Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

Page 281 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Should this thread be shut down?

  • No

    Votes: 10 35.7%
  • No

    Votes: 24 85.7%

  • Total voters
    28
  • Poll closed .
Re:

Isaak-Gabriel said:
Quintana, Aru etc should do a test too, why Froome only
Well because as Brailsford said "“There are opportunities to do what we can to make the unbelievable believable.”

The other 2 showed talent young and realistic progression in their careers. But if they wanted to share their data that would be fine.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
dacooley said:
Red Rick said:
HelloDolly said:
So Chris Froome does has the attributes of a Tour de France champion

http://chrisfroome.esquire.co.uk/

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/12/froomes-data-released-showing-impressive-lab-results-as-well-as-some-limited-blood-test-figures/

Guess some bias idiots on here will continue to call him a mutant and ET , no matter what
If you think that has any credibility whatsoever, you haven't been paying attention
that's much easier - haters gonna hate.
It's not about hating, it's about knowing when research means something. They have 1 data point in 2007. Then they directly translate his power output to his super thin output, cause they assume that power output won't change when you change into a skeleton. They assume he's clean during the tests because they test him (if they even do that, and if they'd do the same tests they'd do as when he was racing, it would just be selection bias).

Froome and Sky put themselves out there with their cleaner than thou attitude, then they follow that up with empty arguments, contradictions, and more ******. Why do they do that? Because people fall for it, even though Armstrong did the exact same thing and was busted only a couple of years ago.
true, but it should be understood that whatever data sky gives to the world, overwhelming majority would treat it critically. on here, people tend to love or hate to the last and extremely rarely change their minds. :p
 
Mar 27, 2015
435
0
0
“It’s interesting and I’d like to do more,” he says. “One of the reasons was to understand more about my physiology and maybe find ways to be better. I’d like to do the VO2 test again, because I was definitely quite tired. I can do better.”
Chris the Great with a great attitde. Easy to be a fanboy. Maybe someday a Finn (or a Dutch) get a podium as well.



 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Re:

hrotha said:
Why would you discuss this here instead of at the Clinic?

Was wondering the same thing.

It really belongs in the clinic, and even has a thread of it's own.

Posting about it here will be in vain, as posts will be removed.

Thank you.
 
I disagree, there are a lot of people who don't want to post in the clinic. What is wrong with talking about Froome's physiology in the Froome thread?

For Red Rick who implied that scientists made up the data. No one would sacrifice their careers for a cyclist. And that is what fudging data for a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal would entail. Career suicide. FWIW, Swart isn't even British.
 
Mar 27, 2015
435
0
0
Re:

djpbaltimore said:
For Red Rick who implied that scientists made up the data. No one would sacrifice their careers for a cyclist. And that is what fudging data for a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal would entail. Career suicide. FWIW, Swart isn't even British.
And Swart seems to be highly respected by Tucker as well. Moreover, he seems to be very correct and patient as the discussion with that @ewonidiot shows.
 
Re:

djpbaltimore said:
I disagree, there are a lot of people who don't want to post in the clinic. What is wrong with talking about Froome's physiology in the Froome thread?

For Red Rick who implied that scientists made up the data. No one would sacrifice their careers for a cyclist. And that is what fudging data for a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal would entail. Career suicide. FWIW, Swart isn't even British.
I agree with this ....but unfortunately those who don't want to accept anything about Froome's ability will throw every red herring they can find into the mix to justify their steadfast bias
Its grasping at straws to build shaky arguments as so called proof of cheating & underhand behaviour. As if scientist from anywhere would jeopardize their standing/careers for once off tests. But I guess as the argument here goes they are more likely to do so in England ...pure bull & racist

And I am not particularly a Froome fan ...in fact as a rider while I think he is very good I can take him or leave him
I just don't want to sit around letting the rubbish he has to contend with go unchallenged
 
Re: Re:

Carols said:
Isaak-Gabriel said:
Quintana, Aru etc should do a test too, why Froome only
Well because as Brailsford said "“There are opportunities to do what we can to make the unbelievable believable.”

The other 2 showed talent young and realistic progression in their careers. But if they wanted to share their data that would be fine.
And given the history of the sport you still feel comfortable making that call?
 
Mar 27, 2015
435
0
0
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
pink_jersey said:
6,26 watt/kg?! :)) That's insane, but Contador can do better. Didn't he had 6,78 watt/kg on Verbier? Alberto to win TdF 2016.
Alberto's FTP is 420W same as Froome but Alberto weighs much less :)
Do you have a link to a lab test which confirms that? A couple of blood tests would be fine as well :)
 
Re:

djpbaltimore said:
I disagree, there are a lot of people who don't want to post in the clinic. What is wrong with talking about Froome's physiology in the Froome thread?

For Red Rick who implied that scientists made up the data. No one would sacrifice their careers for a cyclist. And that is what fudging data for a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal would entail. Career suicide. FWIW, Swart isn't even British.
I can think of a few who have...others could easily do the same today.
 
May 13, 2015
2,101
0
0
Re:

pink_jersey said:
6,26 watt/kg?! :)) That's insane, but Contador can do better. Didn't he had 6,78 watt/kg on Verbier? Alberto to win TdF 2016.
That was Contador almost 7 years ago. Not the 33 year old Contador.

And do you honestly believe that the other teams are studying Froome's numbers? From what I can read, they don't even care.
 
Re: Re:

WheelofGear said:
pink_jersey said:
6,26 watt/kg?! :)) That's insane, but Contador can do better. Didn't he had 6,78 watt/kg on Verbier? Alberto to win TdF 2016.
That was Contador almost 7 years ago. Not the 33 year old Contador.

And do you honestly believe that the other teams are studying Froome's numbers? From what I can read, they don't even care.
They are really, really stupid if don't care...Saxo, Movistar and Astana should take a look at this.

Yeah, Contador is 7 years older but I don't think his level dropped so much. I think he can beat Froome.
 
May 13, 2015
2,101
0
0
Re: Re:

pink_jersey said:
WheelofGear said:
pink_jersey said:
6,26 watt/kg?! :)) That's insane, but Contador can do better. Didn't he had 6,78 watt/kg on Verbier? Alberto to win TdF 2016.
That was Contador almost 7 years ago. Not the 33 year old Contador.

And do you honestly believe that the other teams are studying Froome's numbers? From what I can read, they don't even care.
They are really, really stupid if don't care...Saxo, Movistar and Astana should take a look at this.

Yeah, Contador is 7 years older but I don't think his level dropped so much. I think he can beat Froome.
Maybe they will, but I highly doubt it. They don't seem to be interested in it.

Personally I think the rider with the best chance of (although very unlikely) beating Froome is Aru. Especially when it comes to responding to Froome's acceleration. Contador and Quintana's best chance is that the race turns into a Giro-like marathon with early attacks and riders spread all over the map. On a MTF, Froome is nearly unbeatable with those brutal watts.
 
Re: Re:

Jspear said:
I can think of a few who have...others could easily do the same today.
Think about what the scientists would have to gain by doing this though. Virtually nada. It is not like they are getting a major grant ($$$$) to look at the physiology of Froome. This is a side project for all of them. If they have no incentive to cheat, why would they falsify data? In the small community of scientists, whose careers are dependent on peer-review, reputation is your number one calling card. Scientific misconduct is something that can't be easily washed away. And due to the collaborative nature of the study, many scientists would have to be involved. Suggesting that this is a likely outcome is ludicrous IMO.
 
Re: Re:

dacooley said:
WheelofGear said:
LaFlorecita said:
You really believe that Contador would have been able to hang on to Froome on Pierre St Martin if he was in peak shape?
not a bad question in general, but a stupid one for laflo. :)
I'll let her respond herself, but maybe it had more to do with Aru...Top form Aru couldn't beat AC (not in tip top form) in the Giro, but he's going to be named as keeping up with Froomie?

We've seen a decent form AC and Froome go at it. Froome won, AC was on the same time though. Also Quintana gained more time on Froome in the mountains this year, yet the above poster named Aru over him as well.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
HelloDolly said:
Red Rick said:
HelloDolly said:
So Chris Froome does has the attributes of a Tour de France champion

http://chrisfroome.esquire.co.uk/

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/12/froomes-data-released-showing-impressive-lab-results-as-well-as-some-limited-blood-test-figures/

Guess some bias idiots on here will continue to call him a mutant and ET , no matter what
If you think that has any credibility whatsoever, you haven't been paying attention
I have been paying attention ...this is what was asked for and this is what he gave..VO2 max for instance was the cry of many cynics on here
And what's more it is more than what other riders are providing
But hey no matter what he does there will the same people with the big stick, sticking it to Froome and SKY
Give us your data
Oh it s not the right data
Oh we don't believe it
Oh we wanted this and not that

And you talk about credibility and paying attention
You think after all the stuff Sky's said, all the contradictions, all the media hype, this would be to go ahead with a clean slate? Power date proves nothing, VO2 max proves zilch. It was done in England for **** sake. Stuff like that is just too easy to get away with and everyone's buying it. There's just very few ways to prove you're legit, and doing such a dumb test certainly isn't one of them. Guy wins tour, tests himself 2 weeks later. Yeah, that's Tour winner power output right there. No **** ****.

I'm not gonna believe shams like this until someone comes up with a legit reason for me to not be sceptic about it.
Have you heard of Ross Tucker ? A South African sports scientist who is a big sceptic. He said the testing and the people doing it are above reproach and have very high reputations. You think two world class scientists are going risk their careers and reputations and do that, likewise for the company GSK. I think I'll take his and their word over what you said.
 
May 13, 2015
2,101
0
0
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
LaFlorecita said:
WheelofGear said:
LaFlorecita said:
You really believe that Contador would have been able to hang on to Froome on Pierre St Martin if he was in peak shape?
Yes no doubt in my mind :confused: Berto has put out 5.9 W/kg before on long climbs, no problemo
Froome was at least 6 that day
I heard he was 6.1 or 6.2. Berto can't do that anymore. A 26 year old Contador could.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY