Recent content by nickhalliwell

Sorry mate but actually that wasnt what was happening, people were basically suggesting froome is a mediocre rider who somehow is winnig the tdf. You may not of but if you look at many of the posts they were. I started reading this forum to get some info what was in walshs book and if it was...

Oh year walsh is out his mind... Armstrongs clearly talented even though there is a lot of evidence it wasnt a level playing field he won the WC and the tdf 7 times. He clearly had to train really hard and have some talent this isnt something he acknowledges. He also the doping issue is his...

Nor do I, personally think my positions fairly reasonable.... feel a lot of the people skeptical about doping turn it into a bit of a vendetta against the individual rather than a fair analysis of the situation.

I agree strongly about quintanna and am really excited to see how him and froome match up.... strange your unsure if hes doping but not froome esp as his teams full of ex dopers.... and if one team dominated the tour was them or saxo.... Get what your saying about early results but considering...

Riis less so as he rode in an era were whoever was most mental ie willing to go to 60% hmg values could win. The doping tests dont stop doping but certaintly seem to restrict the disparities which teams can dope.... unless one teams more sophisticated than the rest which is possible.... however...

What im saying is that its illogical to argue that tdf winners arent talented because they doped... especially when there are quite tight paramaters in which doping is allowed on the biopassport. Lots of you saying hes a clown on the bike just makes you seem bias and stupid. To win the tdf...

Why would I... I said I think they are probably all doping. So I assume whatever saxo are doing in terms of doping is the same as sky and moovistar. Your point that he may have a free pass is interesting but my question is why would he? Do you think sky have bribed the UCI significantly? Is...

whys that so funny... you think it makes sense for someone to win the tdf by 5 mins and be a poor cyclist? that seems mental

yer that is a fair point.... but still have to accept that the weight froome has got down to for his height as well as how hard he has trained give him an excellent physique to be a strong rider. Considering the last 20 years everyone has been doping it would seem fair to say froome is still...

I get that most think they are all doping... which i feel they must be as for horner to win he must have doped which shows there are massive loopholes in the biological passport. However a lot of the arguments on here are that froome is not a talented cyclist in an attempt to prove he is...

be more realistic If sky and froome are doping, one would think the rest of the peleton is also doping... this is simply a reasonable assumption. Contador, Valverde and most of moovistar are all ex dopers, if there a big loophole in the testing that allows significant gains whoever is winning...