Giro d'Italia 2018 Stage 21: Roma - Roma, 115 KM

Weepsie

pelevin wrote: »

To pick one of those, at age 23 Quintana came 2nd in the Tour de France.

But a year earlier he was 36th in the Vuelta. Precisely the same jump Froome made between his first and second completed GCs.

That said Quintana was a far more talented, or successful cyclist at the younger level.

It's more that people are saying he came from nowhere to competing, when the jump in GC results is matched by others who've gone to win or podium.

pelevin

Weepsie wrote: »

But a year earlier he was 36th in the Vuelta. Precisely the same jump Froome made between his first and second completed GCs.

That said Quintana was a far more talented, or successful cyclist at the younger level.

It's more that people are saying he came from nowhere to competing, when the jump in GC results is matched by others who've gone to win or podium.

There is no comparison between Froome's results before jumping to 2nd at the Vuelta and other really top riders. He had no results of any significance in any races at the highest level before this.

el tel

I don't think Froomes rise is that remearkable. He followed the well known path of

A. Big weight loss
B. Cured from an medical condition (Bilharzia)

and the optional step of C. getting asthma

Couple that with fancy pillows and matress toppers, and bingo - primo GC man

Lumen

greenspurs wrote: »

Froomes testing - (as released by teamsky)

2007 -
Peak power = 540w
Threshold (20-40mins) = 420

2015 -
Peak power = 525w
Threshold (20-40mins0 = 419

pelevin wrote: »

There is no comparison between Froome's results before jumping to 2nd at the Vuelta and other really top riders. He had no results of any significance in any races at the highest level before this.

This was done to death in 2015.

Froome doesn't have remarkable power. What he has is remarkable weight, and the ability to maintain his performance over three weeks.

https://roadcyclinguk.com/racing/features-racing/analysis-what-does-chris-froomes-lab-test-data-mean/

As for how he achieves these two things, who knows.

But there are plenty of riders who distinguish themselves by their recovery ability (or lack of).

I think there's too much focus on the things we understand (watts, kgs, oxygen consumption, blood cell counts) and not enough on the things we don't - fatigue and recovery. Sports science doesn't seem to have explanations for these things.

I have a possibly unfair explanation that sports science is overpopulated by people who were excelled at P.E. at school. Or maybe it's just hard.

neris

https://twitter.com/SmokeyTimRobbo/status/1001917661599629312

Macy0161

Weepsie wrote:

It's more that people are saying he came from nowhere to competing, when the jump in GC results is matched by others who've gone to win or podium.

I'll say again, it's the fact that sky were apparently ready to run down his contract that raises most questions rather than GC positions.

However, at barloworld he was essentially riding for himself/ GC rather than the more usual route of other GC contenders who are initially working for someone else in their first number of three week stage races.

greenspurs

Lumen wrote: »

This was done to death in 2015.

Froome doesn't have remarkable power. What he has is remarkable weight, and the ability to maintain his performance over three weeks.

Froome on Giro Stage 19 2018
attacked on the Colle delle Finestre with 80km to go with his 397 watts average over a time of 11'03" on a 3.02km section of the 9.3% gradident ascent.

Froome held a lead of about 40 seconds at the top, he did the 11.2km descent in 12'15", hitting a maximum of 80.1km/h.
The next climb, to Sestriere, he averaged the 6.3km ascent at 23.2km/h.
For the full 5h12'26" of the 184km stage, he averaged 35.3km/h and hit a maximum speed of 84.9km/h.
He gained 2.3secs per km over Dumoulin, and 10secs per km over Pozzivivo

Lumen

greenspurs wrote: »

Froome on Giro Stage 19 2018

What's your point?

greenspurs

Lumen wrote: »

What's your point?

You cant find a point ??
Amongst all those stats ?

Lumen

greenspurs wrote: »

You cant find a point ??
Amongst all those stats ?

You posted it, it's your point to make.

If we're in the business of copy/pasting from elsewhere...

https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/the-secret-pro-an-insiders-view-on-chris-froomes-crazy-giro-attack/

"In my view, he gained most of his advantage through incredible descending and a poor chase behind."

greenspurs

Lumen wrote: »

Lumen wrote: »

You posted it, it's your point to make.

If we're in the business of copy/pasting from elsewhere...

https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/the-secret-pro-an-insiders-view-on-chris-froomes-crazy-giro-attack/

QUOTE]
I don't know what your problem is, but theres a thing you posted !?
Explain that ! :rolleyes:

Lumen

greenspurs wrote: »

I don't know what your problem is, but theres a thing you posted !?

Oh yeah, so I did!

el tel

Lumen wrote: »

I have a possibly unfair explanation that sports science is overpopulated by people who were excelled at P.E. at school.

AKA people do did "Guttie Studies"

Or folk whose GSCE grades spell F U D G E

ford2600

Lumen wrote: »

Froome doesn't have remarkable power. What he has is remarkable weight, and the ability to maintain his performance over three weeks.

As for how he achieves these two things, who knows.

But there are plenty of riders who distinguish themselves by their recovery ability (or lack of).

I think there's too much focus on the things we understand (watts, kgs, oxygen consumption, blood cell counts) and not enough on the things we don't - fatigue and recovery. Sports science doesn't seem to have explanations for these things.

For an already elite GT athlete to lose 10% plus of his bodyweight and still maintain almost the same power AND health/vigour during a GT is really hard to believe.

For an unfit non athlete, who starts to train "newbie" gains are the norm; its like a holy grail for strength athletes to be in a catabolic state (dropping weight) but getting fitter. For a trained elite athlete to do the same at 10% bodyweight is fantasy stuff. He has to have lost muscle and yet has been able to upregulate the efficiency of his body to counteract that.

The human body (and all other mammals) have a really ancient microbiology to defend losses in bodyweight. At GT level Roche is probably the best example, when he drops weight he loses power and/or gets sick has really bad days.

If you were to try and get an athlete to drop weight and maintain power/strength/vigour, steroids would be the way to do it. You would want a really smart medic team

Lumen

ford2600 wrote: »

For an already elite GT athlete to lose 10% plus of his bodyweight and still maintain almost the same power AND health/vigour during a GT is really hard

Agreed. That was my point. It was the same with Wiggo. An 80kg rider in a 68kg body (or whatever). We just don't know how Sky are able to do it so consistently with riders.

greenspurs

Lumen wrote: »

Agreed. That was my point. It was the same with Wiggo. An 80kg rider in a 68kg body (or whatever). We just don't know how Sky are able to do it so consistently with riders.

Jiffy bags ................. and tues ................ and hayfever ......... :rolleyes:

Lumen

greenspurs wrote: »

Jiffy bags ................. and tues ................ and hayfever ......... :rolleyes:

But with the exception of the Salbutamol abuse, these rule-bending methods are available to all teams, and yet somehow only Sky manage these incredible body transformations.

How many pro teams are in MPCC? Half? Why haven't the other half managed to copy Sky's methods? There are enough riders who've been exposed to Sky's methods and are in other teams now.

It's not ethics that are holding back the likes of Astana.

TBH I have no idea why the UCI haven't just mandated the MPCC rules wholesale and made that association redundant.

What did Cookson do during his reign? What is Lappartient doing?

odyssey06

Lumen wrote: »

Agreed. That was my point. It was the same with Wiggo. An 80kg rider in a 68kg body (or whatever). We just don't know how Sky are able to do it so consistently with riders.

Not totally consistently, or we'd be celebrating an Irish GT win with Nico or Deignan!

Lumen

odyssey06 wrote: »

Not totally consistently, or we'd be celebrating an Irish GT win with Nico or Deignan!

Right. My theory is that Sky are actively selecting and promoting riders who are responsive to their methods, in the same way that in the past some riders were particularly sensitive to EPO (but in case it's not clear, I am NOT accusing Sky of running an illegal doping programme).

Chips Lovell

Actually, Wiggo only got good at riding grand Tours when he dropped the weight too. And it was at Garmin, not Sky, that Wiggo became Twiggo.

Lumen

Some fine whataboutery from MPCC

http://www.mpcc.fr/index.php/en/news-uk/item/671-credibility-figures-as-at-30-april

greenspurs

But in fairness, Sky seem to have more sway with the UCI and the organisers of GT's (final stage of the Giro) , Their methods are known, and they will continue using them until those in power decide , Hey enough lads, yere cheating!!
I wouldn't use Astana as an example of being a clean team (if that's what you meant!) , look at Vinokourov , one of their D.S.!!

Cookson did very little , made McQuaid look good ! Lappartient is anonymous so far, and is too quiet !

Lumen

greenspurs wrote: »

I wouldn't use Astana as an example of being a clean team (if that's what you meant!)

No, it wasn't what I meant.

harringtonp

odyssey06 wrote: »

Not totally consistently, or we'd be celebrating an Irish GT win with Nico or Deignan!

Is Deignan highly principled ? Have often wondered why he never gets to ride GTs with Sky

lismuse

More on the enigma...........
https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/ewan-mackenna-so-how-is-it-then-that-you-explain-a-freak-like-chris-froome-36968940.html

harringtonp

lismuse wrote: »

More on the enigma...........
https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/ewan-mackenna-so-how-is-it-then-that-you-explain-a-freak-like-chris-froome-36968940.html

Very good article. And while substance abuse in the circumstances is hard to believe for me I would give some credence to the mechanical doping line of thought

harringtonp

lismuse wrote: »

More on the enigma...........
https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/ewan-mackenna-so-how-is-it-then-that-you-explain-a-freak-like-chris-froome-36968940.html

However the reason I mention "conspiracy theories" earlier in the thread is that you see a lot of stuff put forward that is clutching at straws or just plain wrong. For example take

"A cyclist attacking while seated with a cadence in the 120s alone was amazing. Then the data comes, and you see these jumps in power with next to no change in heart rate. Perhaps there were problems with the measuring equipment but in a climb that takes over 45 minutes, riders should not be at max heart rate, and so there should be some gain or capacity to increase heart rate. Either that, or Froome was actually riding at his maximum rate, and launching vicious attacks repeatedly. Either is crazy."

from the above article. In my experience its just wrong. Look at

https://www.strava.com/activities/1594955260/analysis

which is a regular turbo session I do. FTP is about 280, that session is ridden about 240-250 with short seated spins up every 2 minutes to over 400W. Look at the heart rate, the rise is minimscule. In short the heart rate behaviour described above seems quite normal to me once the accelerations are brief.

velo.2010

Ask this lady how Froome dropped the weight/fat before the 2011 Vuelta.



Interesting that McKenna stated a weight of 64kg for the 2013 Tour in the article. If true, then Froome's w/kgs is in the ET zone.

I had an idea, from a couple of articles and comments from Froome himself, that he was as low as 65kg for the 2015 Tour. His GSK figures (for a Sky claimed Tour weight of 67kgs) give a threshold of 6.26w/kg. Plugging in 65kg and 64kg, you get numbers like 6.46w/kg and 6.56w/kg.

I believe Froome and Wiggins took the initiative to go down whatever route they went down and Team Sky simply came on board by 2011 when they realised their ethical approach to the sport was not providing the results. They subsequently built the marginal gains bullsh*t argument to explain the improvements.

greenspurs

harringtonp wrote: »

Is Deignan highly principled ? Have often wondered why he never gets to ride GTs with Sky

He is wasted with Team Sly.... a great climber, I think he would flourish at any other team. Must be getting great money to be content to ride on the TeamSly "C" team in Norway ....... Its a pity.

MPFGLB

Deignan has a wife and soon to be child to provide for ...I imagine that his main focus is money


Getting back to Froome and credibility

I approach this just like solving greek geometry at school where you prove the converse of a theorom can only be false so then the theorom must be true

So if Froome is legit he is

-The greatest GT rider ever ...winning multiple GTs without the aids used by past greats and in an era of greater/broader competetion.
-He has the best recovery powers ever in a GT rider, surviving crashes, being over weight,etc to beat some of the best riders in the world who have come through the age ranks as world beaters (who needs youth development programmes)
-He has gone from not being great at handling a bike to being one of the best descenders (if not the best) in the peloton in a few short years
-No one at SKY with all their testing and performance measuring could spot Froome's potential before the 2011 Vuelta
- He can unlike riders like Rohan Dennis lose loads of weight and still out perform everyone on multiple high mountian stages.
- He can accelerate while seated on very steep mountains while using very high cadence /low gears
- He can TT with the top TTers while using a very high gear the next day
- And he can do all the above while suffering periodically from a plethora of illnesess


I guess if you believe in Froome you would have to say he is one of the best sportmen that has ever lived