You are reading a single comment by @dan and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • There's an interesting chapter in Dr Hutch's book about the genetics of cyclists - it makes it pretty clear that whilst todays top cyclists are relatively predisposed genetically to being good at cycling, even they might only have10 out of a possible 23 polymorphisms necessary for excelling at endurance sports, and even then that's pretty rare. Even if Froome only had one more of these polymorphisms than his peers then he would be head and shoulders above them.

    I'm not necessarily saying he does (and I'm not saying he isn't going right up to the line with whatever is currently allowed drugs-wise), I'm just saying that the role genetics play is huge (much much MUCH larger than training, equipment or even doping) if he really is the physical freak everyone says he is, it's not a totally ridiculous conclusion that he might have one or two more polymorphisms than Armstrong (or whoever).

    Traditionally cycling has had access to quite a narrow, white, European gene pool. With a widening base of interest in cycling, the chances of people genetically predisposed to being good at it taking it up instead of say, running (or even nothing) are much greater. Exciting, and also a little bit terrifying.

About

Avatar for dan @dan started