victim of computer hacking by critics convinced Tour de France leader Chris Froome is using performance-enhancing drugs.

Froome, during the 2013 Tour which he won, was subjected to sustained interrogations and his performances were pored over by critics, with some using data to justify their stance.

The 30-year-old Team Sky leader has always insisted he competes clean and has described "clowns" interpreting power data as "unhelpful". He is prepared to be a spokesman for drug-free sport.

Froome led the Tour by 12 seconds on Monday's first rest day and could extend his advantage in the Pyrenees this week, beginning with Tuesday's 167-kilometres 10th stage from Tarbes to La Pierre-Saint-Martin ski station.

That would give his detractors, many of whom are active on Twitter, ammunition to fuel their argument which Froome and Brailsford believe is flawed.

Asked if he is ready for the almost inevitable doping questions, Team Sky principal Brailsford said: "It's part of the game, isn't it? If he does well (on Tuesday), the rest of the Tour it's 'How do you know he's not doping?'

"The question of how to prove a negative is always going to be a difficult one.

"We think someone has hacked into our training data and got Chris' files, so we've got some legal guys on the case there.


Please let us know when that investigation has concluded Dave.

 

[thehog]

I guess the obvious question, considering Froome; "he just lost the fat and the engine was always there", why didn't he win flat stages or similar pre-Sept 2011? or even get close? The Tour of Poland 3 weeks pre-Vuelta would have been prime for such a move.

l.'equipe this morning mentioned that a fan took a photograph of Froome's Garmin where his heart rate was at 175 just prior to he crash, which is well above his claimed 165.

Not sure if it's been validated though.

 

[gazr99]

I guess the obvious question, considering Froome; "he just lost the fat and the engine was always there", why didn't he win flat stages or similar pre-Sept 2011? or even get close? The Tour of Poland 3 weeks pre-Vuelta would have been prime for such a move.

l.'equipe this morning mentioned that a fan took a photograph of Froome's Garmin where his heart rate was at 175 just prior to he crash, which is well above his claimed 165.

Not sure if it's been validated though.

So got a quote from the fan but didn't get the photo, which would have been excellent evidence

 

[thehog]

Which is what I wrote, yet to be validated. Please read.

 

[CTQ]

https://twitter.com/PatrickAnge/status/753920934436802561


photo here, not heart rate but kilometer

 

[gazr99]

Which is what I wrote, yet to be validated. Please read.

I did my comment isn't directed at you, it's at the fine journalism work by L'Equipe. Not sure how they can take that quote and then not get the photo.

 

[vedrafjord]

(drumroll)

http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Abstract/publishahead/The_Physiological_Profile_of_a_Multiple_Tour_de.97426.aspx

 

[vedrafjord]

Introduction: This case study reports a range of physiological characteristics in a two-time Tour de France champion.

Methods: Following body composition assessment (DXA), two submaximal cycling step-tests were performed in ambient (20[degrees]C, 40%) and hot and humid (30[degrees]C, 60% [HH]) conditions from which measures of gross efficiency (GE), lactate-power landmarks and heart rate responses were calculated. Additionally, thermoregulatory and sweat responses were collected throughout. V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak and peak power output (PPO) were also identified following a separate ramp test to exhaustion.

Results: V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak and PPO were 5.91 L[middle dot]min-1 (84 mL[middle dot]kg-1[middle dot]min-1) and 525 W respectively, whilst mean GE was 23.0% and 23.6% for ambient and HH conditions respectively. In addition to superior GE, power output at 4 mmol[middle dot]L-1 lactate was higher in HH vs. ambient conditions (429.6 W vs. 419.0 W) supporting anecdotal reports from the participant of good performance in the heat. Peak core and skin temperature, sweat rate and electrolyte content were higher in HH conditions. Body fat percentage was 9.5%, whilst total fat mass, lean mass and bone mineral content were 6.7, 61.5 and 2.8 kg respectively.

Conclusion: The aerobic physiology and peak power output values indentified are amongst the highest reported for professional road cyclists. Notably, the participant displayed both a high V[Combining Dot Above]O2peak and GE, which is uncommon amongst elite cyclists, and may be a contributing factor to their success in elite cycling. Additionally, performance in HH conditions was strong, suggesting effective thermoregulatory physiology. In summary, this is the first study to report physiological characteristics of a multiple Tour de France champion in close to peak condition and suggests what may be the prerequisite physiological and thermoregulatory capacities for success at this level.