The Froome Files, test data only thread

Page 98 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
hazaran said:
brownbobby said:
I don't see how any kind of motor could apply power to the upper middle part of the crank arm, which is where the strain gauge is on a stages PM. :confused:
That's before you consider strain gauges are not magic devices that measure cycling power as long as something touches them :lol:

It's one big statistical process and will only yield any sort of reasonable number when used in the manner it was trained, pushing down on the pedals.
Stages doesn’t measure from the downward force on the pedal. It measures via the deflection in the crank arm when force is applied along with using an algorithm for temperature and torque - it doesn’t know where that force might come from.
 
thehog said:
Alex Simmons/RST said:
gillan1969 said:
Apologies for not going through all the pages but did Swart check for a motor on Froomes bike before the test?
Power was measured at the crank arms and at the ergometer load device. A motor would result in different power readings. They were not different.
For argument sake let’s say he did have a motor during the test.

Crank has Stages so would measure the “strain” applied by the motor, the wind trainer is providing the resistance and is measuring power produced from where? The force of the roller, with resistance? He wasn’t using a standard ergo/jig. Which means a motor could be used depending on the type of motor & where it was placed.

Let me make this simple for you.

If there was a motor then it could power the rear wheel without any force being applied to the cranks.

Power at the rear wheel is measured via an electromagnetic brake control device - it measures the torque and rotational velocity applied to the trainer's roller.

IOW if there was a motor, then:
Power at the rear wheel/trainer's roller = Power of a motor + Power applied via the bicycle cranks

Since the power measured at the rear wheel was the same as the power measured at the cranks, the contribution by any motor (assuming this hypothetical device even existed) was therefore zero.
 
thehog said:
Stages doesn’t measure from the downward force on the pedal. It measures via the deflection in the crank arm when force is applied along with using an algorithm for temperature and torque - it doesn’t know where that force might come from.
No, it doesn't know (can be your feet/legs, or your hands, or something leaning on it) except that any such force must be applied to the crank arm itself. BB motors do not apply forces to crank arms.
 
Alex Simmons/RST said:
thehog said:
Alex Simmons/RST said:
gillan1969 said:
Apologies for not going through all the pages but did Swart check for a motor on Froomes bike before the test?
Power was measured at the crank arms and at the ergometer load device. A motor would result in different power readings. They were not different.
For argument sake let’s say he did have a motor during the test.

Crank has Stages so would measure the “strain” applied by the motor, the wind trainer is providing the resistance and is measuring power produced from where? The force of the roller, with resistance? He wasn’t using a standard ergo/jig. Which means a motor could be used depending on the type of motor & where it was placed.

Let me make this simple for you.

If there was a motor then it could power the rear wheel without any force being applied to the cranks.

Power at the rear wheel is measured via an electromagnetic brake control device - it measures the torque and rotational velocity applied to the trainer's roller.

IOW if there was a motor, then:
Power at the rear wheel/trainer's roller = Power of a motor + Power applied via the bicycle cranks

Since the power measured at the rear wheel was the same as the power measured at the cranks, the contribution by any motor (assuming this hypothetical device even existed) was therefore zero.
I don’t think he had a motor, that we all agree, however the rear resistance was controlled at a set level, it wasn’t measuring his power output per se. You really only had one independent measurement of power which came from the crank arm.

The sub-maximal testing undertaken by Chris Froome required him to ride on his own bike connected to an ergometer that controlled the power independent of cadence. The test started at 250 watts and increased at a rate of 25W every four minutes. This test was done twice — once under ambient conditions, and once under hot and humid environmental conditions.
 
thehog said:
I don’t think he had a motor, that we all agree, however the rear resistance was controlled at a set level, it wasn’t measuring his power output per se. You really only had one independent measurement of power which came from the crank arm.

The sub-maximal testing undertaken by Chris Froome required him to ride on his own bike connected to an ergometer that controlled the power independent of cadence. The test started at 250 watts and increased at a rate of 25W every four minutes. This test was done twice — once under ambient conditions, and once under hot and humid environmental conditions.
If only you would do even the least amount of cursory research before posting nonsense...

The test was performed on a Computrainer. It both measures the actual load as well as provides a means to control that load while cycling, if required. It is quite effective at doing both at the same time. This is ergometer 101.

It's not new technology, having been in use for decades with hundreds of thousands of such data files created every month on such ergometers. I own one myself and have performed hundreds of tests on them.
 
Aug 1, 2018
2
1
515
Chris Froome has retweeted a Eurosport feature on his rise to greatness, which includes this paragraph concerning his notorious bilharzia condition, which although an old well-worn subject I think is still capable of raising a smile in certain circles.

"Froome was diagnosed with the parasite in 2011 and had been carrying it since at least 2009 - during his time with Barloworld, perhaps even longer. In essence, he had reached the level of Team Sky with one arm tied behind his back. With that restriction lifted, a physiologically improved Froome was catapulted into the very elite of the pro peloton."
 
Aug 1, 2018
2
1
515
Hold on folks. It gets even better. Check this out:

By Tom Bennett:

"The physical strain of competing with bilharzia, coupled with Froome’s experience of exercise at altitude early in his life, is also an explanation for his remarkably low heart rate. Froome’s maximum heart rate is just 159 beats per minute, while his resting heart rate drops as low as 32bpm. It’s not uncommon for cycling’s best climbers to have such low heart rates, maximising their ability to pump blood and oxygen to the muscles. And for Froome, that boost provided by his bilharzia-restricted training has been his own biological marginal gain, perhaps the extra little edge he has needed in defining moments.
But to even reach the professional level while carrying such an illness illustrates Froome’s single-minded determination to succeed. Few would have carried on in the face of such physical limitations. But Froome did. It is that mentality which makes him so special, and what means he may, once again, be able to defy the doubters."



Interesting, but I'd like to know how did his weight drop so spectacularly from chubby Froome to 'Mr. Lean'. Anything to do with abusing asthma medication as his team mate Bradley Wiggins did?
Also, how about 'wonder drink' Ketone. Was Sky the only team that could afford it when it was 10 grand a bottle or whatever?
 
Reactions: ppanther92
Interesting, but I'd like to know how did his weight drop so spectacularly from chubby Froome to 'Mr. Lean'. Anything to do with abusing asthma medication as his team mate Bradley Wiggins did?
Also, how about 'wonder drink' Ketone. Was Sky the only team that could afford it when it was 10 grand a bottle or whatever?

He probably just burnt more calories than he consumed, like anyone else who loses weight. Losing 5kg is hard spectacular. Regular people manage to lose far more than that.
 
Reactions: brownbobby
Hold on folks. It gets even better. Check this out:

By Tom Bennett:

"The physical strain of competing with bilharzia, coupled with Froome’s experience of exercise at altitude early in his life, is also an explanation for his remarkably low heart rate. Froome’s maximum heart rate is just 159 beats per minute, while his resting heart rate drops as low as 32bpm. It’s not uncommon for cycling’s best climbers to have such low heart rates, maximising their ability to pump blood and oxygen to the muscles. And for Froome, that boost provided by his bilharzia-restricted training has been his own biological marginal gain, perhaps the extra little edge he has needed in defining moments.
But to even reach the professional level while carrying such an illness illustrates Froome’s single-minded determination to succeed. Few would have carried on in the face of such physical limitations. But Froome did. It is that mentality which makes him so special, and what means he may, once again, be able to defy the doubters."



Interesting, but I'd like to know how did his weight drop so spectacularly from chubby Froome to 'Mr. Lean'. Anything to do with abusing asthma medication as his team mate Bradley Wiggins did?
Also, how about 'wonder drink' Ketone. Was Sky the only team that could afford it when it was 10 grand a bottle or whatever?
There was something banding about recently, a spreadsheet snippet from the Dawg in the TDF (Cant rememebr what climb, the on where he left Wiggins) and his max HR was 180.

But hey

Transparency
 
Reactions: Bronstein
"The physical strain of competing with bilharzia...that boost provided by his bilharzia-restricted training has been his own biological marginal gain, perhaps the extra little edge he has needed in defining moments.
What kind of nonsense in this? The schisto story has been thoroughly rebutted. E.g., the false statement that after taking PZQ, one can't train for a week or more. The lack of correlation between treatments and Froome's performance. The need for multiple treatments. And on and on and on.

"Froome was diagnosed with the parasite in 2011 and had been carrying it since at least 2009 - during his time with Barloworld, perhaps even longer. In essence, he had reached the level of Team Sky with one arm tied behind his back. With that restriction lifted, a physiologically improved Froome was catapulted into the very elite of the pro peloton."
Typical mixing up of the facts. According to his own statements, Froome was treated for schisto several times before the Vuelta in 2011.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Bronstein
oh boy is Froome back racing or something.....we are going over old ground guys, must try harder
He probably just burnt more calories than he consumed, like anyone else who loses weight. Losing 5kg is hard spectacular. Regular people manage to lose far more than that.
losing 5kg for a lard ar*e is easy...losing 5kg when you are a skinny professional athlete is actually quite spectacular...ask SDB...oh...someone did...and answer came there none......still, good question to ask :cool:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS