The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Well in that Giro he shipped gobs of time in mountains and truly seemed down and out until the last tt.Lemond was struggling in the spring of 89, but not struggling at all compared to what Froome has done. Lemond was 6th in Tirreno and 4th in Criterium International (behind Indurain, Mottet and Roche, but beating Fignon!). If Froome had results anywhere near this level there could be a reason to be optimistic about his chances in top level competition, but he isn't close and even if he "keeps improving" he will still be far away.
Yes but that was one bad race after a few good ones just before. Froome has no real good results to show for during his 3 year streak of bad (compared to the level he and other are talking about), so the comparison between Lemond post-accident and Froome post-accident is therefore really bad.Well in that Giro he shipped gobs of time in mountains and truly seemed down and out until the last tt.
You are simply wrong about 2014 Contador, as Perico has also demonstrated. Saying as proof of your argument he "couldn't even beat Talansky at the Dauphine" only evidences a lack of perspective. For the American didn't win that GC on strength, but botched team tactics. At a rate, Contador strategically started that race undercooked, like Nibali for that matter (even moreso), but still only lost about 10 secs to Froome in the opening tt and was not dropped by him on the first mtf, only to drill It with a searing attack in a subsequent stage. No, Contador was on fire that year as his magnificent Vuelta win further confirmed.Nah, nah. Fans always point to Dauphine that year but forget that Froome beat him in the prologue and first MTF. Froome then crashed. And contador couldn’t even beat Andrew Talansky.
There is a very logical reason Contador never came close (particularly in France) after 2010 DQ.
He never won a stage, never podiumed, never wore the yellow jersey. And he often struggled in ITTs. No more beating Cancellera in a flat TT. and often strangely on the rivet, seated and straining when climbing. Never the explosiveness of Verbiers or Aubisque with Rasmussen. He was a very, very different rider.
It's not really bad, as both accidents were apparently life-threatening. I will concede you are right about Froome's even poorer performances afterward, but 88 Lemond was nearly as bad if not as bad (he says due to overtraining, but if he were overtrained it was also because his body evidently just could not yet handle the workload). The point I think is that Lemond could get back to the highest level, whereas Froome thus far (after 3 years) has not.Yes but that was one bad race after a few good ones just before. Froome has no real good results to show for during his 3 year streak of bad (compared to the level he and other are talking about), so the comparison between Lemond post-accident and Froome post-accident is therefore really bad.
On another note:
Lemonds giro performance in '89 is quite similar to Ullrich Giro performance in '06. Shame we didn't get to see Ullrich in the Tour that year.
And Lemond wasn't returning to racing at 35 but 25.Lemond was struggling in the spring of 89, but not struggling at all compared to what Froome has done. Lemond was 6th in Tirreno and 4th in Criterium International (behind Indurain, Mottet and Roche, but beating Fignon!). If Froome had results anywhere near this level there could be a reason to be optimistic about his chances in top level competition, but he isn't close and even if he "keeps improving" he will still be far away.
Definitely! Without drugs, most males are at their peak physical power from age 27 to 32 years old.Isn't age the most likely reason as to why he couldn't regain the form?
Quite bad ITT so far. Like all year. Seems like endurance is there but sustained power is still severly missing.
sorry but not cracking the top 50 is just not good. more proof coming stages 7 and especially 8He is lacking in raw watts however he is the same time behind Vingegaard as he was in the Dauphine ITT last year which was half as long.
I don't see it happen in a GT. Maybe in a smaller stage race.So what can he realistically aim for as long term goal? A multi-mountain stage from a break at a GT?
64 |
| Israel-Premier Tech | + 03:06 | | |
65 | | Trek-Segafredo | + 03:07 | | |
66 | | Israel-Premier Tech | + 03:08 | |
Well, it all depends on where you put the bar.Reading the latest comments I assumed Chris Froome's TT today at the Dauphine was an absolute disaster.
It wasn't.
Decent times today were within 38.00mins and Froome was outside that at 38.38mins.
Not great admittedly, but not poor either.
He had the best time on his Israel team, two seconds better than their own national TT champion.
Yes, we know he is down on power, Chris Froome says that himself, but do we really need the pile-on when he fails to match the performances of the top riders?
But he was the best placed on his team so that’s good.Quite bad ITT so far. Like all year. Seems like endurance is there but sustained power is still severly missing.
In my opinion it was. Since recent results indicated an overall increase in performance, one could hope for a gain in shorter-term power as well. He finished a flatish TT at the same time as Kenny Elissonde. Back in his days, Froome was a winner of GT ITTs. Thats two different galaxies and he will never overcome that. And as indicated in the first sentence - I am now again fully convinced that whenever explosiveness/power matters he will continue to be bad. The improvements are all based on a good level on resistance and endurance. Very much also corresponds to holding the group in Classic Alpes-Maritimes but as soon as attacks started he was gone.Reading the latest comments I assumed Chris Froome's TT today at the Dauphine was an absolute disaster.
It wasn't.
Won the close battle with Omer Goldstein.But he was the best placed on his team so that’s good.
Exactly!Well, it all depends on where you put the bar.
If you're talking about Froome ever being capable of getting any sort of good result on top level again, then performances like today is a very bad sign. You say "decent times today were within 38.00mins". Esteban Chaves did 38.00. It says a lot on how bad Froome is now when you indicate doing the same time as Esteban Chaves in a 30 km flat ITT would be good. Because this isn't about "pile-on when he fails to match the performances of the top riders". He is nowhere near the top riders. Today he is not even near riders like Meintjes and Chaves in a flat TT.