Wigans goes there. Cadence!

[the big ring]

your word for option 1 could be interpreted as nondoped or doped.

Correct, and you should have interpreted it that way.

Righto. So when your words can be "interpreted", it's the interpreters fault if they get it wrong, but when you "interpret" what I wrote wrongly, after trimming words from what I said, it's my fault.

"The precise communication of precise ideas requires the precise use of precise terminology." - A. Coggan, ca. 1980.

Or IOW: if your "stream of conciousness" writing style leads to miscommunication, you have no one to blame but yourself...

Heads you win, tails I lose.

Very.... convenient.

More sophistry...

It means that I agree with Krebs Cycle, i.e., you are clearly only interested in a ****ing contest, and are willing to twist words and misstate people's positions in an attempt to "win" the same. It most definitely does NOT mean "I'm sorry".

That precise enough for you?

Given I quoted you verbatim, unlike the post of mine you trimmed, I'd really like to see where I twisted anything. Perhaps you can show that.

You claimed I "interpreted' it wrong, implying it could be interpreted. Therefore the language was imprecise. "You have noone to blame but yourself" - A, Coggan, ca 2012.

If you think that's sophistry you need a new dictionary.

 

[armchairclimber]

And yet. Despite putting me down. And carrying on like an alleged "expert" in the process. You cannot tell me what Brad's training was for the IP in 2008, or any of his training for the IP.

Huh.

Your contribution to date has been one list of physiological terms, not unlike the one that Krebs posted - far, far short of what anyone would call an "explanation".

And now, demanding from the known non-PhD in phsyiology (ie me) proofs and evidence, while you yourself are providing... nothing but insults and condescencion.

No.

I asked for Brad's training. If you can't provide it, say, "I don't know". But don't then turn around and say Brad didn't train on the road and therefore can't have possibly won on the road with any regularity or consistency.

Why would I need to know what his training was when there is no contention?
If you can't provide one single scientific reason why an IP world champ can't make a GT front runner, then stop wasting everybody's time.
Frankly, I think Krebs and acoggan have shown you a good deal of patience/forbearance.

You can take this to mean that you have won the internet if you so wish.

 

[roundabout]

It's a question that I've been wanting to ask and it may have been already asked (and answered!), but what was the track schedule for Wiggins during his early road career? I am thinking between 2002 and 2008? I think that he even missed the track Worlds in 2006 or 2007? Was it planned? Did he focus on the road more?

 

[the big ring]

Why would I need to know what his training was when there is no contention?
If you can't provide one single scientific reason why an IP world champ can't make a GT front runner, then stop wasting everybody's time.
Frankly, I think Krebs and acoggan have shown you a good deal of patience/forbearance.

You can take this to mean that you have won the internet if you so wish.

So to clarify. You're only contribution is "there is no contention"? 890 posts in this thread alone, not counting the Sky thread would lead me to believe there is contention. Perhaps you missed it.

And in case you missed it, Brad was more than a "GT front runner". He dominated the stage racing scene in 2012 from March through to July, and capped it off with an Olympic TT gold medal. If you feel your time is being wasted, feel free to read other threads.

 

[armchairclimber]

So to clarify. You're only contribution is "there is no contention"? 890 posts in this thread alone, not counting the Sky thread would lead me to believe there is contention. Perhaps you missed it.

And in case you missed it, Brad was more than a "GT front runner". He dominated the stage racing scene in 2012 from March through to July, and capped it off with an Olympic TT gold medal.

Yes, I watched. I'll ask again. What are the physiological factors that would prevent him, a world class IP rider, from making that transition?
You're the one with the doubts....explain what you think the factors are that should limit his performance. Go on...in detail please.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Not likely though... Otherwise over the history of cycling we would have seen many more pursuiters turn up as Grand Tour contenders. I'm going to do a Krebs Cycle here and ask, how many riders laboured in track obscurity before becoming Grand Tour winners? Lots of great one-day riders came off the track. But how many became Grand Tour champions?

This oft repeated moot point is a strawman argument and does not disprove the science which demonstrates that the physiological characteristics required for success in track endurance and road racing are remarkably similar. This fact is also proven by the array of cyclists that have been successful at international level in both track endurance and road racing.

But since strawman arguments are what you guys apparently seem to understand then I'll give you one right back.... how many track endurance cyclists in the entire history of the sport with the same track pedigree as Wiggins actually tried to win the TdF?

The answer, of course, is none. It doesn't disprove that Wiggins is doping, but then your strawman doesn't prove he is doping either. However the science underscores the fact that a doping explanation is not mandatory.

I have to keep repeating this last bit over and over because you guys just ignore ignore ignore deny deny deny. You all seem to think that there is NO HUMANLY POSSIBLE EXPLANATION for Wiggins' seemingly incomprehensible (to you) achievements in 2012. This is rubbish. Myself and others have presented those possible explanations time and again and we have backed them up with scientific rationale. NONE of you have disproven them using scientific rationale and I've been asking you for months. The best you come up with are moot strawman arguments.

 

[acoggan]

I'd really like to see where I twisted anything. Perhaps you can show that.

For starters, you *** u me d/claimed that my "option 1" excluded the possibility of doping, when clearly it did not.

For finishers, you claimed that I have argued that Wiggins is innocent of doping, when in fact I have not.

In between, you've just been an ***.

 

[acoggan]

This oft repeated moot point is a strawman argument and does not disprove the science which demonstrates that the physiological characteristics required for success in track endurance and road racing are remarkably similar. This fact is also proven by the array of cyclists that have been successful at international level in both track endurance and road racing.

Did Ekimov ever pursue a high GC placing in any of the GTs?

 

[Krebs cycle]

Please answer me any of these questions anyone.....

Why can't a great one day rider become a GT contenter?

Why can't a great ITT rider (eg: Martin or Cancellara) become a GT contenter?

Why can't a world class mountain biker or cyclocross rider become a GT contender?

Why must one show good results in stage racing at a young age to be considered the only possible GT contender?

What physiological characteristics distinguish a GT contender from a track endurance rider or a great one day classics rider?

 

[taiwan]

Why can't a donkey become a racehorse? Anything's possible.

 

[taiwan]

This has been the central matter throughout the thread. Yes, Wiggins - a great IP and decent prologue specialist could theoretically have had the potential to be a dominant Tour winner which he eventually unlocked, but no, I don't have to buy that he actually did.

 

[the big ring]

I have to keep repeating this last bit over and over because you guys just ignore ignore ignore deny deny deny. You all seem to think that there is NO HUMANLY POSSIBLE EXPLANATION for Wiggins' seemingly incomprehensible (to you) achievements in 2012. This is rubbish. Myself and others have presented those possible explanations time and again and we have backed them up with scientific rationale. NONE of you have disproven them using scientific rationale and I've been asking you for months. The best you come up with are moot strawman arguments.

The ONLY scientific "rationale" you have provided is a link to a study from 20 years ago, of track cyclists. The study didn't have road cyclists involved and you did not "explain" anything.

Your explanations:
1. World class IP riders have similar physiological characteristics to pro road riders.
* IP riders train and race on the road
* Brad did sweet FA on the road
* 20 years ago IP riders would have been riding 6-day events (ie real endurance) just to bring home some pay
* Neil Craig's study only mentions IP riders.

2. Brad generates more power aerobically than average.
* You don't know that for sure. JV said it on this forum first, and you guys jumped on the band wagon, but noone has actually shown the test, where it was held, when, by whom, and what the results were.
* None of you are prepared to explain how that comes about. (a list of words is not an explanation)
* None of you can say with any confidence what advantage it affords Brad or why

You Krebs, have also provided as evidence:
1. Wiggins can climb (Tour de l'Avenir)
2. Wiggins can timetrial (Martin on wet roads vs Wiggins on dry / 7th then 10th at WC)
3. Wiggins is a dedicated and focused individual (Kate Bates op-ed)

All of the "scientists" excuse Brad's poor showing on the road, riding as a professional, claiming he was "focusing on the IP".

When we ask "what training did he do for that IP", they wave their hands and say oh no no no you have to PROVE he can't win a GT after being Olympic IP champion for years.

We ask again, "what training did he do for the IP?" and get told "there is no contention".

You can point out studies from 20 years ago all you like. The fact remains: Brad trained and raced on the road as a professional, during the time he was training for his IP. You have even listed races where he was in day-long breakaways as evidence of his "massive engine". Yet when we say - there's no results, or the results are weak, suddenly his performance on the road is irrelevant.

Then BAM. 3rd (Vuelta), 3rd, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st (Tour), in 2 grand tours and 4 minor stage races in a row.

Not normal.

 

[davidmam]

Again, no evidence, just supposition and innuendo. "he won, he must have been doping". You are extrapolating race position as an indicator of objective performance when it is subjective at best. There are so many other aspects going in to a race - whether he was the protected rider, what his weight was, what his training had been.

Are his performances on an objective level physiologically improbable? if so why? You steadfastly refuse to provide anything approaching an objective analysis.

Edit: And no results? Excluding the prologues, he won two stages in 2005 with Credit Agricole, and 2009 also won the Herald Sun Tour. Always good pack fodder carrying too much weight, too unfocussed in training and too hung up on the track to really shine on the road.

 

[armchairclimber]

Still waiting...

 

[the big ring]

Edit: And no results? Excluding the prologues, he won two stages in 2005 with Credit Agricole, and 2009 also won the Herald Sun Tour. Always good pack fodder carrying too much weight, too unfocussed in training and too hung up on the track to really shine on the road.

Herald Sun Tour results:

Brad Wiggins:
Year: 2009
Age: 29
Years as professional roadie: 9
Position: 1st
Start list: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/jayco-herald-sun-tour-start-list
Team: Garmin (the only pro tour team in the race, the rest were pro-conti or less)

Top 10 GC:

1 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Garmin-Slipstream 15:51:27
2 Chris Sutton (Aus) Garmin-Slipstream 0:00:11
3 Jonathan Cantwell (Aus) Fly V Australia 0:00:20
4 Svein Tuft (Can) Garmin-Slipstream 0:00:48
5 Bernard Van Ulden (USA) Jelly Belly 0:01:43
6 Matthew Wilson (Aus) Jayco Australia National 0:02:05
7 Ben Jacques-Maynes (USA) Bissell Pro Cycling 0:02:08
8 Aaron Kemps (Aus) Rock Racing 0:02:12
9 Philip Zajicek (Aus) Fly V Australia
10 David Tanner (Aus) Rock Racing 0:02:23



Nathan Haas:
Year: 2011
Age: 22
Years as a professional roadie: 0
Years as a roadie: 3
Position: 1st
Start list: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/jayco-herald-sun-tour-start-list-1
Team: Genesys Wealth advisors (pro-conti, you won't have heard of them)
Other teams: Saxobank, Garmin-Cervelo, Omega-Lotto, Katusha

Top 10 GC:


1 Nathan Haas (Aus) Genesys Wealth Advisers 16:39:39
2 Jack Bobridge (Aus) Garmin-Cervelo 0:00:17
3 Jonas Aen Jorgensen (Den) Saxo Bank-SunGard 0:00:26
4 Reinardt Janse Van Rensburg (RSA) MTN - Qhubeka 0:00:27
5 Jens Debusschere (Bel) Omega Pharma-Lotto 0:00:29
6 Rhys Pollock (Aus) Drapac Professional Cycling 0:01:21
7 Joseph Lewis (Aus) Australian National Team 0:03:29
8 Bernard Sulzberger (Aus) V Australia 0:03:56
9 Tim Gudsell (NZl) Pure Black Racing 0:03:59
10 Koen De Kort (Ned) Skil - Shimano 0:05:12

 

[the big ring]

Still waiting...

As soon as you provide the basic / general training plan Brad followed when training for the IP and racing as a road professional, my discussion with you can continue.

Until then, your "Still waiting" is as valuable as every other contribution you have made: 0.

 

[acoggan]

The ONLY scientific "rationale" you have provided is a link to a study from 20 years ago, of track cyclists. The study didn't have road cyclists involved

1. Scientific studies don't have an expiration date.

2. If you don't understand that elite road cyclists are also characterized by having a high VO2max and a high LT, your knowledge base is sorely lacking.

2. Brad generates more power aerobically than average.
* You don't know that for sure. JV said it on this forum first, and you guys jumped on the band wagon

More revisionist history: I have always qualified my statements by saying "if Wiggins obtained more energy from aerobic metabolism...", and I believe that Kreb's Cycle has done the same.

 

[acoggan]

Did Ekimov ever pursue a high GC placing in any of the GTs?

Thinking for a moment: how about McGee? I seem to recall him trying to become a GC contender, only to find that he tended to "crack" after a week or two of racing.

 

[the big ring]

More revisionist history: I have always qualified my statements by saying "if Wiggins obtained more energy from aerobic metabolism...", and I believe that Kreb's Cycle has done the same.

Hang on. JV made the claim. Are you saying that you, Krebs and everyone else that has ever mentioned MAOD is not actually speaking from a foundation of knowledge in regards to Brad?

That it's only speculation?



Seriously?

 

[sittingbison]

switching from cadence (this thread) to weight for a moment:
1) agoggan is uncertain that wiggo actually lost any weight
2) davidmam thinks wiggo was a fat pig all those years winning gold medals and world championships
3) krebs thinks it might be possible to maintain power but lose weight because a lightweight rower did it once. And gym training.

Now the interesting thing about this is it is generally acknowledged that to succeed in the mountains you need to be as light as possible. So fat pig trackie wiggo was broom wagon in the mountains all the way up to 2009. So acoggan is probably wrong. But acoggan is always right.

But wiggo was the best track cyclist ever. So it is likely that he had an extremely focused track training program, and wore very tight skin suits. And was as fit as humanely possible, so unlikely to be carrying a spare tyre around the velodrome. So his 82kg was lean muscle mass. So where did the the massive (reportedly 13kg total, 10.5kg between Olympics and 2009 TdF) weight loss come from?

But wiggo needed all that lean muscle mass to launch himself around the velodrome at 570W. Much like Canc and Martin need it to win all those world titles, and ITT stages that wiggo was unable to win. However with all that track training and powerful lean muscle mass and huge engine, how many prologues and ITTs did he manage to win prior to abandoning the track in 2009? In fact, lets add on a couple of years and make that until 2012.

So then we get to 2009, and lose 10.5kg. And climb as well as Contador, Schleck and Armstrong. Only 4th! Drat, better lose another 2.5kg, I'm carrying too much fat! Don't need to worry about power output though. I'm putting out the same power as I always have, so the ITTs will be in the bag, those fatties Canc and Martin wont be able to keep up with me because I'll be a knife blade cutting through the air.

Hold it, I'm a scrawny 69kg. My skin suit flaps around in the breeze. Everyone except the big ring says the reason I can win the the TdF is because I have a huge engine, after all I won all those gold medals and world champs on the track with track training, weighing in as 82kg of lean muscle mass. But I am no longer a trackie. I am focused on road training, I don't have any of that lean muscle mass that made me so successful, I lost 13kg of it. I can dominate ITT now when I couldn't before as a trackie, I can dominate climbs now when I couldn't even climb before as a trackie. So what were those similarities again?

But wait!! Maybe I changed CADENCE (you know, this thread), because world renowned sports scientis Kerrison thought it would be a good idea. I'm the best trackie who ever lived, but I know nothing about cadence because what I said about Kerrisons ideas was complete drivel. And I will abandon all that technique I knew nothing about while I won all those gold medals and world titles strapped to a fixie, and do what world renowned cycling coach Kerrison says. Although I'm confised, davidmam thinks it was to slow down from 105 to 90 revs/min.

So lets try that. Sounds good. I have no idea why, but hey there must be some scientific studies somewhere to support the theory. And someone in the 100 year history of cycling might have attempted it. So away we go! 131313, get out your stop watch and start counting those revs. I've even slowed right down to only 90revs/min so you can easily keep up. I'm blitzing the field now, all those fat slow bone idle lazy wonkers cannot keep up with new knife blade thin slow peddling wiggo hehe. ****z!! So 131313, how am I going, like my new rythm? WHAT?? I'm actually peddling at 100??? FFS thats the same cadence I ALWAYS peddle at. You have got to be frakking kidding me!

 

[thehog]

Thinking for a moment: how about McGee? I seem to recall him trying to become a GC contender, only to find that he tended to "crack" after a week or two of racing.

Dean Woods, McGree all tried.

McGee finished 8th in Giro one year several minutes down. He tried the whole weight loss thing as well.

But he documented the reason why he couldn't complete in no uncertain terms.

"dope"

The only way he could become a world class GT rider was to dope.

He then went back to prologues and won the honour of holding the leaders jersey in the Giro, Tour and Vuelta.

In his own words:

"I believe that given the right training, team working creation, recovery and mental approach that anything is possible in my profession. I have not, do not, and never will take performance enhancing drugs or procedures to make this belief come true. Why would I? And yet, given recent estimates and accusations in the media by cyclists, journalists, government officials and even a member of the World Anti Doping Authority (WADA) I fall into a category of 'must be' doped riders.

F*** You.

Come and live with me. Sit in a car and watch me train. Sit up all night stressing over upcoming races and map out game plans. Share the pain through injury and feel the torment when for unknown reasons the form is just not there."

 

[the big ring]

Now if you think there is no medical explanation for losing 7kg from a combination of upper body muscle mass + body fat over a 9 month period then you need to wake up and get a reality check. I've been working with world class lightweight rowers for several years and sometimes the men will lose up to 3kgs in one month leading into competition and not lose any power.

3kg in one month is interesting. I have lost 16 kg in 4 months and improved my power, mainly because I was unfit, but still. For comparison, Armstrong was 79.7kg 4 months after he won the Tour in 1999. His racing weight was 75kg. I am confident he could not only lose 4kg in a month (better than your rowers), but increase his VO2 and power at VO2, given that he had dropped to 71 ml/m/kg by that stage. Basically he had porked out.

Looking at this again, what we need is a heavyweight rower (or one at 82kg) winning Olympic gold and World championship single scull races at that weight, to lose weight over a period of 10 months or so, down to 69/70kg (is that lightweight) and maintain the same power.

Go.

el oh el.

 

[D-Queued]

Did Ekimov ever pursue a high GC placing in any of the GTs?

Good one. He might be as close as any.

Won a number of stages, but never pursued a high GC in a GT, but in smaller Tours including Tour DuPont/Georgia.

Super Dom.

Also, to use Lance's lingua franca: Not Normal.

Dave.

 

[acoggan]

1) acoggan is uncertain that wiggo actually lost any weight

Uh, no: I don't know for a fact what he weighed when he won the IP, nor do I know for a fact what he weighed this year. All I know for a fact is that it is claimed that he lost 10+ kg.

 

[acoggan]

Hang on. JV made the claim. Are you saying that you, Krebs and everyone else that has ever mentioned MAOD is not actually speaking from a foundation of knowledge in regards to Brad?

That it's only speculation?

Isn't practically everything posted here speculation?

Seriously.