Log in:  

Register

Froome Talk Only

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Irondan, Eshnar, Red Rick, Valv.Piti, Pricey_sky, Tonton, King Boonen

Re: Froome Talk Only

11 Sep 2017 15:49

Gung Ho Gun wrote:
MartinGT wrote:I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.

I'm not judging the "acceptable" part, but the Vuelta sure looks like the easiest GT to win (in terms of competition, not the difficulty of the stages). Most riders in the Vuelta have already raced a GT earlier in the season, whether it be the Giro or the Tour. Many others focus on the Worlds, and may even simply ignore the Vuelta. That's also one of the reasons that the Vuelta produces more once-in-a-lifetime high GC finishes such as Velits, Monfort, Deignan, ... I believe many riders who routinely go for GC in various GTs have their highest placings in the Vuelta. Especially the lower end of the top ten often looks less spectacular than Tour and Giro.

Going for the Vuelta after the Tour *is* different than winning the Giro and then having to face fresh competition, the strongest in the world, in the hardest GT of them all.


Aye, I get what you're saying.

3 Weeks after a Tour win by the Dawg and he seemed to dominate the Vuelta as much as he does the Tour. We mustn't forget that cycling especially a GT relies on a strong team. Sky have been lucky with lack of injuries / sickness. That's big thing.

We had though at the Vuelta a Nibali who didnt ride the Tour. Chaves who seemed rejuvinated after a difficuly personal issues and seemed motivated. Kruijswijk too.

The big contendors in Aru, Bardet etc who rode the Tour seemed cooked.

Are some of Sky's 'lesser' doms THAT much stronger than the 'lesser' doms of Lotto et al?
User avatar MartinGT
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,206
Joined: 04 Jul 2010 20:48

Re: Froome Talk Only

11 Sep 2017 17:34

Gung Ho Gun wrote:
MartinGT wrote:I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.

I'm not judging the "acceptable" part, but the Vuelta sure looks like the easiest GT to win (in terms of competition, not the difficulty of the stages). Most riders in the Vuelta have already raced a GT earlier in the season, whether it be the Giro or the Tour. Many others focus on the Worlds, and may even simply ignore the Vuelta. That's also one of the reasons that the Vuelta produces more once-in-a-lifetime high GC finishes such as Velits, Monfort, Deignan, ... I believe many riders who routinely go for GC in various GTs have their highest placings in the Vuelta. Especially the lower end of the top ten often looks less spectacular than Tour and Giro.

Going for the Vuelta after the Tour *is* different than winning the Giro and then having to face fresh competition, the strongest in the world, in the hardest GT of them all.

There are a few factors that affect the difference between a Giro-Tour double and a Tour-Vuelta double that have to be considered when comparing them and in your points above.

Firstly, in general, the average speed of the péloton is higher at the Tour than the Vuelta. The importance of Tour stages to the sponsors, the propensity for baking heat in southern Vuelta stages, the proliferation of sprinters' stages at the Tour with a full strength sprinting field vs. fewer bonanza sprinters fighting over the limited spinters' opportunities at the Vuelta (also, at the Vuelta even much of what looks flat isn't truly so, hence why Spanish cycling has produced few real superstar power sprinters, instead having a history of those who are more durable, like Tarzán Sáez, Óscar Freire and to the present day with the likes of Lobato and Barbero), so there are fewer teams as intent on forcing sprint outcomes at the Vuelta. The first reason is the most important, though; the Tour is the most important race of the season to pretty much every team save for the wildcard teams at the Giro and Vuelta (Cofidis excepted). The high average pace at the Tour means sticking with it and backing up a Giro GC performance with being among the strongest at the Tour is harder than being able to go great guns on a Unipuerto stage design after staying in a péloton going at a lower average speed in the Vuelta after a Tour GC performance. Landa is the best doubling up from Giro to Tour form we've had in a long time, but his form at the end of the Giro was affected by the crash in the Blockhaus stage and not being so clearly marked as a result towards the end of the race as there was no longer pressure on him to stay up near the front of the péloton at all times to protect his GC position.

Another thing with the Vuelta's GC race is that, especially when there is a hilly Worlds, there is a ready-made out for underperformance for several riders. Many of them, therefore, when their GC bid starts to fail, will let go rather than continue on. Take Cunego in 2009. After winning on Aitana and going well on Xorret del Catí and Velefique, he was well-placed but started suffering badly in the Sierra Nevada stage. Instead of trying to protect the GC position as he might have done otherwise, the fact that the Mendrisio Worlds suited him was the perfect "out" - he let go, came in with the autobus, went in the break the next day to win another stage and then, seeing no further stages to his liking, went home to prepare for the Worlds. On years with flatter Worlds, this is less common, although in 2011 we had a very odd race anyway owing to the underperformances of several pre-race favourites. The GC field drawn by the Vuelta can be - it is becoming less so but certainly was for a while - dependent on the nature of the World Championships course and how well it suits the hilly classic riders who can also do a strong GC.

Many riders who have gone really deep at the Tour don't fancy another go round so soon; this is the same with the Giro, but for a lot of riders, and certainly with riders who've not done the Tour before, they're unlikely to turn down the chance to compete at the Grand Boucle, whereas if you've already raced the biggest race of them all, it's perhaps a bit easier to turn down the Vuelta. We do see some freak GC performances, the likes of Velits, Deignan, Monfort and so on, at the Vuelta, but then we're less than 20 years removed from Paolo Bettini making the top 10 of the Giro. Deignan in fairness got given several minutes in a break, but the other two are striking. Monfort in fairness profited from the number of underperformances - he has 10 GT results between 11th and 20th - had Antón, Scarponi, Nibali and Rodríguez all been on more typical form at that Vuelta, they may well have had him down to the fringes of the top 10, which wouldn't seem that out there compared to the rest of his career. Velits, well, who knows. HTC were very good at wrestling GC results out of people you mightn't expect, and not just at the Vuelta, but Velits was the biggest success they had, but he seems to have been a one-hit wonder.
User avatar Libertine Seguros
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,919
Joined: 20 Feb 2010 11:54
Location: Land of Saíz

Re: Froome Talk Only

11 Sep 2017 21:20

hazaran wrote:math tells us the average speed in the Tour was 39.76 km/h versus 40.18 km/h in the Vuelta. Not to mention that sitting in the peloton all day for a 200k transition stage in the Tour is basically active recovery.

I take it you didn't catch the words "in general"?

2014: Tour 40,67km/h vs. Vuelta 39,20
2013: Tour 40,54km/h vs. Vuelta 39,70
2012: Tour 39,72km/h vs. Vuelta 38,96
2011: Tour 40,04km/h vs. Vuelta 39,06
2010: Tour 39,58km/h vs. Vuelta 37,18
2009: Tour 40,32km/h vs. Vuelta 37,73
2008: Tour 40,49km/h vs. Vuelta 40,49 (almost identical speeds)
2007: Tour 39,23km/h vs. Vuelta 40,49
2006: Tour 40,78km/h vs. Vuelta 39,48
2005: Tour 41,65km/h vs. Vuelta 40,85
2004: Tour 40,55km/h vs. Vuelta 39,04
2003: Tour 40,94km/h vs. Vuelta 42,52

As you can see, editions where the Tour is run at a faster overall speed vastly outnumber those where the Vuelta has a higher average speed.
User avatar Libertine Seguros
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,919
Joined: 20 Feb 2010 11:54
Location: Land of Saíz

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 09:17

I dont know how anyone can state that Froome should be up there in the record books...this is a professional cyclist with a more or less paltry 6 years under his belt

Froome last raced the Giro d'Italia back in 2010,when he was disqualified on stage 19 to Aprica, when he accepted a tow while trying to get to the feed zone to abandon because of knee pain


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/hinault-froomes-next-target-should-be-the-giro-ditalia/

WHY arent the journailsts picking up on the miniscule amount of pro cycling years he has.

He has only been racing since 2008- its just ludicrous that this is not being highlighted !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Kenyan-born rider competed for his homeland until switching to a British racing licence in 2008, the start of a successful relationship with the Great Britain Cycling Team
Read more at https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/gbcyclingteam/new/bio/Chris_Froome#3tl6kGCbAlorrj3p.99
User avatar Cycle Chic
Member
 
Posts: 1,740
Joined: 26 Sep 2009 18:24
Location: United Kingdom

12 Sep 2017 09:57

Your reading comprehension is severely lacking.
User avatar hrotha
Veteran
 
Posts: 15,369
Joined: 10 Jun 2010 20:45

Re:

12 Sep 2017 10:02

hrotha wrote:Your reading comprehension is severely lacking.


I beg to differ....and if thats your only criticism of my post, I am delighted.
User avatar Cycle Chic
Member
 
Posts: 1,740
Joined: 26 Sep 2009 18:24
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 10:55

Cycle Chic wrote:I dont know how anyone can state that Froome should be up there in the record books...this is a professional cyclist with a more or less paltry 6 years under his belt

Froome last raced the Giro d'Italia back in 2010,when he was disqualified on stage 19 to Aprica, when he accepted a tow while trying to get to the feed zone to abandon because of knee pain


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/hinault-froomes-next-target-should-be-the-giro-ditalia/


Its an absolute sham that they accept Chris Froome's explanation for his cheating here.

He got disqualified for holding onto a bike.

That is a fact.


Then after he got disqualified he came up with a story about how he wanted to abandon. Because cheaters never make up fake explanations for why they did bad right :o ?

Its even more ridiculous than that because in his book he claims the motorcyclist made him hang onto his bike. Froome didn't actually want to. AND a few seconds after Froome started to hold on (not his own choice) the comisars dqd him. It was classic Italian (those cheats) entrapment of poor innocent froomie.

Lets reprint his word as fact. While we are at it lets, write in articles that "Tyler Hamilton was mistakenly found positive for testostrone because he had a twin". I mean its his word so it must be fact right?
User avatar The Hitch
Veteran
 
Posts: 28,637
Joined: 14 Jun 2010 10:58
Location: London.

12 Sep 2017 13:04

http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/41241506
TdF, Vuelta & Worlds TT - no problem! :D
Rød pølse - Breakfast of Champions!
User avatar Robert5091
Member
 
Posts: 1,029
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 14:00

Libertine Seguros wrote:
hazaran wrote:math tells us the average speed in the Tour was 39.76 km/h versus 40.18 km/h in the Vuelta. Not to mention that sitting in the peloton all day for a 200k transition stage in the Tour is basically active recovery.

I take it you didn't catch the words "in general"?

2014: Tour 40,67km/h vs. Vuelta 39,20
2013: Tour 40,54km/h vs. Vuelta 39,70
2012: Tour 39,72km/h vs. Vuelta 38,96
2011: Tour 40,04km/h vs. Vuelta 39,06
2010: Tour 39,58km/h vs. Vuelta 37,18
2009: Tour 40,32km/h vs. Vuelta 37,73
2008: Tour 40,49km/h vs. Vuelta 40,49 (almost identical speeds)
2007: Tour 39,23km/h vs. Vuelta 40,49
2006: Tour 40,78km/h vs. Vuelta 39,48
2005: Tour 41,65km/h vs. Vuelta 40,85
2004: Tour 40,55km/h vs. Vuelta 39,04
2003: Tour 40,94km/h vs. Vuelta 42,52

As you can see, editions where the Tour is run at a faster overall speed vastly outnumber those where the Vuelta has a higher average speed.


That Vuelta speed though.... I wonder if they were going so fast because of the EPO or the attempt to escape Nozal's stinky pits? Top three are hilarious, but I guess it was de rigueur then.
The poster formerly known as yespatterns.
User avatar GraftPunk
Member
 
Posts: 491
Joined: 21 Feb 2017 21:15
Location: High Desert Steppe

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 14:23

Cycle Chic wrote:I dont know how anyone can state that Froome should be up there in the record books...this is a professional cyclist with a more or less paltry 6 years under his belt

Froome last raced the Giro d'Italia back in 2010,when he was disqualified on stage 19 to Aprica, when he accepted a tow while trying to get to the feed zone to abandon because of knee pain


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/hinault-froomes-next-target-should-be-the-giro-ditalia/

WHY arent the journailsts picking up on the miniscule amount of pro cycling years he has.

He has only been racing since 2008- its just ludicrous that this is not being highlighted !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Kenyan-born rider competed for his homeland until switching to a British racing licence in 2008, the start of a successful relationship with the Great Britain Cycling Team
Read more at https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/gbcyclingteam/new/bio/Chris_Froome#3tl6kGCbAlorrj3p.99


I honestly do not understand what you are getting at. Minuscule amount of pro cycling years? He became pro in 2008 at age 22 - nothing special there. He was a decent talent but his African connection was the most remarkable about him. His first pro year was quite good, of course expectations weren't that high. There was nothing really that pointed to the astonishing capabilities he exhibited all of a sudden in the Vuelta three years later, but you know, that's practically the whole raison d'être of this thread, so what's your point? :confused:
tweak37
Junior Member
 
Posts: 73
Joined: 23 Apr 2013 15:39

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 15:13

Libertine Seguros wrote:
hazaran wrote:math tells us the average speed in the Tour was 39.76 km/h versus 40.18 km/h in the Vuelta. Not to mention that sitting in the peloton all day for a 200k transition stage in the Tour is basically active recovery.

I take it you didn't catch the words "in general"?

2014: Tour 40,67km/h vs. Vuelta 39,20
2013: Tour 40,54km/h vs. Vuelta 39,70
2012: Tour 39,72km/h vs. Vuelta 38,96
2011: Tour 40,04km/h vs. Vuelta 39,06
2010: Tour 39,58km/h vs. Vuelta 37,18
2009: Tour 40,32km/h vs. Vuelta 37,73
2008: Tour 40,49km/h vs. Vuelta 40,49 (almost identical speeds)
2007: Tour 39,23km/h vs. Vuelta 40,49
2006: Tour 40,78km/h vs. Vuelta 39,48
2005: Tour 41,65km/h vs. Vuelta 40,85
2004: Tour 40,55km/h vs. Vuelta 39,04
2003: Tour 40,94km/h vs. Vuelta 42,52

As you can see, editions where the Tour is run at a faster overall speed vastly outnumber those where the Vuelta has a higher average speed.


It would also be interesting to know the difference between the average speed of the first and of the last riders.
User avatar lenric
Member
 
Posts: 1,324
Joined: 19 May 2014 21:52

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 15:48

For this year's vuelta, Froome finished the 3,234 km in 82:30:02, average speed 40.29kph

Last place finisher Connor Dunne finished in about 87 hours, average speed 38 kph
ngent41
New Member
 
Posts: 17
Joined: 08 Feb 2013 22:26

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 15:56

Cycle Chic wrote:
WHY arent the journailsts picking up on the miniscule amount of pro cycling years he has.

He has only been racing since 2008- its just ludicrous that this is not being highlighted !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of the top 20 in the Vuelta, only Nibali, Contador and Roche have been pro riders longer than Froome

What a peculiar argument
Parker
Member
 
Posts: 1,188
Joined: 04 Mar 2011 01:20

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 16:01

GraftPunk wrote:That Vuelta speed though.... I wonder if they were going so fast because of the EPO or the attempt to escape Nozal's stinky pits? Top three are hilarious, but I guess it was de rigueur then.

Yea, the 2003 Vuelta (and the 2001 one) were run at a speed faster than any Tour has ever been, 2001 is at the height of the Vueltas for the time triallists era (Casero won) with short mountain stages on roads everybody had come to know by then, and 2003... well, it opened up with a supersonic TTT and then was almost all about 5% uphill rumblings, which Isidro and his body odour was able to overcome until the last. The race started in Asturias and wound its way eastward, precluding all that tricky terrain across the Sierra Cantabrica in the north that includes all those false flats, unmarked repechos, inconsistent climbs and steep gradients, and instead filling the race with tempo climbing. There was also 96km of individual flat time trialling, which we pretty much never see now, to go with the super-fast TTT and the final MTT.

These were the decisive stages that year:
Stage 2: Cangas de Onis - Cangas de Onis, 148km
Image

Stage 7: Huesca - Cam Basque (Cauterets), 190km (MTF of 16km @ 5,1%, only the last 5km of any real toughness)
Image

Stage 8: Cauterets - Pla de Beret, 166km (MTF of 20km @ 4%, not like the 2008 version over Bonaigua!)
Image

Stage 9: Vielha-Val d'Aran - Andorra-Estaciò de Grandvalira, 175km (MTF of 26,8km @ 5,1%)
Image

Stage 15: Valdepeñas - Sierra de la Pandera, 172km (very steep MTF, but Unipuerto stage)
Image

Stage 16: Jaén - Sierra Nevada, 162km (MTF of 30km @ 5,7%, but the conventional side of the climb which by this time was ceasing to be as selective and was on a Unipuerto stage)
Image

Stage 19: La Vega de Alcobendas - Collado Villalba, 164km (one of the easier Sierra de Madrid finishes of recent years, and Navacerrada is a climb that pretty much everybody knew like the backs of their hands at this point)
Image

Stage 20: San Lorenzo de El Escorial - Alto de Abantos, 11,2km (CRI)(one of only two really inconsistent, misleading climbs compared to the great many in the last few years, and the stage where Isidro finally cracked)
Image

In addition to this it was high end late EPO era, of course, and there was also two sprint stages that finished a fair way below their start points, encouraging a high speed - Stage 5 from Soria to Zaragoza and stage 12 from Cuenca to Albacete. There were also multiple stages with just one hilly obstacle late on - Stage 11 to Cuenca and stage 17 to Córdoba, for example.
User avatar Libertine Seguros
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,919
Joined: 20 Feb 2010 11:54
Location: Land of Saíz

12 Sep 2017 17:58

at the beginning of the 2000's , vuelta a espana was reduced to only 2800-3000 km in total length.


it was said that it will make it a more human race :P
User avatar jens_attacks
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,746
Joined: 08 Sep 2009 18:00

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 18:02

Parker wrote:
Cycle Chic wrote:
WHY arent the journailsts picking up on the miniscule amount of pro cycling years he has.

He has only been racing since 2008- its just ludicrous that this is not being highlighted !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of the top 20 in the Vuelta, only Nibali, Contador and Roche have been pro riders longer than Froome

What a peculiar argument

The argument about Froome being a late comer to the sport has been used a few times before, but as far as I can recall not as an argument for him doping but instead as an argument for why his late blossoming talent is explicable. Notwithstanding that he has been racing longer than since 2008 anyway - he was a pro with Konica Minolta in 2007, but it was in 2008 that he switched national allegiance from Kenya to Great Britain. And he had been with the UCI's World Cycling Center in Aigle before that (that's where the alleged test that Vaughters brought up where he showed he had the numbers to be a GT winner was taken). While he may not have had the instant development that young talents in places like Belgium, France or Italy get, he's also far from a Primož Roglič or a Michael Woods either - genuine late converts to the sport after competing in another.

Therefore, the crux of the issue should not be how long he was a pro, but why it took him until he was about to lose his contract at the end of his 5th pro season to discover the level that he now has, which several possible reasons have been mooted for but little satisfactorily explains, as it either raises further unanswered questions or doesn't convince as a justification for such a marked performance increase. Sure, his time at the top has been comparatively short as a result of that late emergence, but his pro career is already as long or longer than long-established legends of the sport like Jan Janssen, José Manuel Fuente, Luís Ocaña, Fred de Bruyne, Abraham Olano, Marco Pantani. Rominger is perhaps your best parallel in terms of career path to Froome's, although he turned pro much later on than Froome did so it's difficult to judge as a direct comparison doesn't really match up.
User avatar Libertine Seguros
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,919
Joined: 20 Feb 2010 11:54
Location: Land of Saíz

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 18:12

Libertine Seguros wrote:
Parker wrote:
Cycle Chic wrote:
WHY arent the journailsts picking up on the miniscule amount of pro cycling years he has.

He has only been racing since 2008- its just ludicrous that this is not being highlighted !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of the top 20 in the Vuelta, only Nibali, Contador and Roche have been pro riders longer than Froome

What a peculiar argument

The argument about Froome being a late comer to the sport has been used a few times before

his pro career is already as long or longer than long-established legends of the sport like

The poster wasn't saying any of that. It was quite the opposite.
Parker
Member
 
Posts: 1,188
Joined: 04 Mar 2011 01:20

Re: Froome Talk Only

12 Sep 2017 19:00

The Hitch wrote:
Cycle Chic wrote:I dont know how anyone can state that Froome should be up there in the record books...this is a professional cyclist with a more or less paltry 6 years under his belt

Froome last raced the Giro d'Italia back in 2010,when he was disqualified on stage 19 to Aprica, when he accepted a tow while trying to get to the feed zone to abandon because of knee pain


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/hinault-froomes-next-target-should-be-the-giro-ditalia/


Its an absolute sham that they accept Chris Froome's explanation for his cheating here.

He got disqualified for holding onto a bike.

That is a fact.


Then after he got disqualified he came up with a story about how he wanted to abandon. Because cheaters never make up fake explanations for why they did bad right :o ?

Its even more ridiculous than that because in his book he claims the motorcyclist made him hang onto his bike. Froome didn't actually want to. AND a few seconds after Froome started to hold on (not his own choice) the comisars dqd him. It was classic Italian (those cheats) entrapment of poor innocent froomie.

Lets reprint his word as fact. While we are at it lets, write in articles that "Tyler Hamilton was mistakenly found positive for testostrone because he had a twin". I mean its his word so it must be fact right?



he is such a gentleman as well(your words)
rick james
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,041
Joined: 02 Sep 2014 13:21
Location: Ecosse

12 Sep 2017 22:01

http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/41218253
When asked whether it was possible to win all three Tours in one year, he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I wouldn't say it's impossible, nothing's impossible, but certainly it would take some doing."


http://news.sky.com/story/chris-froome-should-go-for-grand-tour-treble-next-year-says-bernard-hinault-11030362
And 62-year-old Bernard Hinault, one of only six riders in history to win the Vuelta, the Tour de France and the Giro d'Italia, sees no reason why Froome cannot attempt to win all three Tours in the same year.

"He should try that," said five-time Tour de France winner Hinault.
Rød pølse - Breakfast of Champions!
User avatar Robert5091
Member
 
Posts: 1,029
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

12 Sep 2017 23:04

We've seen a few arctic Giro with debilitating Stages, to recover and acclimatise for the heat of the Tour can't be easy.
Choppy Warburton
New Member
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 21 May 2015 12:37

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 70kmph, Avoriaz, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Norks74 and 19 guests

Back to top