WATT NONSENSE!
Sky: False data used to smear Froome
IT REMAINS to be seen if Chris Froome continues to face doping accusations here at the Tour de France, given the determination in some quarters to discredit the Briton’s right to the yellow jersey.
But Froome and his Team Sky bosses may at least have silenced his chief accuser after publishing performance data on the climb that is central to the debate since last Tuesday’s first mountain stage.
France 2, the Tour’s host broadcaster, employed Dr Pierre Sallet — a professor of sports physiology — to analyse Froome’s 15.3km climb to La Pierre-Saint-Martin, quoting figures he said only doped riders had achieved in the past.
The controversy centres on the power-to-weight ratio generated by Froome. This indicates how well a cyclist can climb and the figures quoted by France 2’s expert were strong stuff.
They made all the more impact because Sky principal Sir Dave Brailsford happened to be a studio guest. Brailsford admitted he had been ambushed by France 2 and did not have the numbers at hand to even begin to respond.
But on the Tour’s second rest day here, Sky gave the facts. Seated between Brailsford and Tim Kerrison, Sky’s head of athlete performance, Froome was calm. As was his pregnant wife Michelle, sitting among the journalists.
Sallet had told the France 2 audience that Froome produced an average of 7.04 watts per kilogramme on the climb, estimating the British rider’s weight at 71kg. Now, at a hotel next to an abattoir, Kerrisons laughtered t hose figures.
Kerrison said Sallet had been wildly inaccurate. For a start, Froome weighs just 67.5kg, thus reducing his w/kg reading to 6.13.
Kerrison then added that Sallet’s figures must be reduced by a further six per cent because Froome uses osymetric (oval) chainrings which ‘ over- report’ power and that the true reading should therefore be even lower at 5.78w/kg.
If that is all too scientific, here is a bit of context. Lance Armstrong’s preparation for those seven Tour victories was built around his power-to-weight-ratio. If he could climb the Col de la Madone — at 13.1km a similar distance to La Pierre-Saint-Martin, with similar gradients — at 6.7w/kg he was confident he could win the Tour.
That, of course, would be achieved in a one-off fitness test, not 152km into the 10th stage of the Tour. But it does prove there was nothing superhuman about Froome last week, even if the manner in which he dropped his rivals 6.4km from the summit was breathtaking.
His detractors are sure to respond. Froome also trains on the Madone, close to his Monaco home, and his record for the climb tops Armstrong’s. At 30min 09sec he is 38 seconds quicker than the Unfair rap: Sky insist that Froome (yellow jersey) has been judged on inaccurate figures American stripped of those seven titles, but then Richie Porte, Froome’s training partner and team-mate, has the record at 29:40 — and he lost a minute to Froome on that climb last week.
‘If you are going to present something on television, then you do have an obligation to get your facts right,’ said Brailsford.
‘What France 2 did, putting out that headline: seven watts per kilo, a picture of Armstrong and a picture of (Jan) Ullrich — that was so wildly wrong that we thought we should just correct that . . . and give the concrete facts so people could judge for themselves.’
Kerrison, who made the point that Froome’s power actually dropped after the 24- second ‘attack’ that destroyed main rival Nairo Quintana, agreed. ‘People, especially scientists, have a responsibility to ensure the information that they share is accurate,’ he said.
Asked if it was ethical for a doctor of physiology to publish calculations based on assumptions, he said: ‘You should ask him and France 2 that question, but with great power comes great responsibility. If you have the power to influence what millions think, you have the responsibility to make sure your f acts are accurate.’
Froome showed no emotion. ‘I’m not sure if numbers are going to fix everything, but we’re definitely trying to be as open and transparent as possible,’ he said.
‘We’ve been asked more questions than any team. I’ve been asked more questions. I’d like to think we’re answering those questions.’
Nobody is so naive as to think there will not be further questions if Froome excels on the next four mountain stages in the Alps but if the roadside abuse also continues, has it reached the point where he might fear repercussions if he makes a strong ascent?
Brailsford said: ‘If Chris feels he can attack and leave everybody behind, it would be a travesty if he thought, “Oh, I’d better not”.’
Indeed it would.