4 ms·
I was wrong... it's 10% down according the source I was remembering: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18921784 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18921784 and
by triplesec 14y ago
I was wrong... it's 10% down according the source I was remembering: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18921784 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18921784 and the 6 was from the power ratio of the top riders now down to around 6W/Kg.
Read more of the in-depth articles about Sky. Their training methods are hugely different, and came from the GB track cycling programme which has taken the world championships and Olympics by storm over the past decade. They're open about what it is, and unlike with others, it's only the performance which makes anyone wonder. Look at the figures, and remember, they're still 10% slower than Armstrong!
What they are using is demonstrable physiological science and feedback: a manifestation of the benefits of the Quantified Self approach!
- honzzz 14y agoThat article is interesting - it made me reconsider my opinion a bit. I certainly can be wrong about SKY team. I would have respect for them even if they were not clean because I have enough experience with cycling to be able to imagine how hard you have to work to get through any grand tour even if you are not clean. But if they are... good for them.