Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

Page 649 - 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 .
I didn't think the contract for Froome was a good idea, but I've changed my mind.
Everytime I look at this thread (like every three, four days or so), it has 5-10 pages more.
Everyone is talking about Froome, every day, every commentator, Horner-type, cycling journalist, although his performances give absolutely no reason to do so.
The article about Lefevere talking about the DQS Tour roster had a headline about Cavendish, who's not in it -surprise, surprise. Sam Bennett and Alaphilippe are mentioned, at least.
In German media there isn't much talk about cycling at all and when it's usually a rather neutral, unenthusiastic coverage. But I read the Guardian sports page, and doing so I get how much the names Cavendish and Froome mean to English speaking countries - honestly, Pogacar, recent Tour winner or not, doesn't come close.
For Israel this is all about making a name, getting a spot on the map of WT teams, and I think they reached their goal.
Question is, where do they go from here.
 
I didn't think the contract for Froome was a good idea, but I've changed my mind.
Everytime I look at this thread (like every three, four days or so), it has 5-10 pages more.
Everyone is talking about Froome, every day, every commentator, Horner-type, cycling journalist, although his performances give absolutely no reason to do so.
The article about Lefevere talking about the DQS Tour roster had a headline about Cavendish, who's not in it -surprise, surprise. Sam Bennett and Alaphilippe are mentioned, at least.
In German media there isn't much talk about cycling at all and when it's usually a rather neutral, unenthusiastic coverage. But I read the Guardian sports page, and doing so I get how much the names Cavendish and Froome mean to English speaking countries - honestly, Pogacar, recent Tour winner or not, doesn't come close.
For Israel this is all about making a name, getting a spot on the map of WT teams, and I think they reached their goal.
Question is, where do they go from here.
The good old "any publicity is good publicity" adagium.
 
Reactions: SHAD0W93
I said he's the most disingenuous rider since Armstrong and I stand by that 100%. Did I say he was as much of a jerk? No. That he bullied anyone? No. But he's certainly lied extensively, and it reminds me of the level of lying that Armstrong did. Quick critical thinking tip, comparisons are not meant to be equivalencies. I drew a comparison on one aspect of his persona.

Further, the willingness of his fans to swallow his drivel is quite reminiscent of the Armstrong phenomenon. Logic goes out the window with fandom. And no, I don't like him. I don't like his ungainly riding "style", I don't like how Sky approached the sport and launched their PR campaigns to gloss over what they were doing, and I don't like people (Froome, Sky, etc.) who insult my intelligence. I didn't like the way the team rode the races into the ground, just like US Postal used to. It was boring when Postal did it and it was worse when Sky did it because Froome just so utterly lacked any style on the bike. Hideous riding. A bane to the sport.

If it's too much for you, just skip my posts.

I don't really get the calls for retirement or why anyone cares that he soaked ISN for that absurd contract. Ride on, make your money in the grupetto like you did pre-Vuelta 2011. But the irrational reactions of his fans to his daily drama and his absurd excuses does warrant comment and a good chuckle from me, so don't expect it to stop as long as folks continue to lap up his comments in this thread. It's a fascinating phenomenon to me.
I truly appreciate your contributions to the forum, but I think you're a bit obsessed here.

The notion of Froome having "fans" is a straw man. By 2016, anyone who knew anything about cycling had settled into, at best, grudging admiration for what Sky had been able to do with Froome. But a "fan" in, say, a Contador sense? No way. I'd say 98% of the posts on here have been either negative or neutral toward Froome.

No one could possibly be that naive to believe everything that he (or any other pro cyclist) says or "swallow his drivel."

There have always been a few trolls who like to rile up posters such as yourself, of course.

I don't think Froome is any more disingenuous than any other public figure. He says what he wants people to think about him. Is he "lying extensively" -- not really. And if he really is "lying," then what's he demonstrably "lied" about? For example, he might think his form is getting better, based on what his power meter shows. Now, his results don't reflect that, of course, but is he really "lying" when he says he's feeling stronger? No, he's just putting a good spin on things.

I continue to find this piling on distasteful, in a way that I didn't with Lance, because his sins had all come out in the wash.
 
At some point people will get tired of pointing out that Froome is riding bad anyway.
I don't think so. Its just the Schleck thread all over again (with a bit more interest). But the Schleck thread also only ended with his retirement.

On another note - there is no reason to *** the thread down though. Who says we are only allowed to talk about good performances? Obviously Froome is still an interesting rider.
 
Well see that's the confusing part. He had it. Then he didn't. Then he had it again. It was cured the first time, then after multiple times. It affected him for some races then didn't for others. It was cured in Kenya, then somewhere else. He found out about it different times in different stories.

Anyway, it seems you're not as up on the history there as many of us. No worries. Suffice it to say there's no chance someone who changed their story that number of times is telling the truth.

But no point in hashing through all that. If you want to believe the guy, enjoy.
In fairness to Froome, a lot of the lies are part of the myth-making made around him, not by him. You know, things like the sand shoes myth which is disproven by photos from that very event in Froome's own book which came out before the book that initiated the sand shoes myth.

Taxus wrote a blog post many years ago about how much talent Froome showed and all the things that made him a top tier talent, but most of those points had long been debunked, however Taxus would keep pointing people to them. You know the drill because we've all been through them 1000 times. How he was super strong in the Alpe d'Huez stage in 2008 and rode up the climb with Menchov, despite that he was in the break, was dislodged from it shortly after Johan van Summeren, finished 9 minutes behind Menchov at the summit. How he outperformed Nibali in the queen stage and the final ITT, despite how Nibali had done a Giro-Tour double and been better than Froome by a country mile on every stage before that. Hyping every moderately interesting result in a minor race as though it was proof of super-talent. These arguments have been had in both the PRR forum and the Clinic ad nauseaum, and most of us have come to our conclusions on them, there's no new information that has come to light, and there's no value to be had in re-hashing them.

But Taxus has been absent for a while, long enough to let those arguments lie for a bit, so that their side of the argument can be posted afresh, with counter-arguments not immediately visible on the front page until somebody goes through the rebuttals. I've noticed a lot of that over the last few years in the Clinic too, suddenly years down the line long-dead lines of argument will be resurrected because new readers won't be bothered to read back through hundreds of pages to see that this has been counter-argued 100 times already. And it's usually by one of the parties (on both sides of the debate) that has been privy to all of those previous discussions re-sparking the flame wars, rather than the more innocuous option of it being a new poster who understandably doesn't want to read thousands of pages with enlightening and interesting posts buried under an avalanche of trolling in the Clinic.

Personally, I think Taxus isn't trying to convince you that Froome never lied. They're talking directly to you, but you're not even the intended audience for their comments.
 
Last edited:
I didn't think the contract for Froome was a good idea, but I've changed my mind.
Everytime I look at this thread (like every three, four days or so), it has 5-10 pages more.
Everyone is talking about Froome, every day, every commentator, Horner-type, cycling journalist, although his performances give absolutely no reason to do so.
The article about Lefevere talking about the DQS Tour roster had a headline about Cavendish, who's not in it -surprise, surprise. Sam Bennett and Alaphilippe are mentioned, at least.
In German media there isn't much talk about cycling at all and when it's usually a rather neutral, unenthusiastic coverage. But I read the Guardian sports page, and doing so I get how much the names Cavendish and Froome mean to English speaking countries - honestly, Pogacar, recent Tour winner or not, doesn't come close.
For Israel this is all about making a name, getting a spot on the map of WT teams, and I think they reached their goal.
Question is, where do they go from here.
Maybe becouse is the rider with more merit and who train more?
Maybe becouse is the best GC rider of this century?

I dont mind, if they pay him 0 euros or 1000 euro million. Follow his effort and his progression is interesting. and it is more when lot of people say he is done. Maybe they will be surprised even in this Dauphiné.
If you dont like this tread you have an eassy solution.
 
In fairness to Froome, a lot of the lies are part of the myth-making made around him, not by him. You know, things like the sand shoes myth which is disproven by photos from that very event in Froome's own book which came out before the book that initiated the sand shoes myth.

Taxus wrote a blog post many years ago about how much talent Froome showed and all the things that made him a top tier talent, but most of those points had long been debunked, however Taxus would keep pointing people to them. You know the drill because we've all been through them 1000 times. How he was super strong in the Alpe d'Huez stage in 2008 and rode up the climb with Menchov, despite that he was in the break, was dislodged from it shortly after Johan van Summeren, finished 9 minutes behind Menchov at the summit. How he outperformed Nibali in the queen stage and the final ITT, despite how Nibali had done a Giro-Tour double and been better than Froome by a country mile on every stage before that. Hyping every moderately interesting result in a minor race as though it was proof of super-talent. These arguments have been had in both the PRR forum and the Clinic ad nauseaum, and most of us have come to our conclusions on them, there's no new information that has come to light, and there's no value to be had in re-hashing them.

But Taxus has been absent for a while, long enough to let those arguments lie for a bit, so that their side of the argument can be posted afresh, with counter-arguments not immediately visible on the front page until somebody goes through the rebuttals. I've noticed a lot of that over the last few years in the Clinic too, suddenly years down the line long-dead lines of argument will be resurrected because new readers won't be bothered to read back through hundreds of pages to see that this has been counter-argued 100 times already. And it's usually by one of the parties (on both sides of the debate) that has been privy to all of those previous discussions re-sparking the flame wars, rather than the more innocuous option of it being a new poster who understandably doesn't want to read thousands of pages with enlightening and interesting posts buried under an avalanche of trolling in the Clinic.

Personally, I think Taxus isn't trying to convince you that Froome never lied. They're talking directly to you, but you're not even the intended audience for their comments.
I didnt wrote that as proff of supertalent...But about the possibility of supertalent, when everybody say the contrary. As things went better in cycling, people as Froome went better. His main talent is in his mind, but of course he did a very good test from the begining

About lies, I dont try to convinced about anything, It is a fact that Froome never lies, If anybody has a proof about that, I will change my mind. For example, I said Contador lies, but I proof that saying that he said he was not to win la Vuelta for an knee injury, when he was trained hard few weeks ago. That is to lie, Froome never done.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
What did Chris have for breakfast? Is today the day?
It will be on the mountains, maybe saturday, but with the same breakfast that his current planning ;)-
Today it could be the day to make a decent ITT after his crash...top 80 would be good, top 70 would be very good. But he is here to test himself on the big mountains...no very focused for today,
 
I dont Know what are you talking about. He had bilharzia, He was detected in Kenia, He did much better result than this year with Bilharzia. He is not sure if he got bilharzia before. All of that is proven, If you want I give you the name of the doctor in Kenya who detected it. Butr the important fact to his better performance in la Vuelta compared to some result one year before is not bilharzia, and it is something he had explained lot of times. He was in the UCI time as one of the riders with better potential of the world. He had 10 kilos more than when won his first Tour. He wojn with that weight and with little experience in competitive cycling a stage in Tour of Japan and another in Giro delle Regione... and no for his high speed in the sprint.
aha, proven by.......
 
Froome is goint to be top 100 for sure, but not top 80 as I think would be a good result for him. It looks at the intermediate he was in that way, but he suffered at the end.
Anyway he talked always about the mountains, so we wiull see on saturday.
But if finally there are 50 riders bihind him on this ITT, according the level here is would be maybe his second best ITT after his crash after Catalonia.,
 
Eurosport commentator Brian Smith's take on Chris Froome's time trial today: "I know he's treating it as a bit of a test today, but it's going to be really testing when Nils Pollit actually catches him and passes him.
"It's not the best morale booster that you can get in a time trial when you've been one of the world's best at time trialing.
"Chris Froome is going to have company soon and it is going to come from Nils Pollit.
"It's not ideal, you would want to focus on this time trial. You could see he was focused at the start and came off the start ramp with intent.
"The last thing Chris Froome needs right now is being caught by his minute man."
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Why you need to close this thread? Nobody is forced to come to this thread and comment. If you don't like froome don't open this thread, simple.
There's no shame on what froome is doing, you all forget that he almost died 2 years ago, he broke is neck, ribs,hip,elbow, ribs, femur, lost 2 litres of blood, he had to relearn how to walk. Yes, froome's level now is miserable, and like i said, he needs to retire in the end of the season if there no improvements, but don't blame the guy for try to comeback to his best level, he tried and are trying so hard, 99% of the other riders already would retire after that horrific crash, but he tried to comeback to his best level. Unfortunately he's not making progresses, but give some respect to the guy for trying to comeback to his best level even if you don't like him so much. It was already a great achievement the progresses that he made until now, unfortunately I think he will not progress anymore and he should retire at the end of the season.
Really difficult to understand this hating to a man that almost died in a crash and are trying so hard to comeback to his best.
 
What i calculate from his perf is this. Assuming that Lutsenko did 6.5 w/kg for 20 min thermo effort
RiderVelocity kphWeight kgPower WW/kg
Lutsenko
45.0​
74​
481​
6.5​
Froome
40.9​
68​
380​
5.6​
Percent Reduction
91​
92​
79​
86​
Froome has too far to go. In normal times also it would require a 3 month effort to get back from ~ 15-20% down. Its almost offseason power for his record. maybe he went from 345 w to 380 and it would be a 10% improvement and a big one but just not good enough for WT forget TDF. or he softpedaled which would be unlikely
 
Reactions: bigcog
I truly appreciate your contributions to the forum, but I think you're a bit obsessed here.

The notion of Froome having "fans" is a straw man. By 2016, anyone who knew anything about cycling had settled into, at best, grudging admiration for what Sky had been able to do with Froome. But a "fan" in, say, a Contador sense? No way. I'd say 98% of the posts on here have been either negative or neutral toward Froome.

No one could possibly be that naive to believe everything that he (or any other pro cyclist) says or "swallow his drivel."

There have always been a few trolls who like to rile up posters such as yourself, of course.

I don't think Froome is any more disingenuous than any other public figure. He says what he wants people to think about him. Is he "lying extensively" -- not really. And if he really is "lying," then what's he demonstrably "lied" about? For example, he might think his form is getting better, based on what his power meter shows. Now, his results don't reflect that, of course, but is he really "lying" when he says he's feeling stronger? No, he's just putting a good spin on things.

I continue to find this piling on distasteful, in a way that I didn't with Lance, because his sins had all come out in the wash.
Well I certainly agree that I've been hammering it pretty hard, and I don't plan to continue. I respect your contributions here as well and thought it worth a response. I think when you start calling people obsessed (or make any other ad hominem claim), you're getting into some weird territory. I'd edge away from that myself.

Doesn't have fans? I'm responding to fan comments in this very thread, there are fans a-plenty, so that makes no sense to me. For the rest, you're entitled to your opinion and I'm not going to bother with a recitation of the litany of falsehoods, it's all well documented.

In fairness to Froome, a lot of the lies are part of the myth-making made around him, not by him. You know, things like the sand shoes myth which is disproven by photos from that very event in Froome's own book which came out before the book that initiated the sand shoes myth.
That's certainly true, a lot of it is from his team (racing team, PR team, etc.) yet he's happily gone along with it and repeated a lot of the nonsense generated by the PR team. He owns his brand and image, so in my view he can take the heat when the BS is exposed, whether he generated it or simply accepted and propagated it.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
About lies, I dont try to convinced about anything, It is a fact that Froome never lies, If anybody has a proof about that, I will change my mind. For example, I said Contador lies, but I proof that saying that he said he was not to win la Vuelta for an knee injury, when he was trained hard few weeks ago. That is to lie, Froome never done.
We are talking about the same guy that got his international career started by committing identity fraud, right?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts