Are sky clean or not?
Comments
-
If this thread goes on much longer we will have to update the BR army:
I've always wondered what FF would look like in that. A terrible omission in my view...0 -
I've always wondered what FF would look like in that. A terrible omission in my view...
Or on a bad day:
Contador is the Greatest0 -
I was thinking more this for FF....
Napoleon, don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter.0 -
0 -
Contador's BR Army:
8)"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
If the riders are the same weight, then yes.
It's W/kg - weight is already taken into account.
Quite. The bloke has his own agenda, which is to gain publicity (and admiration), nothing else.
And he professes to be an expert.
Schoolboy error from a massive fraud.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19661333#p19661333]Blazing Saddles[/url] wrote:If anybody is in any real doubt as to just how objective Monsieur Vayer isn't, look no further than here, when a French rider breaks a climbing record set by a known doper:
https://www.twitter.com/festinaboy/status/611233845858435072"
Suddenly, instead of a precise number, we get, wait for it, a w/kg calculation with a 0.3 watt error factor allowance.
Even allowing for the fact he's used a slower time than posted on "Climbing Records", by my rudimentary calculations (and others) his mean figure is also 0.3w/kg on the low side.
To cap it off, he now justifies this by proclaiming it is the result of a tailwind.
Not attempting to cast any doubt on Pinot, just highlighting how this guy operates.
Why don't you reply to his tweet asking him? I would do, but my Twitter is in my business name, Music To Your Ears, which is probably unwise.0 -
It's worth finding a couple of hours to listen to the Cycling Podcast Friends Dopers Special. The interviews with Cookson and Vayer were interesting. Cookson did his Monster's Inc tester's under the bed act, and talked of possible ethics committee follow-up to some redacted CIRC stories. Vayer's main sources appear to be rider's he's looked at.
http://thecyclingpodcast.com/podcast/special-no-7-the-pirc-podcast-independent-reform-commission
Vayer is a chump. He tweeted figures from Pra-Loup yesterday at 6.65W/Kg for Quintana and 6.45W/Kg for Froome.
https://twitter.com/festinaboy/status/624105288073904128
Does he have a clue what he is talking about? If so can someone explain these 'official' figures to me as currently they make no sense.
Those numbers are so obviously wrong it's funny. For a start, shouldn't two riders who do the same climb in the same time have the same W/kg? I thought that was the central premise that inferring doping from performance was based upon. And has anyone told Vayer that Froome and Quintana climbed Pra Loup slower than TJVG did in the Dauphine?
Presumably the weight of the bike, bottles etc isn't taken in to the W/Kg calculation, so if Quintana is 10Kg lighter than Froome but his bike weighs the same as Froome's then he'll need a higher W/Kg to go at the same speed as Froome.
Quintana's power =6.65 X 57Kg (presuming 10Kg lighter) = 379.05W
Froome's Power = 6.45 x 67Kg = 432.15W
If you add 6.8Kg to each rider and work back you get an overall package W/Kg value which is much closer; which is what you'd expect if they are going the same speed.
Quintana's rider/bike package 379.05 / 65.8 = 5.75W/Kg
Froome's rider/bike package 432.15 / 75.8 = 5.70W/Kg
If Quintana weighs 59.7 Kg (rather than the 57 I've guessed, and Froome is 67) then the numbers balance up.0 -
Star Gate Atlantis?0 -
I've noticed Ross seems to be taking a different tact now. It's only people who believe Sky who think power proves anything. He's built his case on the very solid foundation of whats happened in the past will happen again.
I think Rich's theory that some of these people missed out on Armstrong or Festina and are desperate to experience it.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Apart from made up stuff from Vayer, Digger is now tweeting links to the Asylum as "proof" against Sky.0
-
It's worth finding a couple of hours to listen to the Cycling Podcast Friends Dopers Special. The interviews with Cookson and Vayer were interesting. Cookson did his Monster's Inc tester's under the bed act, and talked of possible ethics committee follow-up to some redacted CIRC stories. Vayer's main sources appear to be rider's he's looked at.
http://thecyclingpodcast.com/podcast/special-no-7-the-pirc-podcast-independent-reform-commission
Vayer is a chump. He tweeted figures from Pra-Loup yesterday at 6.65W/Kg for Quintana and 6.45W/Kg for Froome.
https://twitter.com/festinaboy/status/624105288073904128
Does he have a clue what he is talking about? If so can someone explain these 'official' figures to me as currently they make no sense.
Those numbers are so obviously wrong it's funny. For a start, shouldn't two riders who do the same climb in the same time have the same W/kg? I thought that was the central premise that inferring doping from performance was based upon. And has anyone told Vayer that Froome and Quintana climbed Pra Loup slower than TJVG did in the Dauphine?
Presumably the weight of the bike, bottles etc isn't taken in to the W/Kg calculation, so if Quintana is 10Kg lighter than Froome but his bike weighs the same as Froome's then he'll need a higher W/Kg to go at the same speed as Froome.
Quintana's power =6.65 X 57Kg (presuming 10Kg lighter) = 379.05W
Froome's Power = 6.45 x 67Kg = 432.15W
If you add 6.8Kg to each rider and work back you get an overall package W/Kg value which is much closer; which is what you'd expect if they are going the same speed.
Quintana's rider/bike package 379.05 / 65.8 = 5.75W/Kg
Froome's rider/bike package 432.15 / 75.8 = 5.70W/Kg
If Quintana weighs 59.7 Kg (rather than the 57 I've guessed, and Froome is 67) then the numbers balance up.
Isn't aero also going to still have some impact at the speeds these guys are climbing at (20km/h or whatever it is)? So if Froome is better protected on the climbs (which it looks like he has been), he would have had to expend marginally less energy for the same speed which might explain a small difference in w/kg?0 -
It's worth finding a couple of hours to listen to the Cycling Podcast Friends Dopers Special. The interviews with Cookson and Vayer were interesting. Cookson did his Monster's Inc tester's under the bed act, and talked of possible ethics committee follow-up to some redacted CIRC stories. Vayer's main sources appear to be rider's he's looked at.
http://thecyclingpodcast.com/podcast/special-no-7-the-pirc-podcast-independent-reform-commission
Vayer is a chump. He tweeted figures from Pra-Loup yesterday at 6.65W/Kg for Quintana and 6.45W/Kg for Froome.
https://twitter.com/festinaboy/status/624105288073904128
Does he have a clue what he is talking about? If so can someone explain these 'official' figures to me as currently they make no sense.
Those numbers are so obviously wrong it's funny. For a start, shouldn't two riders who do the same climb in the same time have the same W/kg? I thought that was the central premise that inferring doping from performance was based upon. And has anyone told Vayer that Froome and Quintana climbed Pra Loup slower than TJVG did in the Dauphine?
Presumably the weight of the bike, bottles etc isn't taken in to the W/Kg calculation, so if Quintana is 10Kg lighter than Froome but his bike weighs the same as Froome's then he'll need a higher W/Kg to go at the same speed as Froome.
Quintana's power =6.65 X 57Kg (presuming 10Kg lighter) = 379.05W
Froome's Power = 6.45 x 67Kg = 432.15W
If you add 6.8Kg to each rider and work back you get an overall package W/Kg value which is much closer; which is what you'd expect if they are going the same speed.
Quintana's rider/bike package 379.05 / 65.8 = 5.75W/Kg
Froome's rider/bike package 432.15 / 75.8 = 5.70W/Kg
If Quintana weighs 59.7 Kg (rather than the 57 I've guessed, and Froome is 67) then the numbers balance up.
Exactly, the numbers presented by Vayer are fundamentally flawed due to a large number of factors they don't consider, this being one of them.0 -
It's their constant comparisons to Armstrong and US Postal, no matter how tenuous, that give the game away. Although I think for Tucker and Vayer it is entirely about the attention and being made to feel important by an unquestioning media. Vayer in particular is portrayed as everything he wants to be, but isn't.I've noticed Ross seems to be taking a different tact now. It's only people who believe Sky who think power proves anything. He's built his case on the very solid foundation of whats happened in the past will happen again.
I think Rich's theory that some of these people missed out on Armstrong or Festina and are desperate to experience it.
I think there's also an element of being shown up. In their first year Sky were widely mocked and laughed at (which they probably deserved with their hubris). Saying that you are going to produce a British Tour winner in five years invited ridicule. Doing it twice in four invited venom from those that ridiculed. No-one likes to be proved wrong, especially by a smartarse.
It's nearly four years since Froome and Wiggins first made a Grand Tour podium. And despite being every doping fan's favourite target and in a social media age, all they have is dodgy maths from a PE teacher, a doctor released three years ago and Froome's progression being a little haphazard. It's all a little desperate. You can't prove a negative, but poor proof in the face of a relentless search for it is pretty convincing.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Julian Pretot on BBC news explaining the suspicion over Sky being down to them dominating and that the last team to do so was Armstrong's team. I'm hoping this race in a parallel universe has been more exciting than the one I've watched for the last week. The one I'm watching is generally 2 Sky riders, 2 Movistar, 1 Tinkoff and 1 Astana rider slogging out the final climb with a pick and mix selection of maybe 3 or 4 from about 10 others. The rest of the Sky riders are disappearing out the back along with the rest of the supporting cast as soon as any pressure gets put on. This dominant Sky team is behind wildcard Tour first timers MTN Qubeka! Which version of the race are the rest of you getting?0
-
It's worth finding a couple of hours to listen to the Cycling Podcast Friends Dopers Special. The interviews with Cookson and Vayer were interesting. Cookson did his Monster's Inc tester's under the bed act, and talked of possible ethics committee follow-up to some redacted CIRC stories. Vayer's main sources appear to be rider's he's looked at.
http://thecyclingpodcast.com/podcast/special-no-7-the-pirc-podcast-independent-reform-commission
Vayer is a chump. He tweeted figures from Pra-Loup yesterday at 6.65W/Kg for Quintana and 6.45W/Kg for Froome.
https://twitter.com/festinaboy/status/624105288073904128
Does he have a clue what he is talking about? If so can someone explain these 'official' figures to me as currently they make no sense.
Those numbers are so obviously wrong it's funny. For a start, shouldn't two riders who do the same climb in the same time have the same W/kg? I thought that was the central premise that inferring doping from performance was based upon. And has anyone told Vayer that Froome and Quintana climbed Pra Loup slower than TJVG did in the Dauphine?
Presumably the weight of the bike, bottles etc isn't taken in to the W/Kg calculation, so if Quintana is 10Kg lighter than Froome but his bike weighs the same as Froome's then he'll need a higher W/Kg to go at the same speed as Froome.
Quintana's power =6.65 X 57Kg (presuming 10Kg lighter) = 379.05W
Froome's Power = 6.45 x 67Kg = 432.15W
If you add 6.8Kg to each rider and work back you get an overall package W/Kg value which is much closer; which is what you'd expect if they are going the same speed.
Quintana's rider/bike package 379.05 / 65.8 = 5.75W/Kg
Froome's rider/bike package 432.15 / 75.8 = 5.70W/Kg
If Quintana weighs 59.7 Kg (rather than the 57 I've guessed, and Froome is 67) then the numbers balance up.
If that's the case then Quintana is always going to have a much higher number than Froome. So if Quintana beats Froome by a minute then we can all cry doper safe in the knowledge that he's pushed out 7w/kg.0 -
It's worth finding a couple of hours to listen to the Cycling Podcast Friends Dopers Special. The interviews with Cookson and Vayer were interesting. Cookson did his Monster's Inc tester's under the bed act, and talked of possible ethics committee follow-up to some redacted CIRC stories. Vayer's main sources appear to be rider's he's looked at.
http://thecyclingpodcast.com/podcast/special-no-7-the-pirc-podcast-independent-reform-commission
Vayer is a chump. He tweeted figures from Pra-Loup yesterday at 6.65W/Kg for Quintana and 6.45W/Kg for Froome.
https://twitter.com/festinaboy/status/624105288073904128
Does he have a clue what he is talking about? If so can someone explain these 'official' figures to me as currently they make no sense.
Those numbers are so obviously wrong it's funny. For a start, shouldn't two riders who do the same climb in the same time have the same W/kg? I thought that was the central premise that inferring doping from performance was based upon. And has anyone told Vayer that Froome and Quintana climbed Pra Loup slower than TJVG did in the Dauphine?
Presumably the weight of the bike, bottles etc isn't taken in to the W/Kg calculation, so if Quintana is 10Kg lighter than Froome but his bike weighs the same as Froome's then he'll need a higher W/Kg to go at the same speed as Froome.
Quintana's power =6.65 X 57Kg (presuming 10Kg lighter) = 379.05W
Froome's Power = 6.45 x 67Kg = 432.15W
If you add 6.8Kg to each rider and work back you get an overall package W/Kg value which is much closer; which is what you'd expect if they are going the same speed.
Quintana's rider/bike package 379.05 / 65.8 = 5.75W/Kg
Froome's rider/bike package 432.15 / 75.8 = 5.70W/Kg
If Quintana weighs 59.7 Kg (rather than the 57 I've guessed, and Froome is 67) then the numbers balance up.
Isn't aero also going to still have some impact at the speeds these guys are climbing at (20km/h or whatever it is)? So if Froome is better protected on the climbs (which it looks like he has been), he would have had to expend marginally less energy for the same speed which might explain a small difference in w/kg?
Yep especially if there's a headwind and that's why it's pseudoscience (posh guessing) that these fruitcakes are dabbling with. So many variables that simply cannot be considered, CDa, rolling resistance, chain line losses, how much drink and food they have in their pockets and bidons, stiffness of bike and wheels etc.0 -
That's not really the most convincing argument. MTN are high up in the team race because of getting one (and often more) riders in the key breakaways.This dominant Sky team is behind wildcard Tour first timers MTN Qubeka! Which version of the race are the rest of you getting?
Incidentally, has everyone noticed that all the climbing stages bar one have been won by the breakaway. Basically due to Sky ambling through the countryside and being allowed to. The exception being the Sky friendly 'hockey stick' stage 10, which they targeted.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Julian Pretot on BBC news explaining the suspicion over Sky being down to them dominating and that the last team to do so was Armstrong's team. I'm hoping this race in a parallel universe has been more exciting than the one I've watched for the last week. The one I'm watching is generally 2 Sky riders, 2 Movistar, 1 Tinkoff and 1 Astana rider slogging out the final climb with a pick and mix selection of maybe 3 or 4 from about 10 others. The rest of the Sky riders are disappearing out the back along with the rest of the supporting cast as soon as any pressure gets put on. This dominant Sky team is behind wildcard Tour first timers MTN Qubeka! Which version of the race are the rest of you getting?
Exactly! Take away the time bonuses and with 3'10" he's hardly "dominating" . I dread to think what Lemond and Hinault riding up the Alpe would have done to twitter had it been around then.0 -
Exactly, the numbers presented by Vayer are fundamentally flawed due to a large number of factors they don't consider, this being one of them.
It's possible that they have factored this in because the numbers are close, wiki says Quintana is 58kg, and if Froome is 68 (I've read 67 - 68) then it's almost bang on.
But tbh I'm not sure I'd give them that much credit.0 -
Julian Pretot on BBC news explaining the suspicion over Sky being down to them dominating and that the last team to do so was Armstrong's team. I'm hoping this race in a parallel universe has been more exciting than the one I've watched for the last week. The one I'm watching is generally 2 Sky riders, 2 Movistar, 1 Tinkoff and 1 Astana rider slogging out the final climb with a pick and mix selection of maybe 3 or 4 from about 10 others. The rest of the Sky riders are disappearing out the back along with the rest of the supporting cast as soon as any pressure gets put on. This dominant Sky team is behind wildcard Tour first timers MTN Qubeka! Which version of the race are the rest of you getting?
Exactly! Take away the time bonuses and with 3'10" he's hardly "dominating" . I dread to think what Lemond and Hinault riding up the Alpe would have done to twitter had it been around then.
Take away the time Quintana lost to Froome before the mountains and you're left with a 1 minute advantage over 5 mountain stages0 -
Isn't aero also going to still have some impact at the speeds these guys are climbing at (20km/h or whatever it is)?
Let's say for Chris Froome to climb Alpe d'Huez: 1100 m @ 20kph (around 40 minutes).
405 watts: 340 watts due to gravity, 20 watts rolling resistance, 45 watts wind resistance
So wind is 11% of the power. If you get a 30% benefit for riding in a group that's 3.3% of the total power. Of course that's assuming still air, with a head or tailwind it could make a bigger difference. Alpe d'huez (like many climbs) go thru a series of hairpins so it is tricky to calculate the effect of wind as direction changes the whole time.
Compare to Joe Sixpack climbing in 1h20, Of his 200 watts only 6% is due to wind.BASI Nordic Ski Instructor
Instagramme0 -
Exactly! Take away the time bonuses and with 3'10" he's hardly "dominating" . I dread to think what Lemond and Hinault riding up the Alpe would have done to twitter had it been around then.
Agree. It is not a domination in those terms - but when you see the lack of fire and aggression you can make an argument that Froome/Sky are dominating mentally. The other GCers/teams seem to scared of losing places that they ride to Sky's plan and try low risk attacks that will only work if Froome has a bad day and cooks himself. The story put out is - my team can win this for me from this position even if you were a better climber than me; and whilst the other teams fail to seek alternative tactics then this is true. What makes this worse is that Froome is the only one to taken significant time out of the others on climbs. So he is dominating them in as much that they are submitting to his game plan and playing to his rules.
Bertie knows what to do - but can't with giro-jelly-legs; if he had a full team working for him like Sky have for Froome then maybe we could see something0 -
Froome answering questions in French. Maybe if he wasn't so polite he wouldn't invite so many doping questions from hapless French hacks...
http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme-sur-route/Actualites/Chris-froome-sky-on-m-a-attaque-de-tous-les-angles-dans-ce-tour/5763870 -
You've also got to ask yourself why you are watching.
If a rider riding like Chris Froome upsets you that much, why bother watching?
Just returned from hols having been offline for 10 days and have had had only the ITV4 coverage.
Can heartily recommend going old school and watching it you did back in the day.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
I've noticed Ross seems to be taking a different tact now. It's only people who believe Sky who think power proves anything. He's built his case on the very solid foundation of whats happened in the past will happen again.
I think Rich's theory that some of these people missed out on Armstrong or Festina and are desperate to experience it.
Hey! That was my theory!"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
Julian Pretot on BBC news explaining the suspicion over Sky being down to them dominating and that the last team to do so was Armstrong's team. I'm hoping this race in a parallel universe has been more exciting than the one I've watched for the last week. The one I'm watching is generally 2 Sky riders, 2 Movistar, 1 Tinkoff and 1 Astana rider slogging out the final climb with a pick and mix selection of maybe 3 or 4 from about 10 others. The rest of the Sky riders are disappearing out the back along with the rest of the supporting cast as soon as any pressure gets put on. This dominant Sky team is behind wildcard Tour first timers MTN Qubeka! Which version of the race are the rest of you getting?
yeah the third week is looking a lot less defined than a single team domination al la 2006(which was beyond). they are all levelling up due to fatigue and froome is well past starting to feel it.
he'll hang on I think but I can see him losing time on the ape or today"If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm0 -
Of course, if Froome loses time then it will be seen as him having so much in hand he's deliberately losing it to try to deflect the suspicion. I think even if he lost the race it would be seen as a deliberate ploy by some as they only want to believe one thing.0
-
Team Sky's Dave Brailsford on the Today program addressing the doping questions. Sponsor gold.
Significant interview. Not Humphrys. They found a non-Welsh windbag to lead interrogation....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
Team Sky's Dave Brailsford on the Today program addressing the doping questions. Sponsor gold.
Significant interview. Not Humphrys. They found a non-Welsh windbag to lead interrogation.
Didn't say much though, did he? Meejah training rules again.
I miss Wiggins.0
