“Overall, the data suggests that the performances on AX3 fell within a range that could be expected for a relatively clean peloton with the exception of Froome. His performance on AX3 is clearly flagged as an outlier and warrants healthy rationale skepticism. Going forward, the progression of his performance should be closely followed over the rest of the Tour.”
doubt is ‘healthy’ and ‘rationale’. that is the the conclusion from Scott Richards of Cyclismas.com, which can be read in its original form here, or in a more digestible form here in Outdoor Magazine.
incredibly, after all we have been through, there are still people saying we should just trust blindly when we see performances that are on a level or even greater than those performed by riders who we know achieved similar feats when aided by performance enhancing drugs.
the debate has finally moved from the murky shadows – at least in some circles – and we have to persist in this. otherwise, it is back to square one.
a ‘healthy ‘ and ‘rational skepticism’. an absolute requirement.
*thank you to Sean Hogan for sending in this link