Forum menu
as posted on another thread, where Junky told us off for going OT
[teacher voice]I can still hear you [/teacher voice] 😉
Yes PEDS tend to give recovery so they could train harder as well
At the levels available now, due to biological passport etc, it would be "mircro " dosing anyway to not look suspicious.
On a one off they can give just as much as they always could - barring Pantani climbing with 50% hematocrit etc when it was just not physiologically possible to use that much oxygen
Just think it is shame that every GC event leads to this but we dont mind Cav being super human at sprinting [ or Hoy]
Its highly unlikely all of GB cycling is doping so there must be something else - training methods I assume -IMHO
I agree with butcher's point: I think what is happening is that the Spanish and Italian riders who may have doped in the part have been shown up when compelled to ride ride clean. Therefore the teams that have worked hard to perfect training programmes (see also British track cycling, British rowing etc) have reaped the rewards.
I could ecwrong (I was wrong about Hincapie, Hamilton) but for the moment I have nothing but admiration for Porte and Froome.
Struggling to see froome today for all his team mates tbh...
What i would prefer is some evidence beyond oh look he is fast therefore he must be a cheat..
To some extent that is the evidence though. Much of the speculation about yesterday was looking at working out Froome(-dog)'s power to weight for the climb to see if it was in feasible levels for a clean rider. From what I've seen, most seem to think it was just about possible (unlike some of Pantani and Armstrong's rides).
Problem with that is
1. We dont actually have his power data so its a guess.
2. What you can do for short periods is not indicative of drug use - i assume i can get past the 7 watts/kg for a short period of time -what do you reckon the sprinters are churning out at the end of the sprint for say the last 20 minutes and then the last 10 seconds?
I always cite Boardman here - accepted to be clean by all and look what he did for the hour record in terms of watts.
It is pointless it is just going he was fast for a bit therefore he is a cheat. it is not logical to just assume this as there is no proof of anything. the real proof is doing it day after day after day - this is only done with EPO IMHO
the evidenced is flimsy to put it mildly- everytime someone rides fast folk say this and yet Bolt can run fast and no one says much about this
Hopefully one day the sport will get to the point where we dont have to do this and we accept that , like all other sports, competitors get faster due to improved training rather than drugs
From 4 days ago:
As rumours swirl about whether or not there is a performance-enhancing drug culture within Jamaican athletics, Usain Bolt, the country's biggest-ever star, remains adamant that he is clean from doping.
It is pointless it is just going he was fast for a bit therefore he is a cheat.
How would the Occam's Razor principle be applied in this scenario? What is the most likely simple explanation for exceptional performance in professional road racing?
[s]natural as drug use is another assumption - I assume you accept they would have to be good as well as doing drugs [/s]
ITS ALL ABOUT THE BIKE 😛
I still want to see your proof rather than your innuendo
aracer - MemberI'm guessing you've not been following road cycling that long, as it's fairly well known? 85/86, but they went one better and did it with the same two riders both years.
I was 8 yrs old in '85 so you're right, i wasnt an avid road cycling fan at that age!
Take that Grandad 😉
I was 8 yrs old in '85 so you're right, i wasnt an avid road cycling fan at that age!
Eddy Mercx won his last TdF when I was 4, but I still know he won 5. It's not like I was even that into cycling in 1985, I certainly didn't watch the Tour, but the Lemond Hinault duals are surely among the most well known TdF stories for anybody who's paid attention to the history.
1. We dont actually have his power data so its a guess.
2. What you can do for short periods is not indicative of drug use - i assume i can get past the 7 watts/kg for a short period of time -what do you reckon the sprinters are churning out at the end of the sprint for say the last 20 minutes and then the last 10 seconds?
Given we have the timings and the distance/profile of the route, it's an extremely good guess. Of course the issue is about how much power he put out for how long - who cares if somebody managed 1000W at the end of the sprint, as that's within the realms of possibility. Similarly we know that 400W for an hour is possible. The whole point is about riders sustaining power outputs for longer than physiologically possible.
I am actually largely with you on this - I think I was actually the first to introduce CB's hour record power output in one of these threads! The trouble is, some of the calculated outputs for Armstrong et al on the climbs were actually greater than that - and as you say they managed it for several climbs in a row day after day. It is a perfectly valid way of determining whether a rider's performance is suspicious IMHO.
Right now I'm happy that Froome(-dog) is clean until proved otherwise. The circumstantial evidence would suggest it is likely he is. However yesterday's performance certainly left me with doubts and looking carefully at what people were suggesting his output was (lots of speculation at the bottom of http://www.cyclingnews.com/tour-de-france/stage-8/results ). My take is that he was right at the edge of what's physiologically possible for a single day - if he does the same again today I'll be worried.
I think I was actually the first to introduce CB's hour record power output in one of these threads!
I think you did and I think we do largely agree
My take is that he was right at the edge of what's physiologically possible for a single day - if he does the same again today I'll be worried.
Rest day tomorrow so he may be able to but in general this is the only way we can really tell- recovery and duration.
Given we have the timings and the distance/profile of the route, it's an extremely good guess.
Fair point
Have a look at the Science of Sport website for a pretty thorough examination of power over climbs.
I'm working so can't link to it.
Just to stoke the embers of this thread a bit more...
How would Wiggins have coped in Froome's place today without any team mates to support him? Very badly I suspect.
I know Froome would have been with Wiggins but I can't help thinking the Movistar attacks would have been too much for Wiggins.
[i]No need to be a dick about it though is there. I'm allowed an opinion, and was honest about how informed that opinion is.[/i]
Ooh someone's a bit touchy. What's your opinion based on given that you know next to nothing about road riding?
Any people on here who think Wiggins looks cool on a bike obviously didn't watch him descending in the Giro this year .
Ooh someone's a bit touchy. What's your opinion based on given that you know next to nothing about road riding?
I know probably more than the average man in the street but probably a lot less than many on here. Perhaps I should have paraphrased some stuff I read on some cycling blogs and pretended to be an expert though.
What level of knowledge is required in order to be allowed an opinion? Is there an exam or something?
What level of knowledge is required in order to be allowed an opinion? Is there an exam or something?
You mean you haven't even sat them?
So does anybody still think Porte does drugs?
On the Wiggins vs Froome debate, surely Wiggo would have just sat in his saddle and chugged his way back up to the Movistar riders.
Porte looked knackered, Froome (much) less so. I think many of us have become conditioned to just expect the worse now - sadly, this may be Armstrong's biggest legacy to the sport. I want to say that I don't think Froome is doping, but a part of me wonders if that's just because I don't want him to be doping. Does that make sense?
Does that make sense? Absolutely.
This is very much my view on the damage doping has done to the sport. Every time you see a great performance, you can't help but wonder about its legitimacy and your own objectivity.
Still watching though...
On the Wiggins vs Froome debate, surely Wiggo would have just sat in his saddle and chugged his way back up to the Movistar riders.
I think if Wiggins had been in the race yesterday without Froome to support him, he'd have been dropped. There's not many riders in the world who could live with the pace that was set as well as cover the attacks from Quintana and Wiggins is not in that group.
Quintana looked gutted on Saturday though. Must be soul destroying to launch an attack, get up the road and find yourself slowly winched in and passed. Then yesterday to not even be able to get away when your opponent is isolated. Mentally, Froome must really be doing a job on the opposition after those two stages.
Speaking of mental, it was interesting to see Schleck finishing in that group. Either he's out to prove a point to Trek and buried himself yesterday or he's heading back into form.
IMO yesterday Sky suffered due to the effort they'd put into the day before - but they kept yellow, so it was worth it.
Day off now and hopefully they'll recover.
Bet Brailsford was worried though.
Back to the original Q - it's clearly impossible to know if Froome could have won last year and whether Wiggo would have done as well this.
What is clear is that working in support of a GC contender is very different to being one. If you have a bad day as a team member it's not the end of the world where it is as team leader.
Riders after GC need to think about tomorrow and next week when riding, need to be measured and make sure they expend the minimum effort for the days objectives.
Example A is Mr Porte. He was stellar helping Froome get into yellow and himself in second but couldn't back it up today as he pushed so hard and didn't recover. Froome did recover but had 2 team mates to help him for all bar the last part of the day. It would be easy to say after Saturday that he could have beaten Froome had he not held back after pacing etc but it would be wrong.
So you can't take one days result as an indicator as to whether a ride could do better than the leader. Being a leader and winning is far more than one days ride.
It's a team effort and it's more realistic to say that any of Froome, Wiggo or Porte could win this years tour - but they'd approach it in different ways.
It's a team effort and it's more realistic to say that any of Froome, Wiggo or Porte could win this years tour - but they'd approach it in different ways.
I don't think Wiggins would have won this year; too many big mountain stages where he could only rely on the train. I think yesterday for example, as I said, he'd have been off the back rather than able to shut down Quintana like Froome did.
Fair point but Wiggins rides mountains differently.
He doesn't do the accelerations like Froome can do /respond to but last year when Nibali attacked like Quintana did, the Sky boys just kept the same tempo and rode back to him.
Froome is better suited to this years tour but I think Sky have the squad and, now, experience to win with Porte or Wiggo had Froome had an injury and wasn't able to ride.
It's all opinion and all that really matters is what happens tomorrow.
I think atlaz and DaveRambo both make good points which I agree with. At the end of the day it's pure conjecture on a forum but just a bit of fun.
One thing that does occur to me though is I can't recall Chris Froome cracking that badly on the major tours I have seen him ride in recent years but Wiggins, yes.
I think Froome is a much better all-round rider rather than just just a one-trick pony like Wiggins. One thing's for sure though, if Movistar et al continue attacking Froome it's going to be a much more interesting tour than of late.
I can't recall Chris Froome cracking that badly on the major tours I have seen him ride in recent years but Wiggins, yes
Vueletta last year though you could legitimately cite tiredness
Froome has yet to win one you know - we dont know that he wont crack though I hope he does not.
When did Wiggo crack once he focused on the tour? I will give him the benefit and say he ws ill for the Giro
They are different riders and Froome has more raw ability to cope with multiple demands and attacks on mountain stages where as wiggo was more one speed- all be it ridiculously fast and the best TT of the GC.
Would have been interesting had they been on different teams
I'm worried for Froome as there are a lot of good riders and teams in this year's tour. And yesterday showed that there are chinks in Sky's armour.
It is very exciting.
I hate rest days.
He doesn't do the accelerations like Froome can do /respond to but last year when Nibali attacked like Quintana did, the Sky boys just kept the same tempo and rode back to him.
I think that's the point I was making. He needed the support last year whereas Froome yesterday was fairly strong in keeping the Movistar pace and also dealing with GC threat rider attacks. It's not to diminish the result in 2012, but I think most people would agree that the route last year was more suited to Wiggins than this year and that in terms of a more "pure" climber, Froome has the edge over him by quite some distance.
I think they know they did not break him and I think had it been an summit finish he would have attacked again
They will keep trying but i thinks[hope] a few more demoralising days and they will know in their hearts and legs he has their measure and beating and will look for other goals
it's clearly impossible to know if Froome could have won last year
Agreed and Wiggins wasn't given the opportunity to defend his jersey this year by Sky although given his season I guess he would have struggled/pulled out anyway. All part of the slightly weird team vs individual riders aspect of road racing.
You can't call Wiggins a one trick pony when he won the Tour last year.
One trick ponies win the other jerseys 🙂
As Junkyard said he didn't crack last year when he properly prepared and was 'ready' for the tour where Froome struggled on some stages in the Vueletta.
I agree it would have been good to see them on different teams - Roll on Tuesday.
He needed the support last year whereas Froome yesterday was fairly strong in keeping the Movistar pace and also dealing with GC threat rider attacks
Not disagreeing with anything you say but it could be put that Wiggo had support last year so used it. Had Porte stayed with Froome yesterday Froome would have used him.
No question that Froome looks more comfortable in the mountains and he certainly showed a lot of strength, tactical awareness and composure yesterday that Wiggins hasn't had to show (whether he could have coped is always a matter of opinion - what isn't is that he would have coped in the same way).
For me the most interesting and enjoyable part of the race is my 13yr old daughter asking questions and being riveted by the stage yesterday.
It's shaping up to be a riveting tour - Froome looks awesome, but will he be able to do it the hard way without the same level of support that BW had last year? Sky losing Kyrienka and hamstrung by other injuries could make it absolutely nail-biting in the Alps.
My 10-year-old daughter is loving it too.
You can't call Wiggins a one trick pony when he won the Tour last year.
One trick ponies win the other jerseysAs Junkyard said he didn't crack last year when he properly prepared and was 'ready' for the tour where Froome struggled on some stages in the Vueletta.
Maybe I could have phrased it better. I meant that Wiggo seems to have just one pace based on his time trial and track abilities and I think would struggle under similar conditions to what Froome faced yesterday.
Don't get me wrong, I also think Wiggo's win the the Tour last year is the greatest performance by a British sportsperson in my lifetime, possibly ever. I was rooting for him every day and didn't really subscribe to the idea that Froome would necessarily have beaten him last year. In most cases there can only be one team leader and teams perform best when their focus is on getting one guy to the finish line rather than several.
I think last year's Vuelta was one of the most incredible tours I have ever seen. With multiple mountain top finishes and even the one time trial going over a Cat 1 climb I think, it was obviously designed for the likes of Contador, Valverde and Ridriquez.
The fact that Froome was even in there with a shout says volumes about his ability and he may have understandably failed on some of the brutal stages the way those three seemed to be ganging up on him at times.
I think if Wiggins had been in the race yesterday without Froome to support him, he'd have been dropped.
WTF? Andy Shleck finised in the lead group. Andy bloody Shleck! If Andy Shleck (and Evans and a load of other no hopers) can keep up I think Wiggins would have been able too keep up in the form he was in last year.
And I bet Wiggo was sitting at home yesterday with a smug grin on his face as Porte was dropped so early in the stage saying to himself "Now Chris, that is why I didn't want you to needlessly attack in the mountains last year"
WTF? Andy Shleck finised in the lead group. Andy bloody Shleck! If Andy Shleck (and Evans and a load of other no hopers) can keep up I think Wiggins would have been able too keep up in the form he was in last year.
Would that be 4 Grand Tour podium finishes out of the 7 he's started (and 5 he's finished) Andy Schleck? He's been injured then sort of shit since mid-2012 but I don't think yesterday was a day you could consider easy. Only 23 riders out of 183 managed to finish within 25 seconds of the winner, the next group rolled in almost 4 minutes down.
jfletch - MemberIf Andy Shleck (and Evans and a load of other no hopers) can keep up I think Wiggins would have been able too keep up in the form he was in last year.
No hopers? 😆
I think Wiggins smile would have frozen pretty quick as Froome showed himself more than up to the task. I don't think many wearing yellow would have chased Valverde when he bridged across, but was the perfect call yesterday.
Hmmm.......Evans a no hoper as well? You mean the guy who won the TDF a few years ago. I think his recent 3rd in the Giro just took a bit much out of him sadly although he is one tough mother and there are still 2 weeks to go......
Also I thought Wiggins' "I'll never ride le tour again" interview read more like "I realise it was a unique set of circumstances that gave me the chance to win last year, and as that will never happen again what's the point in trying?"
Evans best days are behind him
Competitive but when it gets really tough he will be left wanting
Shame though how many tours would he have won had everyone been clean..lot of respect for "dont touch me"
This pic says it all to me-It's the day Wiggo supposedly blew a gasket & Froome had to wait for him to take him to the line...................
[img] 
[/img]
Would that be 4 Grand Tour podium finishes out of the 7 he's started (and 5 he's finished) Andy Schleck?
Yeah, the Shleck comment was slightly tounge in cheek but he has been crap all year and did lose minuntes on the previous stage.
Only 23 riders out of 183 managed to finish within 25 seconds of the winner
23 riders is actually a huge group for this type of stage. They normally finish in much smaller groups and the final group is much more select. There were still a lot of domestiques left. Sky just suffered because of the pace set by Garmin very early and their grandstanding the previous day.
Wiggins would have hung on fine as they hills were the gradual long type that suit him and the tempo set by Movistar was also to his strenght.
It would have been a different race if Wiggins had been there though, he wouldn't have had a minunte over his nearest contender as he wouldn't have attacked the day before, he probably wouldn't have been in yellow, instead waiting for the TT next week. So we will never know if Wiggins or Froome is the best unless they are on different teams but at their peak together.
But could Wiggins have finished with the leaders yesterday? Almost certainly yes, to claim otherwise is crazy.
sadly, this may be Armstrong's biggest legacy to the sport
very true, and as you say, very sad.
I was very suspect on Saturday, but Sundays stage has put a lot of my worries to bed (FWIW). If sky were doping they wouldn't have been dropped the way they were. US Postal / Discovery / T - Mobile would have been at the front of the race day after day.
I also really liked the way Froome handled the questions about drugs, he didn't say I've never tested positive, and then ban the interviewer from ever speaking to him again (Armstrong), or start swearing and acting like a brat (Wiggins), he politely, calmly addressed the situation, very nice job.