Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

Page 300 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Re: Re:

dacooley said:
LaFlorecita said:
I want whatever Taxus is smoking, please :D
the complete lack of objectivity from the opposite side is amusing too
I have been very objetive. I have given arguments and I put objetives data.

The other part simply invented one story in their minds and is impossible to put it out of them. But time will give reasons.

I remerbered when in the spanish forum some people wrote after his second place at la Vuelta (moral winner): this is an strange result, this man will be as Jaskula and things like that, he will disapear. And I replied: you are wrong, froome is very good and will improve a lot, he is here to stay. That people never admited his mistake and has year by year an explanation.

I was right, in that and in a lot of things later aboput Froome, but I am the wrong or I smoke something. There are more than 16 years I dont smoke anything ilegal.

If they are happy that way, no problem... But reality in another. And truth is just one.
 
Re: Re:

Taxus4a said:
dacooley said:
LaFlorecita said:
I want whatever Taxus is smoking, please :D
the complete lack of objectivity from the opposite side is amusing too
I have been very objetive. I have given arguments and I put objetives data.

The other part simply invented one story in their minds and is impossible to put it out of them. But time will give reasons.

I remerbered when in the spanish forum some people wrote after his second place at la Vuelta (moral winner): this is an strange result, this man will be as Jaskula and things like that, he will disapear. And I replied: you are wrong, froome is very good and will improve a lot, he is here to stay. That people never admited his mistake and has year by year an explanation.

I was right, in that and in a lot of things later aboput Froome, but I am the wrong or I smoke something. There are more than 16 years I dont smoke anything ilegal.

If they are happy that way, no problem... But reality in another. And truth is just one.
there is no complete objectivity in suchlike discussions as ones believe in froome and selflessly defend him and others will always remain non-believers due to numerous reasons discussed for years on here.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Re: Re:

dacooley said:
Taxus4a said:
dacooley said:
LaFlorecita said:
I want whatever Taxus is smoking, please :D
the complete lack of objectivity from the opposite side is amusing too
I have been very objetive. I have given arguments and I put objetives data.

The other part simply invented one story in their minds and is impossible to put it out of them. But time will give reasons.

I remerbered when in the spanish forum some people wrote after his second place at la Vuelta (moral winner): this is an strange result, this man will be as Jaskula and things like that, he will disapear. And I replied: you are wrong, froome is very good and will improve a lot, he is here to stay. That people never admited his mistake and has year by year an explanation.

I was right, in that and in a lot of things later aboput Froome, but I am the wrong or I smoke something. There are more than 16 years I dont smoke anything ilegal.

If they are happy that way, no problem... But reality in another. And truth is just one.
there is no complete objectivity in suchlike discussions as ones believe in froome and selflessly defend him and others will always remain non-believers due to numerous reasons discussed for years on here.
Fact and data are always objetive, and time is giving me reason from 2008 and 2011, and we are already in 2016. But those people who time dont give reason are the more prepotent. They looks dont be able to change his mind. Everybody can be wrong, but everybody must at least admit, maybe I am wrong. I say that: maybe I am wrong, can you say the same? I think is not ask too much when facts are in the other direction to you. Although this kind of people use to be blind.

People that were wrong about what was happening in cycling in 2000 (but people inside cycling know) now are again wrong about what is happening or about how to explain things (but people inside cycling know).
 
Re: Re:

Taxus4a said:
dacooley said:
Taxus4a said:
dacooley said:
LaFlorecita said:
I want whatever Taxus is smoking, please :D
the complete lack of objectivity from the opposite side is amusing too
I have been very objetive. I have given arguments and I put objetives data.

The other part simply invented one story in their minds and is impossible to put it out of them. But time will give reasons.

I remerbered when in the spanish forum some people wrote after his second place at la Vuelta (moral winner): this is an strange result, this man will be as Jaskula and things like that, he will disapear. And I replied: you are wrong, froome is very good and will improve a lot, he is here to stay. That people never admited his mistake and has year by year an explanation.

I was right, in that and in a lot of things later aboput Froome, but I am the wrong or I smoke something. There are more than 16 years I dont smoke anything ilegal.

If they are happy that way, no problem... But reality in another. And truth is just one.
there is no complete objectivity in suchlike discussions as ones believe in froome and selflessly defend him and others will always remain non-believers due to numerous reasons discussed for years on here.
Fact and data are always objetive, and time is giving me reason from 2008 and 2011, and we are already in 2016. But those people who time dont give reason are the more prepotent. They looks dont be able to change his mind. Everybody can be wrong, but everybody must at least admit, maybe I am wrong. I say that: maybe I am wrong, can you say the same? I think is not ask too much when facts are in the other direction to you. Although this kind of people use to be blind.

People that were wrong about what was happening in cycling in 2000 (but people inside cycling know) now are again wrong about what is happening or about how to explain things (but people inside cycling know).
the thing is facts and data are interpreted very differently depending on circumstances, simpathies, antipathies. that's what makes forums so dynamic. As for admitting to be wrong yes that's the case, if people hate someone on here they rarely change their mind and mocking froome is certainly way more pleasurable that saying about what a good rider he is
 
Re: Re:

cantpedal said:
samhocking said:
I don't think you can justify a theory of suspicion about rider A just because it isn't smooth and gradual like rider B? I mean we know during Froomes 2007 to 2011 rapid improvement he was closing in on riders we now know were definitely cheating. Those riders like your Armstrong, Basso, Rasmussen, Schumacher, Contador, Kohl, Ricco, Beltran, Sella, Astarloa, DiLuca, Piepoli, Rebellin, Sevilla, Sinkewitz, Kolobnev, Shlecks, Valverde, Gregorio, Danielson, Scarponi, Visconti etc etc. They all have the required 'unsuspicious' gradually improving palamares and all banned?

I would say, the reason for Froomes sudden improvement in 2007 to 2011 is simply because all those riders listed above were simply not riding against Froome!
I would turn the argument around and say how did any ethical rider stay with these guys back then. that's the puzzle
The riders in that list were nearly all banned by the time Wiggins & Froome won their first Tour de Frances. This is what i'm saying. The riders you would have expected to be beating Froome & Wiggins were mostly removed from the peloton or not the same level of rider after their ban. 2007 - 20011 is a fast transformation in terms of winning a GT, but when you look at that list of riders banned in those years, to me eyes, it seems possible to go from thinking about winning a GT to actually winning it in 3 years like Sky & Wiggins did and then Froome.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Re: Re:

dacooley said:
Taxus4a said:
LaFlorecita said:
I want whatever Taxus is smoking, please :D
the complete lack of objectivity from the opposite side is amusing too
I have been very objetive. I have given arguments and I put objetives data.

The other part simply invented one story in their minds and is impossible to put it out of them. But time will give reasons.

I remerbered when in the spanish forum some people wrote after his second place at la Vuelta (moral winner): this is an strange result, this man will be as Jaskula and things like that, he will disapear. And I replied: you are wrong, froome is very good and will improve a lot, he is here to stay. That people never admited his mistake and has year by year an explanation.

I was right, in that and in a lot of things later aboput Froome, but I am the wrong or I smoke something. There are more than 16 years I dont smoke anything ilegal.

If they are happy that way, no problem... But reality in another. And truth is just one.
there is no complete objectivity in suchlike discussions as ones believe in froome and selflessly defend him and others will always remain non-believers due to numerous reasons discussed for years on here.[/quote]

Fact and data are always objetive, and time is giving me reason from 2008 and 2011, and we are already in 2016. But those people who time dont give reason are the more prepotent. They looks dont be able to change his mind. Everybody can be wrong, but everybody must at least admit, maybe I am wrong. I say that: maybe I am wrong, can you say the same? I think is not ask too much when facts are in the other direction to you. Although this kind of people use to be blind.

People that were wrong about what was happening in cycling in 2000 (but people inside cycling know) now are again wrong about what is happening or about how to explain things (but people inside cycling know).[/quote]
the thing is facts and data are interpreted very differently depending on circumstances, simpathies, antipathies. that's what makes forums so dynamic. As for admitting to be wrong yes that's the case, if people hate someone on here they rarely change their mind and mocking froome is certainly way more pleasurable that saying about what a good rider he is[/quote]


........................

I just like cyclism and clean sport. The rest is secondary for me.
The rider I was more fan was with difference is Iban Mayo, and today I have not sympathy for him. (sportively talking, although he is part of the history of the sport, obviously)

What I mean is that here people could have more sympathies for one or for others, but maybe becouse I am close to the basque supporters, here we always encorourage to everybody with big motivation, becouse we love cycling.

I have nothing againts you if you always think about all the possibilities: I am totally opposite to the talibans, but I am sad for them, becouse they cant enjoy the only credible generation from 1990.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
By the way, I dindt watch this video before...The fact a man who started seriously in cycling 3 years before, with everything to learn about pro cycling, in a second level team with just 5 riders who needed to work for Hunter, his first GT (the highest in level) ...it is at least to watch him closely during the years to come after to be 14 th in the last ITT and attacking with this kind of doper riders as Khol, Astarloza, etc...becouse maybe we could be at a big potential rider. And we were.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPd4aZQmDuQ
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
The journalist congrats him the strong he was at the queen stage of his first big race, but there is still some people saying once and again he had never showed anything. :confused: :rolleyes: :p

I put all the times he showed something, and there was more than 20 times before 2011 Vuelta (I dont count his victories in tour de Mauritious and things like that with 20 years, I mean as pro)

That congratulation of the journalist is a fact, you can interpretate how you want, but it is a fact, and just with that is impossible to say a lot of stupids and with no base thing one have to read here.

Cheers!
 
Feb 16, 2011
1,133
0
0
This year's Tour isn't hard enough for Froome-dawg. This means the others have a chance to snatch the bone.
 
Back to other news - Froome will re-appear in the Volta Catalunya - I imagine he will be in good nick,seeing the way he ride the Herald Sun Tour - Anyway nearly all the big guns will be at Catalunya - It may be an early season TDF.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Stingray34 said:
This year's Tour isn't hard enough for Froome-dawg. This means the others have a chance to snatch the bone.
I think the problem for him is that he prefers longer stages, longerITT and a longer first week.

But anyway I think he is the main favourite, but of course the others han a chance, Quintana is more talented to climb than froome, and contador has the kind of ITT and stageswho suite him quite well, has the experience, the quality and the inteligence, insstead the objetive of the victory, taking risk if neceary to put in real problems.

Contador started Algarve not too well, but he did a very good flat an with cobbles ITT and won in Malhao with his best performance there.

My impression is we will see a better Contador in this Tour than last year, but not really much better. He will need to take risk and play with his experience, alliances and so on to win.

Quintana will be the best in the mountains, becoue we dont have a usual long first week, but he should time in the ITTs, although he is good and the second one suit him quite well.

We will see Porte, or Tejay, they have a chance to podium.

Intereting to see in Paris Nice Contador againts Porte.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Re:

yaco said:
Back to other news - Froome will re-appear in the Volta Catalunya - I imagine he will be in good nick,seeing the way he ride the Herald Sun Tour - Anyway nearly all the big guns will be at Catalunya - It may be an early season TDF.
Yes, people of the Giro and people of the Tour all together...

The race has no ITT as usual, but there are enough mountain to see something interesting, more than other year IMO.

The pity is that although la Volta is the older tour in Spain, by the influence of France, it is not the region which follow more cycling, rather the contrary.
 
Re:

yaco said:
Back to other news - Froome will re-appear in the Volta Catalunya - I imagine he will be in good nick,seeing the way he ride the Herald Sun Tour - Anyway nearly all the big guns will be at Catalunya - It may be an early season TDF.
Yes, as long as he stays healthy when he gets back to Europe. That's been a big problem for him around this time of the year.
 
Jan 15, 2013
863
0
0
Taxus4a said:
I think the problem for him is that he prefers longer stages, longerITT and a longer first week.
The route seems set up to give Quintana a chance, with multi-mountain stages throughout the race from stage 8 on, and only one of the monoclimb stages Froome likes, on stage 12. They're trying to make it harder for Froome to kill off the race on the first MTF.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
vedrafjord said:
Taxus4a said:
I think the problem for him is that he prefers longer stages, longerITT and a longer first week.
The route seems set up to give Quintana a chance, with multi-mountain stages throughout the race from stage 8 on, and only one of the monoclimb stages Froome likes, on stage 12. They're trying to make it harder for Froome to kill off the race on the first MTF.
Froome dont like monoclimbs, but it it depends whom you compare. Quintana in a big climber with big endurance and respect Quintana better monoclimbs stages, but respect Contador (or Porte), better multiclimbs.

if you put at the end of a long, hard and flat first week a multiclimb stage, Froome is going to do a carnage (if there is hot, obviously, other way no).

This year the best for Froome rivals is that the forst week is short, and it has some hilly stages, so for pure climbers it is not a bad Tour. Le Tour even consider 5th stage as a mountain stage. That is more important that ITT or things like that.
 
Jan 15, 2013
863
0
0
Taxus4a said:
Froome dont like monoclimbs, but it it depends whom you compare. Quintana in a big climber with big endurance and respect Quintana better monoclimbs stages, but respect Contador (or Porte), better multiclimbs.
His Tour wins:
2012 stage 7 (La Planche des Belles Filles)
2013 stage 8 (Ax-3-Domaines)
2013 stage 15 (Mont Ventoux)
2015 stage 10 (La Pierre Saint-Martin)

Three of those are monoclimb stages, and the other is close (75% flat, then two climbs at the end of the stage). The Vuelta stage he won had a similar profile to Ax-3-D but with smaller climbs.

He's never won a classic multi-mountain GT stage. The nearest I can think of was his win in stage 7 of last year's Dauphine ie not in a GT and against a limited field (Nibali was toast after the day before so he only had to beat Tejay).
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
vedrafjord said:
Taxus4a said:
Froome dont like monoclimbs, but it it depends whom you compare. Quintana in a big climber with big endurance and respect Quintana better monoclimbs stages, but respect Contador (or Porte), better multiclimbs.
His Tour wins:
2012 stage 7 (La Planche des Belles Filles)
2013 stage 8 (Ax-3-Domaines)
2013 stage 15 (Mont Ventoux)
2015 stage 10 (La Pierre Saint-Martin)

Three of those are monoclimb stages, and the other is close (75% flat, then two climbs at the end of the stage). The Vuelta stage he won had a similar profile to Ax-3-D but with smaller climbs.

He's never won a classic multi-mountain GT stage. The nearest I can think of was his win in stage 7 of last year's Dauphine ie not in a GT and against a limited field (Nibali was toast after the day before so he only had to beat Tejay).
Maybe a I didnt explain quite well.

it depends the kin of riders he face.

Againts pure climbers he prefer multiclimbs, agains explosive riders or Trialist he prefer multiclimbs.

Most of the stages you mention are after first week, what is more important than multi or monoclimbs.

In la Vuelta most of the stages ar monoclins, but he did well, and better respect people as Valverde, Purito, the multi as well.


See this, he was working for Wiggo, other way...

http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=21641

So, it depends the main rival, Quintana or contador, he prefer one kind of stage or another, but for him better mountain stages with ome flat sections,and as longer the best.
 
vedrafjord said:
Taxus4a said:
Froome dont like monoclimbs, but it it depends whom you compare. Quintana in a big climber with big endurance and respect Quintana better monoclimbs stages, but respect Contador (or Porte), better multiclimbs.
His Tour wins:
2012 stage 7 (La Planche des Belles Filles)
2013 stage 8 (Ax-3-Domaines)
2013 stage 15 (Mont Ventoux)
2015 stage 10 (La Pierre Saint-Martin)

Three of those are monoclimb stages, and the other is close (75% flat, then two climbs at the end of the stage). The Vuelta stage he won had a similar profile to Ax-3-D but with smaller climbs.

He's never won a classic multi-mountain GT stage. The nearest I can think of was his win in stage 7 of last year's Dauphine ie not in a GT and against a limited field (Nibali was toast after the day before so he only had to beat Tejay).
Very good observation.
The question is, is this year's Tour giving enough advantage to Froome to successfully defend what he can gain on his favourite profiles?
Maybe the time comparison could be a good indicator, or his rate of fading in the previous Tours. The stages after Ardeche time trial cumulate kilometres and kilometres of altitude.
And it's not only about Froomes resilience.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
sir fly said:
vedrafjord said:
Taxus4a said:
Froome dont like monoclimbs, but it it depends whom you compare. Quintana in a big climber with big endurance and respect Quintana better monoclimbs stages, but respect Contador (or Porte), better multiclimbs.
His Tour wins:
2012 stage 7 (La Planche des Belles Filles)
2013 stage 8 (Ax-3-Domaines)
2013 stage 15 (Mont Ventoux)
2015 stage 10 (La Pierre Saint-Martin)

Three of those are monoclimb stages, and the other is close (75% flat, then two climbs at the end of the stage). The Vuelta stage he won had a similar profile to Ax-3-D but with smaller climbs.

He's never won a classic multi-mountain GT stage. The nearest I can think of was his win in stage 7 of last year's Dauphine ie not in a GT and against a limited field (Nibali was toast after the day before so he only had to beat Tejay).
Very good observation.
The question is, is this year's Tour giving enough advantage to Froome to successfully defend what he can gain on his favourite profiles?
Maybe the time comparison could be a good indicator, or his rate of fading in the previous Tours. The stages after Ardeche time trial cumulate kilometres and kilometres of altitude.
And it's not only about Froomes resilience.
The argument is not a very good information, becouse for froome the best i the forst mountain stage becouse he is more fresh than other riders after the flat week. it is not his blame le Tour didn put the first mountain stage a multiclimb.

But to think Froome wouldnt have won in 2011 some multiclimb stage when everybody wathed he was waiting Wiggo on the mountains is not a good observation. Ha had tha stage that Pinot won when he stoped, you can remerber if you want, and other 2 as well.

All those victorie sare after some days the plain, including Ventoux, but precisely the day he got more difference is the day with 2 climbs, and the climb before was harder than the last one.

Maybe is for something...
 
that's more about froome's shape in a particular stage of the race than profile of the stage, had the 1st mtf been a multimountain stage in 2013 or 2015, i'd wager he could've destroyed the field as he really did and i don't think he would've done alpe d'huez much better if that was a mont ventoux esque stage
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Re:

dacooley said:
that's more about froome's shape in a particular stage of the race than profile of the stage, had the 1st mtf been a multimountain stage in 2013 or 2015, i'd wager he could've destroyed the field as he really did and i don't think he would've done alpe d'huez much better if that was a mont ventoux esque stage
Yes, but it is going always to be a fact between pure climbers and complete riders, and it is that the more mountain stages done before, the hardest climbs has the stage and the less flat sections has the stage, the best for pure climbers (pure climbers with the quality and recovery for 3 weaks as Quintana, I mean).

With Froome weather is another factor, but he is similar than Quintana in that. Contador is good in all the weather, but respet Froome better rain and bad weather.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY