collapse


doolols

  • Domestic Rider
  • Country: 00
  • Posts: 164
  • Liked: 33
Re: Chris Froome
« Reply #360 on: July 17, 2013, 11:22 »
I also think that it is naive to assume the motivations behind the cynics are necessarily pure and well-intentioned. Some of them are for sure generated by petty nationalist rivalries, just as much as some of the defenders may do so for nationalistic reasons.

I think so too. Although I'm British, I support all sorts of riders, and consider myself European. It's the same with football - I love good games, no matter who's playing. I love watching good, exciting bike racing. Stage 13 was the best stage in this race, no matter who won.

Pressure on the authorities is a different thing. Asking questions is a different thing. I'm not ever going to state that Froome is clean, precisely because of what I've said above, but I am prepared to enjoy watching him race until I know otherwise, and I am prepared to examine any arguments made for and against him and try and form an objective opinion.

There are lots of questions about Froome, principally about his performance relative to both current riders, and previous performances.

His competition is poor currently, perhaps because doped riders are trying to find ways of getting performance legally, or at least at much lower risk. It's possible, just, that Sky have spent their time in the past few years developing clean ways of improving performance, without wasting their time dabbling in illegal methods. It's possible, because Sky / British Cycling are immensely analytical, have huge resources, and are not steeped in cycling history which dictates *how* a race should be won, or *how* riders should ride on the bike. His 1,000 rpm cadence looked stupid, but seriously? If you want to accelerate uphill for a short time, select a low gear and peddle like crazy. Who's to say you have to get out of the saddle and "dance on the pedals" like Contador. Maybe they're doing that because of the huge psychological effect it has on a rider with you, struggling up a hill, to see someone move away from you at a rate of knots. We've seen riders suddenly crack, because they suddenly lose the ability to climb.

A lot of hoo-hah centres around comparing his times to those of previously-doped riders from old tours, and the misconception seems to be that performance cannot be increased over time. Why not?  If that were the case, we'd all still be riding on an espresso and a jam sandwich. Maybe the much-lampooned aggregation of marginal gains really does work? 0.2% from using your own pillow; 0.5% from some special nutrition products; 0.3% from a damned good sports psychologist; 0.1% from something else. That's what British Cycling have been doing on the track, where you are talking about fractions of a percent making the difference between a gold medal and not being on the podium.

Having said all that, I still don't know. I hope he's clean. If he gets popped, it would destroy British Cycling.
  • ReplyReply

  • just some guy

    • Fourth Generation humanoid bot
    • Legend
    • Country: 00
    • Posts: 20315
    • Liked: 4651
    • Awards: Thread of the Year 2013Most Helpful Member 2013Art of Brevity 2012Most helpful member 2012Best member of staff 2012
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #361 on: July 17, 2013, 11:42 »
    inrng just tweeted this photo

    Froome as an amateur , must have lost 15 kgs over the years 

  • ReplyReply
  • Fignon - In my day, doping methods were derisory and the riders´exploits were massive.
    For the last 15 years or so  it has been the other way rond: there is a huge number of ways in which riders can dope, and any exploits are derisory.

    Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #362 on: July 17, 2013, 11:49 »
    Is that a total guess?
  • ReplyReply
  • "You can't handle the truth"

    Colonel Nathan R Jessup

    just some guy

    • Fourth Generation humanoid bot
    • Legend
    • Country: 00
    • Posts: 20315
    • Liked: 4651
    • Awards: Thread of the Year 2013Most Helpful Member 2013Art of Brevity 2012Most helpful member 2012Best member of staff 2012
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #363 on: July 17, 2013, 11:50 »

  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #364 on: July 17, 2013, 11:54 »
    Is that a beer gut?
  • ReplyReply

  • Jono L.

    • Domestique
    • Country: au
    • Posts: 532
    • Liked: 428
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #365 on: July 17, 2013, 11:54 »
    5k seems like a lot when looking at this pic from 2008, no?

    5kg easy,

    look at the puppy fat arm and cheeks.

    + long peiods of energy deficit eats your bones away good and proper. Trust me on that one!  :bouaaaaah 

    But yeah, solid speculation over odd photos on the net. We're not really going to get anwhere are we now? :yuush

    All part of the fun :D
  • ReplyReply

  • just some guy

    • Fourth Generation humanoid bot
    • Legend
    • Country: 00
    • Posts: 20315
    • Liked: 4651
    • Awards: Thread of the Year 2013Most Helpful Member 2013Art of Brevity 2012Most helpful member 2012Best member of staff 2012

    Fus87

    • Classics Winner
    • *
    • Country: dk
    • Posts: 4229
    • Liked: 2136
    • Awards: Velorooms Tour de France BINGO champion 2014National Championships Predictions Game Winner 2014Velorooms Monday Quiz ChampionPoster of the Year 2013
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #367 on: July 17, 2013, 12:44 »
    Not really darkside-related, but anyway:
    Is it just me or do the long, black sleeves of the Sky jersey (and shorts) make him look even skinnier?
    That '08 Barloworld jersey covers almost nothing of the arms; the Sky jersey goes down almost to the elbows.

    Another marginal gain?
  • ReplyReply
  • RIP Keith

    doolols

    • Domestic Rider
    • Country: 00
    • Posts: 164
    • Liked: 33
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #368 on: July 17, 2013, 14:21 »
    the Sky jersey goes down almost to the elbows.
    Another marginal gain?

    You can bet that it's been thought about.
  • ReplyReply

  • froome19

    • Classics Winner
    • *
    • Country: gb
    • Posts: 4288
    • Liked: 1474
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #369 on: July 17, 2013, 21:00 »
    What I will say is that people saying we have to keep times in context are completely correct.

    But at the same time if Froome is constantly beating and managing to post amazing times then there is obviously something there to be noted. I really liked what Lemond said, but at the same time you do have to ask yourself if you are at all surprised that the exceptionally legitimate performance came out of Sky?

    That could be thought about two ways, either Sky are the ground breakers in the sport and so can product such performances.. or they are the ground breakers in doping and so could produce such a performance.

    Anyways what is definite is that Lopez needs a good helping of whatever Froome is on atm.  :D
  • ReplyReply
  • RIP Keith

    Drummer Boy

    • National Champion
    • Country: us
    • Posts: 975
    • Liked: 638
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #370 on: July 17, 2013, 21:46 »
    So Froome Dawg smokes the field, once again, but then claims to have been holding back during his TT!  :rolleye



    Says he was "actually prepared to lose a little bit of time"  and that he "didn't want spend everything today and then be wrecked for tomorrow."

    So how good is Chris Froome? Is he dominating this Tour without even having to go as deep as he can? Will we see him pushed to the brink on Alpe d'Huez? What does Chris Froome look like at 100%?

    He practically claims the stage win came as a surprise to him. It reminds a bit of watching Usain Bolt thump his chest while slowing down at the end of his record-breaking sprint. I want to see what the absolute peak would look like. I thought we saw that on Ventoux, but then Brailsford tells as the Froome Dawg could've actually gone faster.

    What to make of all it? It's almost as if he's unaware of his own abilities.
  • ReplyReply

  • kabloemski

    • krebsy's #1 rooster booster
    • Road Captain
    • Country: za
    • Posts: 2358
    • Liked: 125
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #371 on: July 18, 2013, 08:23 »
    Is there an Alberto Contador thread somewhere on the forum? And I don't mean a fan thread, but rather one like this, where I can go and analyze the material his bib shorts are made of. And also some obscure fungi that grow only in Spain. All of which I'm sure will help me determine whether he is a lying doper or not. I really feel that it's unfair that Froome is hogging all the spotlight, AC deserves a little attention too.
  • ReplyReply
  • Hey, Bart! Your epidermis is showing!

    DinZ

    • 2.2 is where it is at
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: zm
    • Posts: 3476
    • Liked: 359
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #372 on: July 18, 2013, 08:31 »
    Apparently some detailed analysis in Lequipe today. some french expert has had access to some sky data or something?

    my french is not good enough to understand and looks like full article is not online yet
  • ReplyReply

  • Mellow Velo

    • National Champion
    • Country: wales
    • Posts: 895
    • Liked: 448
    • Awards: Velogames Classics Champion 20142013 CQ Ranking Giro Game
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #373 on: July 18, 2013, 08:36 »
    Apparently some detailed analysis in Lequipe today. some french expert has had access to some sky data or something?

    my french is not good enough to understand and looks like full article is not online yet

     I posted some stuff on this earlier, or at least I thought I had.

    Anyhow:
    Quote
    the Inner Ring @inrng wrote:Sky release Froome's climbing data and power stats to L'Equipe who have numbers reviewed by @fredgrappe who draws four conclusions:
    1. Froome's power curve* (W vs time) has a normal slope and his rides in the Tour are consistent with data from last 2 years
    2. Sky have never measured his V02 max but Grappe says he must have a score close to the known physiological limits
    3. his weight's been stable for races and
    4. Grappe says he must have excellent powers of recovery. Data go from Vuelta 2011 to Mont Ventoux

    *Curves comparing Froome's power output vs duration compared to Lemond and Armstrong. Froome and Lemond look very similar. Armstrong very different to them in that for the longer durations he could sustain a much higher power output - up to 10%, apparently.
  • ReplyReply
  • "Lance now has more testicles than Tour de France titles."

    L'arri

    • Just the facts, Ma'am ...
    • Monument Winner
    • *
    • *
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 5205
    • Liked: 2974
    • Dopeology.org @DopeologyDotOrg @L_arriviste
      • Dopeology.org
    • Awards: Best Opening Post 2012
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #374 on: July 18, 2013, 08:41 »
    This is exciting because the conclusions are potentially more global than just those for Froome.

    With this data - which I daresay is still private despite this story - we could have an opportunity to see how close is Vayer's, Amattypyoraily's (sic) and Doc Veloclinic's self-generated guesswork to the real data.

    How valid and useful is all that "pseudo-science" which has to deal with all those variables?

    For me, that would represent a big leap forward in the debate.
  • ReplyReply
  • RIP Craig1985 / Craig Walsh
    RIP KeithJamesMc / Keith McMahon

    AG

    • Classics Winner
    • *
    • Country: au
    • Posts: 4477
    • Liked: 1690
    • Awards: Winner, 2013 National Championships prediction gameFan of the Year 2013
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #375 on: July 18, 2013, 08:46 »
    Is there an Alberto Contador thread somewhere on the forum? And I don't mean a fan thread, but rather one like this, where I can go and analyze the material his bib shorts are made of. And also some obscure fungi that grow only in Spain. All of which I'm sure will help me determine whether he is a lying doper or not. I really feel that it's unfair that Froome is hogging all the spotlight, AC deserves a little attention too.

    here you go Kablo   http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=81.0

    for the record - Chris Froome thread currently = 385 posts.
    Alberto Contador thread = 337 posts

    the difference is because a lot of the AC stuff was prior to this forum starting up, otherwise the AC thread would be MUCH bigger. 

    These days - there simply isnt too many who will argue that AC is clean, so there isnt a 100 point discussion about anything in relation to him.  Everyone agrees ... so no arguments.

    There is a discussion every day in regards to Chris Froome because
    a)   its current - he is the one dominating at the moment;    and
    b)  there is doubt.  People do believe in him, and others dont.  That makes for discussion and analysis.  People look deeper into things because they are trying to support their argument.

    Can we please not have these "why isnt there a thread on 'rider abc' or 'team xyz' like this?"   There are threads and discussions if people start them, and they continue if people participate in them.  If everyone already agrees ... then mostly there isnt a deep and long-reaching discussion.

  • ReplyReply

  • search

    • Classics Winner
    • *
    • *
    • Country: de
    • Posts: 4299
    • Liked: 2936
    • Awards: Reigning Tour Prediction ChampReigning Giro Prediction Champ2012 CQ Ranking Tour GameAvatar of the Year 2013
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #376 on: July 18, 2013, 08:46 »
    this is the whole article, sorry, no time to translate:

    Quote
    « Ses performances sont cohérentes »

    FRED GRAPPE a analysé le potentiel physique de Chris Froome durant ces deux dernières années et n’a relevé aucune anomalie.

    PREMIER CONSTAT: SA PUISSANCE S’ÉMOUSSE NORMALEMENT
    La relation entre la puissance et le temps est similaire à celle que l’on connaît et que l’on observe chez tous les coureurs dont on a établi le Profil de puissance record (PPR). Il montre par exemple une diminution significative et normale de la puissance de 60 watts (0,88 W/kg) entre des efforts de vingt et soixante minutes. Il faut savoir qu’en moyenne un coureur perd une cinquantaine de watts dans cet intervalle de temps. Le PPR de Froome établi sur deux ans ne semble montrer aucune anomalie dans sa structure fondamentale. En d’autres termes, ses données de puissance des deux dernières années sont cohérentes avec le profil qu’il présente. Les performances qu’il a réalisées sur Ax 3 Domaines et le Ventoux pouvaient être attendues en regard de son PPR. En deux années, son profil n’a pas changé. Il apparaît que le potentiel qu’il présente aujourd’hui est similaire à celui qu’il possédait en 2011.

    DEUXIÈME CONSTAT: UN POTENTIEL AÉROBIE HORS DU COMMUN
    La puissance maximale aérobie extrêmement élevée (effort sur 5 minutes) confirme qu’il possède un potentiel aérobie hors du commun, qui l’oblige à posséder une VO2max (laquelle n’a encore jamais été mesurée en laboratoire par son équipe) proche des limites physiologiques scientifiques connues. La puissance exceptionnelle qu’il est capable de développer durant un effort maximal de cinq minutes lui donne une certaine réserve par rapport aux autres coureurs. Cela va dans le sens des accélérations qu’il est capable d’effectuer dans le final des montées. Onpeut estimer que, par rapport à ses principaux rivaux, il possède une marge de 20 watts de puissance supplémentaire. C’est cette marge que l’on retrouve par exemple entre lui et ses principaux rivaux dans les montées d’Ax 3 Domaines et du Ventoux.

    TROISIÈME CONSTAT: UN POIDS TRÈS STABLE
    Son poids moyen sur les deux années est de 68 kg (le matin) avec des variations très faibles, inférieures à 900 grammes. Cela montre que la puissance qu’il développe depuis deux ans est relativement stable lorsqu’on l’exprime en watts par kilogramme (W/kg), indice très important dans la performance en montée.

    QUATRIÈME CONSTAT: D’EXCELLENTES QUALITÉS DE RÉCUPÉRATION
    Il est évident que, pour être capable d’exploiter un profil de puissance à quasiment 100 % de son maximum, il faut que Chris Froome possède d’excellentes qualités de récupération entre les étapes. Parce que si le niveau de fatigue s’accumule trop, il n’est plus possible d’évoluer à proximité de ses records.

    Quote
    La méthode décryptée

    QUE MESURET-ON ?
    L’étude du potentiel physique global d’un cycliste est possible à partir de l’analyse de la puissance qu’il développe lorsqu’il produit des efforts maximaux. La puissance qu’il développe, c’est ce qui lui permet de se déplacer grâce à la force qu’il applique sur chaque pédale en fonction de la cadence de pédalage (la vitesse à laquelle il tourne les jambes). Plus la puissance augmente et plus la force augmente. Mais comme cette dernière est limitée dans le temps, à un moment donné la fatigue musculaire limite la poursuite de l’effort. À l’inverse d’une voiture, avec laquelle on peut rouler à plein régime sur des courtes et des longues durées, le cycliste est obligé de trouver un régime moteur optimal pour chaque durée d’exercice. Ainsi, plus la durée de l’effort est courte et plus il est capable de développer un haut niveau de puissance. A contrario, plus la durée est longue (efforts d’endurance) et plus le niveau de puissance diminue.

    QUELLE MÉTHODE GRAPPE A-T-IL UTILISÉE ?
    Aujourd’hui, la plupart des coureurs possèdent un capteur de puissance monté sur le vélo, ce qui permet à l’issue de chaque course de télécharger les données mesurées très précisément. À partir des relevés fournis par l’équipe Sky (ils concernent des efforts considérés comme maximum et d’une durée comprise entre 5 et 60 minutes), Fred Grappe a établi son Profil de puissance record (PPR) depuis deux ans.

    Quote
    Hier aussi

    AVANT D’ACCÉDER aux données fournies par l’équipe Sky, Fred Grappe avait estimé le potentiel de Froome à partir de son modèle de calcul, qui intègre des paramètres liés au coureur, aux conditions environnementales, au matériel utilisé et aux caractéristiques de la montée. En comparant les chiffres, il a pu établir que la marge d’erreur était de 2,5 %, soit une marge extrêmement faible. Fort de ce constat, il a étudié la première ascension de Froome lors du chrono d’hier. Et il a pu observer « que la puissance moyenne développée était encore une fois très bien intégrée dans son profil de puissance, et donc complètement attendue » .
    ]
  • ReplyReply
  • "If this is cycling, I am a banana"

    L'arri

    • Just the facts, Ma'am ...
    • Monument Winner
    • *
    • *
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 5205
    • Liked: 2974
    • Dopeology.org @DopeologyDotOrg @L_arriviste
      • Dopeology.org
    • Awards: Best Opening Post 2012
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #377 on: July 18, 2013, 08:50 »
    Here's today's L'Equipe article in rough English. Any mistakes are mine. Be sure to buy the newspaper. ;)

    "His performances make sense"

    FRED GRAPPE has analysed the physical potential of Chris Froome from the last two years and found no anomalies.

    FIRST CONCLUSION: HIS POWER FALLS AWAY NORMALLY

    The relationship between power and time is similar to what we know and observe among all the riders for whom we've established a Power Profile Record (PPR). It shows for example a significant and normal decrease in power from 60 watts (0.88w/kg) between efforts of 20 and 60 minutes. On average a rider loses 50W in this interval of time. Established over two years, Froome's PPR shows no anomalies in its fundamental structure. In other words, his power data for the last two years makes sense with the profile that he delivers. The performances that he achieved on Ax-3-Domaines and the Ventoux could be expected given what his PPR says. In two years, his profile hasn't changed. It appears that the potential that he shows today is similar to the one he had in 2011.

    SECOND CONCLUSION: AN UNUSUALLY HIGH AEROBIC POTENTIAL

    The extremely high maximum aerobic power (for an effort of 5 minutes) confirms that he has a higher than usual aerobic potential, giving him a VO2Max (which to date has never been measured in a lab by his team) close to the known scientific physiological limits. The exceptional power that he can deliver in the course of a maximal effort of 5 minutes gives him a certain reserve in comparison with other riders. That explains the accelerations that he can do towards the top of the climbs. We can estimate that, in relation to his main rivals, he has a margin of 20W of additional power in his favour. This margin is what we see in examples like Ax-3-Domaines and the Ventoux.

    THIRD CONCLUSION: A VERY STABLE BODY WEIGHT

    His average weight over the two years is 68kg in the morning with very small variations of less than 900g. That shows that the power that he's been able to develop in the last two years is relatively stable when you express that it in Watts per kilogram (W/kg), a very important measure in climbing performance.

    FOURTH CONCLUSION: EXCELLENT ABILITY TO RECUPERATE

    It's clear that, to be able to exploit a power profile at more or less 100% of the maximum available, Chris Froome has to have excellent recuperative abilities between stages since, if the level of fatigue accumulates too much, he would no longer be able to get close to his own recorded limits.

    THE METHOD EXPLAINED

    What do we measure?

    The study of total physical potential of a cyclist is possible starting with the analysis of power that he produces when producing maximal efforts. The power that he produces is what enables him to move forward thanks to the force he applies on each pedal stroke in terms of the the pedalling cadence (the speed with which he turns the legs). The more the power increases, the more effort is required. Unlike a car, with which you can move at full gas on short and long durations, the cyclist has to find an optimal engine turnover for each duration of exercise. Thus, the shorter the duration of the effort, the most capable he is of producing a high level of power. At the same time, the longer the duration (endurance efforts), the more the power level diminishes.

    What method has Grappe used?

    Today, the majority of riders have power meters on their bikes, which enables the download of very precise data at the end of each race. Starting with the data handed over by Team Sky (containing efforts treated as the maxmimum and of a duration between 5 and 60 minutes), Fred Grappe has established Froome's Power Profile Record (PPR) for the last two years.

    Also from yesterday

    Before accessing data handed over by Team Sky, Fred Grappe had estimated Froome's potential using his own calculation method, which includes numbers linked to the rider, environmental conditions, equipment used and characteristics of the climb. Comparing the figures, he was able to establish the margin of error as 2.5%, a very narrow number. Using this conclusion, he studied the first climb by Froome in yesterday's time trial and he observed that "the average power produced was once again very much in line with his power profile, and therefore completely expected."
  • ReplyReply
  • « Last Edit: July 18, 2013, 09:22 by L'arriviste »

    Capt_Cavman

    • Road Captain
    • Country: jp
    • Posts: 1262
    • Liked: 515
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #378 on: July 18, 2013, 08:59 »
    I'll translate it now... please wait ... loading .... do not turn off your computer ...
    Ok, I'll wait,

    hmmmmm tap tap tap tap tap
  • ReplyReply

  • search

    • Classics Winner
    • *
    • *
    • Country: de
    • Posts: 4299
    • Liked: 2936
    • Awards: Reigning Tour Prediction ChampReigning Giro Prediction Champ2012 CQ Ranking Tour GameAvatar of the Year 2013
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #379 on: July 18, 2013, 09:16 »
    I can teach you french in the meantime, 5 VR$$ a lesson :D

    but my word pool is very limited
  • ReplyReply

  • L'arri

    • Just the facts, Ma'am ...
    • Monument Winner
    • *
    • *
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 5205
    • Liked: 2974
    • Dopeology.org @DopeologyDotOrg @L_arriviste
      • Dopeology.org
    • Awards: Best Opening Post 2012
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #380 on: July 18, 2013, 09:20 »
    Loaded 100%...  :D
  • ReplyReply

  • AG

    • Classics Winner
    • *
    • Country: au
    • Posts: 4477
    • Liked: 1690
    • Awards: Winner, 2013 National Championships prediction gameFan of the Year 2013
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #381 on: July 18, 2013, 09:32 »
    Quote
    Also from yesterday

    Before accessing data handed over by Team Sky, Fred Grappe had estimated Froome's potential using his own calculation method, which includes numbers linked to the rider, environmental conditions, equipment used and characteristics of the climb. Comparing the figures, he was able to establish the margin of error as 2.5%, a very narrow number. Using this conclusion, he studied the first climb by Froome in yesterday's time trial and he observed that "the average power produced was once again very much in line with his power profile, and therefore completely expected."

    so does this mean that some of the power estimates that others have made in this manner are relatively correct?

    I am not one for analysing power numbers - I know nothing about the science, so I dont pay much attention - but its interesting that he could basically estimate to that degree of accuracy.
  • ReplyReply

  • Arb

    • Road Captain
    • Country: an
    • Posts: 2188
    • Liked: 483
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #382 on: July 18, 2013, 09:42 »
    No one can know, don't expect to see anything other than words.
  • ReplyReply

  • kabloemski

    • krebsy's #1 rooster booster
    • Road Captain
    • Country: za
    • Posts: 2358
    • Liked: 125
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #383 on: July 18, 2013, 10:08 »
    here you go Kablo   http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=81.0

    for the record - Chris Froome thread currently = 385 posts.
    Alberto Contador thread = 337 posts

    the difference is because a lot of the AC stuff was prior to this forum starting up, otherwise the AC thread would be MUCH bigger. 

    These days - there simply isnt too many who will argue that AC is clean, so there isnt a 100 point discussion about anything in relation to him.  Everyone agrees ... so no arguments.

    There is a discussion every day in regards to Chris Froome because
    a)   its current - he is the one dominating at the moment;    and
    b)  there is doubt.  People do believe in him, and others dont.  That makes for discussion and analysis.  People look deeper into things because they are trying to support their argument.

    Can we please not have these "why isnt there a thread on 'rider abc' or 'team xyz' like this?"   There are threads and discussions if people start them, and they continue if people participate in them.  If everyone already agrees ... then mostly there isnt a deep and long-reaching discussion.

    Thanks for the link :-) Was a genuine question, wanted to know if there was a non-fan AC thread. It's all good AG, I just want to make sure I keep the AC thread updated - Froome is not the only person in the TdF, the whole peloton is actual, and AC a top contender, he deserves some attention too.

    Apropos everybody on here agreeing that AC is a doper, will those posts be on that link?
  • ReplyReply

  • L'arri

    • Just the facts, Ma'am ...
    • Monument Winner
    • *
    • *
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 5205
    • Liked: 2974
    • Dopeology.org @DopeologyDotOrg @L_arriviste
      • Dopeology.org
    • Awards: Best Opening Post 2012
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #384 on: July 18, 2013, 10:25 »
    so does this mean that some of the power estimates that others have made in this manner are relatively correct?

    I am not one for analysing power numbers - I know nothing about the science, so I dont pay much attention - but its interesting that he could basically estimate to that degree of accuracy.

    What this tells us is that:

    a) Grappe's own method is good. However I do not know what Grappe's method is and, perhaps more importantly, how it differs from those of Vayer-Portoleau, Amattypyoraily (sic) and Doc@Veloclinic

    b) Froome's VO2Max is unknown. There are disagreements over how important this is, but it seems surprising that Sky has not tested it.

    c) Grappe had two years' worth of data, including the 2011 Vuelta. Thus he has the complete picture of Interplanetary Froome but nothing from Froome's supposed fallow period prior to that.

    d) Based on these numbers, Froome is able to achieve things that are humanly possible.
  • ReplyReply

  • froome19

    • Classics Winner
    • *
    • Country: gb
    • Posts: 4288
    • Liked: 1474
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #385 on: July 18, 2013, 10:31 »
    JV said today on twitter that he is not surprised that the Vo2 Max of Froome has not been tested for; saying that it is an outdated and not really very useful test.
  • ReplyReply

  • Martin318is

    • Domestique
    • Country: au
    • Posts: 558
    • Liked: 153
    • Less interesting than he seems on paper
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #386 on: July 18, 2013, 10:39 »
    so does this mean that some of the power estimates that others have made in this manner are relatively correct?

    I am not one for analysing power numbers - I know nothing about the science, so I dont pay much attention - but its interesting that he could basically estimate to that degree of accuracy.

    Most power measurement systems are only claiming to be accurate to +/- 2% so you could say he did well or that its a coincidence that he got within 2% of the high side inaccuracy in the measured values.  I'd assume he did some good analysis to get where he did.

    After all, if you go down the he was lucky route you'd have to get to a conclusion that his opinion doesn't mean all that much...
  • ReplyReply
  • About Masters Club racing:
    ".. if I can't double the petrol money, I'm headin over the mountains instead" - Michael Fox, Team SAS

    froome19

    • Classics Winner
    • *
    • Country: gb
    • Posts: 4288
    • Liked: 1474
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #387 on: July 18, 2013, 10:44 »
    Agreed Martin, the question also being as to whether he was more thorough than some of the other guys Larri quoted.
    I would fancy he was, as this seems to be a very extensive study focused solely on Froome and just from how it comes across it seems to be conducted very professionally. Also, as Larri mentioned, he used 2 years worth of data which is probable a larger range than others used.
  • ReplyReply

  • Zam

    • everything and nothing.
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: re
    • Posts: 2658
    • Liked: 456
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #388 on: July 18, 2013, 12:42 »
    Thanks for the link :-) Was a genuine question, wanted to know if there was a non-fan AC thread. It's all good AG, I just want to make sure I keep the AC thread updated - Froome is not the only person in the TdF, the whole peloton is actual, and AC a top contender, he deserves some attention too.

    Apropos everybody on here agreeing that AC is a doper, will those posts be on that link?

    Do you want all of us to post like this " yes contador is a doper"?
  • ReplyReply

  • Zam

    • everything and nothing.
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: re
    • Posts: 2658
    • Liked: 456
    Re: Chris Froome
    « Reply #389 on: July 18, 2013, 13:05 »

    Fred Grappe ‏@fredgrappe 1h
    Ai-je une seule fois évoqué le fait qu'il n'est pas dopé ? Les données analysées ne permet pas de le dire. Je dois rester très honnête...
    Expand  Reply  Retweet  Favorite   More
     Fred Grappe ‏@fredgrappe 1h
    La question qu'il faut davantage se poser c'est plutôt de savoir quel était son profil avant 2011 ? Et là, je n'en sait rien...

    Fred Grappe ‏@fredgrappe 1h
    Quel intérêt de faire une fausse analyse ? J'ai analysé des données comme pour un autre coureur dans les règles de l'art avec objectivité.

    https://twitter.com/fredgrappe
  • ReplyReply

  •  

    * Dark Side Chatbox

    Sorry, this shoutbox does not exist.

    Recent Posts

    Recent Topics

    Featured Topics



    Top
    Back to top