hrotha wrote:Come on, give us some credit. Who distorts your posts, other than the few regular trolls? Might as well never post anything again in that case.
Could you elaborate on the content of those discussions a bit? That's all we're asking. Moncoutié has long been held as a standard of what clean riders could achieve, so if we have to reassess our starting assumptions we're going to need more than this.
Moncutie had a reputation the same as Hesjedal or Dan Martin had it, and a lot or riders
I believe in Moncutie clearness, but as well as others, and of course I am no sure.
If you assume Moncutie was clean, one of his good perfomances was in 2009 in Mont Faron,
A young talent working for his leader was there with him that day. They three put some time to the other riders:http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=10427
Moncutie is clean, ok, you know a man "lamamola" in other forum about Hivert clean, he was five that day, why not Froome clean that day? Why not that young man after three years could not be the best one, after cure a disease and learn a lot about cycling?
To think Moncutie is clean and Froome no make no sense for me.
2005, a year still in the dark era, before OP. Maybe his best year:
3rd in Cataluña:http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=2183
6th in Dauphiné, among dopers:http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=2280
He won a stage in the Tour (that is more believeble), or 6th in San Sebastian, just behind Purito, Garcelli,...
He won in Manzaneda in La Vuelta 2008, been 36 years old, to Beñat Intxausti, one of the good riders in The Giro, the same Vuelta that Froome started to show his potential. Both of them were thinking in the stage.
I think that was possible without doping, pretty hard to believe, but possible, but this kind of argument other people here use to say: oh, that was no possible.