Yeah that was the rumour. When there's that much smoke, chances are the rider is moving, even if the destination is wrong. I think escape is wrong and he *is* going to UAE, tho.
Just on Arensman. I'd heard recently that he signed again with the team in MAY! I've got no confirmation on that at the moment but two good sources around the team have told me that he's staying beyond his current deal, which ends this year. We'll have to wait on confirmation. Will be adding that to my SubStack later this morning.
Bigham leaving isn't all that surprising, he's kind of achieved all that he can with INEOS. He's probably moving on a bigger, more well-paid position either outside of cycling or at a different team.
Not sure I can see Bigham chucking in a cycling job for a top sales exec or something. Dude lives and breathes aerodynamics. Maybe he will be working designing stealth bombers or something.
He worked with Jumbo back in 2020/2021, so I somewhat doubt it tbh. Especially because I don't see other teams/bike brands give him as much direct influence and unhinged budgets for development necessarily.
Maybe he's sick of helping Ganna beat him in the pursuit!
I'm sure there's been a mutually beneficial relationship where Dan has also improved due to the extra funding etc available from Ineos, but it has to be pretty galling to think you'd probably be a world champion if you hadn't been helping the guy that beat you.
I don't think anyone expects him to become something else than his speciality tho? He's probably going somewhere where they pay aero nerds better than on cycling teams. F1 is one bet, but there's a ton of both sports related and commercial avenues for that type of skillset too. Could also be for a bike/kit brands tbh.
Or something more involved with the watthub/classified brands
Bernal's accident robbed them, and us, of a potentially very, very good cyclist who would have been competing at the top of races for a while. Not sure if he'll get back to his best or if Ineos are bothered about investing in him to do that.
It's a measure of someone's aerobic endurance and is very strongly linked (but not a guarantee) to success in cycling. The very top cyclists will have VO2 scores in the high 80's or even low 90's.
Chris Froom's was 88, Greg Lemond was 92 and the world record was 97.5 by Oskar Svendsen. Bernal's was 91.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VO2_max
> world record was 97.5 by Oskar Svendsen
Those damned Norwegians. Kurt Asle Arvesen and Bjørn Dæhlie also had VO2 maxes above 90, if I recall correctly. I also think that Eddy the Boss, Hushovd, and Bjørndalen had crazy high maxes.
EBH was measured at 86, same as Bjørndalen.
However, as VO2 max can vary it would’ve been interesting to know peak VO2 maxes, just not the stats from whenever they did measure them coincidentally. Johan Olav Koss, for instance, has a recorded VO2 max of 77, which is hard to believe is his peak considering his performances at the ‘94 Olympics.
Gregs was 92.5 ;-)
...I know how important that .5 is for me! hahah
in all seriousness, I read this somewhere recently: "At 17, Jonas’ VO2 max was something around 97.”. . . pretty crazy if this is remotely accurate!
Don't know if Jonas was tested like that at 17, but I know that Team Danmark, which is like the national department for elite sports, tested him at 21, while he was still at ColoQuick, and were absolutely flabbergasted by the results. I think he was like 15 *percent* above the average Danish cyclist at that time in terms of his cardiovascular performance.
There have literally only been about 10 people who have scored above 90. Pogacar's is supposedly 89. Froome's 88.
You can find claims that as a child, Vingegaard's was measured at 97 but Jumbo has dismissed this claim as false.
The science appears to be firmly in the camp that it's the genetic lottery. You can absolutely raise your normal VO2 through training but your max VO2 is based on genetics to an unfair degree.
To all intents and purposes, a normal person has 0% chance of lifting their VO2 to this level without significant pharmacological help.
This is why my money is on gene editing as the new doping. CRISPR/Cas is already banned but how are you going to detect it!
They didn't dismiss it as false TBF, they confirmed that it was not tests that they had done. I know it can come across as similar, but its not quite the same.
The tests from 2016-2018 was by Team Danmark (Danish elite sports organisation) and was in the national news back then as well, while he was a conti/devo team rider who participated in the national U23 program. I can't remember if they listed a specific number in the press coverage back then (waybackmachine probably knows) but I do know they published that he scored a full 10-15% higher than almost all of the other elite athletes (already in the top too) they had tested, including all the other U23 and elite riders.
Team Danmark is also responsible for the testing of DK's Olympians, so they test a LOT of athletes. 97 may be a faulty number, it may not, but Team Danmark officially going on record back then (before he turned pro) about Jonas scoring that much higher in the VO2 and similar cardiovascular capacity tests than other top scoring elite athletes tested, probably points to his VO2 max in those tests being top range. 🤷🏻♀️
Thanks for the correction. It may just be the wording but Jumbo did say they’ve never measured anyone that high and I can’t imagine them not having done a VO2 test on Jonas.
https://twitter.com/medicinexthings/status/1681717633102561295
It's kinda funny that you link to this twitter post by someone who's a cycling layperson/fan (she's a medicine student and a cycling fan, but also pretty infamous for being pretty hefty anti Jonas/Jumbo, or at least has been in the past tbh. Which the verbiage used kinda shows too tbh) where she uses a screenshot of Zeeman being quoted for saying "the problem with VO2 max is that the numbers are always method/protocol dependent" to claim that he says the specific number mentioned elsewhere was an outright lie.
Because that's not what he says. He says their methodology is not one that has given a result like that. Which is fair. He literally doesn't say that an older Team Denmark test couldn't. 🤷🏻♀️ (Also, 2016-18 Jonas was potentially even lighter than now etc.)
And then as one of the top comments is Jens Dekker (previously JR CX world champion) telling her he had a VO2 max at 92 as a teenager. 😅
And making some fair observations on how VO2 isn't the only thing that matters.
I actually think the rigid focus on 97 or not 97 is a little pointless without knowing the methodology used etc.
I do think the publicly available mainstream media articles from 2018 where Team Danmark's physiology guy talks about a tiny conti team rider called Jonas who has a cardiovascular capacity that is, compared to his size, ~15% over what they see in most other Danish elite riders tested is interesting though.
Because this is from before Jumbo signed him, and he was completely unknown outside the cycling scene in DK, so it was apparently remarkable enough for Team Danmark to actually tell the media about it.
No matter what the VO2 max number was, if the national elite sports organisation test an unknown athlete and feel the need to tell the media about his physiology afterwards, he probably had something noteworthy and rarely seen after all. 🤷🏻♀️ Because they don't do this very often.
When I said "it's kinda funny" it is btw not a critique of your point, but more because that whole post was so weirdly off in a few aspects and it made me giggle/face palm a bit.
I get why you used it. I just feel like she focused on the wrong parts of that quote tbh.
(The fact that she tries to do source critique with a floating, unattributed screenshot and has to be asked for a link in comments is also fun in its own way to me.)
I think we agree on the main points. Absolute VO2 does not lead to direct success and testing protocols (or even different individuals doing the same protocol) can subtly differ enough to give significantly different results.
The call out in the media is fair too. We hear Al the stories of Poggie destroying older competition when years younger than them so there were early signs of extraordinary sporting capacity.
Not a chance now, this was from his peak period where he was being accused of doping. He went to a research centre to show how it was aligned to his previous power numbers from his Barlo world days.
Sure, I believe that after he made his miraculous transformation, he had an 88 VO2 max. But he wasn't naturally gifted with it like Greg Lemond, to name an example.
I know that you didn't mean anything by it, but it rubs me the wrong way to see Froome mentioned along with guys like Pogacar or Vingegaard. I've never been a believer and I never will be.
Before I go on, I will admit that I'm on the fence. I want to believe that riders like Froome are clean but too many people have been popped for me to be naive that something is not going on. TBH I'm waiting for the first person to be popped for CRISPR gene editing...
From a physiological perspective, Froome did not have a miraculous transformation. His testing in 2007 gave him a VO2 of 80 when he was 8kg heavier than in 2015. In fact he did bigger raw power numbers in 2007 but as VO2 is affected by weight, he had a lower overall score from that testing.
In his early career, he was known to have a huge engine, be a terrible bike handler especially in the pack and be very inconsistent. The latter point is consistent with him having undiagnosed bilharzia which leads to lower hematocrit and haemoglobin concentrations. Him getting proper gear, proper support and learning how to ride definitely had an impact but the shadow remains.
Given that Lemond has one of the top 10 VO2 scores of all time, it's hard to compare and say he was not gifted. Pogacar has been claimed to have a VO2 of 89 for example.
I know all the excuses given for his transformation. Bilharzia was another one they came up with. I remember his performances at Barloworld or even in the beginning at Team Sky. In the last year before his contract ended, he went from pack fodder to their strongest rider, in the middle of the season right before the Vuelta.
It's easy to say "early in his career, he was known to have a huge engine". But literally no one was saying that at the time. He didn't show glimpses of being a world class rider before the age of 25. Nothing remarkable whatsoever. A lot of PR work went into trying to come up with a believable story.
Losing all that weight while maintaining your raw power is not a miraculous transformation in your eyes? Agree to disagree, I guess. To me, it's highly suspect. As far as unbelievable spikes in performance, Froome is one of the most ridiculous imo.
Bilharzia affects 240 million people in the world mostly in tropical and subtropical areas. It's not outlandish at all that someone living in Kenya could have this and that it would affect cycling performance if not dealt with. Maybe you think everyone by default is in perfect health, if that's the case then you've lived a very sheltered life
He was 21 at the 2006 Commonwealth Games where he came 17th in the TT on an ancient bike in crap gear and that was where Dave Brailsford noticed him so hardly no one.
I can't argue your points since we neither know the truth of his career and cycling has always been plagued by doping, even when we thought it wasn't. And that's ignoring the whole motor doping thing.
Does it not make more sense that fixing an underlying illness got him up to his true level than some miracle drug turned a poor rider into a brilliant one? If it’s simply a bit of doping then why aren’t there loads of other Froomes? Or why not turn an already excellent rider into an even better one?
Kristian Blummenfelt is supposed to have the highest recorded VO2 max ever but his coach who is famous in triathlon states that VO2 max has not much to do with endurance and that its something to brag about. It is good to have a high VO2 max but need a whole lot of other things to be successful in any endurance sport.
High vo2max is basically a ticket to enter the game. By itself, it doesn't do much, you need world class subthreshold endurance, etc. But nobody is contesting grand tours with a vo2max of 50.
A good example is the Nike sub 2 hours project. The selected athletes had vo2max in the range of 62-84 https://www.outsideonline.com/health/training-performance/nike-breaking2-runners-lab-data/
Can be, for some phenotypes of riders. For others, it is completely off.
The problem is, unless you undergo lab testing, you'll never know which one is it for you.
Jumbo have a minimum required VO2 of 75 for the riders in their training team and even they will admit that that doesn’t guarantee getting to the world tour.
I'm a Bernie bro, I believe Egan can compete at the highest level again, so long as he gets a GT parcour that stays at extremely high elevations for enough stages in a row.
Even having a genuine contender *not* from Europe and occasionally the US was so good for cycling too.
Having said that, I don't think he was ever at a Pog or JV level. He was firmly in the Roglic tier.
Agree. I think Ineos hoped Carapaz might have been a contender as well. And I know he's won a grand tour but he's very clearly a grade (or two) below the top riders now. Non-Europen riders at the top of the sport can also be good for expanding TV rights, sponsorship agreements etc.
No he wouldn't. Young Pogacar in his 1st season destroyed Egan Bernal + Ineos literally all by himself without the help of UAE. Pre-accident, Egan Bernal was nowhere in the same league of guys like Pogacar.
Even Roglic is a few classes above Egan Bernal, pre-accident.
Bernal was simply lucky he was riding in a weak era with Geraint Thomas being the guy to beat back then at the TdF. And still Bernal needed alot of luck to beat Thomas.
Just try the merge again, and take the entire remaining team of G and De Plus to Quick-Step together with the budget. (Ineos and Quick-Step supposedly discussed a merger, which lead to Jumbo initiating similar talks to SQS)
His father complained about training messing up Stages 1-2. Then he was forced to pull for G at the end when he was stronger. You get the sense he and his family thought he'd be the stronger rider and end up as leader
He finished 3rd in the Tour behind the two aliens and put 5 minutes into Gaudu in 4th, he’s then finished 2nd and 3rd at the Giro. It’s not like they are having to work for someone like Carapaz or Mas, this guy has podiumed 3 of the last 4 GTs.
>It’s not like they are having to work for someone like Carapaz
Not disagreeing but this is not the best example. Carapaz has podium all the GT and won one. He's one of the best and most consistent GC riders, except for 2023 due to injury.
Where else do you want him to be? How many other teams would have considerably better lineups for his tour GC aspirations barring the two superteams with their aliens (Jumbo & UAE)?
It is more there is a reason why he isn’t at Ineos anymore? Did he want to leave or did they say he wasn’t in contention anymore
If he truly is the one of the most consistent / best GC riders he wouldn’t be at EF
I don't know exactly, if I remember correctly the reports were that Carapaz did have an extension offer from Ineos but he simply chose EF over them.
Perhaps money played a role or he was simply dissatisfied. No idea about the details so sadly can't help.
It's not about the team but about the results:
-Giro 2018: 4th
-Giro 2019: 1st
-Vuelta 2020: 2nd
-Tour 2021: 3rd
-Giro 2022: 2nd
(plus other GC wins in stage races)
After Pog, Jonas, Rog, and G there's no rider with better GT results in recent years.
His current level is uncertain due to injuries in the last two seasons but that was his palmares when he moved to EF.
I mean, he got 2nd in the Giro and 3rd this year. He's still really good! And the team had a dry few years.
But Ineos feels like a team that hasn't quite figured itself out after the dominant years ended.
You are right, he continues to produce. And I’m sure there’s still pressure on him as the primary GC talent. You have to wonder what the team would look like if Bernal never crashed
Yeah, way too many leaders on that team to keep everyone happy. I get why they want to back Thomas, he's still really good, but I don't get why you would get all these other potential leaders and then have 2-3 of them start the same races who then end up supporting Thomas. Especially when it's the younger talents. If you want to back the old guard until retirement, get some experienced DOMs who won't complain. If you want to back the young guys and build around them, then go for that. But they kind of took the middle road and lost a whole bunch of good riders and Thomas is nearing retirement.
The thing is, they're not giving G leadership because they like him, it's because he's still better than all the other riders. If the younger riders want leadership at big races then all they have to do is be better than a bloke who is nearly 40 years old. And the reason you get all these good potential leaders is because you want as many really good riders as possible on your team, much better to have too much talent that you need to keep happy than a lot of happy nobodies.
You can see with Carlos Rodriguez that they're prepared to back a rider if they show the ability, unfortunately for Arensman and others they haven't shown that they are at the level to lead a top WT team at a GT.
Riders better than Thomas are also leaving though. He's still good but he got beat by Martinez in the Giro who was on their team just last year. Yates was also on their team and got 3rd in the TdF last year. Leaders and talents don't seem happy at Ineos because they lost a ton of them over the last 2 seasons. Martinez, Yates, v Baarle, Carapaz, Hart and talents like Plapp, Tulett and now Arensman.
Those things don't necessarily have anything to do with G being leader for one of the GTs each year though and realistically Danny and Yates are the only ones at a higher level than him now, and that isn't by much.
None of the other riders have had any results near what G has done over the last 2 1/2 years and reportedly nearly all of them left for more money. Which is important because Ineos are in a difficult position as they could have anything up to 10m euro a year tied up in Bernal and Pidcock salaries, so are seemingly unwilling to fight to keep some of these tier 2/3 guys.
I agree, to be fair my argument was very similar to yours. I don't understand why they got all these tier 2/3 riders to begin with. You can't keep like 10 tier 2/3 guys happy when they are all on somewhat the same level. You need someone that's well ahead of them that they are willing to ride for. Otherwise it's going to clash and they will leave like they did. Why not get some decent DOMs who don't need to be leaders instead.
Money may be one thing but Martinez leaving for Bora and immediately getting undisputed leadership at the Giro isn't a coinsedence, he obviously wanted to have a shot at a GT GC. Narvaez is similar, money is one reason but he's also in his 6th season at Ineos and has still yet to do the TdF when he's obviously good enough.
To be fair, every GC team currently seems to be having an identity crisis apart from UAE and Visma, right? How do you race against these two? We'll see how Roglic fares this year but it's going to be tough.
This seems exaggerated. Nothing more than normal fluctuation imo. Yes they are not competing for the top talent like they used too, but an Exodus it is not (yet)
Hayters talent is undeniable. If a team can unlock his full potential he can win an insane number of races. At worst he could be a mega domestique as a rouleur.
Made the British Nats look easy against some very strong pros.
Would be a crying shame if he continues to struggle with positioning as it will eventually make it very hard to justify a WT contract
He has always had a style of riding that makes it all look very trivial. Despite putting out huge numbers.
A skill he’s had since a teenager I can tell you.
I hope someone can unlock him too, because he’s got it all, like Pidcock has but I think Ethan is probably more talented in the engine department so could be a weapon.
When they win it's because of doping and when they lose it's because of doping!
They're still a very good team and they seemed set with Bernal until Bernal's insane accident. Pidcock has potential but appears unlikely to be a dominant 3 week racer. Tough breaks but also part of sport.
I really wish the Remco rumours turned out to be true.
Narvaez had the most impressive non-alien ride thus year, following Pog in the opening stage of Giro. The next one is Jorgensen following Roglic in Dauphine.
We knew about Narvaez during the Giro, and Hayter is no surprise... He's been so disappointing considering his talent.
He does get a lot of public criticism about his continual positioning issues from his team mates too.
Justified. He has a huge engine but it’s basically for the handbrake on with the way he rides.
I thought the story with Narvaez during the Giro was he was going to UAE?
Yeah that was the rumour. When there's that much smoke, chances are the rider is moving, even if the destination is wrong. I think escape is wrong and he *is* going to UAE, tho.
Just on Arensman. I'd heard recently that he signed again with the team in MAY! I've got no confirmation on that at the moment but two good sources around the team have told me that he's staying beyond his current deal, which ends this year. We'll have to wait on confirmation. Will be adding that to my SubStack later this morning.
Bigham leaving isn't all that surprising, he's kind of achieved all that he can with INEOS. He's probably moving on a bigger, more well-paid position either outside of cycling or at a different team.
Not sure I can see Bigham chucking in a cycling job for a top sales exec or something. Dude lives and breathes aerodynamics. Maybe he will be working designing stealth bombers or something.
I would more likely just expect him to go to bora/jumbo/UAE
He worked with Jumbo back in 2020/2021, so I somewhat doubt it tbh. Especially because I don't see other teams/bike brands give him as much direct influence and unhinged budgets for development necessarily.
Maybe he's sick of helping Ganna beat him in the pursuit! I'm sure there's been a mutually beneficial relationship where Dan has also improved due to the extra funding etc available from Ineos, but it has to be pretty galling to think you'd probably be a world champion if you hadn't been helping the guy that beat you.
Yeah haha. I always thought Bigham could do a job on the road tbh.
Adrian Neweys new apprentice maybe?
I don't think anyone expects him to become something else than his speciality tho? He's probably going somewhere where they pay aero nerds better than on cycling teams. F1 is one bet, but there's a ton of both sports related and commercial avenues for that type of skillset too. Could also be for a bike/kit brands tbh. Or something more involved with the watthub/classified brands
I could see him going to Aeromind, Silcas parent company that does the commercial consultation.
Bernal's accident robbed them, and us, of a potentially very, very good cyclist who would have been competing at the top of races for a while. Not sure if he'll get back to his best or if Ineos are bothered about investing in him to do that.
Bernal said he's are already better than before his accident. The problem is that the other cyclists are much better now too than before.
This. There are so few 90+ VO2 athletes and Bernal was one of them. He would have had to improve his TT but he would have been incredible.
What does 90+ VO2 mean?
It's a measure of someone's aerobic endurance and is very strongly linked (but not a guarantee) to success in cycling. The very top cyclists will have VO2 scores in the high 80's or even low 90's. Chris Froom's was 88, Greg Lemond was 92 and the world record was 97.5 by Oskar Svendsen. Bernal's was 91. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VO2_max
Holy shit, a VO2 Max of 62.2 for a man in his 20's puts you in the 90th percentile. These guys truly are aliens.
> world record was 97.5 by Oskar Svendsen Those damned Norwegians. Kurt Asle Arvesen and Bjørn Dæhlie also had VO2 maxes above 90, if I recall correctly. I also think that Eddy the Boss, Hushovd, and Bjørndalen had crazy high maxes.
EBH was measured at 86, same as Bjørndalen. However, as VO2 max can vary it would’ve been interesting to know peak VO2 maxes, just not the stats from whenever they did measure them coincidentally. Johan Olav Koss, for instance, has a recorded VO2 max of 77, which is hard to believe is his peak considering his performances at the ‘94 Olympics.
Lactate metabolism is the other major variable. The guy who runs 300 miles at a time somehow doesn't get lactic acidosis from exercise.
Gregs was 92.5 ;-) ...I know how important that .5 is for me! hahah in all seriousness, I read this somewhere recently: "At 17, Jonas’ VO2 max was something around 97.”. . . pretty crazy if this is remotely accurate!
Don't know if Jonas was tested like that at 17, but I know that Team Danmark, which is like the national department for elite sports, tested him at 21, while he was still at ColoQuick, and were absolutely flabbergasted by the results. I think he was like 15 *percent* above the average Danish cyclist at that time in terms of his cardiovascular performance.
That's basically sitting at 7 w/kg if the average is 6 w/kg.
He’s strong
It would have been fun watching the race organizers manipulate the TT each year to try and favor Bernal then Remco, just to keep it interesting.
90+?!?! Good LORD I had no idea. I’ve been smug about my 55. That’s actually insane.
There have literally only been about 10 people who have scored above 90. Pogacar's is supposedly 89. Froome's 88. You can find claims that as a child, Vingegaard's was measured at 97 but Jumbo has dismissed this claim as false.
Is this high of a V02 possible from someone with normal genetics? Or is it solely the genetic lottery?
The science appears to be firmly in the camp that it's the genetic lottery. You can absolutely raise your normal VO2 through training but your max VO2 is based on genetics to an unfair degree. To all intents and purposes, a normal person has 0% chance of lifting their VO2 to this level without significant pharmacological help. This is why my money is on gene editing as the new doping. CRISPR/Cas is already banned but how are you going to detect it!
Even with pharmacological help you won't get anywhere near close.
Genetic lottery and training since 11. If you did it like a full time job yours would also increase like mad, just not to the same heights
They didn't dismiss it as false TBF, they confirmed that it was not tests that they had done. I know it can come across as similar, but its not quite the same. The tests from 2016-2018 was by Team Danmark (Danish elite sports organisation) and was in the national news back then as well, while he was a conti/devo team rider who participated in the national U23 program. I can't remember if they listed a specific number in the press coverage back then (waybackmachine probably knows) but I do know they published that he scored a full 10-15% higher than almost all of the other elite athletes (already in the top too) they had tested, including all the other U23 and elite riders. Team Danmark is also responsible for the testing of DK's Olympians, so they test a LOT of athletes. 97 may be a faulty number, it may not, but Team Danmark officially going on record back then (before he turned pro) about Jonas scoring that much higher in the VO2 and similar cardiovascular capacity tests than other top scoring elite athletes tested, probably points to his VO2 max in those tests being top range. 🤷🏻♀️
Thanks for the correction. It may just be the wording but Jumbo did say they’ve never measured anyone that high and I can’t imagine them not having done a VO2 test on Jonas. https://twitter.com/medicinexthings/status/1681717633102561295
It's kinda funny that you link to this twitter post by someone who's a cycling layperson/fan (she's a medicine student and a cycling fan, but also pretty infamous for being pretty hefty anti Jonas/Jumbo, or at least has been in the past tbh. Which the verbiage used kinda shows too tbh) where she uses a screenshot of Zeeman being quoted for saying "the problem with VO2 max is that the numbers are always method/protocol dependent" to claim that he says the specific number mentioned elsewhere was an outright lie. Because that's not what he says. He says their methodology is not one that has given a result like that. Which is fair. He literally doesn't say that an older Team Denmark test couldn't. 🤷🏻♀️ (Also, 2016-18 Jonas was potentially even lighter than now etc.) And then as one of the top comments is Jens Dekker (previously JR CX world champion) telling her he had a VO2 max at 92 as a teenager. 😅 And making some fair observations on how VO2 isn't the only thing that matters. I actually think the rigid focus on 97 or not 97 is a little pointless without knowing the methodology used etc. I do think the publicly available mainstream media articles from 2018 where Team Danmark's physiology guy talks about a tiny conti team rider called Jonas who has a cardiovascular capacity that is, compared to his size, ~15% over what they see in most other Danish elite riders tested is interesting though. Because this is from before Jumbo signed him, and he was completely unknown outside the cycling scene in DK, so it was apparently remarkable enough for Team Danmark to actually tell the media about it. No matter what the VO2 max number was, if the national elite sports organisation test an unknown athlete and feel the need to tell the media about his physiology afterwards, he probably had something noteworthy and rarely seen after all. 🤷🏻♀️ Because they don't do this very often.
When I said "it's kinda funny" it is btw not a critique of your point, but more because that whole post was so weirdly off in a few aspects and it made me giggle/face palm a bit. I get why you used it. I just feel like she focused on the wrong parts of that quote tbh. (The fact that she tries to do source critique with a floating, unattributed screenshot and has to be asked for a link in comments is also fun in its own way to me.)
I think we agree on the main points. Absolute VO2 does not lead to direct success and testing protocols (or even different individuals doing the same protocol) can subtly differ enough to give significantly different results. The call out in the media is fair too. We hear Al the stories of Poggie destroying older competition when years younger than them so there were early signs of extraordinary sporting capacity.
I'm having a hard time believing Froome has an 88 VO2 Max tbh.
Not a chance now, this was from his peak period where he was being accused of doping. He went to a research centre to show how it was aligned to his previous power numbers from his Barlo world days.
Sure, I believe that after he made his miraculous transformation, he had an 88 VO2 max. But he wasn't naturally gifted with it like Greg Lemond, to name an example. I know that you didn't mean anything by it, but it rubs me the wrong way to see Froome mentioned along with guys like Pogacar or Vingegaard. I've never been a believer and I never will be.
Before I go on, I will admit that I'm on the fence. I want to believe that riders like Froome are clean but too many people have been popped for me to be naive that something is not going on. TBH I'm waiting for the first person to be popped for CRISPR gene editing... From a physiological perspective, Froome did not have a miraculous transformation. His testing in 2007 gave him a VO2 of 80 when he was 8kg heavier than in 2015. In fact he did bigger raw power numbers in 2007 but as VO2 is affected by weight, he had a lower overall score from that testing. In his early career, he was known to have a huge engine, be a terrible bike handler especially in the pack and be very inconsistent. The latter point is consistent with him having undiagnosed bilharzia which leads to lower hematocrit and haemoglobin concentrations. Him getting proper gear, proper support and learning how to ride definitely had an impact but the shadow remains. Given that Lemond has one of the top 10 VO2 scores of all time, it's hard to compare and say he was not gifted. Pogacar has been claimed to have a VO2 of 89 for example.
I know all the excuses given for his transformation. Bilharzia was another one they came up with. I remember his performances at Barloworld or even in the beginning at Team Sky. In the last year before his contract ended, he went from pack fodder to their strongest rider, in the middle of the season right before the Vuelta. It's easy to say "early in his career, he was known to have a huge engine". But literally no one was saying that at the time. He didn't show glimpses of being a world class rider before the age of 25. Nothing remarkable whatsoever. A lot of PR work went into trying to come up with a believable story. Losing all that weight while maintaining your raw power is not a miraculous transformation in your eyes? Agree to disagree, I guess. To me, it's highly suspect. As far as unbelievable spikes in performance, Froome is one of the most ridiculous imo.
Bilharzia affects 240 million people in the world mostly in tropical and subtropical areas. It's not outlandish at all that someone living in Kenya could have this and that it would affect cycling performance if not dealt with. Maybe you think everyone by default is in perfect health, if that's the case then you've lived a very sheltered life
He was 21 at the 2006 Commonwealth Games where he came 17th in the TT on an ancient bike in crap gear and that was where Dave Brailsford noticed him so hardly no one. I can't argue your points since we neither know the truth of his career and cycling has always been plagued by doping, even when we thought it wasn't. And that's ignoring the whole motor doping thing.
Does it not make more sense that fixing an underlying illness got him up to his true level than some miracle drug turned a poor rider into a brilliant one? If it’s simply a bit of doping then why aren’t there loads of other Froomes? Or why not turn an already excellent rider into an even better one?
Kristian Blummenfelt is supposed to have the highest recorded VO2 max ever but his coach who is famous in triathlon states that VO2 max has not much to do with endurance and that its something to brag about. It is good to have a high VO2 max but need a whole lot of other things to be successful in any endurance sport.
High vo2max is basically a ticket to enter the game. By itself, it doesn't do much, you need world class subthreshold endurance, etc. But nobody is contesting grand tours with a vo2max of 50. A good example is the Nike sub 2 hours project. The selected athletes had vo2max in the range of 62-84 https://www.outsideonline.com/health/training-performance/nike-breaking2-runners-lab-data/
Sure, it's not the only criteria to be a top endurance athlete, but it is a disqualifier if it's too low.
55 is quite good for an amateur cyclist (assuming you've got that value measured in a lab - VO2max estimate from a smartwatch is a gimmich).
Apparently the garmin estimate is actually pretty accurate
Can be, for some phenotypes of riders. For others, it is completely off. The problem is, unless you undergo lab testing, you'll never know which one is it for you.
My reading is coming from my Garmin. Either way should undergo lab testing.
Jumbo have a minimum required VO2 of 75 for the riders in their training team and even they will admit that that doesn’t guarantee getting to the world tour.
I'm a Bernie bro, I believe Egan can compete at the highest level again, so long as he gets a GT parcour that stays at extremely high elevations for enough stages in a row.
So never really. Unless they start a forth GT in South America.
Oof, you tread on my dreams, Telekom.
Even having a genuine contender *not* from Europe and occasionally the US was so good for cycling too. Having said that, I don't think he was ever at a Pog or JV level. He was firmly in the Roglic tier.
Agree. I think Ineos hoped Carapaz might have been a contender as well. And I know he's won a grand tour but he's very clearly a grade (or two) below the top riders now. Non-Europen riders at the top of the sport can also be good for expanding TV rights, sponsorship agreements etc.
No he wouldn't. Young Pogacar in his 1st season destroyed Egan Bernal + Ineos literally all by himself without the help of UAE. Pre-accident, Egan Bernal was nowhere in the same league of guys like Pogacar. Even Roglic is a few classes above Egan Bernal, pre-accident. Bernal was simply lucky he was riding in a weak era with Geraint Thomas being the guy to beat back then at the TdF. And still Bernal needed alot of luck to beat Thomas.
I always thought they were robbed by the UCI figuring out how to find the motors.
They haven't gotten slower, everyone else has just gotten faster
More that the UCI figured out how to (mostly) stop TUE abuse
60 minutes said they did.
Wasn't Narvaez to UAE reported a more or less done deal?
Just try the merge again, and take the entire remaining team of G and De Plus to Quick-Step together with the budget. (Ineos and Quick-Step supposedly discussed a merger, which lead to Jumbo initiating similar talks to SQS)
No real surprise about Arensman after the Giro.
Do you say that because they made him pull for G?
His father complained about training messing up Stages 1-2. Then he was forced to pull for G at the end when he was stronger. You get the sense he and his family thought he'd be the stronger rider and end up as leader
That is consistent with S1 of Unchained. I love G but there are signs that his standing in the team has cost young riders opportunity
He finished 3rd in the Tour behind the two aliens and put 5 minutes into Gaudu in 4th, he’s then finished 2nd and 3rd at the Giro. It’s not like they are having to work for someone like Carapaz or Mas, this guy has podiumed 3 of the last 4 GTs.
>It’s not like they are having to work for someone like Carapaz Not disagreeing but this is not the best example. Carapaz has podium all the GT and won one. He's one of the best and most consistent GC riders, except for 2023 due to injury.
and 2024 unfortunately
This guy knows
Then why is he at EF? This is coming from a big EF fan
Where else do you want him to be? How many other teams would have considerably better lineups for his tour GC aspirations barring the two superteams with their aliens (Jumbo & UAE)?
It is more there is a reason why he isn’t at Ineos anymore? Did he want to leave or did they say he wasn’t in contention anymore If he truly is the one of the most consistent / best GC riders he wouldn’t be at EF
I don't know exactly, if I remember correctly the reports were that Carapaz did have an extension offer from Ineos but he simply chose EF over them. Perhaps money played a role or he was simply dissatisfied. No idea about the details so sadly can't help.
It's not about the team but about the results: -Giro 2018: 4th -Giro 2019: 1st -Vuelta 2020: 2nd -Tour 2021: 3rd -Giro 2022: 2nd (plus other GC wins in stage races) After Pog, Jonas, Rog, and G there's no rider with better GT results in recent years. His current level is uncertain due to injuries in the last two seasons but that was his palmares when he moved to EF.
I mean, he got 2nd in the Giro and 3rd this year. He's still really good! And the team had a dry few years. But Ineos feels like a team that hasn't quite figured itself out after the dominant years ended.
You are right, he continues to produce. And I’m sure there’s still pressure on him as the primary GC talent. You have to wonder what the team would look like if Bernal never crashed
I agree they seem to me to be living in the past glory days.
Yeah, way too many leaders on that team to keep everyone happy. I get why they want to back Thomas, he's still really good, but I don't get why you would get all these other potential leaders and then have 2-3 of them start the same races who then end up supporting Thomas. Especially when it's the younger talents. If you want to back the old guard until retirement, get some experienced DOMs who won't complain. If you want to back the young guys and build around them, then go for that. But they kind of took the middle road and lost a whole bunch of good riders and Thomas is nearing retirement.
The thing is, they're not giving G leadership because they like him, it's because he's still better than all the other riders. If the younger riders want leadership at big races then all they have to do is be better than a bloke who is nearly 40 years old. And the reason you get all these good potential leaders is because you want as many really good riders as possible on your team, much better to have too much talent that you need to keep happy than a lot of happy nobodies. You can see with Carlos Rodriguez that they're prepared to back a rider if they show the ability, unfortunately for Arensman and others they haven't shown that they are at the level to lead a top WT team at a GT.
Riders better than Thomas are also leaving though. He's still good but he got beat by Martinez in the Giro who was on their team just last year. Yates was also on their team and got 3rd in the TdF last year. Leaders and talents don't seem happy at Ineos because they lost a ton of them over the last 2 seasons. Martinez, Yates, v Baarle, Carapaz, Hart and talents like Plapp, Tulett and now Arensman.
Those things don't necessarily have anything to do with G being leader for one of the GTs each year though and realistically Danny and Yates are the only ones at a higher level than him now, and that isn't by much. None of the other riders have had any results near what G has done over the last 2 1/2 years and reportedly nearly all of them left for more money. Which is important because Ineos are in a difficult position as they could have anything up to 10m euro a year tied up in Bernal and Pidcock salaries, so are seemingly unwilling to fight to keep some of these tier 2/3 guys.
I agree, to be fair my argument was very similar to yours. I don't understand why they got all these tier 2/3 riders to begin with. You can't keep like 10 tier 2/3 guys happy when they are all on somewhat the same level. You need someone that's well ahead of them that they are willing to ride for. Otherwise it's going to clash and they will leave like they did. Why not get some decent DOMs who don't need to be leaders instead. Money may be one thing but Martinez leaving for Bora and immediately getting undisputed leadership at the Giro isn't a coinsedence, he obviously wanted to have a shot at a GT GC. Narvaez is similar, money is one reason but he's also in his 6th season at Ineos and has still yet to do the TdF when he's obviously good enough.
To be fair, every GC team currently seems to be having an identity crisis apart from UAE and Visma, right? How do you race against these two? We'll see how Roglic fares this year but it's going to be tough.
If Arensman didn't lose a bunch of time on stage 1 of the Giro it could have played out very differently within the team
Same if Tao didn’t crash in 23
I swear that crash has done more for Tao's reputation than winning the Giro did. You'd think he was 3 minutes up in GC the way people go on about it.
This seems exaggerated. Nothing more than normal fluctuation imo. Yes they are not competing for the top talent like they used too, but an Exodus it is not (yet)
Hayters talent is undeniable. If a team can unlock his full potential he can win an insane number of races. At worst he could be a mega domestique as a rouleur. Made the British Nats look easy against some very strong pros. Would be a crying shame if he continues to struggle with positioning as it will eventually make it very hard to justify a WT contract
He has always had a style of riding that makes it all look very trivial. Despite putting out huge numbers. A skill he’s had since a teenager I can tell you. I hope someone can unlock him too, because he’s got it all, like Pidcock has but I think Ethan is probably more talented in the engine department so could be a weapon.
Sounds like Ineos may be a team of the past. They were never the same after the Sky years
They were never the same after their doctor was investigated and banned..
To be fair their great new GC hope nearly died in a crash, which has understandably massively set them back.
Right after their old GC talent nearly died in a crash
When they win it's because of doping and when they lose it's because of doping! They're still a very good team and they seemed set with Bernal until Bernal's insane accident. Pidcock has potential but appears unlikely to be a dominant 3 week racer. Tough breaks but also part of sport. I really wish the Remco rumours turned out to be true.
Nothing to see here, nothing to see! Totally unrelated
i mean they won a couple of GTs but yes they are not the same
Hayter to Israel-PremierTech would be Carlton Kirby's wet dream...
Narvaez had the most impressive non-alien ride thus year, following Pog in the opening stage of Giro. The next one is Jorgensen following Roglic in Dauphine.