Chris Froome; Doping?

[LukeTom]

After Froome's second win of the Tour de France, there have been many people saying he is doping. What do you guys think? Just natural ability? Or something suspicious going on?

[Dr. Steve Brule]

What in the tour stands out as him doping? Quintana was quicker up Alpe dhuez, and only finished a minute behind overall, is he doping too? Valverde finished third, does that make Movistar a dirty team?

Doping is a problem in all sports, especially cycling but I honestly feel the top boys nowadays are clean. I think there's just too much to lose after all the doping of the past 20 odd years.

Interesting link below, would someone doped to the gills only be at 77?
http://www.climbing-records.com/2015/07/three-riders-make-it-into-alpe-dhuez.html?m=1

[medusa.cascade]

I remember reading an article a few years ago, is discussed who should of had lance's title in his last tour or something. Turns out you had to get to the eight dude before getting to someone who has never been associated with doping.

Crazy.

[Dr. Steve Brule]

Yeah cycling was the wild west for a good few years, you still get a few guys popped every now and then but it's generally young dudes on eastern European teams, not been any big names popped for a while and hopefully there won't be. I'm probably being naive though.

[torontoflatlander]

I really hope not. The problem is as soon as anyone employs a decent strategy for keeping the yellow jersey for as long as Froome did, they have to be accused of doping in some way, shape, or form. It's piss poor journalism to just criticize the entire race under the pretenses that anyone with any talent must be on something. The grand tours haven't been enjoyable to watch or read about for a number of years because of all the gossip surrounding the guys in the top 10 positions. Do I think anything is going on? Who the fuck knows, until they get UCI/WADA personnel to watch the top 10gc riders 24/7 for the 3 weeks of the tour, there won't be anyone who's satisfied with any scientific results that come from all the testing that's being done during the tours.

[Owen]

I race road.  I race at E1 level, which is 1 level below Pro Tour.  The speeds in E1 are similar to that of Pro, but the 'Tours' are way shorter, and in comparison to Pro riding, we don't go in as hard.

The main thing I can say, from my experience racing, and seeing how my own body reacts to the stresses of going in so hard, is this...

-A top level guy who is not doping, could match the speed and power of one of these world class pro tour guys, in a single day event, but he would be utterly wrecked at the end of it and would need a good week to recover.
-Pro tours are 3 weeks long.  There is no FUCKING WAY they are going in that hard, for that long, and with only 2 rest days, without chemical assistance.  I don't care how much they train, or how elite they are, the human body simply can not take that much abuse, both in terms of pure physical stress to the muscles, and also throwing that much water and food through your system day in day out, without blowing up after at most, 10 days.  It just can not be done.

Whether they are all on straight EPO or not, I think is doubtful.  Probably not nowadays, as that is too detectable, and obvious.  I think what is happening nowadays, is they are doing way more sophisticated stuff like micro-dosing the training, then switching drugs around, etc., to achieve the same end.  The doping process has basically become more refined.

So yeah, of course they are doping, but not in the same way as when it was full on EPO jacking.

[amishrob]

the big thing with froome is how he came from fucking nowhere, then smashed the 2011 vuelta when he was about to be dropped by sky. at least lance had junior results to show he had ability.

[Dr. Steve Brule]

I race road.  I race at E1 level, which is 1 level below Pro Tour.  The speeds in E1 are similar to that of Pro, but the 'Tours' are way shorter, and in comparison to Pro riding, we don't go in as hard.

The main thing I can say, from my experience racing, and seeing how my own body reacts to the stresses of going in so hard, is this...

-A top level guy who is not doping, could match the speed and power of one of these world class pro tour guys, in a single day event, but he would be utterly wrecked at the end of it and would need a good week to recover.
-Pro tours are 3 weeks long.  There is no FUCKING WAY they are going in that hard, for that long, and with only 2 rest days, without chemical assistance.  I don't care how much they train, or how elite they are, the human body simply can not take that much abuse, both in terms of pure physical stress to the muscles, and also throwing that much water and food through your system day in day out, without blowing up after at most, 10 days.  It just can not be done.

Whether they are all on straight EPO or not, I think is doubtful.  Probably not nowadays, as that is too detectable, and obvious.  I think what is happening nowadays, is they are doing way more sophisticated stuff like micro-dosing the training, then switching drugs around, etc., to achieve the same end.  The doping process has basically become more refined.

So yeah, of course they are doping, but not in the same way as when it was full on EPO jacking.

Yeah, that's a thought of mine regarding doping. It's a game of cat and mouse, the testers chasing the teams. As long as the teams have more resources than the testers, they'll always have the advantage. Until full WADA / Olympic  style testing is implemented I guess we'll never know for sure.

[G]

I am very irritated by the way the press has looked at this and all the pseudo-science they have made up. Some guy tweeted how he woke up and the laws of physics had changed or some shit and that a guy making a lower power output beating another guy up a mountain was like a car doing 60 beating a car going 70.. utter bollocks.

Power and speed are NOT the same thing. That's why a 200HP sports car is quicker than a 800HP bus. Aerodynamics, weight and tactics are far more important.

My guess is that Froome (and all the other top riders) are doing what most people would call "doping" but I very much doubt that he is using anything that is clearly illegal under the terms of the rules. Team Sky are too clever for that, and over weeks of a tour I doubt it would help. He openly uses an inhaler. He also openly uses a sitting pedaling style and elliptical rings, both of which have the potential to really help. Movistar managed to get two guys to the podium, perhaps if their tactics had been better they could have traded second and third for first! Team Sky seemed to have traded absolutely all the rest of the teams energy for his result.

Spectators (and journalists) accusing Froome of doping when Contador (and others) are right there too is crazy. Contador was caught using and was barely sanctioned at all, nobody is saying a word about his very recent and very successful doping, while Froome gets all the shit simply because he is winning.

Getting good sleep, cool down, massage, stretching, nutrition, optimised bikes, and tactics are incredibly important.

IF Froome is doping, then you can be sure as hell that the next 5 guys behind him are doping just as much or more, so his win is unlikely to be because of it.

[LukeTom]

Personally I believe that almost all (if not all) the riders are doping, in one way or another. Be it EPO (which I believe is undetectable) or more clearly illicit drugs. So many riders have been associated with drugs that I don't believe there is no smoke without fire, which certainly extends beyond this years TdF.

This being said, if most people agree he and other athletes are doping in one way or another (legally or illegally) do people think there will ever come a time when the sports governing body will just allow it since it is too difficult to stop? And see how truly fast they can cycle the Tour De France. I know there are difficulties concerning the safety of the athletes, but perhaps there are work arounds for this. It would stop the façade of everyone denying doping and make things clearer.

[Narcoleptic Insomniac]

Then they should have a doped category and non-doped category. I'd watch that.

[amishrob]

there's a very vocal twitter 'group' who are accusing everyone, based on very loose 'facts'. they were posting round a picture of valverde using an inhaler before an attack the other day. it's naive to think sky aren't using some grey areas though. i met the team yesterday (walked past, didn't want anyone to talk to me as i'm forced to wear team sky t-shirts) and they seem like nice guys mostly.

[MilkyWilky]

Very obvious chem-trails above the tour. Everyone's doped.

[Allah]

Nice to see some intelligent threads on BG over the last few weeks.

He also openly uses a sitting pedaling style and elliptical rings, both of which have the potential to really help.

Hey G, excuse my ignorance but what are elliptical rings? Oval chainrings? What advantages do these offer and if there is a significant difference why don't we use them in everyday cycling (or BMX for that matter)?

[Kinchy]

They supposedly utilise power at different points of the pedal stroke, so when you put out more power on the down stroke the chainring provides a slightly different gear ratio to what it would when your foot comes across the top. Different oval chainrings work in different ways, so some make the most of the down stroke power, and some even the output out over the whole stroke.

Or something like that.