The Froome Files, test data only thread

[Supimilian]

Re: Re:

Not insurmountable, the UCI regulates the bikes they can regulate the powermeter.

Generic head units, docked after each stage to upload data or alternatively they are already sending the GPS data via the back of the saddle dongle. The power data via ANT or Bluetooth can be transmitted this way also. The only issue is weight, which is the Shroud of Turin - might need a daily 'weigh in' for that one.

That would be great, and obviously not hard to accomplish for all WT level races. Standard issue powermeters with auto upload.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Not insurmountable, the UCI regulates the bikes they can regulate the powermeter.

Generic head units, docked after each stage to upload data or alternatively they are already sending the GPS data via the back of the saddle dongle. The power data via ANT or Bluetooth can be transmitted this way also. The only issue is weight, which is the Shroud of Turin - might need a daily 'weigh in' for that one.

That would be great, and obviously not hard to accomplish for all WT level races. Standard issue powermeters with auto upload.

I'm always struck at the lack of imagination in this area. Velon is terrible & sports science (aka selling coaching services online) are based on Ferrari's work from 20 years ago. I mean TSS, please!?

There is so much more potential development in this area for clean cycling but also much better information to the fan. The closed minded aspect of not wanting to show data because "no one would understand and might misinterpret" hurts cycling ten fold.

In my opinion.

 

[acoggan]

if the objective was to prove Froome was clean (or close to certain), the approach would have been very different.

Motivation is one thing, having the resources (knowledge/time/money/energy) is another.

 

[acoggan]

Re: Re:

sports science (aka selling coaching services online) are based on Ferrari's work from 20 years ago. I mean TSS, please!?

??

TSS has no connection to Ferrari.

 

[acoggan]

it's the genesis of the testing which is odd

Not in the least. Froome didn't appreciate being accused of doping at that 2015 press conference, and it was suggested (incorrectly) that physiological data could help prove his innocence. Team Sky weighed the issue and solicited opinions from people like me (at least I assume that they spoke with others), and ultimately decided to try to remain at arm's length. Froome proceeded on his own anyway, and sought to learn something that might help him in Rio in the process.

so...let's get this straight...Froome seeks to prove he's not doping by instructing tests that can't prove he's not doping...

move aside Einstein

Yup. You see, there is a large contingent of folks who mistakenly believe that physiological measurements or power data can demonstrate whether or not someone is doping. Can you blame Froome for thinking likewise?

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

sports science (aka selling coaching services online) are based on Ferrari's work from 20 years ago. I mean TSS, please!?

??

TSS has no connection to Ferrari.

Well it does, he pioneered the power model to training, equating for load over time over duration. He incorporated a decrease in load due to stress on his programs (along with measuring testosterone & cortisol levels). He gave the same plan to amateur riders as well.

Agree with you though, TSS is simple and easy to understand, it wraps the entire process into an easy to read score for the viewer to understand their load over time.

That's that power that a GUI interface on a PC can give you, which wasn't available when Dr. Ferrari put it together with a notepad and pencil.

All of this is based on Ferrari's work, you'll never get away from that fact.

 

[thehook]

Could not agree more. With some posters sighting Ferrari's methods. That man is/was not just a Dr. he is also miles ahead of anyone on his training, nutrition, clinic methods. He has forgotten more in sports science. Then many can hope to achieve in a lifetime of study.

And I would not be at all surprised if he is still employed.....Likely by SKY

 

[Lyon]

Re:

Could not agree more. With some posters sighting Ferrari's methods. That man is/was not just a Dr. he is also miles ahead of anyone on his training, nutrition, clinic methods. He has forgotten more in sports science. Then many can hope to achieve in a lifetime of study.

And I would not be at all surprised if he is still employed.....Likely by SKY

Ferraris problem is that he was able to observe real life cases on a daily basis. That's not what science is about. Science is about complaining (understandably enough) over how non-scientists barge into the area of expertise of the scientist whilst simultaneously (not so understandably) barging into other peoples area of expertise.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

Standard issue powermeters with auto upload.

The significant impracticalities of this are being glossed over. But more importantly, it still won't answer the doping status question.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...The closed minded aspect of not wanting to show data because "no one would understand and might misinterpret" hurts cycling ten fold.

Not showing the pre-Vuelta 2011 data to Grappe was such a red flag.
And recall Brailsford getting all grumpy and finger pointing when a reporter asked him about it.

Meanwhile Swart just pretends there's nothing to see there.

Why not release proper power data?

Didn't there already do this? They released all his data to Fred Grappe ...

 

[Jeroen Swart]

Re: Re:

...The closed minded aspect of not wanting to show data because "no one would understand and might misinterpret" hurts cycling ten fold.

Not showing the pre-Vuelta 2011 data to Grappe was such a red flag.
And recall Brailsford getting all grumpy and finger pointing when a reporter asked him about it.

Meanwhile Swart just pretends there's nothing to see there.

Why not release proper power data?

Didn't there already do this? They released all his data to Fred Grappe ...

Sniper, this is where you are fundamentally wrong. And once again you resort to thinly veiled accusations of impropriety. You were challenged on this 2 days ago but immediately disappeared, only to wait until the heat was off before coming back to follow the same modus.

Your frame of reference leads you to assume that I pretend there's nothing to see.

Rather, I see little relevance in this for these reasons:

We can see from the 2007 data that he already had the ability to produce the required power output.

Analysing the data from pre 2011 will demonstrate either:

a) an inability to deliver the same output in competition

OR

b) an inability to deliver the same output in training AND competition

OR

c) an inability to reproduce the performances reliably.

None of the above will tell you why that changed. It doesn't tell the story.

The results already confirm that one of the 3 above scenarios prevailed.

To go back to the 2007 results - He had the power then.

Was he therefore:

a) Extremely talented but unable to deliver on this promise until late 2011.

OR

b) Doped for the 2007 tests, then stopped doping for a period of 4 years and then recommenced doping just prior to the 2011 Vuelta.

Or

c) The 2007 data are a complete fabulation. He was clean until late 2011 and then suddenly started doping on his own.

His training and racing will not provide any insight into which of these 3 scenarios is correct.

Scenario B makes no sense to me.

Scenario C does not seem plausible from my frame of reference. I do not see any motive for the Lausanne scientists to risk their careers to enter into a conspiracy AND if the motive was money, then SKY would need to be complicit (in bribing those scientists). If so, then why did they not dope him themselves. Why would he had to do it himself if they were interested or invested in cheating?

As with the heart rate data, instead of simply asking for data and information, come with a hypothesis and then test that hypothesis.

 

[sniper]

Thanks, Jeroen.
I don't understand why you think he must have been clean prior to the Vuelta 2011?


On a side, and completely off topic (so do ignore if you find it inappropriate):
I'd be interested in your opinion on Barry Austin. He's been working closely with a handful of SA riders who later got caught doping, including, as you know, the youngest ever EPO positive in 2005 (Michael Van Staaden).
Your former athlete, Johnny Lee Augustyn now works with Barry.
How does a clean athlete like Johnny Lee end up with a controversial coach like Barry? There's enough evidence against Barry to draw some common sense conclusions.

 

[acoggan]

Re: Re:

sports science (aka selling coaching services online) are based on Ferrari's work from 20 years ago. I mean TSS, please!?

??

TSS has no connection to Ferrari.

Well it does, he pioneered the power model to training, equating for load over time over duration. He incorporated a decrease in load due to stress on his programs (along with measuring testosterone & cortisol levels). He gave the same plan to amateur riders as well.

Agree with you though, TSS is simple and easy to understand, it wraps the entire process into an easy to read score for the viewer to understand their load over time.

That's that power that a GUI interface on a PC can give you, which wasn't available when Dr. Ferrari put it together with a notepad and pencil.

All of this is based on Ferrari's work, you'll never get away from that fact.

Unless you can provide evidence of your claims, why should anyone believe you?

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...

Sniper, this is where you are fundamentally wrong. And once again you resort to thinly veiled accusations of impropriety. You were challenged on this 2 days ago but immediately disappeared, only to wait until the heat was off before coming back to follow the same modus.

Your frame of reference leads you to assume that I pretend there's nothing to see.
...

Well if you state that Sky "gave all data to Grappe", I can tell you they didn't. Weren't you aware? Honest question.

And if you maintain the pre-Vuelta data are irrelevant anyway, why didn't they give them to Grappe?

I also recall you stating in the podcast last year that "there is absolutely nothing on Sky".
Are you standing by that statement? To me, in light of pretty clearcut evidence that Sky have been lying about a variety of incriminating things, then stating that "there is absolutely nothing on Sky" to me indeed equals 'pretending there's nothing to see'.

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

...The closed minded aspect of not wanting to show data because "no one would understand and might misinterpret" hurts cycling ten fold.

Not showing the pre-Vuelta 2011 data to Grappe was such a red flag.
And recall Brailsford getting all grumpy and finger pointing when a reporter asked him about it.

Meanwhile Swart just pretends there's nothing to see there.

Why not release proper power data?

Didn't there already do this? They released all his data to Fred Grappe ...

Sniper, this is where you are fundamentally wrong. And once again you resort to thinly veiled accusations of impropriety. You were challenged on this 2 days ago but immediately disappeared, only to wait until the heat was off before coming back to follow the same modus.

Your frame of reference leads you to assume that I pretend there's nothing to see.

Rather, I see little relevance in this for these reasons:

We can see from the 2007 data that he already had the ability to produce the required power output.

Analysing the data from pre 2011 will demonstrate either:

a) an inability to deliver the same output in competition

OR

b) an inability to deliver the same output in training AND competition

OR

c) an inability to reproduce the performances reliably.

None of the above will tell you why that changed. It doesn't tell the story.

The results already confirm that one of the 3 above scenarios prevailed.

To go back to the 2007 results - He had the power then.

Was he therefore:

a) Extremely talented but unable to deliver on this promise until late 2011.

OR

b) Doped for the 2007 tests, then stopped doping for a period of 4 years and then recommenced doping just prior to the 2011 Vuelta.

Or

c) The 2007 data are a complete fabulation. He was clean until late 2011 and then suddenly started doping on his own.

His training and racing will not provide any insight into which of these 3 scenarios is correct.

Scenario B makes no sense to me.

Scenario C does not seem plausible from my frame of reference. I do not see any motive for the Lausanne scientists to risk their careers to enter into a conspiracy AND if the motive was money, then SKY would need to be complicit (in bribing those scientists). If so, then why did they not dope him themselves. Why would he had to do it himself if they were interested or invested in cheating?

As with the heart rate data, instead of simply asking for data and information, come with a hypothesis and then test that hypothesis.

the 2007 data has not been released...a fax has...

and his racing does provide an insight...as whilst there are many variables in racing when you are as good as Froome purports to be you can't hide that in a race all the time i.e. for about 6 years

under scenario your scenario (a) - which of course doesn't rule out doping - we tend to see a more even spread of progress, or at least flashes of brilliance, with Froome it was from zero to hero......

as an aside, with those results and data available (2007) don't you find it surprising Froome never had a copy, SKY never had a copy, SKY never tested him and SKY never told him to lose some weight / lay off the nutella?

cheers

 

[Jeroen Swart]

Re:

Thanks, Jeroen.
I don't understand why you think he must have been clean prior to the Vuelta 2011?


On a side, and completely off topic (so do ignore if you find it inappropriate):
I'd be interested in your opinion on Barry Austin. He's been working closely with a handful of SA riders who later got caught doping, including, as you know, the youngest ever EPO positive in 2005 (Michael Van Staaden).
Your former athlete, Johnny Lee Augustyn now works with Barry.
How does a clean athlete like Johnny Lee end up with a controversial coach like Barry? There's enough evidence against Barry to draw some common sense conclusions.

(a) was only one scenario.

JL does not work for Austin. It was temporary employment. He is back in Italy.

 

[Jeroen Swart]

Re: Re:

...

Sniper, this is where you are fundamentally wrong. And once again you resort to thinly veiled accusations of impropriety. You were challenged on this 2 days ago but immediately disappeared, only to wait until the heat was off before coming back to follow the same modus.

Your frame of reference leads you to assume that I pretend there's nothing to see.
...

Well if you state that Sky "gave all data to Grappe", I can tell you they didn't. Weren't you aware? Honest question.

And if you maintain the pre-Vuelta data are irrelevant anyway, why didn't they give them to Grappe?

I also recall you stating in the podcast last year that "there is absolutely nothing on Sky".
Are you standing by that statement? To me, in light of pretty clearcut evidence that Sky have been lying about a variety of incriminating things, then stating that "there is absolutely nothing on Sky" to me indeed equals 'pretending there's nothing to see'.

You're deflecting.

You should address the questions posed instead of answering questions with questions.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
as an aside, with those results and data available (2007) don't you find it surprising Froome never had a copy, SKY never had a copy, SKY never tested him and SKY never told him to lose some weight / lay off the nutella?

ouch. So much for that "attention to detail second to none" that Swart spoke about earlier.

What wonders me is why Jeroen put the "just lost the fat" line out there so eagerly.
This is from Johnny Lee Augustyn - Swart's protegee from 2010(11?) to 2014, and Froome's principal training buddy from 2006-2008. Here he's quoted in Vavafroome (2013):

"Chris has always been very into nutrition", says Johnny Lee Augustyn. "He showed me a lot of new things, all the natural products, organic food".

 

[Jeroen Swart]

Re: Re:

...The closed minded aspect of not wanting to show data because "no one would understand and might misinterpret" hurts cycling ten fold.

Not showing the pre-Vuelta 2011 data to Grappe was such a red flag.
And recall Brailsford getting all grumpy and finger pointing when a reporter asked him about it.

Meanwhile Swart just pretends there's nothing to see there.

Why not release proper power data?

Didn't there already do this? They released all his data to Fred Grappe ...

Sniper, this is where you are fundamentally wrong. And once again you resort to thinly veiled accusations of impropriety. You were challenged on this 2 days ago but immediately disappeared, only to wait until the heat was off before coming back to follow the same modus.

Your frame of reference leads you to assume that I pretend there's nothing to see.

Rather, I see little relevance in this for these reasons:

We can see from the 2007 data that he already had the ability to produce the required power output.

Analysing the data from pre 2011 will demonstrate either:

a) an inability to deliver the same output in competition

OR

b) an inability to deliver the same output in training AND competition

OR

c) an inability to reproduce the performances reliably.

None of the above will tell you why that changed. It doesn't tell the story.

The results already confirm that one of the 3 above scenarios prevailed.

To go back to the 2007 results - He had the power then.

Was he therefore:

a) Extremely talented but unable to deliver on this promise until late 2011.

OR

b) Doped for the 2007 tests, then stopped doping for a period of 4 years and then recommenced doping just prior to the 2011 Vuelta.

Or

c) The 2007 data are a complete fabulation. He was clean until late 2011 and then suddenly started doping on his own.

His training and racing will not provide any insight into which of these 3 scenarios is correct.

Scenario B makes no sense to me.

Scenario C does not seem plausible from my frame of reference. I do not see any motive for the Lausanne scientists to risk their careers to enter into a conspiracy AND if the motive was money, then SKY would need to be complicit (in bribing those scientists). If so, then why did they not dope him themselves. Why would he had to do it himself if they were interested or invested in cheating?

As with the heart rate data, instead of simply asking for data and information, come with a hypothesis and then test that hypothesis.

the 2007 data has not been released...a fax has...

and his racing does provide an insight...as whilst there are many variables in racing when you are as good as Froome purports to be you can't hide that in a race all the time i.e. for about 6 years

under scenario your scenario (a) - which of course doesn't rule out doping - we tend to see a more even spread of progress, or at least flashes of brilliance, with Froome it was from zero to hero......

as an aside, with those results and data available (2007) don't you find it surprising Froome never had a copy, SKY never had a copy, SKY never tested him and SKY never told him to lose some weight / lay off the nutella?

cheers

Fax or not. The scientists who collected the data have not refuted it's validity. Hence the point stands.

I said his racing DOES provide an insight. The data would provide no further insight into whether or not prohibited substances were responsible for the transformation.

You discuss scenario (a). You don't address the point. How will data tell you anything about how the transformation occurred?


I have no information to answer the last question. Ask me questions I can answer.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...

(a) was only one scenario.

but in scenarios (b) and (c) you're also proposing long periods of clean riding by Froome.
Why?
Next you're gonna propose Lance was clean pre-1999...

JL does not work for Austin. It was temporary employment. He is back in Italy.

Cheers, I didn't know.
But Austin was JL's first real coach, right?

John-Lee raced his first international event as a junior cyclist under the management of Barry Austin
"I have known Barry Austin since I started my Pro career...” -
doitnow.mobi/content/john-lee-augustyn-guide-and-inspire-next-generation#sthash.YDxsZ5kH.dpuf

That doesn't bode well for JL's cleanliness, to be honest.
Austin doped Van Staden when he was still only 16.
Anyway, off topic, apologies.

 

[Jeroen Swart]

Re: Re:

...

(a) was only one scenario.

but in scenarios (b) and (c) you're also proposing long periods of clean riding by Froome.
Why?
Next you're gonna propose Lance was clean pre-1999...

JL does not work for Austin. It was temporary employment. He is back in Italy.

Cheers, I didn't know.
But Austin was JL's first real coach, right?

John-Lee raced his first international event as a junior cyclist under the management of Barry Austin
"I have known Barry Austin since I started my Pro career...” -
doitnow.mobi/content/john-lee-augustyn-guide-and-inspire-next-generation#sthash.YDxsZ5kH.dpuf

That doesn't bode well for JL's cleanliness, to be honest.
Austin doped Van Staden when he was still only 16.
Anyway, off topic, apologies.

Is your hypothesis that his 2011 transformation was due to doping?

If so, then before that he was clean or cleaner.

What is your hypothesis?. That is the question you need to answer. Let's test your hypothesis.

Your last accusation is outright libel once again, are not on topic and I do believe based on Irondan's prior warnings could get you banned from this forum. I would suggest a retraction and some restraint.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
If so, then before that he was clean or cleaner.

All we need to assume is he doped differently before the Vuelta.
But "cleaner" sounds fair enough.
That's still vastly different from him being *clean*, though, as I hope you'll agree.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...I would suggest a retraction and some restraint.

Fair enough:
Everything I've read about the Van Staden case (positive for EPO age 16) suggests he was doped by his then-coach, Barry Austin who, in the same period, also coached Johnny Lee Augustyn.

 

[Jeroen Swart]

Re: Re:

...
If so, then before that he was clean or cleaner.

All we need to assume is he doped differently before the Vuelta.
But "cleaner" sounds fair enough.
That's still vastly different from him being *clean*, though, as I hope you'll agree.

Ok. Then how did he produce even higher power outputs for the 2007 test than he did last year?

If the doping was so effective that it produced the lab results, why did it not work in competition?

And to get back to the data: How will this give you any insight. It won't prove anything.

Decide what your hypothesis is. Decide what information you need to test that hypothesis. Request that information.

And you keep calling me a pseudoscientist! :surprised:

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

...

Sniper, this is where you are fundamentally wrong. And once again you resort to thinly veiled accusations of impropriety. You were challenged on this 2 days ago but immediately disappeared, only to wait until the heat was off before coming back to follow the same modus.

Your frame of reference leads you to assume that I pretend there's nothing to see.
...

Well if you state that Sky "gave all data to Grappe", I can tell you they didn't. Weren't you aware? Honest question.

And if you maintain the pre-Vuelta data are irrelevant anyway, why didn't they give them to Grappe?

I also recall you stating in the podcast last year that "there is absolutely nothing on Sky".
Are you standing by that statement? To me, in light of pretty clearcut evidence that Sky have been lying about a variety of incriminating things, then stating that "there is absolutely nothing on Sky" to me indeed equals 'pretending there's nothing to see'.

Careful; Sky only gave 2 years worth to Grappe. From the Vuelta 2011 to the Tour 2013:

Team Sky has given French newspaper L'Equipe and respected French physiologist Frederic Grappe access to two years of Chris Froome's power data, with Grappe saying that the Tour de France leader's power data indicates that his performances are consistent.

Speaking to Equipe about Froome's data, Grappe suggested that Froome's power indicate that his performances were consistent during 2011-2013 and similar to other riders he has studied.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-releases-froomes-power-data/