Le Tour 2015

[taylorsworkrate]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jul/21/team-sky-chris-froome-performance-data-stage-10

It appears that Pierre Sallet, the French doctor of physiology was either knowingly lying, or woefully incompetent at his job when on Sunday night he calculated Froomes power in watts as 7.04 per kilogram

[simon ward 50]

Never mind all this!

Did anyone see Geraint Thomas spectacular crash yesterday? How he got up I do not know. Hard as nails these road race cyclists!

[aj2k77]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jul/21/team-sky-chris-froome-performance-data-stage-10

It appears that Pierre Sallet, the French doctor of physiology was either knowingly lying, or woefully incompetent at his job when on Sunday night he calculated Froomes power in watts as 7.04 per kilogram

Lying more than likely.

Thomas' crash, I don't think I've ever seen a pro ride in to a lamppost before! Balls of steel man, riding down mountains overtaking motor bikes. Not for me. I like going up, not so much going down. At least if I fall off I know I'm only going 5mph if it's uphill.

[aj2k77]

I see Sky released some of Chris' stage 10 data today. In the words of Kimmage, it's a complete and utter mess.

[Dave Cooper please]

Kimmage really has a bee in his bonnet about Froome and Sky doesn't he, it's "damned if you do...." with him.

Sky don't release data - it's because they are doping.
Sky release data - Yeah, but it doesn't prove they aren't doping.
He might be right, but at the moment he just sounds bitter.

As far as most analysts are saying (and I admit I've not looked too hard at the media stories so far), Froome was within the realms of what should be possible on that climb and well below the output of the likes of Armstrong and Pantani when they were EPO'd to the eyeballs, and of course technology has improved since then so gains will be made anyway.

[SteveN]

 Froome's autobiography 'The Climb' (a good read) gives a good account of his early days in cycling and how he developed as a rider.  Seems to me that some are reluctant to acknowledge that what he has achieved is through hard work as well as the benefits that Sky provide.

Good luck to the man I hope he is still in yellow in Paris.

[aj2k77]

Kimmage really has a bee in his bonnet about Froome and Sky doesn't he, it's "damned if you do...." with him.

Sky don't release data - it's because they are doping.
Sky release data - Yeah, but it doesn't prove they aren't doping.
He might be right, but at the moment he just sounds bitter.

As far as most analysts are saying (and I admit I've not looked too hard at the media stories so far), Froome was within the realms of what should be possible on that climb and well below the output of the likes of Armstrong and Pantani when they were EPO'd to the eyeballs, and of course technology has improved since then so gains will be made anyway.

Dave you must not have been listening to Kimmage for the last decade. He's asked for relevant numbers to be put out. Not just from Froome, the whole of cycling needs to do it. Releasing average cadence and obviously incorrect numbers from stage 10, it's useless for the overall picture.

Technology hasn't improved much btw. UCI puts a limit on what changes can be made.

I'll leave it at that though, never ending circles. Everyone believes what they want to believe, so we can just enjoy watching what remains of the tour.

[taylorsworkrate]

I actually feel a bit sorry for Sky (bloody hell, never thought I'd say that!)

Surely it's impractical for Sky to release all their data, exactly in the same way that Villa couldn't make their scouting reports on their opponents publicly known.

They can't be expected to give all the other teams a blueprint of how to beat them?

[Meanwood Villa]

Been finding this tour a bit dull really, I want Froome to win but it'd be good to see him put under a bit of pressure. He's been snuffing out attacks so easily.

[Dante Lavelli]

Kimmage really has a bee in his bonnet about Froome and Sky doesn't he, it's "damned if you do...." with him.

Sky don't release data - it's because they are doping.
Sky release data - Yeah, but it doesn't prove they aren't doping.
He might be right, but at the moment he just sounds bitter.

As far as most analysts are saying (and I admit I've not looked too hard at the media stories so far), Froome was within the realms of what should be possible on that climb and well below the output of the likes of Armstrong and Pantani when they were EPO'd to the eyeballs, and of course technology has improved since then so gains will be made anyway.

Dave you must not have been listening to Kimmage for the last decade. He's asked for relevant numbers to be put out. Not just from Froome, the whole of cycling needs to do it. Releasing average cadence and obviously incorrect numbers from stage 10, it's useless for the overall picture.

Technology hasn't improved much btw. UCI puts a limit on what changes can be made.

I'll leave it at that though, never ending circles. Everyone believes what they want to believe, so we can just enjoy watching what remains of the tour.

aj2k77 - I disagree with your opinion - currently - but I appreciate what you have to say.  I'm speaking for myself here, obviously, but I think you opinion is very relevant to the thread and you should not censor it.

[aj2k77]

That last climb yesterday looked crazy from the air, like a mini Alpe D'huez packed in to 2 and a bit miles. Beautiful, I love how every year new climbs are found.

[simon ward 50]

Bit of a dicey stage today!

[ian c.]

Naughty Nibali, attacking as Froome had a mechanical.

[aj2k77]

No love lost between those two it seems. I think next year we will see a stronger Nibali , this defeat wont sit well with him.

[SteveN]

Froome!  Really pleased for him, had to really dig deep today.