Its hard to take Walsh or Kimmage serious as they are badly researched.
Surely it wouldnt take much for either of them to actully get a guy with a Phd in Physics/Biology and crunch these wattage figures and cut throught the bullshit.
I was mildly amused that Kimmage got the hump that Brailsford wouldn’t give him some doctors number. Couldn’t he have looked up the phone book book himself?
That’s exactly what has happened. That’s what Russ Tucker has done for example. And other experts in the field. But they don’t have reliable figures that they can trust other than the “hacked” ones which Sky are changing their mind about - hacked or fake. Otherwise it’s estimates and the estimates tell a story very different to the one Sky tell.
I’m no expert on cycling @rocko but do they need to rely on figure published by Sky to make these calculations. Are there not enough variables factually availble that would allow them to deduce if these performances are possible undrugged… ?
Personally I don’t see why Froome should have to make any figures available or defend himself in the court of public opinion if others aren’t doing it.
While his and Sky’s performance on that stage last week was US Postal-esque, at the same time, taking a minute and a half out of a rival is proof of nothing.
Still have no doubt that him and the other Sky riders are juiced up good, and the rest of them.
I’m with @Kinvara_s_Passion on this one. After all the years chasing Lance and Froome around you’d think Kimmage and Walsh would have some journeyman knowledge of power, wattage, etc. I can’t imagine it’s rocket science.
In one of the Kimmage articles recently he referenced going around with Sky on the Tour that time and the Sky fella* said he’d rather have Kimmage “on the inside pissing out.”
Kimmage is too much of a cunt to take up that role, but Walsh is obviously happy to.
Must get tiring to constantly rage against the machine in fairness, although who would listen to Kimmage if he wasn’t?