Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

Page 687 - 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 .
He helped a sprinter on the flat while shipping time, compared to Contador who actually managed to stay in the peloton and helping his leaders.
Froome lost 4:04, 4:55 (2:52), and 4:55 before the first TT. He lost 25:33 and 31:56 to then finish 11:41 behind Sastre, around 3 minutes ahead of Zabel. He then lost 7:07 and 3:08 and then ride the tt. All of his good results came after he shipped time and was to rest more. Yay, he attacked a bunch on a parade day as everyone says. Yes, so Froome was literally allowed to do whatever.

Have you seen who rode that results list? I’ve heard of 5/70 of those riders not counting Froome.

Almost everyone has said that the thing going for Froome was he was decent at TTs, not Contador. It took him awhile.

Honestly his best result against the competition was at Volta ao Distrito de Santarém outside of the Tour in my opinion.

He showed nothing before that Vuelta that he could even contend at a WT stage race. The fact that Team UK was sad he could not gain 1 point is very telling.
No, they helped Hunter most of the days. Your have to cover him from the wind always to save as much as possible his energies, both mountain stages, both flat ones... That is basically cycling for most of the riders. It doenst min how much he lost after his job. Contador had freeadom becouse he was a promissing rider years before. Froome just came from Africa and he was not predicted to ride that Tour, so he didnt prepare especially for that. He was in the Queen stage after la Madeleine in a Group of 20 withh all the important riders of the race, He finished 14th last ITT, wich is a very good measu to evaluate a rider for GT (long individual effort at the end of 3 weeks) and he was 14th..anjd I dont talk about other issues that give more merit to that becouse is for another part of the forum.
 
Reactions: Ilmaestro99
No, they helped Hunter most of the days. Your have to cover him from the wind always to save as much as possible his energies, both mountain stages, both flat ones... That is basically cycling for most of the riders. It doenst min how much he lost after his job. Contador had freeadom becouse he was a promissing rider years before. Froome just came from Africa and he was not predicted to ride that Tour, so he didnt prepare especially for that. He was in the Queen stage after la Madeleine in a Group of 20 withh all the important riders of the race, He finished 14th last ITT, wich is a very good measu to evaluate a rider for GT (long individual effort at the end of 3 weeks) and he was 14th..anjd I dont talk about other issues that give more merit to that becouse is for another part of the forum.

I'd argue that 14th in the last ITT in a GT is everything but "telling result" about some rider quality.
Simply because majority of the peloton is dead tired and doesn't care about that stage.
But as you wish. Make it look like an evidence about a future GT winner.

I mean, will Fred Wright podium a GT? He was 15th in the last TDF TT.
 
Reactions: SHAD0W93
The questruon for me for any expert in Demicin, a doctor or similar in the forum...Caoudl Bilharzia be dormant for 10 years in his body and return??
Becouse I cant acceot the posibility of e¡a reinfection by taking again in Africa in the last years.. It would be quite incredible.
 
The questruon for me for any expert in Demicin, a doctor or similar in the forum...Caoudl Bilharzia be dormant for 10 years in his body and return??
Becouse I cant acceot the posibility of e¡a reinfection by taking again in Africa in the last years.. It would be quite incredible.
I don't know what Demicin is, but this article discusses repeat treatments for bilharzia. The short answer is that all discussion of repeat treatments are for people who are chronically exposed to the parasite. The approach there is for repeated treatment with praziquantel, to deal with repeat infections, not a single, recurring infection.


I have never seen a discussion of this in all the time on the forum where it was suggested that chronic infection or repeated treatment was a thing for someone not repeatedly exposed to the parasite. It is quickly and easily cured with a single-day course of praziquantel. Some cases require an additional treatment if the first one was too soon after infection, because praziquantel is more effective against adult worms. No cases I've ever read are repeat treatments without additional exposure.

Given all that, the logical response is not to believe that someone can be re-infected without repeated exposure over time, unless someone presents evidence to support the assertion that this can happen and in fact did happen in the case of Froome. It's just basic logic not to believe a proposition without evidence. Assertions carry no weight without evidence.

I certainly don't expect them to provide evidence. They simply floated this for reaction. I would expect it to be dropped in the future or doubled down upon with repeated similar statements but no evidence to support it. If asked, they'll throw up some "personal medical information" or "our doctors confirmed it" assertions, also without evidence.

I'll happily admit I was wrong should any actual evidence ever be forthcoming.

I will say that it's possible he had the disease at some point. Of course it's possible. And it's irrelevant. They've never shown evidence of the timing of his claimed infection, and they've never shown or pointed to evidence that infection has detrimental effect on cycling performance. It just sounds like something that would affect performance, in that it can potentially reduce RBC count, and sounds dramatic and scary. Bad tropical disease from Africa. Ick. Could it affect performance? Sure. I might even expect it to. Show us the evidence and I'll accept that it does. Short of that, nope.

Historically, there are several claims about Froome's bilharzia, all which should be treated independently in terms of accepting them:
  • Froome had bilharzia. Entirely possible but no evidence has ever been shown, only claims and assertions. If he did have it, no evidence of when he had it exists, only claims that it was early in 2010, which explains zero about his performances before that point.

  • The (claimed) bilharzia affected his performance. I have never seen any study or independent anecdote which shows bilharzia negatively affects cycling performance. If it exists, great, I'm not claiming it doesn't. Would love to see it. Certainly seems possible but until it's shown, why accept this claim?

  • The (claimed) bilharzia had affected his performance so much that curing it turned a very average rider into a rider who would win multiple GT's against the top riders of the day, including all-time legends who were in fact doped. Obviously there is no evidence for this claim. It's an extraordinary claim, relying on multiple levels of unsupported claims underneath it. Why accept such an extraordinary claim without any evidence? Without incredibly compelling evidence? In a sport where simpler answers are obvious and part of the record.

  • The above explain how he did all what he did clean. Since there is no evidence for any of the above, why would someone accept this?
I'm 100% sure there are additional claims in all their discussion which also have no evidence but this is enough.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: SHAD0W93
No, they helped Hunter most of the days. Your have to cover him from the wind always to save as much as possible his energies, both mountain stages, both flat ones... That is basically cycling for most of the riders. It doenst min how much he lost after his job. Contador had freeadom becouse he was a promissing rider years before. Froome just came from Africa and he was not predicted to ride that Tour, so he didnt prepare especially for that. He was in the Queen stage after la Madeleine in a Group of 20 withh all the important riders of the race, He finished 14th last ITT, wich is a very good measu to evaluate a rider for GT (long individual effort at the end of 3 weeks) and he was 14th..anjd I dont talk about other issues that give more merit to that becouse is for another part of the forum.
Contador was also coming back from an actual medical injury that kept him not riding for months. Froome got to spend majority of his days losing time whether he worked or not. Then before his two good days he shipped a bunch of time. More would be given if he didn’t lose all that time beforehand.
 
The questruon for me for any expert in Demicin, a doctor or similar in the forum...Caoudl Bilharzia be dormant for 10 years in his body and return??
Becouse I cant acceot the posibility of e¡a reinfection by taking again in Africa in the last years.. It would be quite incredible.
It can be dormant for long periods of time but with the treatment he should have had with Sky from them saying he had it in 2010 would have cleaned it up.
 
Reactions: glassmoon
I don't know what Demicin is, but this article discusses repeat treatments for bilharzia. The short answer is that all discussion of repeat treatments are for people who are chronically exposed to the parasite. The approach there is for repeated treatment with praziquantel, to deal with repeat infections, not a single, recurring infection.


I have never seen a discussion of this in all the time on the forum where it was suggested that chronic infection or repeated treatment was a thing for someone not repeatedly exposed to the parasite. It is quickly and easily cured with a single-day course of praziquantel. Some cases require an additional treatment if the first one was too soon after infection, because praziquantel is more effective against adult worms. No cases I've ever read are repeat treatments without additional exposure.

Given all that, the logical response is not to believe that someone can be re-infected without repeated exposure over time, unless someone presents evidence to support the assertion that this can happen and in fact did happen in the case of Froome. It's just basic logic not to believe a proposition without evidence. Assertions carry no weight without evidence.

I certainly don't expect them to provide evidence. They simply floated this for reaction. I would expect it to be dropped in the future or doubled down upon with repeated similar statements but no evidence to support it. If asked, they'll throw up some "personal medical information" or "our doctors confirmed it" assertions, also without evidence.

I'll happily admit I was wrong should any actual evidence ever be forthcoming.

I will say that it's possible he had the disease at some point. Of course it's possible. And it's irrelevant. They've never shown evidence of the timing of his claimed infection, and they've never shown or pointed to evidence that infection has detrimental effect on cycling performance. It just sounds like something that would affect performance, in that it can potentially reduce RBC count, and sounds dramatic and scary. Bad tropical disease from Africa. Ick. Could it affect performance? Sure. I might even expect it to. Show us the evidence and I'll accept that it does. Short of that, nope.

Historically, there are several claims about Froome's bilharzia, all which should be treated independently in terms of accepting them:
  • Froome had bilharzia. Entirely possible but no evidence has ever been shown, only claims and assertions. If he did have it, no evidence of when he had it exists, only claims that it was early in 2010, which explains zero about his performances before that point.

  • The (claimed) bilharzia affected his performance. I have never seen any study or independent anecdote which shows bilharzia negatively affects cycling performance. If it exists, great, I'm not claiming it doesn't. Would love to see it. Certainly seems possible but until it's shown, why accept this claim?

  • The (claimed) bilharzia had affected his performance so much that curing it turned a very average rider into a rider who would win multiple GT's against the top riders of the day, including all-time legends who were in fact doped. Obviously there is no evidence for this claim. It's an extraordinary claim, relying on multiple levels of unsupported claims underneath it. Why accept such an extraordinary claim without any evidence? Without incredibly compelling evidence? In a sport where simpler answers are obvious and part of the record.

  • The above explain how he did all what he did clean. Since there is no evidence for any of the above, why would someone accept this?
I'm 100% sure there are additional claims in all their discussion which also have no evidence but this is enough.
 
This is fantastic. When do we think the recovery from badzilla will kick in? Opening weekend? MSR or Strade Bianchi? The Ardennes? Or will it happily coincide with the Dauphiné?

plus: wait for stories of new training records, smoking LRP on the Madone…

next season will be a popcorn frenzy as CF seeks to give payback for the reputed €5 m.
 
Reactions: red_flanders
This is fantastic. When do we think the recovery from badzilla will kick in? Opening weekend? MSR or Strade Bianchi? The Ardennes? Or will it happily coincide with the Dauphiné?

plus: wait for stories of new training records, smoking LRP on the Madone…

next season will be a popcorn frenzy as CF seeks to give payback for the reputed €5 m.

so, you think the badzilla is in the USA ? because he is in Florida.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
This is fantastic. When do we think the recovery from badzilla will kick in? Opening weekend? MSR or Strade Bianchi? The Ardennes? Or will it happily coincide with the Dauphiné?

plus: wait for stories of new training records, smoking LRP on the Madone…

next season will be a popcorn frenzy as CF seeks to give payback for the reputed €5 m.
Why? Are you so afraid of what chris froome will do next season? Like many people here :tearsofjoy:
He still gave you nightmares.
 
What is this video?. Is this a real video of Froome this year?? where?? that is a water to have bilgarzia again..But it a big mistake for someone who had bilharzia before.
I have no idea where, just clicked on the tweet bigcog shared and that was the first reply on the tweet. CTQ says it was done in Miami Florida.

or he can't resist to wildlife animals, some love goats, some others are more the exotic types ;)
I’d be scared s***less going into the water with an alligator or crocodile right there.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Miami, Florida... the USA isn't known for bilharzia.
Yes, he go every year for a charity event, one time to San Francisco, another to Florida.
But Sudafrica has Bilhazia, and he used to go there, He could be reinfected and be dormant any of this years...Of course it would be quite surprising, but of course possible.
Anyway, for me it doesnt matter if he was bad at the end of le Tour an the weeks later for Biljhazrzia or any other problem, The fact is that he recovered, he showered better numbers at the end of the season, and this winter he is able to train normal. He is to ride San Juan , in Argentina, with an ITT and at least a mountain stage, so, good race to see progression
 
Whether Froome had Bilharzia is unimportant - He needs as a base line to get back to his 2020 Vuelta form, and hopefully improve on that - Frankly, currently he's not WT standard.
He was similar oe even better to that Vuelta level this end of season. Of course he is WT standar, He made the selection in the echelons to an small group with the best riders of the world.
He wanst at Tour of Germany or another races this year.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY