Crystael posted:

For anyone who regularly rides/races with a HRM monitor (as I do, as well as a number of others in this thread), a delay or lag in heart rate is normal - if you put in a big attack (incidentally 2 seconds at 1000w isn't a big deal - I can do that), then you wouldn't see that reflected in the heart rate until roughly 10 seconds later.

However, the heart rate barely changing in his attacks is really odd. I've no idea what that could indicate, doping or otherwise. I can only think that he must have been riding close to his max heart rate already, and therefore even a big attack would barely raise that. Being able to ride that close to max heart rate for so long is pretty strange, though, but does it indicate doping? I don't know.

The problem is, we've not got anything to compare it with. As the Science of Sport post said, transparency cannot be a bad thing - we simply don't know, or have a representative sample of what an elite cyclist's data climbing Ventoux should look like. What I do know is that 388w for the duration of Ventoux is, on the surface, a legitimate figure.

I would love to see power and heart rate data overlays during live broadcasts and, if teams have nothing to hide, I don't see why they wouldn't allow it (well there are reasons, but in the interests of transparency I think they should forsake them).

At the very least this is yet another Sky PR disaster!

he1ixx posted:

Good post. I also considered that is HR/power telemetry tech from 2003 so who knows how good that was. If I get spikes and lags with my HR monitor in 2015 with brand new tech, I can imagine it was much less accurate over short bursts back then. I don't know what any of this means but it is funny to watch how much people hate Froome in here. I definitely don't get cycling threads.

he1ixx posted:

I definitely don't get cycling threads.

he1ixx posted:

Good post. I also considered that is HR/power telemetry tech from 2003 so who knows how good that was. If I get spikes and lags with my HR monitor in 2015 with brand new tech, I can imagine it was much less accurate over short bursts back then. I don't know what any of this means but it is funny to watch how much people hate Froome in here. I definitely don't get cycling threads.

serious gaylord posted:

This is the year he gets done isnt it?

They should probably grab Contadors data too, that would be an interesting comparison.

quote:

Physiology
Froome appears to have a physiology superior to fellow athletes. His resting heart rate is as low as 29 beats per minute, while his 30-minute power output in the peak form before winning the 2013 Tour de France was 459 watts.[137]

Loving Africa Chaps posted:

Vaughters is saying his V02 Max must be in excess of 90ml/kg/min

CAT INTERCEPTOR posted:

It's from 2013.

Skarsnik posted:

Lol if you are not literally making GBS threads yourself with pure anger that someone is obviously doping in a field full of people doping

Unless it's a rider everyone likes then it's ok

vikingstrike posted:

It's from the last time he won the Tour.... Regardless of him being a doper or not what about his racing is fun to watch to you? Ultimately you want to be entertained and he's just boring to watch. This one data point doesn't crucify him, it's just odd. If there was transparency with the sports data it would be much easier to see how much of an outlier it is in perspective.


Look at the science of sports stuff on their website. Thy have some posts up from when Contador had that crazy climb in 2009.

serious gaylord posted:

Barguil looks like hes just done his collar bone. Didn't see how he went down.

Edit: he was being a fanny, just road rash.

Hegay posted:

Vimeo mirror of the clip that was taken down

https://vimeo.com/133412409

Paddyb posted:

Lmbo, I forgot about the guy with the wild boar under his arm.

he1ixx posted:

quote:

Among other suspicious revelations in the news about Froome's Ventoux climb were revelations about Froome's testing history at Sky.

In an article in "The Guardian", linked earlier in this thread, it is stated that Team Sky has never tested Froome's V02 max. "Team Sky have never measured Froome's VO2Max – his maximal level of oxygen intake during exercise – but [Frederic] Grappe concludes that this must be "close to currently known physiological limits …"(http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/jul/18/team-sky-chris-froome-data).
It goes without saying that it would be malpractice for Team Sky Management to contract a rider with as varied a history as Froome's, without a full battery of physiological tests, including tests of his VO2 max. How else could Team Sky identified the Bilharzia-addled Barloworld rider as a potential contributor, let alone future star, without this crucial information? Shouldn't Froome have since undergone multiple VO2 max tests at Team Sky?

Hegay posted:

Rewatching Froome seated blasting by Quintana makes me so angry lol

Withnail posted:

Hold on a sec. Is someone proposing the best athletes in the world have really good physiology?

Hegay posted:

Looked more like his knee

Gibbo posted:

If frooome was so biologically superior, why does he basically not race anything else the year round? Does a gt tune up race, a gt, and that's about it. You hardly hear his name anywhere else.

goatface posted:

When are they hoping to catch the break, about 1/3 of the way up the climb?