Wigans goes there. Cadence!

[Franklin]

Never heard of him.

He's a nobody really. His first client as physiologist was Greg Lemond. Then became the Rabo physiologst, did some time for Slipstream and now is the Garmin physiologist. That means he has been working with some decent juniors, amateurs and pro's.

And he gives out several public training advices. This one (as the green tea method) have been around for years.

And seriously, what's the point?

Considering you seem to be stuck on the weightloss which I already questioned I guess there is no point....

But had you read my post where I pointed out that it is to train your metabolism to do quicker uptake on slow energy reserves it might make sense for an endurance sport. And what do you know... cycling is indeed an endurance sport.

Sorry to be so snarky but this is just ***. A hunger training is not uncommon, nor is it a sign of doping. Cyclists dope and they also wear funny shoes, so those funny shoes surely must be connected to doping

 

[Afrank]

I don't necessarily think this method of weight loss is a sign of doping. I do think it shows some dishonesty from Wiggins.

The big thing that gives a hint about possible doping in this isn't the method he used to lose weight but more the actual rapid weight loss. I have no idea how much he lost and don't think we can figure out how much he lost from just looking at pictures. But he does appear to be very thin at the moment. I don't think it's too far out of reality that he may have used some kind of doping method in his weight loss. Maybe he didn't use doping to help lose weight, and just did it the usual calorie deficit way, but I see it as a possibility.

 

[Franklin]

I wouldn't be so confident using the word "convincingly" when it's demonstrably not the case. You may be convinced. That doesn't mean anyone else is.

Let us have a little grin, now shall we?

Ulrich never looked better wouldn't you say? Thinner as ever, look at those arms.

But that night he got hungry and started to eat. He filled his plate and dug in. Then he wanted MORE. MORE! MORE!!!! Indeed all his teammates hid in the cellar as this was a feast they had never seen before:

I'd say Jan ate about 50 pancakes that night wouldnt you say?

If you still with a straight face can say that you can see a two kg weightloss from Wiggins (with full sleeves and beard), I'll just smile and wave. Because indeed I have proven convincingly that judging a riders weight is extremely hard.


And I notice you don't dare to touch the problem that all of a sudden we have to trust Wiggins with a bargepole as that won't hold at all as we have established how trustworthy Wiggo's words are.

Gotcha Red.

 

[Franklin]

I don't necessarily think this method of weight loss is a sign of doping. I do think it shows some dishonesty from Wiggins.

No arguument there. The guy is at best "creative" with words

The big thing that gives a hint about possible doping in this isn't the method he used to lose weight but more the actual rapid weight loss. I have no idea how much he lost and don't think we can figure out how much he lost from just looking at pictures. But he does appear to be very thin at the moment. I don't think it's too far out of reality that he may have used some doping method in his weightloss.

It might be rapid weightloss. It might be doping assisted(certainly likely if it's dramatic and not in the 1 kg range). But there's a tiny issue here... namely the thin evidence for this dramatic weightloss. I don't say it didn't happen, but I do say that we have absolutely no clue if it did happen. It's typical pro-cyclist missdirection.

Or we are going with the notion that for once Wiggo is extremely honest about this vital stat. But see your own phrasing "dishonesty" seems to be a lot closer to the mark if we talk about this guy.

I'm treating this as the usual Wiggo nonsense. I don't believe the amount of weight he lost. I don't believe the length of his trainings. I don't believe the intensities of his training. It's all nonsense.

 

[oldcrank]

Adding sachets of 'CNP Elite Energy' powder to ones
water bottles doesn't constitute 'eating on the bike' does
it? 'CNP Elite Energy' is a tri-source carbohydrate and
electrolyte blend available in three flavours. I prefer the
lemon-lime, but I'm not sure which one Sir Brad chooses.

Of course, during a period of weight loss Sir Brad will
be very careful to include adequate protein in his diet
to prevent, or limit, muscle and strength losses.

I believe Wiggo is on the record as saying that when he's
training without breakfast he will consume CNP ELITE
PEPTIDE, an advanced time release protein, while on
the bike. Two scoops (43g) added to 300ml of cold
water and mixed provides a tasty 30g of protein,
5.2g of carbohydrates and 1.7g of fat.

 

[zlev11]

And those who in the sport like Wiggins who spout shyte to explain these amazing performances have always been doping.

remember how Ferrari cleared up Rominger's allergies?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

1. I have convincingly proven that you can't judge a cyclists weight.

Only to yourself.

 

[Ripper]

Of course, during a period of weight loss Sir Brad will
be very careful to include adequate protein in his diet
to prevent, or limit, muscle and strength losses.

I believe Wiggo is on the record as saying that when he's
training without breakfast he will consume CNP ELITE
PEPTIDE, an advanced time release protein, while on
the bike. Two scoops (43g) added to 300ml of cold
water and mixed provides a tasty 30g of protein,
5.2g of carbohydrates and 1.7g of fat.

Trying to sell this crap? Nice - sucralose in a sports drink. Garbage.

 

[Franklin]

Only to yourself.

Oh yes, everyone elase immediately see that Ulrich has no weight difference betewen those pictiures. See DW that's the problem, I have shown quite convincingly that judging pictures is hard. That you are annoyed that this is indeed proof that pictures are no proof... well, too bad.

Or are you still going to say that you can judge wiggo's weight from a picture?

As an aside, you were so curious about my postings... I answered you and asked in return why you want to know. What's the answer?

 

[stutue]

Accurate judging of weight by photo is impossible.

Only an utter cretin would think otherwise, frankly.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Oh yes, everyone elase immediately see that Ulrich has no weight difference betewen those pictiures. See DW that's the problem, I have shown quite convincingly that judging pictures is hard. That you are annoyed that this is indeed proof that pictures are no proof... well, too bad.

Hyperbole - look it up if you have to. Everyone, immediately, etc - it's all hyperbole. A sample size of one does not make a valid case. Sorry. Despite your belief in your argument.

Or are you still going to say that you can judge wiggo's weight from a picture?

I did not realise pictures had been posted as proof - I must have missed it.

As an aside, you were so curious about my postings... I answered you and asked in return why you want to know. What's the answer?

You said you had "many times" said they were using obsolete methods. Then cited one example. You may have repeated yourself many times, but it's not many examples of Sky's obsolete methods. Just one example. And hill repeats are not obsolete. I was just curious if you could perhaps quickly list Sky's obsolete methods, or if you are again engaging in hyperbole.

 

[Franklin]

Hyperbole - look it up if you have to. Everyone, immediately, etc - it's all hyperbole. A sample size of one does not make a valid case. Sorry. Despite your belief in your argument.

Okay, let's be honest, are you seriously seeing the same weight in the Ulrich pictures? Or would you say that's hard to estimate?

I did not realise pictures had been posted as proof - I must have missed it.

Considering you have trouble fininding my posting history, let me help you here again:

Despite seeing him clearly much heavier at Roubaix,

I disagree,

Joe looking 140lbs here...at 6'3" I would say google some photos of these two since their frames are pretty close.

You said you had "many times" said they were using obsolete methods. Then cited one example. You may have repeated yourself many times, but it's not many examples of Sky's obsolete methods.

See, you really have issues finding posts

Just one example. And hill repeats are not obsolete.

Agreed, hill repeats are not obsolete

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teide

Nice "hill".

I was just curious if you could perhaps quickly list Sky's obsolete methods, or if you are again engaging in hyperbole.

Then ask that question? But here you go, some training criticism I gave the last few years.

1. The effect of warmin up and coolling down is highly debatable. Yet it's now one of the keys to succes? (I listed articles showing the scientific results). Not obsolete, but definitely not supported by science.
2. Training on high intensity in the mentioned quantity is mideval.
3. Traning on such a big mountain as the Teide constantly isn't nice for cardio and muscular system (wear and tear). There's a reason Lance chose the Madone. That was just sound new insights. Do not overdo it on training.

And considering the amount of training mentioned there would hardly be time for much else, so it's hard to argue that if true, Sky's training methods in the run up to Wiggo's win were obsolete

That's why I dont believe a word of it.. and that's rather problematic if you see the other problems at that time (Leinders, DB constant lieing, Seany, etc. etc.).

But that also makes me disregard about everything about the condition of the riders (Bilharzia... uhuh). It's simply to far from what we know about physiology to be believable. So wiggo talking weight? Amusing, but not to be trusted.

So let me amaze you: I'd say chances Wiggo doped are overwhelming.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Okay, let's be honest, are you seriously seeing the same weight in the Ulrich pictures? Or would you say that's hard to estimate?

I'm not looking at your example and seeing it is the same as Wiggins example.
I see no images in the red_flanders post you quoted?

Considering you have trouble fininding my posting history, let me help you here again:

Yeah forgive me for not being so enamored.

1. The effect of warmin up and coolling down is highly debatable. Yet it's now one of the keys to succes? (I listed articles showing the scientific results). Not obsolete, but definitely not supported by science.

Not obsolete. Gotcha.

2. Training on high intensity in the mentioned quantity is mideval.

I don't understand this sentence. Doing high loads of intensity does not seem obsolete, unless you mean something else? Is medieval obsolete? Obsolete seems to indicate a way people trained before but no longer do? I am pretty sure medieval training methods involved long slow miles and lots of racing. Sky espouse training at race pace and less racing, but racing to win. Sounds legit to me, sincerely.

3. Traning on such a big mountain as the Teide constantly isn't nice for cardio and muscular system (wear and tear). There's a reason Lance chose the Madone. That was just sound new insights. Do not overdo it on training.

How is this obsolete?

All Wiggins is saying is they stay at altitude, and when they go training, they have to ride down the hill to go to their training routes. If you are there for 2 weeks, you are effectively riding up that hill every day. If you do a hard training ride, this enforced final climb would lead to all sorts of mindsets.

You are espousing some mythical "wear and tear" effect of training lots, apparently ignoring the full-time nature of these guys as athletes perhaps? Just because it's a mountain does not mean you have to train hard up it either - you can cruise up anything if you have the right gearing. Given Wiggo's FTP is around 450W, doing 250W would be a doddle.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So let me amaze you: I'd say chances Wiggo doped are overwhelming.

Oh goodie. More hyperbole.

 

[stutue]

If I find a moment, I'll post 3 photos, all the same shot, but each one formatted slightly differently.

Hopefully that'll end this fatuous nonsense about judging weight by a photo on a webpage.

 

[SundayRider]

I agree that he has a steady, fairly consistent weight, he just doesn't have the type of frame that adds weight (muscle or fat) quickly. Shorter, 'stockier', muscular athletes do have the ability to lose/gain fairly big amounts of weight quickly, most cyclists (especially those built like BW/CF/Schleck brothers) don't tend to have this type of physiology. Wiggins is the type who even if he was an office worker who only did a few hours riding on a weekend, would still be thin.

 

[Franklin]

I'm not looking at your example and seeing it is the same as Wiggins example.
I see no images in the red_flanders post you quoted?

Of course, he's alluding to visual evidence, but let's play a silly game now? And considering you hopscotch about the other post I'd say my point is well made.

We can do this as long as you want, we both know that the picture angle is just crooked.

Yeah forgive me for not being so enamored.

You don't like me? Is that reason to be to lazy to look it up yourself? I'm sorry, but you will see that I try to stick with verifiable facts (and indeed will change my mind if proven wrong). There are many facts about Wiggo that make him suspicuous.

Not obsolete. Gotcha.

Awwww, so I shouldn't point out that it's of very discutable value.

Doing high loads of intensity does not seem obsolete,

Mideval=> Butchered spelling of Medieval. Appologies for a language gap.
Those are 70-80 methods if done in the quantities claimed by Wiggins

How is this obsolete?

Training for the mentioned timeframes on a big mountain (not living, but training!) is obsolete as it's too high intensity and just hard on the system. Hence Lance opted for an easier col.

Obsolete: 70-80ies mentality. Nowadays we know that's a bad training idea.

All Wiggins is saying is they stay at altitude, and when they go training, they have to ride down the hill to go to their training routes.

Except that we can actually check what the man said

Wiggins is in his element. “I did 32,000 metres of climbing around Teide during a two-week camp last month and, by the time we finish this latest fortnight, I will have done another 32,000 metres,” he says.

“From April 1 this year to the day I line up for the Tour de France prologue on June 30, I will have done 100,000 metres of high-quality climbing. If I had trained this hard when I was riding track at the Olympics, God only knows what I might have done. I have no idea how I ever finished fourth in the 2009 Tour de France. I used to think I worked hard but this is a different level.

Or let's look at another gem:

“Shane Sutton, our head coach, has a mantra – 'Train hard, race easy’ – which has become my motto now that I’m getting older and more sensible.

Out of the horses mouth no less. So:

1. This is true => idiotic, obsolete training methods.
2. It's flat out nonsense from Wiggo's mouth.

Considering we know he did win the TdF I'd say we can safely go for option 2.

You are espousing some mythical "wear and tear" effect of training lots, apparently ignoring the full-time nature of these guys as athletes perhaps? Just because it's a mountain does not mean you have to train hard up it either - you can cruise up anything if you have the right gearing. Given Wiggo's FTP is around 450W, doing 250W would be a doddle.

There's simply more cardiac wear and tear due to the pressure. But even if we ignore that... see Wiggins own quote.


1. I don't claim sleeping high, training low is a viable scheme.. it's just not what Wiggins says he was doing.
2. I don't claim Wiggins is not idiotically thin... I just don't see the alarming weightloss since P-R. The guy has been a stick since 2009. So far no evidence for this drop in weight.

Oh goodie. More hyperbole.

Nope, just common sense based on indeed facts:

1. a GT winner is almost always a doper. FACT
2. Having a doping doctor is almost always a key indicator of doping. FACT
3. Wiggo's wattage/weight numbers are in the suspicous levels. FACT
4. A team with entrenched dopers at the helm is a key indicator of doping. FACT.

Then add the following facts:

5. A team boss who is flat out lieing about doctor and teammanagers (among other things).
6. A team mate with a disease story that doesn't add up and who puts out even more amazing numbers.

I'm really comfortable saying that the chances that Wiggins is a doper are overwhelming. He could be clean, but the odds are not very high.

That still doesn't mean every accusation or theory is sound.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So you, Franklin, an amateur racer (?) are looking at what Wiggins is doing in training and saying it's medieval / obsolete?

And you think 3200m elevation per day is tough for a full-time pro?

I know an amateur who was working full-time and training 1000km / week.

I think your arguments for training and their efficacy are dubious at best.

The hyperbole was the "let me amaze you bit". You don't amaze me, one bit.

 

[Franklin]

So you, Franklin, an amateur racer (?) are looking at what Wiggins is doing in training and saying it's medieval / obsolete?

Considering I try to stay up to date with training theory and scientific research, yep ;D

And you think 3200m elevation per day is tough for a full-time pro?

Yes. Certainly so. I don't say it can't be done, it's just tough on the body and inefficient compared to a much lighter schedule.

I know an amateur who was working full-time and training 1000km / week.

Okayyyy... and that has relation with the argument because???

I think your arguments for training and their efficacy are dubious at best.

I disagree and am quite comforatbel at those grounds

The hyperbole was the "let me amaze you bit". You don't amaze me, one bit.

Hyperbole (/haɪˈpɜrbəliː/ hy-pur-bə-lee;[1] Greek: ὑπερβολή hyperbolē, "exaggeration") is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.

You could say I'm dead wrong as I don't amaze you. Saying "let me amaze you" is hyperbole is just weird

So appologies I thought you meant the other part you quoted as that's the only part that could be seen as hyperbole

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Considering I try to stay up to date with training theory and scientific research, yep ;D

Yes. Certainly so. I don't say it can't be done, it's just tough on the body and inefficient compared to a much lighter schedule.

So please, tell me about the roll around the block you would do to prepare for a 5400m elevation stage in the Tour de France.

I disagree and am quite comforatbel at those grounds

You certainly sound comfortable. What TSS and CTL do you usually train at?

You could say I'm dead wrong as I don't amaze you. Saying "let me amaze you" is hyperbole is just weird

You are clearly ESL, so it's no problem for me that you do not understand what hyperbole means when someone says something like:

LET ME AMAZE YOU: the sun rises in the East.

It' not amazing. You don't amaze me. It's an exaggeration to say it would amaze me. Hence hyperbole.

 

[Franklin]

So please, tell me about the roll around the block you would do to prepare for a 5400m elevation stage in the Tour de France.

I wouldn't know... but what I do know that what Wiggins describes is not the way to do it

My guess, something along the lines of:

Every number is a week:

1. Build up (ext)
2. Build up (int and ext)
3. Build up (int and ext)
4. Consolidate (ext/int + test)
5. Build Up (ext)
6. Peak 1 (Intensive)
7. Recover (ext)

Repeat.
Then the last block.

15. Build Up (ext)
16. Build Up (ext)
17. Consolidate (ext and int + test)
18. Recover (ext)
19. Consolidate (ext and int)
20. Primary Peak!

Note that the 2 secondary peaks are not extremely far from what we see with Froome/Wiggo, so it's not in conflict with what we see.

You certainly sound comfortable. What TSS and CTL do you usually train at?

Hahahaha Why would I use Coggan's methods, especially as lowly amateur? I don't even use a powermeter, I use a HR unit. Talk about old fashioned and obsolete. Scoring my training stress is old fashioned logging "how do you feel afterward?". And usually a few weeks in the season I just forget about that whole log and just try to fit in miles between my working life

But I still like to read up on training and when someone like Wiggo is pushing a silly notion I just do a source check. You don't need to be a start physiolgist to separate chaff from wheat.

You are clearly ESL, so it's no problem for me that you do not understand what hyperbole means when someone says something like:

LET ME AMAZE YOU: the sun rises in the East.

It' not amazing. You don't amaze me. It's an exaggeration to say it would amaze me. Hence hyperbole.

Sorry, if I say you are scared and you aren't it's not hyperbole, nor is it an exaggeration... it's just plain false.

Exaggeration: Everyone knows the sun rises in the east!
We can be pretty sure there are people who don't know that (even with modern education^^).

 

[Dear Wiggo]

This conversation is struggling, but I am sincerely curious, so will persist:

Wiggo: I rode 32,000 m in 2 weeks (average 2300m / day). I will be racing the Tour de France where stages have up to 5400m elevation (could be wrong on that one).

Franklin: this is obsolete training. He should be training easy miles.

Dear Wiggo: he is going to race the Tour with up to 5400m in one stage, surrounded by stages of 2000m elevation, in a 3 week race. What would you suggest he do instead of 32,000 m in one 2 week training block?

Franklin: build, build, consolidate, build, peak, recover

Dear Wiggo: Uhhhhh... dafuq?

Let's try this again. You think 32,000 in a 2 week (clearly peak) training block is too much, and that he should be taking it easy. So let's assume he's doing a 2 week training camp, where all he does is train, get massaged, eat and sleep.

What would you suggest he do instead of 32,000m elevation during that 2 weeks. Keeping in mind he will be racing the Tour for 3 weeks. ie how many meters elevation for that 2 week block + largest day of elevation gain?

 

[Catwhoorg]

One of the 'lessons' from 2010, was he struggled at altitude. (based on both his and DB comments after the fact)

Not necessarily the climbing directly, but the lower oxygen levels atop the peaks.

That seemed to be fixed by 2011 when using Teide and sleeping high.

 

[Catwhoorg]

I was confused by Sir Wiggo's use of the phrase sleeping in an oxygen tent on Mallorca.

Surely an oxygen tent (oxygen rich) would undo the effects of altitude (though it probably would aid recovery).

I assume he meant a low oxygen tent.

Any insight folks ? Is my understanding wrong ?

 

[zigmeister]

Guys, certaintly I never made a claim that photos of two people either side-by-side is scientific by any means.

It is definitive? Absolutely not. But, it is a better methodology to compare and estimate weight than 99.9% of all of the complete nonsense and "speculation" regarding weight that goes in this thread. Based on photos and comparisons of such, I can guess their weight within 4lbs.

I'm an expert at the carnival weight guessing game.