Froome's lab test

laraghrider · 04-12-2015 09:57AM #1

So the results are out and so the real fun begins. Thousands of fans, journalists, scientists will be ripping it apart.

http://chrisfroome.esquire.co.uk/

I've had a read. Personally speaking I believe in the man.

DirkVoodoo · 04-12-2015 10:33AM

laraghrider wrote: »

So the results are out and so the real fun begins. Thousands of fans, journalists, scientists will be ripping it apart.

http://chrisfroome.esquire.co.uk/

I've had a read. Personally speaking I believe in the man.

Good post here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1843770&sid=93d4c8ea200b841b5c472656a128acc1#p1843770

dastardly00 · 04-12-2015 10:33AM

The article linked below is written by Ross Tucker, and was published yesterday (December 3rd) on Cyclingnews.com. It's well worth a read as a 'preview' to the lab results article in Esquire.

What to expect from Chris Froome’s physiological test data

.... one can feel some sympathy for Froome in that he will (partly justifiably) say that he's done what was asked. And certainly, many were asking for a VO2max test, as though this would be the piece of the puzzle that would help it all make sense. That request was, in my opinion, misguided. A single VO2max test, even with reams of supporting physiological data like heart rates, and lactates, can't complete the story when you're trying to read the entire book.

So Froome's act of transparency, belatedly, deserves credit for what it is, but it won't pacify most, because it can't. That's why I and many others have called for this kind of performance testing to be done in a type of passport system, where the athlete is regularly monitored.

Of course, there is a chance that Froome will also release the results of testing that was done on him in 2007, by the UCI. If that were to be linked to the 2015 data, then we'd be in a better position to evaluate. It would be like having two chapters of a book, which provides some context, and possibly alignment, between then and now.

godtabh · 04-12-2015 10:40AM

laraghrider wrote: »

So the results are out and so the real fun begins. Thousands of fans, journalists, scientists will be ripping it apart.

http://chrisfroome.esquire.co.uk/

I've had a read. Personally speaking I believe in the man.

Does the article just end very abruptly?

Also is it clear that the testing is 100% independent? Sky or Froome (either of them) have no conflict of interest with GSK?

godtabh · 04-12-2015 10:41AM

dastardly00 wrote: »

The article linked below is written by Ross Tucker, and was published yesterday (December 3rd) on Cyclingnews.com. It's well worth a read as a 'preview' to the lab results article in Esquire.

What to expect from Chris Froome’s physiological test data

Isnt that exactly what has been done? 2007 and 2015 data released?

dastardly00 · 04-12-2015 10:46AM

godtabh wrote: »

Isnt that exactly what has been done? 2007 and 2015 data released?

Yup.

onmebike · 04-12-2015 10:54AM

I fear that people are looking for an exact answer from something that is too variable. I'm not educated in VO2 maxes, haemoglobin and all the rest of it, but surely different human bodies do slightly different things with the same input. That's what makes some people elite athletes and others not.

Or am I wrong? Is, say for example, a measure of his VO2 max on the day after a crit in the Netherlands (followed by a flight) going to be the same as if he'd had 3 good rest/training days before it?

godtabh · 04-12-2015 11:00AM

onmebike wrote: »

I fear that people are looking for an exact answer from something that is too variable. I'm not educated in VO2 maxes, haemoglobin and all the rest of it, but surely different human bodies do slightly different things with the same input. That's what makes some people elite athletes and others not.

Or am I wrong? Is, say for example, a measure of his VO2 max on the day after a crit in the Netherlands (followed by a flight) going to be the same as if he'd had 3 good rest/training days before it?

He more or less says that in the article. he says he was tired and could do better and wants to do another test.

thats why one of the points of the article was to suggest that regular VO2 max tests should be included in the BP.

harringtonp · 04-12-2015 11:19AM

godtabh wrote: »

Isnt that exactly what has been done? 2007 and 2015 data released?

"He has other interesting news: Michelle has finally managed to track down the report from the tests carried out on Froome in Lausanne on 25 July, 2007. It’s the missing link in the Froome story. Is he an athlete who underwent a dramatic — and suspicious — transformation, or were there clues in 2007 that he could become a champion?

The latter, says Swart. What is striking is how similar the two reports, eight years apart, are. Apart from one thing. Froome was 75.6kg: more than 8kg heavier than his current race weight. His body fat was 16.9 per cent. “Frankly, for an elite cyclist that’s chubby,” says Swart. “But he produced better figures: peak power of 540 [15 watts higher than in August 2015], threshold of 420 — we made it 419, so it’s one watt less.” His V02 max in 2007 was 80.2.

“The engine was there all along,” says Swart. “He just lost the fat.”"

velo.2010 · 04-12-2015 04:05PM

I still think they're playing around with a kilo here or there regarding Froome's weight in an attempt to 'normalise' the figures and hush the speculation. He was lighter than 67kg at the Tour, for sure, if previous Tour quotes from Froome and others are to be believed.

There will never be an end to speculation regarding doping in professional sport. I'm reminded of an interview recently with a former professional sportsperson that gave a good insight into the mind of an elite athlete. When asked about recent scandals, he replied back 'Well, who are professional sportspeople? I'll tell you who they are. they are the most competitive - the most ruthless people on the planet. If they know their main compatitors are doing xyz to win then they will do the same. if they find out they're competitor is taking xyz to win then they will take xyz. Professional athletes will never let their competition gain an advantage.'

Froome may be clean but many, across all sports, are not.

harringtonp · 04-12-2015 04:55PM

velo.2010 wrote: »

Froome may be clean but many, across all sports, are not.

You've hit it here, there are professional sports people who will always be ethical (and we all know examples of the fanatically ethical) and there are those who just look to see what they can get away with.

Just like real life... politics will naturally attract more of the latter with engineering attracting more of the former

Froome's lab test

Comments