[Closed] Wiggins v Froome - handbags at dawn?

So why isn't it obvious now when Froome matches Pantani?

[b]he matches him for short periods- how many times do you need to be told that average times and average wattas are dropping - see th etimes for alpe D huez I linked to where pantini is literally 4 minutes ahead of Cadel - it is just not true so please stop saying it [/b] see alpe d'Huez climbs for example 🙄
To keep repeating short burst of peak [ ish watts] as a reply is to fail to graps the subject matter at hand or what is being said.

It is really quite daft to keep doing this and it isjust not true average watts, speeds, times and watts per kg are all dropping

agrees with CPt leaves it to molly

Just a reminder that Dave Brailsford is in charge of SKY Professional cycling team and runs it in the same way as British Cycling.....so if the sky riders are doped and so are the rest of the British Cyclists from the last three olympics by implications.

IMHO Wiggins....Cav...Froome...Thomas...Swift....Kennaugh are clean....have you not read or realised that the attention of detail they go to in diet.....and structured coaching which has been revolutionary to what has been done before ie no coaching just pump them with drugs...has improved the riders legally....Team SKY arenot infallible they got it wrong for the classics...and other teams have been attacking them differently in the stage races I have seen.

Do you really think that Wiggins is the same as LA I dont think so for one minute......and would Brailsford want to jeopardise the sky funding for British Cycling as well whilst running a doped professional team ...er I don't think so....

Keep an eye on David Walsh articles upcoming he's with Team Sky for both the Giro and TDF and he defo doesnot like doping !!

Ok then, look at the Peyresourde times for the complete climb despite a lazy start to it. Research has been done on the physiological limits for various durations of effort. 470W for 7mins is well into the suspicious zone.

I'm convinced riders have been warned off setting records for whole climbs as it proves doping. Why did Sky order Froome to slow down? Wiggins was quite happy on his own.

In this particular debate I don't think either side are going to convince the other. My main point is that in virtually every instance where a team or individuals have dominated a grand tour like Sky did, it has subsequently been proven to be down to doping. I hope Sky are clean, and hope that cycling has turned over a new leaf. But it has claimed to have done that after Festina, Ullrich, Basso, Landis, Contador etc and call me cynical, but I can't see it being any different after Lance.

..have you not read or realised that the attention of detail they go to in diet.....and structured coaching

Old hat presented as something new. Renault Gitane had dieticians, ergonomists, the Renault wind tunnel and a highly "scientific' approach to training that was carried through to La Vie Claire with Lemond and Hinault.

How was the doped rider able to attack the other doped rider is surely the question you should want to ask

Are you really asking why the support guy was asked not to attack the team leader and winner and concluding that the ONLY reason was drug doping - comedy gold

TBH why on earth would they dope if they were then just going to take it easy ? Now that is as daft as your argument tbh

PS 470 watts for 7 mins is short term effort so can you show me that for say I dont know an entire tour like what that LA fella did ...of course you cannot.

Deffo going now but that has made me chuckle

he actually failed a drug test as well for glenbutorol iirc in a race but got a prescription for it. I did expect a reaction to that one but from Edukator.
tbh I would not be surprised to discover he doped - frankly given what has happened in Spain re blood doping and Bertie I would not be surprised by any Spanish rider, now or in the past saddly.

It was actually Salbutamol (ventolin), which has absolutely no performance enhancing effect whatsoever on a trained athlete. It's effect is only really measurable in asthmatics where it helps dilate the bronchial passage. This only works where they're constricted and if yours are already dilated (a non asthmatic for example), then Salbutamol will not help.

Apparently, it only got on the banned list due to it being on the French banned list. I'm yet to see any evidence of salbutamol providing any performance enhancement; it can only level the playing field. Put simply, if you don't need it, then it will not do anything for you.

Where are these calculations Ed? You're convinced they're correct (obviously) but what if they're way off, aerodynamic drag is still a factor on climbs and Froome is possibly the skinniest stick like thing I've ever seen (behind myself possibly). Maybe he's just uber aero 😛

Wiggo is clean, he's got far too much to loose. If not then Weller and Gallagher would probably be his only mates.

Un bon coureur de 70kg peut développer 1.200 watts pendant 15 secondes, 450 watts pendant 6 minutes, 400 watts pendant 30 minutes. Sur le triathlon d’Hawaii, la puissance sur la portion de vélo a déjà été évaluée pour le vainqueur à 300 watts pendant cinq heures. Plus la durée d’effort est longue, moins la puissance moyenne est élevée.

I don't think that needs translating. When guys that have been riding for several hours, have been at around 400W for half an hour then put in 7 minutes at 470W, questions need to asked. Nearly every media source in France was asking questions anyhow. At the point they should have been showing signs of fatigue they accelerated.

Wiggo is clean, he's got far too much to loose.

Like Ulrich, Armstrong, Cantador and every other rider that already has a few wins.

Tall riders make lousy cyclists because they take a lot of wind and have a lot of bones and muscles in relation to their heart and lung capacity. Before blood doping the most successful riders had builds like Hinault, Lemond and Merckx, they could time trial well and get up the mountains fast enough to hold off the specific climbers for GC. Climbers were shorter. EPO changed all that and gangly things like 60% Riis and 550W Mig could suddenly climb better than the short-arse specific climbers..

I don't think that needs translating

Patronising asshat.

yes and wrong as well whihc is more important

Without boring you too much with the technicalities I averaged 456 watts for 55 minutes at the Worlds last year against Tony [MARTIN} and still finished 1min 20sec behind.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/cycling/9442119/Bradley-Wiggins-hopes-cycling-in-a-higher-gear-will-help-him-to-emulate-hero-in-Olympic-time-trial.html

http://www.cyclingpowerlab.com/OlympicTimeTrial.aspx
this claims slightly lower FWIW and Martin @ 481 for 50 ish minutes so your figure for an hour seems way off as top ten were all over 400 for basically an hour [ ok 10 th was 399 for clarity]@ 57 :14 time not sure where you get to have 300 watts - I can only assume you take this as yet more proof of widespread cheating and part of the global conspiracy 😕

I love you too, Flash. How about putting a counter argument together rather than insulting me. I really don't think those numbers need translating. I'll remove the text and just quote the self-explanatory numbers:

70jg
15s 1200W
6min 450W
30min 400W
5h 300W

Thank you for the evidence that riders are still producing as much power as at the height of the Festina doping programme, Junkyard.

You now seem to be agreeing that riders haven't slowed down having spent most of the thread caliming they are now less powerful than before.

481W for 50min is firmly in the highly suspicious zone.

You cannot even follow an argument can you - is that deliberate ?
To repeat
They are as powerful for short bursts as they always were because the PEDS improve recovery or stamina on long tours with day after day of activity - you do know hamecrit drops dont you on tour for example as does testoreone etc without doping and therefore perfomance?
A TT is not a great example of endurance what with it being short and one day 🙄 there will be no difference and it is not suspicious at all it is used to show your wattage figures are just wrong - as i suspected proving this to you just fuels your conspiracist view rather than make you question the actual basis or foundation on which your view stands
SO lets see your evidence for the grand tours then and how much faster they get you have none for they are slower, average less have lower watts per kg. go up mountains slower though they can off course hit LA levels for short periods but not the whole tour which is the point you miss as well as giving a very low [ polite for wrong]watts threshold for "proof" of doping

It is clear facts wont alter your view and you cannot follow what is being said

Not sure how much you can read into this, but the average speed of the last four TDFs (2009-2012 inclusive) works out at 39.87km/hr.

The average speed for the EPO era of 1990-99 works out as an average of 39.151km/hr

So overall, today's race is faster than the dirtiest period in cycling history. Maybe that's down to equipment, maybe not.

back to the original topic, i reckon the outcome of fight between froome and wiggo will depend on the temperature when they come to climb Ventoux a blistering hot day could be bad news for Brad.

I get 39.5 - 2009 - 2012 which includes cheating contador BTW
Why do you think the EPO era was pre LA and the Dirtiest time and started in 1990 ? Le mond won that year - everyone accepts he was clean - very odd choice of dates and i would say a bit of cherry picking not to mention odd

Full data here FWIW i could nto be bothered doing the maths but a quick glance shows it has slowed but clearly not significantly

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/23/tour-de-france-winner-list-garin-wiggins

470W for 7mins is well into the suspicious zone.

481W for 50min is firmly in the highly suspicious zone.

What do you make of 462W for an hour? Possible by a clean athlete?

I was using data from [url= http://bikeraceinfo.com/tdf/tdfstats.html ]here[/url], and used the 90's as it is widely considered the dirtiest era - virtually the whole peleton was using EPO, and there was no test for it - it was basically a free for all.

1. wiggo vs froome? makes a good story, get's people ranting on forums, classic sports psychology at play
2. is wiggo clean? Pointless debate, only time will tell.
3. spanish judge ordering doped blood to be destroyed? smells like football and boxing cover up, sports even more corrupt than cycling

Sorry, just realised left out two of your questions - chose 2009-2012 as 2009 was Wiggins break through year (4th since upgraded to 3rd) - before that he wasn't considered a contender.. Chose 1990 onwards just so there was a large enough group not to be skewed by one or two results. For example, pretty sure there were longer time trials in the early 90's, favouring Mig, which would have pushed the average up slightly.

Sadly, and IMO, the most sensible view is to be highly cynical about all pro sports and especially cycling. That is the legacy of the LA (and others) era. Read Tyler Hamilton's description of how they rode hills and the watch out heros last year and difficult not to note the similarities!?! Sad, but it will take a good generation of clean riding not a few nice young Brits before I will remove my cynical blinkers.

The current Spanish cover up (football, tennis, athletics) etc hardly fills one with confidence.

Any way back to the OP. Beware the scorned girlfriend/fiancée. Handbags on the web. Classy!! I hope Wiggo wins the Giro, that they compete at the start of he tour and then go with the better rider mid way thru the TDF. Lets have some combat, fully juiced or not!

Sorry, just realised left out two of your questions - chose 2009-2012 as 2009 was Wiggins break through year (4th since upgraded to 3rd) - before that he wasn't considered a contender.

Chose 1990 onwards just so there was a large enough group not to be skewed by one or two results. For example, pretty sure there were longer time trials in the early 90's, favouring Mig, which would have pushed the average up slightly.

Cheers for the link interesting how the stuff differs!
FWIW the difference in average speed is negligible tbh so probably better to look at Watts per kg
As far as that goes the peak of LA was circa 6.5- 7 and it is assumed that 6 watts/kg is the best natural- Niballi for example was doing about 5.7 in the BBC link I gave and the others tend to not publish the data so the Wiggo would have been the same ish - I assume under 6.
FWIW given Wiggos weight this would give us 414 watts - this is an average edukator not a TT one @ 6 345Watts@ 5, 4.3 gives 303.6

I have no idea why Edukator insits that 300 is the norm as it is a pretty low value tbh and to assume anything above this is proof of cheating would mean every single cyclist since the 60s say in all disciplines is and was a cheat

Handbags on the web. Classy!

I agree the legacy is what leads to us all being supicious but I really do believe we have turned a corner in cycling and some are clean now. I do agree many other sports are still in the dark days of turning a blind eye as the UCI were doing [ IMHO] and that some are still cheating.It does not seem to make sense to just assume that every winner must a be a cheat anymore that it makes sense to assume Bolt cheated beacause Ben Johnson did - iirc every sprinter in that race has tested positive at some point in their career so it wa snot just cycling that had issues then or now

Think maybe the average speed of the whole tour is misleading. Seem to remember in the days when there was an obvious patron in the peleton that long flat stages would often be rode at quite a pedestrian pace (because Lance, Hinault, Big Mig, Cippo, etc. said so.)

Look at the grand tours nowadays where the whole peleton seems nervy and everyone is worried about crashes and staying at the front, and no one obviously bossing the peleton. No data to back this up but I wouldn't be surprised if the higher average speeds are mostly down to these flat stages.

I hope that you are correct JY ie, with the corner being turned. I am still in the, "foot fully on the accelerator mode" sadly. Its the modern day equivalent of the Colliseaum. We want spectacle and theatre and bu$$er the consequences. Instead of blood and guts we crave endless records and drama and people will go to extremes to fulfil this endless desire unfortunately. Nothing new in that.

Are we all guilty by association? 😉

Not me mate as none of the drugs i ever took enhanced my performance 😛

What do you make of 462W for an hour? Possible by a clean athlete?

Absolutely, now name a range of bikes after that man!

I'm assuming you mean Boardman, and I think he was clean, at his best he could beat anyone in a TT, so was capable of the output figures that the GC riders were, but he just couldn't do it day in day out like the juicers could.

I have no idea why Edukator insits that 300 is the norm

because it is... for pro ironman athletes.

now factor in they've just swam a couple of km and have a marathon left to run

Un bon coureur de 70kg peut développer 1.200 watts pendant 15 secondes, 450 watts pendant 6 minutes, 400 watts pendant 30 minutes. [b]Sur le triathlon d’Hawaii[/b], la puissance sur la portion de vélo a déjà été évaluée pour le vainqueur [b]à 300 watts pendant cinq heures[/b]. Plus la durée d’effort est longue, moins la puissance moyenne est élevée.

I think people have forgotten that pre 1990 even athletes on cortisone and steroids didn't produce more that 390W on TDF climbs. 300 is what triathletes produce on an ironman bike leg.

Rominger set his hour record with 560/580W BTW, the same as you state Tony Martin produced for over 50min. Rominger spent a lot of time on training camps with Ferrari in the mid 90s. Boardman and Obree had just over 400W for their first hour records. Boardman 440/450W for his current record set in 96... .

I can't remember where I copied this from four years ago:

80s
Avoriaz 1985, Herrera, Hinault 375 w
Superbagnères 1986, Lemond 380 w
Alpe d'Huez 1987, Herrera 395 w, 1989 Fignon, Delgado 390 w

90s
Luz-Ardiden 1990, Indurain, Lemond 390 w
Saint Lary 1993, Indurain, Jaskula, Rominger 430 w
Val Thorens 1994, Pantani 437 w
Alpe d'Huez 1995, Pantani 460 w
La Plagne 1995, Indurain 448 w
Arcalis 1997,Ullrich 474 w
Les Deux Alpes 1998, Pantani 450 w

2000s
Hautacam 2000, Armstrong 449 w
Alpe d'Huez 2001, Armstrong 442 w
Luz-Ardiden 2003, Armstrong 442 w
Courchevel 2005, Valverde, Armstrong 449 w

Those posting power figures for Wiggo compare for yourselves and make your own judgements.

The thread started quite well... 😥

It was from Cyclismag. They also stated no-one ever got over 400W on the final cols of a mountain stages before 1990. The 89 Séoul Olympics were where EPO first influence performance. It's interesting that Lemond's 390W were enough to make him the best rider until EPO appeared, he was then completely over run despite still producing his 390W. He didn't get slower, the others suddenly got faster.

Edit: Opps I've made Rominger 100W more powerful than he was, that should read 460/480W depending on which source you read.

Didn't realise they were riding with powermeters in the 80's. Or the 90's early 2000's for that matter.

Edukator v Junkyard - keyboards at dawn? And continuing the rest of the day and in fact week?

No, I've got a bike to ride and a sink to plumb in. I get invoved in a debate for a day or so every couple of weeks, Molgrips.

There's video footage of cols to calculate power outputs from going back to the 80s.

Boardman 440/450W for his current record set in 96... .

462W according to http://www.jappl.org/content/89/4/1522.full which would appear a more authoritative source than anything you're coming up with, it being a peer reviewed article and all that. As irelanst guessed - though it should have been fairly obvious. A figure you appear to be quietly ignoring.

I mean 462W for an hour does rather put the following into perspective:

470W for 7mins is well into the suspicious zone.

Those posting power figures for Wiggo compare for yourselves and make your own judgements.

The figures for Wiggo are ~400W aren't they? Of course that is a complete impossibility given that Lemond could only manage 390W.

Did i mock you on the thrilling overtaking thread mr Pot?

Rominger set his hour record with 560/580W BTW, the same as you state Tony Martin produced for over 50min

Those posting power figures for Wiggo compare for yourselves and make your own judgements.

I'm not really interested in getting into the debate about who is/isn't/might be on drugs but want to stick my 2p in about these power outputs being quoted. The majority of the 90s ones are calculated either by VAM (so suffer from errors due to tailwinds/atmospheric pressure etc., I mean really, 460W for Pantani? That's escape velocity 🙂 ) or frontal area by pixel count (as they did for Indurain's hour record). Without proper, verified power data it's all just guesswork.

And even this jobbing club-level 72kg amateur can knock out above 330W for an hour and over 400 for several minutes, so those guys several tiers higher can certainly do the same without PEDs. And no, I don't believe everyone is clean now.

No I made a genuine mistake with Rominger's numbers which I pointed out and corrected in my next post. 460/480W for Rominger from me and 481W for Martin (Wiggins just a tad less). That's the same for the EPO era hour record and a current rider. They haven't slowed down.

That's the same for the EPO era hour record

Like Boardman? 462W?

This thread is ruined and off topic.
Mods please close the bloody thing.
Start your own doping thread guys and lets discuss Wiggo/Froome on a new thread.

But Martin is massive, Rominger was a skinny little rat. With the figures quoted above Pantani should've taken the hour record as his power:drag ratio would've been massive.
How could Rominger need 480W and Indurain 510 with their huge differences in size? Apart from Boardman's data it's all junk.

The 80s, 90s and 2000s power outputs are calculated from times (often taken from videos) up the final cols of the TDF stages quoted. The same has been done for time trials from the period taking into account bike design and Position - the power figures confirm the mountain results. Wind plays a bigger part in TTs though and some people trying to discredit Lemond have calculated his power from a TT without taking into account the TT was downhill with the wind behind.

Rominger went 2Kmh faster than Indurain which requires a lot of extra Watts at that speed. They both had poor back positions which is why Boardman went faster than both with less power than Rominger..