Re:
What formula is that ?
Merckx index said:Let's see if I can post again...
The efficiencies were estimated using Alex's curves, but there is a formula that the curves are derived from that can be used to calculate exact values. I apparently underestimated the values from the curves. By the formula, the efficiencies are 26.5% for 2015, and 25.6% for 2007. These are indeed unusually high values, and though I can't access all the relevant literature--Coggan would probably know--i don't think anyone with a V02max value this high has ever been reported to have an efficiency this high. Though in fairness, most elite cyclists have never published this kind of information (though some have, albeit anonymously, which for our purposes here, is just as good).
Anyway, from the studies I've seen, the highest published product of V02max x GME is about 0.202. Froome's is 88.2 x .265 = 0.234. About 15% higher than the highest published. Keep in mind that V02max x GME is two-thirds of the formula for power, the remaining number being utilization (the rest of the formula involves fixed numbers, at any rate numbers the same for all riders, generally). Froome's value for that, however, about 80%, is not exceptionally high, a very high value would be about 90%. Still, if you throw that in, Froome's product is 0.0187. Assuming the rider with the highest published product had a utilization of 90%, his product would be 0.0182. This would be the best case scenario for anyone with published values (even anonymously) AFAIK. So by the physiological parameters, Froome is one of the strongest riders ever.
I don't have a problem with this, per se. The problem, of course, is that by his own testimony, he weighed 70-71 kg way back at Barloworld, which means he would have been very close to being at this unworldly level even then. Indeed, for the August test, he was basically at the same weight, 70 kg, and had a V02max/kg of just a shade under 6.0 W/kg. Even without the weight loss down to 67 kg, that value would put him at the top of the peloton. So at Barloworld, collating his own records and testimony, he was every bit as good as he was this August.
Alex Simmons/RST said:if you lose weight and have same absolute VO2max (nothing overly unusual with that), then your absolute VO2max remains the same while relative VO2max goes up.
Up to a point. Froome is claiming he lost > 10% of his body weight, with < 3% loss of peak power, and essentially no loss of sustained power. That would be very suspicious for anyone who was already a fit pro. We're not talking about some weekend warrior who starts riding and sheds weight.
Except that it apparently is not the case. As posted before, he told Kimmage he was at 70-71 kg at Barloworld. Quite frankly, this 75-76 kg value looks like a story used to explain how he could increase his power/weight so much. If it's really true, he needs to explain why he told Kimmage something very different.
There is also the fact that the report that just came out is using 67 kg, when Froome again told Kimmage something different, 66 kg. That's not a big deal, perhaps, but assuming this V02max stays the same, his V02max/kg now rises to nearly 90, and his power to 6.35 W/kg.
What formula is that ?