Giro d'Italia / Tour de France Cycling thread 2013

[Dave Cooper please]

Well Sky have provided all the training data for all of their riders to the UCI to show how they are achieving the results they are getting so if there's anything untoward it should come out.
Some people are never going to be convinced that a TDF winner can be clean, that's the legacy Armstrong et al have left the sport to carry I suppose.

[aj2k77]

Surely its not just about how big they are, its power to weight.  If he has less baggage to cart around then he wont have to be so extremely powerful.  Triathlon competitors dont tend to be big bastards, just incredibly fit, and they have to use a varying amount of mucsles.  Fair play to Froome, and for what its worth, i think he is clean.  The step change in mentality, and the huge policing in the sport now is the evidence I would quote.

Power to weight doesn't matter in flat time trials, it's only pure power output. Weight comes into it uphill with gravity playing the major factor.

[aj2k77]

Well Sky have provided all the training data for all of their riders to the UCI to show how they are achieving the results they are getting so if there's anything untoward it should come out.
Some people are never going to be convinced that a TDF winner can be clean, that's the legacy Armstrong et al have left the sport to carry I suppose.

I just don't believe anything to do with Froome. Backstory, blood data, the lot. It's extremely rare for a 27 year old to appear out of nowhere and be a world beater, there's normally some kind of talent and progression from a young age. I've only been following cycling since 93 and the times when someone has appeared with no track record and tore it up they've been doped to the eyeballs.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be wrong but I've ended up so cynical with the sport.

[paul_e]

Surely its not just about how big they are, its power to weight.  If he has less baggage to cart around then he wont have to be so extremely powerful.  Triathlon competitors dont tend to be big bastards, just incredibly fit, and they have to use a varying amount of mucsles.  Fair play to Froome, and for what its worth, i think he is clean.  The step change in mentality, and the huge policing in the sport now is the evidence I would quote.

Power to weight doesn't matter in flat time trials, it's only pure power output. Weight comes into it uphill with gravity playing the major factor.

Weight always matters, it just matters more when you're climbing, it's fairly basic physics, the energy required to move object x from a to b changes based on the weight of the object, being on a bike doesn't alter that, climbing a mountain just means you add a multiplier for gravity.

Efficiency is the key to success in cycling, getting the maximum speed for the least possible effort.  Team Sky and the UK athletics Cycling teams have based their entire training regime around minor changes for maximum reward with their entire lifestyle in the buildup to and during major events.  They've got set sleeping patterns and diets (including water intake), they have every second of their training monitored to pick out technical inefficiencies and they 'share the load' in the peloton better than any other team in the tour.  The team leader has a 'mate' (Froome was Wiggo's) whose job is to help him up the hills and lead the charge to close down breakaways.

[hipkiss92]

Well Sky have provided all the training data for all of their riders to the UCI to show how they are achieving the results they are getting so if there's anything untoward it should come out.
Some people are never going to be convinced that a TDF winner can be clean, that's the legacy Armstrong et al have left the sport to carry I suppose.

I just don't believe anything to do with Froome. Backstory, blood data, the lot. It's extremely rare for a 27 year old to appear out of nowhere and be a world beater, there's normally some kind of talent and progression from a young age. I've only been following cycling since 93 and the times when someone has appeared with no track record and tore it up they've been doped to the eyeballs.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be wrong but I've ended up so cynical with the sport.

He's not exactly come out of nowhere though? This was his fourth top-4 finish in a grand tour.

And don't forget he suffered from bilharzia when he was 24, when you would normally expect a cyclist to appear.

[Dave Cooper please]

I just don't believe anything to do with Froome. Backstory, blood data, the lot. It's extremely rare for a 27 year old to appear out of nowhere and be a world beater, there's normally some kind of talent and progression from a young age. I've only been following cycling since 93 and the times when someone has appeared with no track record and tore it up they've been doped to the eyeballs.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be wrong but I've ended up so cynical with the sport.

Just because you hadn't heard of him until last year doesn't mean he just appeared out of nowhere!
He's been a professional for six years and spent his youth cycling up and down mountains in southern Africa.
A lot of the reason he didn't get too many wins in his early professional career is he suffered from Bilharzia, a parasitic blood disease contracted in Kenya, look it up. *EDIT* as Hipkiss said already!

[SteveN]

If Froome and/or Sky are cheating then they are doing it brilliantly in order to avoid detection.

Top riders are tested in and out of competition more than any other sport, I have no doubt that Froome and the vast majority of the peleton are clean with just a few rogues and rascals left.

I enjoy the sport more than ever in that belief.

[aj2k77]

I just don't believe anything to do with Froome. Backstory, blood data, the lot. It's extremely rare for a 27 year old to appear out of nowhere and be a world beater, there's normally some kind of talent and progression from a young age. I've only been following cycling since 93 and the times when someone has appeared with no track record and tore it up they've been doped to the eyeballs.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be wrong but I've ended up so cynical with the sport.

Just because you hadn't heard of him until last year doesn't mean he just appeared out of nowhere!
He's been a professional for six years and spent his youth cycling up and down mountains in southern Africa.
A lot of the reason he didn't get too many wins in his early professional career is he suffered from Bilharzia, a parasitic blood disease contracted in Kenya, look it up. *EDIT* as Hipkiss said already!

Don't believe the Bilharzia tale. Would fit in perfectly as a cover story for a dodgy bio passport.
He's been pro for 6 years and sucked for four of them. Joined sky and found the magic ingredient. Same as Wiggins. How at such a late age did he suddenly learn to climb? It's not something you can learn to do, like perfect a freekick through practice, it's in your biological make up.

No one has adequately explained how super skinny riders like Froome and Wiggins can beat monsters like Cancellara in flat time trials yet.

It reminds me of times when Rasmussen, Pantani, Virenque, Mancebo, Sevilla, etc really skinny guys who  time trialled with the best and outclimbed everyone else.

Look at Ryder Hesjedal in this years giro, someone I believe is cleaner than most. He lost a lot of weight beforehand to combat Nibali and Wiggins, and also ended up losing a lot of Power too. How do Froome and Wiggins put out monstrous power outputs at those weights?

[SteveN]

How do Froome and Wiggins put out monstrous power outputs at those weights?

[/quote]

Bloody hard work and sacrifice, which is why I doubt you will see Wiggins going for the Tour or the Vuelta again.

[lovejoy]

The problem is they can't win either way. I think Armstrong trotted out every excuse under the sun and so has made us all sceptical. Shame on him.

[aj2k77]

How do Froome and Wiggins put out monstrous power outputs at those weights?

Bloody hard work and sacrifice, which is why I doubt you will see Wiggins going for the Tour or the Vuelta again.
[/quote]

Sounds like a Lanceism to me.

''What am I on? My bike busting my ass, 6 hours a day.''

Are you not at all sceptical with regards to Wiggo that he became a top tier climber in his 30's? There's many examples of this happening before. Unforuntaley they've all been busted since.

[aj2k77]

Surely its not just about how big they are, its power to weight.  If he has less baggage to cart around then he wont have to be so extremely powerful.  Triathlon competitors dont tend to be big bastards, just incredibly fit, and they have to use a varying amount of mucsles.  Fair play to Froome, and for what its worth, i think he is clean.  The step change in mentality, and the huge policing in the sport now is the evidence I would quote.

Power to weight doesn't matter in flat time trials, it's only pure power output. Weight comes into it uphill with gravity playing the major factor.

Weight always matters, it just matters more when you're climbing, it's fairly basic physics, the energy required to move object x from a to b changes based on the weight of the object, being on a bike doesn't alter that, climbing a mountain just means you add a multiplier for gravity.

Efficiency is the key to success in cycling, getting the maximum speed for the least possible effort.  Team Sky and the UK athletics Cycling teams have based their entire training regime around minor changes for maximum reward with their entire lifestyle in the buildup to and during major events.  They've got set sleeping patterns and diets (including water intake), they have every second of their training monitored to pick out technical inefficiencies and they 'share the load' in the peloton better than any other team in the tour.  The team leader has a 'mate' (Froome was Wiggo's) whose job is to help him up the hills and lead the charge to close down breakaways.

Please don't tell me all these little extras like Wiggo using his own pillows and warming down more than others has led to him being able to keep pace with a doped to the gills Contador, Schleck and Armstrong in the mountains in 09.

We've  heard it all before anyway, those who believe will believe no matter what and those who don't won't accept any evidence either.

Cycling for me is a broken sport until those that were involved in Omerta and systematic drug use are no longer associated with the sport. From team managers, Soigneurs to the President it's still 90% the same faces.

[paul_e]

There's no point discussing this, you've clearly decided that both of them must be on drugs and will forever view them in that light.  That's a pretty sad state of affairs given there is no evidence to suggest either has ever done anything wrong (lance had rumours for years, as did mostof the other high profile dopers).

If you don't think small changes can make a big difference then you don't believe it, doesn't stop it being true.

[peter w]

Just because someone is built like a brick shithouse doesn't mean they have endurance. They are suited to shorter distances and bursts of power. Its why its possible to see Mo Farah beat Usain Bolt over 600 metres.

With Froome he wasn't at a team like Sky - a professional team whose techniques were sneered at but now mostly copied. Peter Withe was a nobody until he joined Villa and fit. Farah, as mentioned has come good over the last couple of years. Jonathon Edwards was almost 30 when he started breaking records and winning world titles  and 34 for an olympic title.

There are countless people who don't obtain brilliance immediately. Doesn't mean its drugs.

[aj2k77]

There's no point discussing this, you've clearly decided that both of them must be on drugs and will forever view them in that light.  That's a pretty sad state of affairs given there is no evidence to suggest either has ever done anything wrong (lance had rumours for years, as did mostof the other high profile dopers).

If you don't think small changes can make a big difference then you don't believe it, doesn't stop it being true.

Yes, it is a sad state of affairs. It hasn't been innocent until proven guilty for years in cycling now.

Clean riders posting times up climbs as fast as or very close to well known dopers historical times does not look good at all.

Although I don't go in for cross sport comparison Peter Withe wasn't exactly a nobody, being a  1 in 3 striker in the top flight, Jonathan Edwards had won International medals at 23 and well Mo Farah, I don't believe he's clean either :O. Froome has Zero reputation for anything before finishing 2nd in a grand tour and Wiggins becomes a climber at the grand old age of 30 after both pedalled square wheels up even small hills for years.

Cycling and most other sports aren't comparable so please don't bother posting more 30 somethings who ended up winning something. Genetic potential at the top level of cycling is massively important. That's why you see thoroughbreds winning from a young age.

Sky didn't invent modern cycling and are no more professional than the majority of the other continental teams, they train just as hard and are just as cutting edge. It's media baloney to suggest otherwise. Sky have employed more  than a few shady characters with bad links to the past, just like everyone else has and as usual it will come down to who has the most expensive program.

Anyway it's pointless arguing about cycling, the ''sport'' has become a charade and is nowhere near to sorting itself out of it's own mess yet.