Sky are dopers - Oh no they're not

morstar

Did anybody catch itv4 coverage tonight and their coverage of the rest day press conference?
Froome faced many doping questions and when challenged over his superior performance compared to previously strong riders he simply alluded to why some riders are possibly not riding as well as previously due to their own changed behaviour.
Absolutely no doubting who or what he was alluding to. True champion answer full of panache!
I wasn't too keen on the fella last year but I have really warmed to him.

nic_77

morstar wrote:

Did anybody catch itv4 coverage tonight and their coverage of the rest day press conference?
Froome faced many doping questions and when challenged over his superior performance compared to previously strong riders he simply alluded to why some riders are possibly not riding as well as previously due to their own changed behaviour.
Absolutely no doubting who or what he was alluding to. True champion answer full of panache!
I wasn't too keen on the fella last year but I have really warmed to him.

Yep - I noted that too. A step in the right direction.
The only way to break the doping culture is from within - riders need to self police, and be rewarded for outing the cheats.

inseine

nic_77 wrote:

morstar wrote:

Did anybody catch itv4 coverage tonight and their coverage of the rest day press conference?
Froome faced many doping questions and when challenged over his superior performance compared to previously strong riders he simply alluded to why some riders are possibly not riding as well as previously due to their own changed behaviour.
Absolutely no doubting who or what he was alluding to. True champion answer full of panache!
I wasn't too keen on the fella last year but I have really warmed to him.

Yep - I noted that too. A step in the right direction.
The only way to break the doping culture is from within - riders need to self police, and be rewarded for outing the cheats.

Even JV says that the only way to prevent doping is by the most rigorous testing possible. Unfortunately riders can't be trusted to self police.

frenchfighter

I wonder whether the dope testers are all over Sky this TdF. Some domestiques distinctly under par. Gone from riding half of the Stage Race contenders off their wheel without breaking a sweat to barely making the time cut off.

Squirrelpie

frenchfighter wrote:

I wonder whether the dope testers are all over Sky this TdF. Some domestiques distinctly under par. Gone from riding half of the Stage Race contenders off their wheel without breaking a sweat to barely making the time cut off.

They will indeed be tested but Movistar will be targeted more due to their position leading the team competition.

One fast assent on the first mountain stage is an indicator of nothing for Froome.

Froome's team tired the following day showing the sacrifice they made to give him the opportunity to attack,
after all Contador had said all along he was aiming to peak for the final week. Sky took a calculated gamble and it paid off, even losing second GC spot on stage 10 will have made up for the loss of Kiryienka as Porte is now Domestic only and will recover.

Sky currently have no need to ride people off there wheels now they have the time gap and after today it could be a large gap.

Spiny_Norman

Squirrelpie wrote:

Russ Tucker is drifting of the mark recently. Keeping the doping debate going. It never ends, all people want to know is about doping years after the real issue was ignored.

The problem with his performance models used are that they not based on clean elite performances as no one seems to have sufficient data from the likes of Froome (current data), Contador, Schleck or Evans etc. His estimates are based on bits of data mostly from domestics who have an inferior physiology to start with.

No team will share this data and causing a stir on twitter isn't going to change anything about that as those who want it don't know the capabilities of man to start with and neither does Ross as he would not care to see it if he actually did.

I thought his recent pieces were the few sensible bits of proper investigation I've seen. He's not saying guilty or innocent, he's highlighting the reasons why eyebrows may be raised, and also the reasons why you can't draw any conclusions based on what amounts to a single stage.

The fact is, whether we like it or not, doping will always be suggested when anyone performs well. It's as much a part of the sport as coloured jerseys, historic ascents and the suitcase of courage. Tucker isn't talking about doping for fun, but because those suspicions have been raised in considerable volume, and I think he's covered the issues very well.

MrTapir

frenchfighter wrote:

I wonder whether the dope testers are all over Sky this TdF. Some domestiques distinctly under par. Gone from riding half of the Stage Race contenders off their wheel without breaking a sweat to barely making the time cut off.

Couldnt they have just ridden so hard the one day that they were knackered the next day? I think thats just as plausible as something else more dodgy.

No_Ta_Doctor

MrTapir wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

I wonder whether the dope testers are all over Sky this TdF. Some domestiques distinctly under par. Gone from riding half of the Stage Race contenders off their wheel without breaking a sweat to barely making the time cut off.

Couldnt they have just ridden so hard the one day that they were knackered the next day? I think thats just as plausible as something else more dodgy.

That's just because you haven't put on FF's thinking cap.

You should try it.

MrTapir

No tA Doctor wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

I wonder whether the dope testers are all over Sky this TdF. Some domestiques distinctly under par. Gone from riding half of the Stage Race contenders off their wheel without breaking a sweat to barely making the time cut off.

Couldnt they have just ridden so hard the one day that they were knackered the next day? I think thats just as plausible as something else more dodgy.

That's just because you haven't put on FF's thinking cap.

You should try it.

Thats rather fetching, I like the tin foil pheasant's feather too.

MrTapir

Anyway if Sky are dodgy, you have to look at Quintana: rode everyone off his wheel with 40k to go, got called back to help Valverde then finished with Contador, looking fairly comfortable. Well dodge.

Vino'sGhost

Above The Cows wrote:

It's alright, there's another controversy now, we can forget Sky doping at least until Froome wins the TT by a minute. The new controversy is Cav's new policy of intentionally taking out other people's lead out men, this will take up discussion for at least the remainder of the evening.

Oooooops can we get back to froome now?

Vino'sGhost

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/539351/fdj-trainer-chris-froome-s-performance-looks-legitimate.html

Doesn't convince me either way

ms_tree

Pross wrote:

Interesting little piece on ITV's rest day show. Even Kimmage sounded sane and reasonable. Good points made by all 3 (Brailsford, Kimmage and Millar) from varying perspectives. Was also good to see Imlach raising the Armstrong issue - Phil & Paul have probably taken him of their Christmas card lists.

I thought this was interesting as well - Kimmage came across as quite normal! Not keen on Brailsford but I must be mellowing as I was nodding when David Millar was speaking. He made a lot of sense.

rich_pcp

Is all this talk a result of people not believing that the blood passport would show up any irregularities in Froome?
I can't remember if Di Luca and Santambrogio were targeted because of irregularities in the BP or because they were riding like juiced demons.

DeadCalm

Vino'sGhost wrote:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/539351/fdj-trainer-chris-froome-s-performance-looks-legitimate.html

Doesn't convince me either way

Yes. I saw that. It's interesting to see how Cycling Weekly have twisted what Grappe has said (basically that you can't categorically say that Froome is a doper based on his performances) into 'Chris Froome's performance looks legitimate'.

Rob Noall

Can someone explain to this long time lurker and Cat 3 nobody how Vayer's model takes account of temperature, wind direction, road surface etc. etc. etc. (Never mind the rather pertinent question as to where to the metre does the timing start and finish and what roadworks have changed corners, gradients and overall distances year-to- year!).

From my own strava times on the London Olympic lap I delivered massive improvements to my PB's on every segment where new tarmac was laid. Like 10%+ better in an immediate step change. I guess new tarmac is a regular feature of TdF climbs although not every year they ride the iconic climbs, which suffer a fair amount of surface damage every winter. (So are we comparing like-with-like?).

Furthermore riding the same Cat 3/4 climb dozens on time in roughly the same power output (± 5%) my time varies by ± 10-15%, solely depending on temperature and wind direction as far as I can tell.

Not to suggest proper measurement of these things isn't long overdue, but right now it is highly implausible to me that Vayer, Tucker or anyone else playing with these models can get anywhere near enough accuracy to claim fair or foul with any scientific credibility. (To be fair Tucker I think makes this point himself but claims that if you compare enough riders on enough climbs on a 3 week tour you iron out any variences. I'm not sure if you don't risk compounding errors but the scietists on here can soon put me right, hopefully in short order, rather than geological time).

Going forwards is it not a good idea that the UCI (or insert alternative trustworthy body) should get GPS, heart rate, power data off every rider, on every Km of every stage, just like that other respected body governing F1 the FIA gets access to all teams' telemetry data in every race. Over time combined with the biometric passport a database will be built up which should really show who is clean or who is cheating?

And turning to the question:

Are Sky [Insert any Team] dopers? I don't know. I hope not. If they are I hope they get caught.

r0bh

Rob Noall wrote:

Can someone explain to this long time lurker and Cat 3 nobody how Vayer's model takes account of temperature, wind direction, road surface etc. etc. etc. (Never mind the rather pertinent question as to where to the metre does the timing start and finish and what roadworks have changed corners, gradients and overall distances year-to- year!).

It doesn't. And therein lies the problem.

frisbee

If he's estimating power from speed, how does he take into account aerodynamic drag? It sounds like the fudge factor to end all fudge factors.

RichN95.

Vayer's method takes into account two factors: How much are they paying me and what number do they want? Unlike the Science for Sport guys and Veetoo, he's never revealed a number he wasn't paid for.

Macaloon

This is a fantastic read on the topic of estimating power outputs and extrapolating to physiology. Good interviews with the likes of Kerrison...
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2013/07/can-performance-be-used-as-an-indicator-of-doping/

RichN95.

If I was Froome (and clean) here is what I would do:

State in a post stage conference that you think that comparing data is worthless but testing is the key and in particular retro-active testing. State that there should be more of it. Then pledge all his cut of the prize money from the Tour to WADA, specifically and solely, for the retro-active testing of his samples, both now and in the future.

Do that and there's not a lot of comeback from the doubters.

alihisgreat

RichN95 wrote:

If I was Froome (and clean) here is what I would do:

State in a post stage conference that you think that comparing data is worthless but testing is the key and in particular retro-active testing. State that there should be more of it. Then pledge all his cut of the prize money from the Tour to WADA, specifically and solely, for the retro-active testing of his samples, both now and in the future.

Do that and there's not a lot of comeback from the doubters.

Michelle won't be too pleased.. might have to downgrade the wedding

RichN95.

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

If I was Froome (and clean) here is what I would do:

State in a post stage conference that you think that comparing data is worthless but testing is the key and in particular retro-active testing. State that there should be more of it. Then pledge all his cut of the prize money from the Tour to WADA, specifically and solely, for the retro-active testing of his samples, both now and in the future.

Do that and there's not a lot of comeback from the doubters.

Michelle won't be too pleased.. might have to downgrade the wedding

Pah! Just do a couple of extra crits.

Macaloon

It's a great idea. Although it won't thin the herd of zombie zealots it stands a chance of changing the story for a day. I'll make sure Michelle sees this.

Bo Duke

RichN95 wrote:

If I was Froome (and clean) here is what I would do:

State in a post stage conference that you think that comparing data is worthless but testing is the key and in particular retro-active testing. State that there should be more of it. Then pledge all his cut of the prize money from the Tour to WADA, specifically and solely, for the retro-active testing of his samples, both now and in the future.

Do that and there's not a lot of comeback from the doubters.

I thought under our law you were innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around?

How can folks feel outraged about Cav having p!ss thrown on him but think the constant debate about Froome doping doesn't affect him? He's not a LA terrorizing others to hide his guilt, he's simply saying 'I don't dope'. Double standards guys, these personal attacks have to stop.

I'd also have thought seeing yesterday's news about mass positive test on Turkish athletes that teams and individual riders would have realized by now that if they dope, they will get caught. It might take a couple of seasons but sport testing is rapidly moving forward.

Time to move on and congratulate Froomie for showing how clean riders can dominate the Tour.

salsiccia1

Serious, genuine questions to those who think Froome/Sky are doping:

Do you think Sky are dodgy and no-one else?
Why do you continue to watch/comment on a sport which you feel is fraudulent and has been for a large part of the last 25 years?

epc06

Salsiccia1 wrote:

Serious, genuine questions to those who think Froome/Sky are doping:

Do you think Sky are dodgy and no-one else?
Why do you continue to watch/comment on a sport which you feel is fraudulent and has been for a large part of the last 25 years?

Perhaps they love the sport/spectacle of prefessional cycling but have been watching for last 25 years and are skeptical...once bitten twice shy and all that! (In this case a 100 times bitten)

ddraver

Hmmm but Salsiccia's point is that they re only concerned about being bitten by Sky...

dish_dash

EPC06 wrote:

Salsiccia1 wrote:

Serious, genuine questions to those who think Froome/Sky are doping:

Do you think Sky are dodgy and no-one else?
Why do you continue to watch/comment on a sport which you feel is fraudulent and has been for a large part of the last 25 years?

Perhaps they love the sport/spectacle of prefessional cycling but have been watching for last 25 years and are skeptical...once bitten twice shy and all that! (In this case a 100 times bitten)

But skeptical of what? Every winner, the whole sport, or just selective names/teams? I'm fine with skeptical - take the view then that they are all on the juice and provide a spectacle that we enjoy.

But it's this slightly confused approach where some performances are fetted, while selective others are there for endless inuendo and speculation. And more often than not, the known dodgy histories and performances are brushed aside in favour of the gossip.

Cycling (and most sports) throughout it's history has always seen phases of dominant performance. Does that make it dull? At time yes, but that's part of following the sport, the ebs and the flows, seeing who is dominating and watching for who is coming up and spotting when the old legends begin to falter. But there will never be an ideal, eh?

frenchfighter

Vino'sGhost wrote:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/539351/fdj-trainer-chris-froome-s-performance-looks-legitimate.html

Doesn't convince me either way

Decent read. Interesting that he says: The hotter is gets the harder it is to reach and maintain really high power outputs, as on Saturday it was ridiculously hot. Sweat was dripping off the riders even the Spanish ones. Which is just one more thing to add to the list against Froome.