Sky are dopers - Oh no they're not

RichN95.

rayjay wrote:

a team sponsored by IMO one the worst and most foul organizations the world has seen.

I realise that you may be angry that they bought the rights to Game of Thrones for Sky Atlantic, but that seems a little over the top to me.

slim_boy_fat

FleshTuxedo wrote:

Can I just point out that Froome is not "the best at time trialling". Tony Martin is.

Few decent TT'ers missing this year as well.

ugo.santalucia

Paulie W wrote:

Depends what you mean by OK - Fignon, Anquetil and Gaul all sit comfortably in the Mercyx group for my money (and probably Indurain who was rarely bested in the mountains and had some pretty strong days).

What I mean is that mr Indurain was normally not dropping people up the alps... rather sitting a la Wiggins, knowing he would them hammer them in the time trial.
Fignon was not the best at TT, Anquetil was not the best of his generation up the slopes and Gaul was not the best at TT.

Zulle was as good a TTriallist as Indurain, if I remember correctly

inseine

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

Depends what you mean by OK - Fignon, Anquetil and Gaul all sit comfortably in the Mercyx group for my money (and probably Indurain who was rarely bested in the mountains and had some pretty strong days).

What I mean is that mr Indurain was normally not dropping people up the alps... rather sitting a la Wiggins, knowing he would them hammer them in the time trial.
Fignon was not the best at TT, Anquetil was not the best of his generation up the slopes and Gaul was not the best at TT.

Zulle was as good a TTriallist as Indurain, if I remember correctly

What does all this mean? Usually the best GT riders are the best climbers and TTers. Not always N°1 but among the best, like Froome. In TTs there is Martin, Dowsett, Cancellara, Wiggins....

Paulie W

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

Depends what you mean by OK - Fignon, Anquetil and Gaul all sit comfortably in the Mercyx group for my money (and probably Indurain who was rarely bested in the mountains and had some pretty strong days).

What I mean is that mr Indurain was normally not dropping people up the alps... rather sitting a la Wiggins, knowing he would them hammer them in the time trial.
Fignon was not the best at TT, Anquetil was not the best of his generation up the slopes and Gaul was not the best at TT.

Zulle was as good a TTriallist as Indurain, if I remember correctly

Gaul won 4 stages at the 1958 Tour and 3 of them were time trials (admittedly one up Mt Ventoux) - he was a pretty damn fine TTer and one of the great climbers. Fignon won several time trials in his two Tour victories beating Hinault in the process in 1984. You're argument doesnt really stand up to analysis. Froome has no more place in the first group than any of the riders I've named.

Team4Luke

whiteboytrash wrote:

Team4Luke wrote:

Training as moved on, a lot, and so to has the support behind it and of course equipment and clothing etc, just maybe Dopers were and are lazy and might not even be that physically talented, whereas we are now seeing those willing to put the work in and train to win and win clean are now just starting to beat all the ex dopers.

The roads are so much faster now as well. Cyclists can go faster.

There will come a time when bikes will be as fast as cars. But only for those who put the work in.

the quality of road surface is very influential on tyre friction in terms of overall average speed, ask any experienced time trialler. A time posted by a tour rider on a known climb could be easily bettered by others if said surface had changed/been resurfaced.

RichN95.

Paulie W wrote:

Depends what you mean by OK - Fignon, Anquetil and Gaul all sit comfortably in the Mercyx group for my money (and probably Indurain who was rarely bested in the mountains and had some pretty strong days).

Also LeMond definitely in the top category and Ullrich in 1997 form.
It's harder to find Tour winners who weren't in the top 5 in both disciplines than those that were.

ugo.santalucia

inseine wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

Depends what you mean by OK - Fignon, Anquetil and Gaul all sit comfortably in the Mercyx group for my money (and probably Indurain who was rarely bested in the mountains and had some pretty strong days).

What I mean is that mr Indurain was normally not dropping people up the alps... rather sitting a la Wiggins, knowing he would them hammer them in the time trial.
Fignon was not the best at TT, Anquetil was not the best of his generation up the slopes and Gaul was not the best at TT.

Zulle was as good a TTriallist as Indurain, if I remember correctly

What does all this mean? Usually the best GT riders are the best climbers and TTers. Not always N°1 but among the best, like Froome. In TTs there is Martin, Dowsett, Cancellara, Wiggins....

Froome virtually did the same time as Toni Martin (second plus or minus) and gave nearly 2 mniutes to Contador on a couple of occasions.
I know when it comes to Team Sky they are all Sirs and saints, but if this came out of Valverde's box of tricks how would you take it?
I still remember the moaning and Groaning when Contador did virtually the same time as Cancellara in Annecy 2009 and dropped everyone on the climbs... we all know what sort of meat he did eat at the time...
But when it comes to team Sky we are not allowed to have doubts, as Brailsford is a Sir and a Saint... therefore his riders are too
I have my doubts, unfortunately. last year's Wiggins performance was in his abilities, this year's performance isn't...
So either he is the most phenomenal athlete of his generation or he is not... simple... pointless to argue that he's riding against donkeys, as he is not... in the same way Nibali was not... it seems to nme 2013 marks the return of the Dominators... I am suspicious

Paulie W

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Froome virtually did the same time as Toni Martin (second plus or minus) and gave nearly 2 mniutes to Contador on a couple of occasions.
I know when it comes to Team Sky they are all Sirs and saints, but if this came out of Valverde's box of tricks how would you take it?
I still remember the moaning and Groaning when Contador did virtually the same time as Cancellara in Annecy 2009 and dropped everyone on the climbs... we all know what sort of meat he did eat at the time...
But when it comes to team Sky we are not allowed to have doubts, as Brailsford is a Sir and a Saint... therefore his riders are too
I have my doubts, unfortunately. last year's Wiggins performance was in his abilities, this year's performance isn't...
So either he is the most phenomenal athlete of his generation or he is not... simple... pointless to argue that he's riding against donkeys, as he is not... in the same way Nibali was not... it seems to nme 2013 marks the return of the Dominators... I am suspicious

Fine, be suspicious. That's perfectly reasonable. But dont try and back it up with some half-arsed categorising of riders!

slim_boy_fat

ugo.santalucia wrote:

inseine wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

Depends what you mean by OK - Fignon, Anquetil and Gaul all sit comfortably in the Mercyx group for my money (and probably Indurain who was rarely bested in the mountains and had some pretty strong days).

What I mean is that mr Indurain was normally not dropping people up the alps... rather sitting a la Wiggins, knowing he would them hammer them in the time trial.
Fignon was not the best at TT, Anquetil was not the best of his generation up the slopes and Gaul was not the best at TT.

Zulle was as good a TTriallist as Indurain, if I remember correctly

What does all this mean? Usually the best GT riders are the best climbers and TTers. Not always N°1 but among the best, like Froome. In TTs there is Martin, Dowsett, Cancellara, Wiggins....

Froome virtually did the same time as Toni Martin (second plus or minus) and gave nearly 2 mniutes to Contador on a couple of occasions.
I know when it comes to Team Sky they are all Sirs and saints, but if this came out of Valverde's box of tricks how would you take it?
I still remember the moaning and Groaning when Contador did virtually the same time as Cancellara in Annecy 2009 and dropped everyone on the climbs... we all know what sort of meat he did eat at the time...
But when it comes to team Sky we are not allowed to have doubts, as Brailsford is a Sir and a Saint... therefore his riders are too
I have my doubts, unfortunately. last year's Wiggins performance was in his abilities, this year's performance isn't...
So either he is the most phenomenal athlete of his generation or he is not... simple... pointless to argue that he's riding against donkeys, as he is not... in the same way Nibali was not... it seems to nme 2013 marks the return of the Dominators... I am suspicious

Does it not slightly alay your suspicions when you see the likes of Ten Dam and Mollema up there? Seems to me the other GC contenders are sub par this year. Granted, Froome does seem to be having a special tour but does the failings of others make that look more extraordinary than it is?

RichN95.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

But when it comes to team Sky we are not allowed to have doubts, as Brailsford is a Sir and a Saint... therefore his riders are too
I have my doubts, unfortunately.

You are perfectly entitled to have your doubts. But if you back up your doubts with erroneous reasoning, someone is going to call you on it.

UncleMonty

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Just visited that CN forums link a page or so back... what a scary place that is.

Haha me too, I'd seen references to the Clinic before but that was my first and last visit, their off their tit$.

RichN95.

UncleMonty wrote:

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Just visited that CN forums link a page or so back... what a scary place that is.

Haha me too, I'd seen references to the Clinic before but that was my first and last visit, their off their tit$.

I would highly recommend seeking out the work of "Cycle Chic" over there. Some of the most ill thought out looney tunes conspiracy theories you are ever likely to read. She's the one that is so batsh*t mental that even the crazy regulars think she's crazy.

Paulie W

I think there are some interesting parallels between Gaul and Froome both in their ability as climbers coupled with impressive TTing and their use of very high cadence in the mountains, normally staying in the saddle.

Runtothehills

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Paulie W wrote:

Depends what you mean by OK - Fignon, Anquetil and Gaul all sit comfortably in the Mercyx group for my money (and probably Indurain who was rarely bested in the mountains and had some pretty strong days).

What I mean is that mr Indurain was normally not dropping people up the alps... rather sitting a la Wiggins, knowing he would them hammer them in the time trial.
Fignon was not the best at TT, Anquetil was not the best of his generation up the slopes and Gaul was not the best at TT.

Zulle was as good a TTriallist as Indurain, if I remember correctly

But Indurain wasn't being dropped either - suggesting he was a stronger climber but didn't attack becasue TTs were a more certian way to get time. Wiggins gained time on all his closest rivals except Froome in the mountains as well, he didn;t attack more because he didn't need to.

There was a link somewhere on one of the other threads to the history of the time trial in the tour. I can't remember how far back they went for this stat but as they mentioned LeMond elsewhere in the article I think it was 25 years or so (I'm pretty sure it was at least 20). Anyway the only rider to win the tour in that time without coming in the top 3 in at least one time trial was Andy Schleck suggesting that if you're faster than someone uphill chances are, unless they're much bigger than you, that you're faster on the flat as well.

ugo.santalucia

Once I read a famous doping wizard doctor saying that he did draw the line around 6.1-6.2 Watt/Kg. Anything above was definitively doping, as in his experience no clean athlete can produce a higher aerobic threshold.
Anyone has any number on Froome's two winning stages to have a clue of what sort of Power/Weight ratio we are looking at?
I suppose the Alpe d'Huez ascent will give a clearer picture are the EPO times of around 38 minutes and below are well known...

disgruntledgoat

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Once I read a famous doping wizard doctor saying that he did draw the line around 6.1-6.2 Watt/Kg. Anything above was definitively doping, as in his experience no clean athlete can produce a higher aerobic threshold.
Anyone has any number on Froome's two winning stages to have a clue of what sort of Power/Weight ratio we are looking at?
I suppose the Alpe d'Huez ascent will give a clearer picture are the EPO times of around 38 minutes and below are well known...

WE haven't a clue and never will. It's all just guesswork.

slim_boy_fat

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Once I read a famous doping wizard doctor saying that he did draw the line around 6.1-6.2 Watt/Kg. Anything above was definitively doping, as in his experience no clean athlete can produce a higher aerobic threshold.
Anyone has any number on Froome's two winning stages to have a clue of what sort of Power/Weight ratio we are looking at?
I suppose the Alpe d'Huez ascent will give a clearer picture are the EPO times of around 38 minutes and below are well known...

Did you read the piece on how wind affects it? Without knowing the wind speed and direction at all points up the ascent for all times we are comparing then the times are pretty much useless.

Runtothehills

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Once I read a famous doping wizard doctor saying that he did draw the line around 6.1-6.2 Watt/Kg. Anything above was definitively doping, as in his experience no clean athlete can produce a higher aerobic threshold.
Anyone has any number on Froome's two winning stages to have a clue of what sort of Power/Weight ratio we are looking at?
I suppose the Alpe d'Huez ascent will give a clearer picture are the EPO times of around 38 minutes and below are well known...

This was posted a couple of pages ago, shows that unfortunately calculating power from ascent times is a fruitless exercise.

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com.au/2013/ ... s.html?m=1

EDIT: ninja'd ahh well, also if he was a doping wizard where did his clean athlete come from? Surely anyone at the top end of the talent range that wasn't on drugs would be quickly put on them/not be a top priority for training and reaching the top of their game under his leadership.

kleinstroker

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Froome virtually did the same time as Toni Martin (second plus or minus) and gave nearly 2 mniutes to Contador on a couple of occasions.
I know when it comes to Team Sky they are all Sirs and saints, but if this came out of Valverde's box of tricks how would you take it?
I still remember the moaning and Groaning when Contador did virtually the same time as Cancellara in Annecy 2009 and dropped everyone on the climbs... we all know what sort of meat he did eat at the time...
But when it comes to team Sky we are not allowed to have doubts, as Brailsford is a Sir and a Saint... therefore his riders are too
I have my doubts, unfortunately. last year's Wiggins performance was in his abilities, this year's performance isn't...
So either he is the most phenomenal athlete of his generation or he is not... simple... pointless to argue that he's riding against donkeys, as he is not... in the same way Nibali was not... it seems to nme 2013 marks the return of the Dominators... I am suspicious

Why is it so black and white?
Please explain why 8 of the all time top40 ventoux ascent times were done on Sunday? There's a massive increase in performance across the board, so please explain why

RichN95.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Once I read a famous doping wizard doctor saying that he did draw the line around 6.1-6.2 Watt/Kg. Anything above was definitively doping, as in his experience no clean athlete can produce a higher aerobic threshold.
Anyone has any number on Froome's two winning stages to have a clue of what sort of Power/Weight ratio we are looking at?

The estimates for Ventoux were under 6W/kg - even Vayer's. Somewhere between 5.8-6 seems to be the ball park figure. For the time trial we know that he did between 415 & 420 watts, which gives a top line figure of 6.17W/kg for 36 minutes. These fit well with Froome's power file from the 2011 Vuelta TT - probably his best TT to date (406W for about 50 minutes).

(And Aldo Sassi was the one who suggested around 6.2 - largely based on Cadel Evans - and he wasn't a doping doctor)

deejay

disgruntledgoat wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Once I read a famous doping wizard doctor saying that he did draw the line around 6.1-6.2 Watt/Kg. Anything above was definitively doping, as in his experience no clean athlete can produce a higher aerobic threshold.
Anyone has any number on Froome's two winning stages to have a clue of what sort of Power/Weight ratio we are looking at?
I suppose the Alpe d'Huez ascent will give a clearer picture are the EPO times of around 38 minutes and below are well known...

WE haven't a clue and never will. It's all just guesswork.

Yup the taliban have no idea but they still talk with authority.
In the previous posts on this thread we have seen Brailsford ask the "Media" and you, just what you require to prove the SKY team innocent. (ie they are guilty until proved innocent)
He also said the "Data" is available for all to see, so I think you should ask him on behalf of this very important forum.

I'm still scratching my head but not quite the same as 1996 or 1999 when I was very sure about the performances.

inkyfingers

Not sure if anyone has suggested it, but why don't we make this a sticky and call it The Clinic Thread or summat? All doping chat in one place?

RichN95.

inkyfingers wrote:

Not sure if anyone has suggested it, but why don't we make this a sticky and call it The Clinic Thread or summat? All doping chat in one place?

Generally there's little doping chat on this forum so it's good that we can mention doping, in context, alongside other matters without having to resort to rules and division.
It's July so you get a lot more of it than usual. There's only a few more days of it. The Tour of Poland and the Eneco Tour quickly sort things out. Few have the stomach to get through both of them.

frenchfighter

Another decent read:
http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderrepor ... the-power/

Daz555

The GC riders apart from Froome look bloody awful this year. If Contador and Evans were anywhere near their best, if Nibs was riding, and if Wiggo was here taking a minute out of Froome in the TTs I suspect Froome's performances would look less remarkable.

Froome can only beat those alongside him and to be honest this year they are universally awful.

frenchfighter

Regarding the wind:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.p ... count=5667

Note that when riders are within the lines of fans and caravans they are protected a decent amount from the wind.

I would be conservative at saying that the wind factor played a part in edging up Froome`s stats.

Daz555

frenchfighter wrote:

Regarding the wind:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.p ... count=5667

Note that when riders are within the lines of fans and caravans they are protected a decent amount from the wind.

I would be conservative at saying that the wind factor played a part in edging up Froome`s stats.

Fans and vans do not get in the way of tail winds much I'd say.

Runtothehills

frenchfighter wrote:

Another decent read:
http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderrepor ... the-power/

Not really, he seems to be advocating a world in which it's ok to dope so long as you only dope up to 430 Watts. 50% hematocrit anyone?

RichN95.

frenchfighter wrote:

Regarding the wind:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.p ... count=5667

Note that when riders are within the lines of fans and caravans they are protected a decent amount from the wind.

I would be conservative at saying that the wind factor played a part in edging up Froome`s stats.

I saw a Rogers interview and he said it was mostly cross (protected by the caravans) with some tail. Definitely not head.

He also said comparing times from different years was stupid.