# McQuaid's Own Words



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

_“In the big mountain stages, you never see the (team) leader surrounded by three or four domestiques. He usually finishes the climb on his own. That wasn’t the case during the big period of EPO,” said McQuaid.​_
http://velonews.competitor.com/2012...assport-is-changing-the-sports-culture_222978

While I generally agree with the passport system and the positive effects, I found this statement at odds with what we saw in this years tour. I would love to know McQuaid's thoughts on this years Tour.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

88 rex said:


> _“In the big mountain stages, you never see the (team) leader surrounded by three or four domestiques. He usually finishes the climb on his own. That wasn’t the case during the big period of EPO,” said McQuaid.​_
> http://velonews.competitor.com/2012...assport-is-changing-the-sports-culture_222978
> 
> While I generally agree with the passport system and the positive effects, I found this statement at odds with what we saw in this years tour. I would love to know McQuaid's thoughts on this years Tour.


McQuaid has a point but there are a couple key points missing

1. Sky spent millions on some top level domestique. Of course they are going to be at the front

2. A large group of riders did nothing in this years Tour. Riders who had high past performances, had teams built around them, did nothing. With the increased testing along with fear of prosecution you suddenly have a large group of riders who were exposed as being the product of various doctors. 

Sky did not climb fast or put out huge watts compared to previous Tour leaders.....But there were a large group of riders who suddenly sucked


----------



## The Tedinator (Mar 12, 2004)

But Doc, Rogers himself said that he had never put out numbers like he has this year. Not when he worked with Ferrari, not when he was visiting Freiberg with the rest of the T-Mob.


----------



## cyclesport45 (Dec 10, 2007)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Sky did not climb fast or put out huge watts compared to previous Tour leaders.....But there were a large group of riders who suddenly sucked


Well put, good Doctor, well put.

I remember one Bradley Wiggins (2007) throwing out his Cofidis kit in disgust and making a promise to never ride for that team again.

I see your large group of suck riders and raise you 10 more. When some people who DID suck suddenly do better, without generating more power, and those who DIDN'T suck, now suck, it doesn't suck.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

You can out climb anyone by not necessarily making more power, but making equivalent power for longer.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

The Tedinator said:


> But Doc, Rogers himself said that he had never put out numbers like he has this year. Not when he worked with Ferrari, not when he was visiting Freiberg with the rest of the T-Mob.


Rogers said that at the DL but the wattage numbers he gave had no basis in reality. I prefer to look at specifics then his or Basso's opinions. While Sky did not give out SRM files many other riders, like Jani and sometimes Nibali, did. It is fairly easy to see that most climbs were in the mid - low 5 w/kg. Top riders in the late 90's early 00's were pushing 6.7 for 40 minutes and VAM's of 1850. Huge difference

I am not saying Sky is clean, hard to say, but it is clear their wattage was nothing compared to 10 years ago.....and they crushed the field. This points to a much cleaner field and a bunch of guys who need to get out of the sport and let some others have a chance

Rogers never went to Frieberg


----------



## Haridic (Jun 9, 2008)

I'm inclined to think Sky didn't crush the field in the mountains because they didn't have to. As another poster's mentioned, they 'somehow' had the endurance to put out decent watts for a very long period of time.

I'd be curious to see what their numbers were during the TTs and how this compared to their TT efforts from last year etc. When Wiggins said that his TTs were better this year because 'he tried harder' I call bullsh*t, as a professional you're not going to be sandbagging at 28, 29 years old.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Haridic said:


> When Wiggins said that his TTs were better this year because 'he tried harder' I call bullsh*t, as a professional you're not going to be sandbagging at 28, 29 years old.


When did he say that, can you post a link? I'm surprised he'd mention TTs since its always been his speciality from his track days.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

Referring to the field being cleaner than it used to be, Wiggins addressed the Sky strategy in an interview as being dependent on the field being cleaner than it used to be. After responding defensively when asked about doping earlier in the Tour, he was a little more direct about it here. He said that Sky wouldn't panic in attacks and that when someone went off the front, Michael Rogers would say not to worry about it because the attacker couldn't sustain their pace. Wiggins said that the attackers would have to sustain 500 watts for about 20 minutes to make those attacks stick, which would be impossible (in his words) without a couple of extra litres of blood. 

Wiggins: The Tour Is A Lot More Human Now | Cyclingnews.com


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

On the other hand, from reading people's reactions to this tour, though I disagree with it I have to say that I understand why some athletes decide to dope. The fans are vicious and want to see blood on the road. They lament the snooze-fest of a Tour where riders can't sustain 500 watts for long enough to make a Pantani-esque attack stick. I was reading Mario Cipollini's blog and he was complaining about the VAM numbers on the climbs in this Tour being unimpressive. I can tell that it is already getting to Wiggins that the consensus among many is that he will always be remembered as the winner of one of the most boring Tours ever. That's the climate now. Lets assume for a minute that Wiggins did win the Tour merely from hard work and determination and not chemical enhancement or blood manipulation. It wasn't enough to satisfy the masses. The spectators aren't happy because they didn't get the show they wanted. It is sad but even if it has been proven that a modern Tour can be won honestly, it doesn't mean that a modern Tour can be won honestly with the accolades and "cred" that come from superhuman performances. I feel bad for the athletes that try to ride clean. The forces against them don't just come from the dirty riders they have to compete with; they come from the fans too.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Wiggins does allude to climbing at a sustained 450 watts which is near the number that seemed like a miracle when Lance did it on his attacks, not tempo. I would be interested in seeing the ascent times on the known climbs against previous editions of the race. I do not believe that the riders that Sky assembled happen to be head and shoulders above everyone else naturally. Many are known qualities that never rode this well before this year, Wiggins included.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

davidka said:


> Wiggins does allude to climbing at a sustained 450 watts which is near the number that seemed like a miracle when Lance did it on his attacks, not tempo. I would be interested in seeing the ascent times on the known climbs against previous editions of the race. I do not believe that the riders that Sky assembled happen to be head and shoulders above everyone else naturally. Many are known qualities that never rode this well before this year, Wiggins included.


Especially Rogers, client of Dr. Ferrari and graduate of Freiburg University with a degree in blood doping. When Stapleton took over control of the T-Mobile team, he forced Rogers to stop seeing Ferrari. The Freiburg connection was shut down. Rogers sucked for the next couple of years. This year in an interview after the Dauphine he claimed that he had his best power numbers ever. He averaged 440 W for 34 minutes. He now rides better now clean than when he was doping? Not believable. In an interview at the Tour Wiggins said that on the climbs, Rogers would be riding at 450W; when someone would attack, Rogers would tell the team to let him go because there was no way they could sustain the wattage necessary to stay away.

A couple of years ago people were laughing at Sky saying they would win the Tour in five years. There was no British rider in sight with anywhere near the capabilities to win. Now they have magically produced not one but two.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

trailrunner68 said:


> Especially Rogers, client of Dr. Ferrari and graduate of Freiburg University with a degree in blood doping. When Stapleton took over control of the T-Mobile team, he forced Rogers to stop seeing Ferrari. The Freiburg connection was shut down. Rogers sucked for the next couple of years. This year in an interview after the Dauphine he claimed that he had his best power numbers ever. He averaged 440 W for 34 minutes. He now rides better now clean than when he was doping? Not believable. In an interview at the Tour Wiggins said that on the climbs, Rogers would be riding at 450W; when someone would attack, Rogers would tell the team to let him go because there was no way they could sustain the wattage necessary to stay away.
> 
> A couple of years ago people were laughing at Sky saying they would win the Tour in five years. There was no British rider in sight with anywhere near the capabilities to win. Now they have magically produced not one but two.


I call BS on Rogers claim

He made it here
Michael Rogers Q&A | Ride Media
Using this I get 427 watts and 5.85 w/kg
http://www.cycleops.com/en/training/tools/calculators/watts.html

All believable numbers

Rogers rode it in 34:50, Pantani was 32:55

I am not saying Sky are clean but they would have been several minutes back from the top climbers of the old days


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> I call BS on Rogers claim
> 
> He made it here
> Michael Rogers Q&A | Ride Media
> ...



I thought 450 sounded a bit high myself for what I was seeing. At any rate, 5.85 sounds much more human. 

It is also bold in that this is probably the first modern Tour winner to publicly say that going up a climb at close to 7 w/kg for 20 minutes isn't possible without blood doping.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> I call BS on Rogers claim
> 
> He made it here
> Michael Rogers Q&A | Ride Media
> ...


No way was he 73 kg. He is more like 69. Rogers says that he now weighs what he did when he was sixteen. That would put him at 6.19 W/kg. Using his own power number it is 6.38 W/kg. While it is not the ludicrous numbers of Armstrong, those are spectacular numbers for someone who could not reach that level on T-Mobile's blood doping scheme.

Just because the extreme excesses of the past are not longer with us does not mean that the lower numbers should be believed.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

trailrunner68 said:


> No way was he 73 kg. He is more like 69. Rogers says that he now weighs what he did when he was sixteen. That would put him at 6.19 W/kg. Using his own power number it is 6.38 W/kg. While it is not the ludicrous numbers of Armstrong, those are spectacular numbers for someone who could not reach that level on T-Mobile's blood doping scheme.
> 
> Just because the extreme excesses of the past are not longer with us does not mean that the lower numbers should be believed.


His official number is 75, I dropped it to 73. He is 6'1 so I am not sure I would put him at 69

I completely agree, that they are slower is not an indication of cleanliness. The bigger story is what is happening in the back. Huge portions of the field off the back by minutes. Former podium guys way back


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Rogers rode it in 34:50, Pantani was 32:55
> 
> I am not saying Sky are clean but they would have been several minutes back from the top climbers of the old days


Without power data we're speculating but to put that comparison into context, Rogers paced his team leader to that time, Pantani (doped to the gills on things that weren't even detectable at the time) rode to that time attempting to win. Hard tempo vs. all out attack. To me that makes that 2 minutes seem a little smaller. 



trailrunner68 said:


> No way was he 73 kg. He is more like 69.


Rogers is listed @ 6' 1" and he's a medium build guy (as pro cyclists go) so I'm inclined to believe 71-72kg, 69kg (150lb) seems a little bit light?


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

trailrunner68 said:


> Especially Rogers, client of Dr. Ferrari and graduate of Freiburg University with a degree in blood doping. When Stapleton took over control of the T-Mobile team, he forced Rogers to stop seeing Ferrari. The Freiburg connection was shut down. Rogers sucked for the next couple of years. This year in an interview after the Dauphine he claimed that he had his best power numbers ever. He averaged 440 W for 34 minutes. He now rides better now clean than when he was doping? Not believable. In an interview at the Tour Wiggins said that on the climbs, Rogers would be riding at 450W; when someone would attack, Rogers would tell the team to let him go because there was no way they could sustain the wattage necessary to stay away.
> 
> A couple of years ago people were laughing at Sky saying they would win the Tour in five years. There was no British rider in sight with anywhere near the capabilities to win. Now they have magically produced not one but two.


All this and they hired Rabobank's drug doc. hmmm..... DF can say Sky got away with what they did because riders the pelo was worried about doping tests, the numbers don't add up. All those Sky riders at the top of climbs when most if any other teams had one or two. It just doesn't jive with me.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Rogers official weight was 75 before he went to Sky's Tenerife fat farm and lost tons of weight. He is visibly thinner than when he was T-Mobile.

Riders like Leipheimer and Menchov have gone backwards, true, and maybe Evans as well if he was not sick. What are the chances that U.S. Postal has been reborn in the UK but this time without drugs? It looks slim to me. It Sky would not have brought Cav and his help then we would have seen six Sky riders tearing up the climbs instead of four. Postal never brought anyone who could not help Armstrong. Sky is even more ridiculous than Postal.

Rogers by his own words says he is performing better now, and we all know what he was up to in the past. That says it all.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

davidka said:


> Without power data we're speculating but to put that comparison into context, Rogers paced his team leader to that time, Pantani (doped to the gills on things that weren't even detectable at the time) rode to that time attempting to win. Hard tempo vs. all out attack. To me that makes that 2 minutes seem a little smaller.


I think this is the main point with Team Sky right now.

The numbers don't seem all that high and the climbing speed doesn't seem all that great, but at no time were they ever really challenged!

They rode tempo all day, every day. When somebody attacked, they didn't attack, they just upped the temp until they brought the guy back in, dropped back the pace until somebody else took off, then upped the tempo to bring them back in.

Nobody on Team Sky had a need to attack so we never watched what they were really capable of...had somebody put them under pressure those numbers may have gone up...in a significant fashion. It's the Tour...why spend more energy than you need to when you know you are going to win anyway...and it prevents having bad days down the line.

In the end...when you have 4 guys capable of riding the rest of the Peloton off their wheels and they are only riding "Tempo"...something doesn't smell right :idea:


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

trailrunner68 said:


> Sky is even more ridiculous than Postal.


LOL!! Even though the science points out were not talking about those levels of performances?! I like the fact that even with lower power outputs people are claiming that the reason is because they ARE doping but just didn't need to show they were! :mad2: 

Trailrunner, above you stated that we weren't talking about the extreme doping excesses of the past. Then you say Sky are worse than the most extreme example of doping excesses! ut:

I understand people questioning Sky, I do myself (although I don't know how much of that comes from spending too much time on this forum and not questioning half the "facts" that are bandied about).

Lower power outputs/ascent times = they're doping but not having to show it (well why dope then?)
Spending millions on domestiques doesn't equate to improved team performances, it apparently means the return of full team wide doping programs despite no evidence to suggest that.
A TT specialist who has ridden his entire career at tempo, winner of 6 Olympic track medals including 3 golds couldn't possibly win a tour, instead he's apparently showing ludicrous performance increases.
Weight loss can't mean training to improve climbing apparently, it must mean that secretive training camps are taking place (have you been to Tenerife? It's hardly David Millars mountain hideout).

Questioning performances? Completely appropriate. Froome definitely. Rogers was an idiot to work with Ferrari as was anyone and deserves the questioning. Fitting any piece of information, fact or invention to agree with the conclusion you've already made? Pointless. 

Why discuss anything if you've already decided?


----------



## Haridic (Jun 9, 2008)

Bradley Wiggins: I can never dope because it would cost me everything | Sport | The Guardian

'They see me put in a great time trial like I did on Monday ....even when i wasnt putting in anything like the kind of effort I have in the past couple of years'

Yeah, since 2009 (inception of Team Sky) Bradley's decided to actually try in the time trials. For a rider who prides himself on his TT, why wouldn't he have been trying before?


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Haridic said:


> Bradley Wiggins: I can never dope because it would cost me everything | Sport | The Guardian
> 
> 'They see me put in a great time trial like I did on Monday ....even when i wasnt putting in anything like the kind of effort I have in the past couple of years'
> 
> Yeah, since 2009 (inception of Team Sky) Bradley's decided to actually try in the time trials. For a rider who prides himself on his TT, why wouldn't he have been trying before?


Wiggins pre 2009 ITT winning palmares:

2003, Stage 1, 6 days of Ghent
2005 Circuit de Lorraine
2007 Prologue, Criterium de Dauphine 
2007 Stage 1, Four days of Dunkirk
2007 Stage 4, Tour du Poitou-Charentes de la Vienne

I wouldn't say he wasn't trying before. In 2009 he was a full time road cyclist, having left the track after Beijing. Is it such a surprise that a newly appointed team leader at a new team with a big budget now focussing solely on the road, and age-wise coming towards their prime improves?

p.s. I should just say as an aside, that the only shock to me was him beating Spartacus by so much in the first ITT. At the moment I'm putting that down to 1) Fabian wants the Olympics and was always going home, 2) I think Cancellara buried himself two days before. If Wiggins smashes Fabian in the Olympic TT having just won a tour and presumably put himself into the ground to help Cav in the road race I'm joining you guys in breaking out the pitchforks.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

roddjbrown said:


> Wiggins pre 2009 ITT winning palmares:
> 
> 2003, Stage 1, 6 days of Ghent
> 2005 Circuit de Lorraine
> ...


It all sounds so eerily similar to Armstrong...Good, but not great early career results (if you take his one WC win away), a guy that was more of a single day racer/sprinter...loses weight, trains hard and now is TDF champion (7 times over).

:aureola:


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Wookiebiker said:


> It all sounds so eerily similar to Armstrong...Good, but not great early career results (if you take his one WC win away), a guy that was more of a single day racer/sprinter...loses weight, trains hard and now is TDF champion (7 times over).
> 
> :aureola:


Yep I've no doubt there's some truth in that but if you ignore LA aren't there hundreds of examples of people across every sport who have some promising inconsistent early results and then mature and improve into different roles and specialities?

Not sure I get the one day/sprinter reference though? Those are all TT results


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

http://www.lemonde.fr/sport/article...aison-le-poison-agit-encore_1736926_3242.html

Vayer has been writing some good articles on this during the Tour. The biggest challenge is he uses a lot of assumptions on weight etc. that could result in small variances. 

SKY does not give out their wattage, but others do. Nibali and Jani are the best to look and at even at full gas on the final climbs they are around 5.6 3w/kg

http://www.trainingpeaks.com/av/5IGQQZ4XINBIKWQQZFEQZA2YIE


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

How do you guys know they were riding "tempo"?


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

I don't know where he got it and I would like to analyze the data myself but Cipollini calculated the VAM going over the Tourmalet at 1200 and at 1550 on the last climb that day. If he is correct, 1550 is pretty fast but a 1990's Pantani/Armstrong attack would have left them in the dust.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Local Hero said:


> How do you guys know they were riding "tempo"?


We don't...but what we do know is what the riders have to say. With that there has been a lot of talk about the Sky riders riding at Tempo, which for them was 420-450 watts apparently.

Wiggins was quoted as saying that for an attack to stick the rider would have to hold 500 watts for 40 minutes...which even in the drug induced world was pretty freaking hard to do for the climbers.

So if a climber has to work that hard to make an attack stick...how hard ar the Sky Team riding at Tempo?

If you actually watched the race every other contender was attacking as hard as they could, face in pain, lungs shooting out of their chests....then you look back at Sky and they are stone faced, not breathing too hard, just letting it go and riding tempo to pull them back in.

Compared to the rest of the peloton...they were "On another level"...:thumbsup: Call it better training, better domestiques, better doctors...whatever you want, but there was a big difference between Sky's entire team and the others. 

Not that it says much but...even Cavindish was leading the front of the peloton up a CAT 1 climb for a while near the end of a race. If he is pulling the peloton, either the entire peloton was COMPLETLY sandbagging the climb...or something's not right.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Wookiebiker said:


> If you actually watched the race every other contender was attacking as hard as they could, face in pain, lungs shooting out of their chests....then you look back at Sky and they are stone faced, not breathing too hard, just letting it go and riding tempo to pull them back in.


I love this. I'm surprised the UCI hasn't brought facial expressions in as the doping test yet. Evans may have been training with Ferrari but he's got to be clean. He sweats like a pig in a sauna. And Voekler.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

thechriswebb said:


> I don't know where he got it and I would like to analyze the data myself but Cipollini calculated the VAM going over the Tourmalet at 1200 and at 1550 on the last climb that day. If he is correct, 1550 is pretty fast but a 1990's Pantani/Armstrong attack would have left them in the dust.


correct. VAM's were in the 1500-1650 range....not the 1850 of the old days


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

roddjbrown said:


> Yep I've no doubt there's some truth in that but if you ignore LA aren't there hundreds of examples of people across every sport who have some promising inconsistent early results and then mature and improve into different roles and specialities?


True...but how many of those were aided through PED's? It's not like the tests are hard to beat, regardless of sport.

I have zero faith that any sport is clean at the upper and even amature levels. Look at the last Olympics and several of the positive PED's were in sports like shooting and archery! Not sports associated with PED usage generally.

If they are using them in those sports...you can pretty much make the assumption that it's going on in all other sports.



> Not sure I get the one day/sprinter reference though? Those are all TT results


That was just showing how Armstrong had some good results early on, but he was seen as a sprinter, not a GC guy because he was too big to win the Tour. So he was discounted by all as a GC contender...then lost a lot of weight, got on a good system and all the sudden was the best GC rider in the world for 7 years.

Similar story to Wiggins...A good TT/Track specialist with excellent results in those areas who was seen as too large to be a GC guy...loses weight and all the sudden is the best GC guy in the world?

If Cancellara dropped 20 pounds, kept the same power levels and all the sudden won the TDF would anybody question what he was doing?


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

roddjbrown said:


> I love this. I'm surprised the UCI hasn't brought facial expressions in as the doping test yet. Evans may have been training with Ferrari but he's got to be clean. He sweats like a pig in a sauna. And Voekler.


It's called body language...and is used around the world every day to determin how people are feeling and what their actions/intents are, even in courts of law (though somewhat indirectly).

As I've said...the arguments used to show why Wiggins is clean are the same used by Armstrong. 

You could almost cut and paste them from years back and just change the name from Lance to Bradley and print them as actual quotes....by both the riders and their fans.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Wookiebiker said:


> It's called body language...and is used around the world every day to determin how people are feeling and what their actions/intents are, even in courts of law (though somewhat indirectly).
> 
> As I've said...the arguments used to show why Wiggins is clean are the same used by Armstrong.
> 
> You could almost cut and paste them from years back and just change the name from Lance to Bradley and print them as actual quotes....by both the riders and their fans.


I'm actually no Wiggins fan - I don't think many cycling fans are given his style. And of course you can. Equally there are hundreds of clean sportsmen you could cut and paste from as evidence someone isn't doping. Similarities in words don't seem to me to be much of a conspiracy.

Yes it's body language. I can show you plenty of proven dopers looking like they're burying themselves over the limit, so how is it valid? Were they in fact wrongly accused and clean?


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

thechriswebb said:


> On the other hand, from reading people's reactions to this tour, though I disagree with it I have to say that I understand why some athletes decide to dope. The fans are vicious and want to see blood on the road. They lament the snooze-fest of a Tour where riders can't sustain 500 watts for long enough to make a Pantani-esque attack stick. I was reading Mario Cipollini's blog and he was complaining about the VAM numbers on the climbs in this Tour being unimpressive. I can tell that it is already getting to Wiggins that the consensus among many is that he will always be remembered as the winner of one of the most boring Tours ever. That's the climate now. Lets assume for a minute that Wiggins did win the Tour merely from hard work and determination and not chemical enhancement or blood manipulation. It wasn't enough to satisfy the masses. The spectators aren't happy because they didn't get the show they wanted. It is sad but even if it has been proven that a modern Tour can be won honestly, it doesn't mean that a modern Tour can be won honestly with the accolades and "cred" that come from superhuman performances. I feel bad for the athletes that try to ride clean. The forces against them don't just come from the dirty riders they have to compete with; they come from the fans too.


IMO the Tour was boring not because of doping vs. non-doping issues. It was boring because it was designed for and won by a time trialer.


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

Wookiebiker said:


> If you actually watched the race every other contender was attacking as hard as they could, face in pain, lungs shooting out of their chests....then you look back at Sky and they are stone faced, not breathing too hard, just letting it go and riding tempo to pull them back in.


Yeah, I think I even saw Wiggins climbing out of the saddle once or twice. Remarkable tempo riding!


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

Here's a link to Chris Anker Sorensen's power data for Stage 16 - the Col du Tourmalet day. 

Power Analysis: Sørensen tears up week three of the Tour

There are also links to his Stage 17, 18 and 19 data.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

trailrunner68 said:


> Rogers official weight was 75 before he went to Sky's Tenerife fat farm and lost tons of weight. He is visibly thinner than when he was T-Mobile..


Losing a little weight is fine but 6+ kilo off an already top level rider is a dramatic transformation. I didn't see a difference that I'd hang that big a number on but I suppose we'll have to keep our eyes open in the coming weeks. I'm sure the sporting media will be talking to these guys as it's a compelling story (UK based team, UK based winner, etc.).



Wookiebiker said:


> I think this is the main point with Team Sky right now.
> 
> The numbers don't seem all that high and the climbing speed doesn't seem all that great, but at no time were they ever really challenged!


They rode a very hard tempo and smashed the whole race in 4 miles at the first hilltop finish when all the GC contenders should've been at their best. I don't believe that we saw lower numbers and speeds until I see direct comparisons from past races. Richie Porte is good but good enough to decimate the best racers in the most important race in the world? With 4 of his team mates able to match it? I want to see the power numbers.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

davidka said:


> Losing a little weight is fine but 6+ kilo off an already top level rider is a dramatic transformation. I didn't see a difference that I'd hang that big a number on but I suppose we'll have to keep our eyes open in the coming weeks. I'm sure the sporting media will be talking to these guys as it's a compelling story (UK based team, UK based winner, etc.).


Rogers claims he has not weighed this little since he was sixteen. Wiggins claims he has lost even more weight than that, and he looked like a stick when he was on Cofidis. Where he found seven or eight or more, whatever he now claims he lost, I don't know. It's like Kate Moss telling people she lost five kilos.


----------



## PaxRomana (Jan 16, 2012)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> McQuaid has a point but there are a couple key points missing
> 
> 1. Sky spent millions on some top level domestique. Of course they are going to be at the front


Say what? Who?

Froome? Barely had a contract until last year's Vuelta. Was out most of the year with bilharzia and the injuries from the March crash.
Porte? When did he show such spectacular abilities as a domestique? Never.
Rogers? The former Ferrari client with ties to the Freiburg clinic.
Boasson-Hangen? Yep, I'll grant you that one.

That's basically it. Unless you're counting Knees.


----------



## PaxRomana (Jan 16, 2012)

Wookiebiker said:


> It's called body language...and is used around the world every day to determin how people are feeling and what their actions/intents are, even in courts of law (though somewhat indirectly).
> 
> As I've said...the arguments used to show why Wiggins is clean are the same used by Armstrong.
> 
> You could almost cut and paste them from years back and just change the name from Lance to Bradley and print them as actual quotes....by both the riders and their fans.


Exactly. +10000


----------



## Cableguy (Jun 6, 2010)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Sky did not climb fast or put out huge watts compared to previous Tour leaders.....But there were a large group of riders who suddenly sucked


How did the speeds and numbers that Sky pulled out of their hat compare with those of 2011 and 2010?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Wookiebiker said:


> the arguments used to show why Wiggins is clean are the same used by Armstrong.


If a rider wants to profess his innocence, what is a legitimate argument?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

The Weasel said:


> Yeah, I think I even saw Wiggins climbing out of the saddle once or twice. Remarkable tempo riding!


We all saw a stone-faced Wiggo staying in the saddle early in le tour...later in le tour we saw a stone-faced Wiggo staying in the saddle, about to get dropped by his teammate. 

On the rivet or tempo, maybe the guy climbs seated with a sober look on his face?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

PaxRomana said:


> Say what? Who?
> 
> Froome? Barely had a contract until last year's Vuelta. Was out most of the year with bilharzia and the injuries from the March crash.
> Porte? When did he show such spectacular abilities as a domestique? Never.
> ...


Froome podiumed at the Vuelta and signed his new contract after that
Porte-Top 10 Giro, WC TT, and Best Young rider at the Giro
Rogers-Former doper, never at Freburg, Has won a ton big TT over the last decade

The point is not if they are clean but that given their past performances this is what we should expect from them. It is not like they came out of nowhere.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Cableguy said:


> How did the speeds and numbers that Sky pulled out of their hat compare with those of 2011 and 2010?


I have not seen any numbers from SKY but from other riders. In most cases they are slower


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Froome podiumed at the Vuelta and signed his new contract after that
> Porte-Top 10 Giro, WC TT, and Best Young rider at the Giro
> Rogers-Former doper, never at Freburg, Has won a ton big TT over the last decade
> 
> The point is not if they are clean but that given their past performances this is what we should expect from them. It is not like they came out of nowhere.


For me, it is because we are aware of their histories. They didn't come out of nowhere, their qualities were fairly well known. Rogers and Porte's past performances while quite respectable, do not indicate to me that they should be able to slaughter almost all of the best riders in the world on an uphill. None of their pasts do.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

When was Rogers exonerated for being at Freiburg? At the 2006 TdF, his team made a side trip to the university to have their blood topped off.

It has been seven years since he was able to do a good time trial against decent competition. I cannot remember him ever being able to do one in the midst of a grand tour. Those three WC ITTs were against weak competition. Armstrong, Ullrich, and the other masters of the discipline were all GT riders who would end their seasons before the world's. When Cancellara, Martin, and others came into their own, they made the world's a target and Rogers disappeared.

In 2007, 2008, and 2009, when Stapleton took over and shut down the blood doping program, Rogers won only a single race, a time trial in his own country. He joined Sky and began winning again.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

trailrunner68 said:


> When was Rogers exonerated for being at Freiburg? At the 2006 TdF, his team made a side trip to the university to have their blood topped off.
> 
> It has been seven years since he was able to do a good time trial against decent competition. I cannot remember him ever being able to do one in the midst of a grand tour. Those three WC ITTs were against weak competition. Armstrong, Ullrich, and the other masters of the discipline were all GT riders who would end their seasons before the world's. When Cancellara, Martin, and others came into their own, they made the world's a target and Rogers disappeared.
> 
> In 2007, 2008, and 2009, when Stapleton took over and shut down the blood doping program, Rogers won only a single race, a time trial in his own country. He joined Sky and began winning again.


Rogers wasn't in the car

http://velonews.competitor.com/2007...to-sign-mccartney-vuelta-back-to-basics_13640



> “Contrary to reports in certain sections of the media, the Australian rider Michael Rogers has not been implicated by his teammate Patrik Sinkewitz,” the UCI stated. “This was revealed after the UCI examined the dossier sent by the German Federation (BDR) following the statements made by the German rider. The document sent by the BDR showed that Michael Rogers is not implicated in any way.”


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

davidka said:


> For me, it is because we are aware of their histories. They didn't come out of nowhere, their qualities were fairly well known. Rogers and Porte's past performances while quite respectable, do not indicate to me that they should be able to slaughter almost all of the best riders in the world on an uphill. None of their pasts do.


SKy's output and VAM were a fraction of the old days. They would have lost many minutes to the riders of the 90's

The bigger question is why so many riders who used to be on the podium of big races suddenly do nothing. Winners are now many minutes off the back. 

It is increasingly clear that a wide range of riders got their wins through a syringe and should not be in the sport anymore.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

The UCI never sanctioned a single person for Freiburg. This sounds too much like the Spanish clearing Valverde and Contador for Operacion Puerto.

I wonder how many euros Rogers slipped to the UCI under the table.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

trailrunner68 said:


> The UCI never sanctioned a single person for Freiburg. This sounds too much like the Spanish clearing Valverde and Contador for Operacion Puerto.
> 
> I wonder how many euros Rogers slipped to the UCI under the table.


Sinkewitz named the guys in the car, Rogers wasn't on the list. The Freiburg report named many names, but not Rogers. 

Not saying he is clean, just that he did not go to Freiburg


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> SKy's output and VAM were a fraction of the old days. They would have lost many minutes to the riders of the 90's
> 
> The bigger question is why so many riders who used to be on the podium of big races suddenly do nothing. Winners are now many minutes off the back.
> 
> It is increasingly clear that a wide range of riders got their wins through a syringe and should not be in the sport anymore.


Where did you find numbers? Can you share them? I would be interested to see.

Rogers has been a pro for 11 years. Knees has only one international win to his credit. Wiggins in a way is the most suspicious. He's been around a long time, racing against the same guys and he crushes this year? That feels a bit like Bjarne Riis. 

These days we have guys racing into their 40s so lots of the guys who used to podium big races are simply getting old. If the race were slower then surely these guys would have been closer to the front.

Do you trust that the anti-doping authorities are competent enough that all of the "old guard" have stopped trying to beat the system? 

I want to see power files.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

davidka said:


> Where did you find numbers? Can you share them? I would be interested to see.
> 
> Rogers has been a pro for 11 years. Knees has only one international win to his credit. Wiggins in a way is the most suspicious. He's been around a long time, racing against the same guys and he crushes this year? That feels a bit like Bjarne Riis.
> 
> ...


There are a suprising amount of them out there. Trainingpeaks has had Jani's for most of the race

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/races/tour-de-france.aspx

He was 5.8 W/kg on the Les Planche des Belles Filles, but it was only 17 minutes

SRM also had some files. The best was Nibali's 

http://www.srm.de/index.php/de/srm-blog/tour-de-france/737

He was in the Yellow jersey group that shredded the field, he was doing 5.6W/kg on the final climb. On the other climb's he was @5w/kg

For comparison Armstrong claimed he would hold 6.7 w/g for 40 minutes. 

These guys have lots of good info. 

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2012/07/tour-in-mountains-analysis-discussion.html


----------

