The commentator on Eurosport (not Sean Kelly) doesn't half talk some bollocks.
The trouble with this is that Scutter's point, with respect, is based on speculation. Watching the Tour on the telly doesn't give you any realistic comparison points for different riders at different times.
L'Equipe's physiologist was given the power data, and apparently reckons Froome's power outputs are within human limits:
I rode the Ventoux last year. Froome attacked Contador 7km from the top, which is just around the approach to the corner where the restaurant car park is and the trees thin out. That bit is practically flat, about 2% gradient. Round the corner it ramps up again for the moonscape bit. The other thing is that as soon as you clear the trees the mistral wind hits you like a slap in the face. So I guess aerodynamics are important. This isn't mentioned when the burst of acceleration is written about.
Personally I think it's quite a plausible explanation. It's to do with conditioning the rider to go into the anaerobic zone for short periods of time, remaining seated to reduce drag, and then to be able to recover from the lactic acid while maintaining a high cadence.
yep, and shockingly, O'Grady announced his retirement yesterday. I expect Voight to follow suit.a quick visit to Cyclingnews tells that the French Senate report on cycling doping is out tomorrow.
also look at some of the others:
Quintana did no racing from April until the Tour. of course Lance was into this 'i train harder than i go in races' bullshit and the idea of training instead of racing in June was something i remember Manolo Siaz first proposing.
Kreuziger worked with Ferrari.
Upgrade your account now to disable all ads... If we had any... Which we don't right now.Upgrade now