Dumoulin.

[Jagartrott]

Re:

He was said to be strong on short steep climbs. The last two km-s was just that.

He should be able to go really well on Mortirolo as well. I mean, that's just like six 2-km steep climbs in quick succession. On the longer, more gradual climbs, he can go in time-trial mode, which is like a magic trick that can turn the Cancellara's of this world into proper climbers.

 

[May0maniac]

He's the Dutch Peter Velits.

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

He was actually better on the steeper climbs then on the long climbs. Confirms what his trainer said. He can do amazing wattages for 5-25 minutes. But not on a 40m climb or more

Come on, he's like 70kg and he's beating Purito on a super-steep finish after spending much more time in the wind on the slightly flatter sections. Fast-forward a bit, and now, after 16 days of fatigue, he's able to hang on on the super steep stuff after having no experience whatsoever in managing fatigue over a Grand Tour.

Your argument about 'well, Froome is the same weight' doesn't work unless you are suggesting that Froome is clean. Otherwise, by your own admission, he is extremely similar to a practically known doper (believe me, nationalism can blind your eyes - I too used to be in a state of denial about Froome doping, with patriotism clouding my judgement)

I wonder when you started to watch cycling. Considering you are British, not so long ago. You're the only one who thinks that only flyweights should be able to climb.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

He was actually better on the steeper climbs then on the long climbs. Confirms what his trainer said. He can do amazing wattages for 5-25 minutes. But not on a 40m climb or more

Come on, he's like 70kg and he's beating Purito on a super-steep finish after spending much more time in the wind on the slightly flatter sections. Fast-forward a bit, and now, after 16 days of fatigue, he's able to hang on on the super steep stuff after having no experience whatsoever in managing fatigue over a Grand Tour.

Your argument about 'well, Froome is the same weight' doesn't work unless you are suggesting that Froome is clean. Otherwise, by your own admission, he is extremely similar to a practically known doper (believe me, nationalism can blind your eyes - I too used to be in a state of denial about Froome doping, with patriotism clouding my judgement)

I wonder when you started to watch cycling. Considering you are British, not so long ago. You're the only one who thinks that only flyweights should be able to climb.[/quote]

Yes, him, anyone else with critical thinking skills and about 90% of the cyclists and commentators / journalists who did not have big butts in the Tour around 1990-2000.

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

He was actually better on the steeper climbs then on the long climbs. Confirms what his trainer said. He can do amazing wattages for 5-25 minutes. But not on a 40m climb or more

Come on, he's like 70kg and he's beating Purito on a super-steep finish after spending much more time in the wind on the slightly flatter sections. Fast-forward a bit, and now, after 16 days of fatigue, he's able to hang on on the super steep stuff after having no experience whatsoever in managing fatigue over a Grand Tour.

Your argument about 'well, Froome is the same weight' doesn't work unless you are suggesting that Froome is clean. Otherwise, by your own admission, he is extremely similar to a practically known doper (believe me, nationalism can blind your eyes - I too used to be in a state of denial about Froome doping, with patriotism clouding my judgement)

I wonder when you started to watch cycling. Considering you are British, not so long ago. You're the only one who thinks that only flyweights should be able to climb.

Yes, him, anyone else with critical thinking skills and about 90% of the cyclist who did not have big butts in the Tour around 1990-2000, most of whom were soon gone.[/quote]Where were you in the 80s. Lets be honest.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

He was actually better on the steeper climbs then on the long climbs. Confirms what his trainer said. He can do amazing wattages for 5-25 minutes. But not on a 40m climb or more

Come on, he's like 70kg and he's beating Purito on a super-steep finish after spending much more time in the wind on the slightly flatter sections. Fast-forward a bit, and now, after 16 days of fatigue, he's able to hang on on the super steep stuff after having no experience whatsoever in managing fatigue over a Grand Tour.

Your argument about 'well, Froome is the same weight' doesn't work unless you are suggesting that Froome is clean. Otherwise, by your own admission, he is extremely similar to a practically known doper (believe me, nationalism can blind your eyes - I too used to be in a state of denial about Froome doping, with patriotism clouding my judgement)

I wonder when you started to watch cycling. Considering you are British, not so long ago. You're the only one who thinks that only flyweights should be able to climb.

Yes, him, anyone else with critical thinking skills and about 90% of the cyclist who did not have big butts in the Tour around 1990-2000, most of whom were soon gone.[/quote]Where were you in the 80s. Lets be honest.[/quote]

I wasn't on a forum getting personal with people to shut down discussion.

That's where I wasn't.

Anything else is irrelevant and your post is typical of those written by people losing an argument due to lack of valid points to make, resorting to personal attacks.

It's a weak position to be in, I get that, but also quickly recognisable.

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

Come on, he's like 70kg and he's beating Purito on a super-steep finish after spending much more time in the wind on the slightly flatter sections. Fast-forward a bit, and now, after 16 days of fatigue, he's able to hang on on the super steep stuff after having no experience whatsoever in managing fatigue over a Grand Tour.

Your argument about 'well, Froome is the same weight' doesn't work unless you are suggesting that Froome is clean. Otherwise, by your own admission, he is extremely similar to a practically known doper (believe me, nationalism can blind your eyes - I too used to be in a state of denial about Froome doping, with patriotism clouding my judgement)

I wonder when you started to watch cycling. Considering you are British, not so long ago. You're the only one who thinks that only flyweights should be able to climb.

Yes, him, anyone else with critical thinking skills and about 90% of the cyclist who did not have big butts in the Tour around 1990-2000, most of whom were soon gone.

Where were you in the 80s. Lets be honest.[/quote]

I wasn't on a forum getting personal with people to shut down discussion.

That's where I wasn't.

Anything else is irrelevant and your post is typical of those written by people losing an argument due to lack of valid points to make, resorting to personal attacks.

It's a weak position to be in, I get that, but also quickly recognisable.[/quote]
Its the truth and that hurts, I understand. You try to lecture people and know *****. Thats my opinion. If you know something about cycling, you wouldnt disagree with my comment.

Its too bad we are on the internet here, because the world wide web is endless. Face to face, it wont last long to see that I have a point (too many act like an expert and havent watched a race until this century) but its not only you.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2dz7x16c]
Its too bad we are on the internet here, because the world wide web is endless. Face to face, it wont last long to see that I have a point (too many act like an expert and havent watched a race until this century) but its not only you.[/quote]

Are you threatening me?

People don't ride face to face, so it's the only possibility I can imagine. If you were offering to show you can ride quicker than me up a hill, fine, but that's not what you seem to be suggesting.

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":4taf4w4k]
Its too bad we are on the internet here, because the world wide web is endless. Face to face, it wont last long to see that I have a point (too many act like an expert and havent watched a race until this century) but its not only you.

Are you threatening me?

People don't ride face to face, so it's the only possibility I can imagine. If you were offering to show you can ride quicker than me up a hill, fine, but that's not what you seem to be suggesting.[/quote]
Dude, I am talking about know how.

Right now I am 100% sure you will ride quicker than me. I havent ridden a bike in years. Its not that hard to admit things.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":9ggarrga]
Its too bad we are on the internet here, because the world wide web is endless. Face to face, it wont last long to see that I have a point (too many act like an expert and havent watched a race until this century) but its not only you.

Are you threatening me?

People don't ride face to face, so it's the only possibility I can imagine. If you were offering to show you can ride quicker than me up a hill, fine, but that's not what you seem to be suggesting.[/quote]
?

Dude, I am talking about know how.[/quote]

What does "face to face it won't last long" mean then?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

[quote=""Jeff"":2kjq1v70]
Regarding cycling, I've competed against and with former Tour de France competitors as amateur. Right now I am 100% sure you will ride quicker than me. I havent ridden a bike in years. Its not that hard to admit things.[/quote]

You are an arrogant git if you think you are the only one who has raced here.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

He was actually better on the steeper climbs then on the long climbs. Confirms what his trainer said. He can do amazing wattages for 5-25 minutes. But not on a 40m climb or more

Come on, he's like 70kg and he's beating Purito on a super-steep finish after spending much more time in the wind on the slightly flatter sections. Fast-forward a bit, and now, after 16 days of fatigue, he's able to hang on on the super steep stuff after having no experience whatsoever in managing fatigue over a Grand Tour.

Your argument about 'well, Froome is the same weight' doesn't work unless you are suggesting that Froome is clean. Otherwise, by your own admission, he is extremely similar to a practically known doper (believe me, nationalism can blind your eyes - I too used to be in a state of denial about Froome doping, with patriotism clouding my judgement)

I wonder when you started to watch cycling. Considering you are British, not so long ago. You're the only one who thinks that only flyweights should be able to climb.[/quote]

I started watching cycling when I took up cycling back in 2001.

And the fact that you are trying to be aggressive shows that you are clearly prepared to defend your little idol and attack anyone who points out the obvious and the fact that he is at least slightly suspicious

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":1mx5v9gj]
Regarding cycling, I've competed against and with former Tour de France competitors as amateur. Right now I am 100% sure you will ride quicker than me. I havent ridden a bike in years. Its not that hard to admit things.

You are an arrogant git if you think you are the only one who has raced here.

I think about 90% if not more, are still riding a bike here. I belong to the 10%. No idea, what your point is, but thats nothing new.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2msumzc5]
Its too bad we are on the internet here, because the world wide web is endless. Face to face, it wont last long to see that I have a point (too many act like an expert and havent watched a race until this century) but its not only you.

Are you threatening me?

People don't ride face to face, so it's the only possibility I can imagine. If you were offering to show you can ride quicker than me up a hill, fine, but that's not what you seem to be suggesting.

?

Dude, I am talking about know how.[/quote]

What does "face to face it won't last long" mean then?[/quote]Face to face, people wont have time to search for statistics, arguments, stories, facts, rumours etc etc. Thats what I mean.[/quote]

Ie face to face, you would have less evidence to back up any claims, and therefore could get away with bs arguments?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

As if I had to look up that quote on the Internet when one of the riders lamented "riders with big butts passing skinny riders uphill". :-/

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

He was actually better on the steeper climbs then on the long climbs. Confirms what his trainer said. He can do amazing wattages for 5-25 minutes. But not on a 40m climb or more

Come on, he's like 70kg and he's beating Purito on a super-steep finish after spending much more time in the wind on the slightly flatter sections. Fast-forward a bit, and now, after 16 days of fatigue, he's able to hang on on the super steep stuff after having no experience whatsoever in managing fatigue over a Grand Tour.

Your argument about 'well, Froome is the same weight' doesn't work unless you are suggesting that Froome is clean. Otherwise, by your own admission, he is extremely similar to a practically known doper (believe me, nationalism can blind your eyes - I too used to be in a state of denial about Froome doping, with patriotism clouding my judgement)

I wonder when you started to watch cycling. Considering you are British, not so long ago. You're the only one who thinks that only flyweights should be able to climb.

I started watching cycling when I took up cycling back in 2001.

And the fact that you are trying to be aggressive shows that you are clearly prepared to defend your little idol and attack anyone who points out the obvious and the fact that he is at least slightly suspicious[/quote] Again, it seems like you think only flyweights should be able to climb.

In your world, only the Purito's of the peloton should finish top 10 in a mountain stage. Only riders with muscular legs can sprint etc etc. That's your world. If you notice something different than you are shocked and ''pointing out the obvious'', according to yourself.

 

[Cookster15]

I don't find it hard to believe Dumoulin is doping (though I still hope he's not). What I find hard to believe is the inference that his rivals are not or are less doped and this is why they can't drop him. Aru, Landa, Valverde, Purito are all riding this Vuelta clean? Or are we just saying big riders benefit more than little ones?

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

He was actually better on the steeper climbs then on the long climbs. Confirms what his trainer said. He can do amazing wattages for 5-25 minutes. But not on a 40m climb or more

Come on, he's like 70kg and he's beating Purito on a super-steep finish after spending much more time in the wind on the slightly flatter sections. Fast-forward a bit, and now, after 16 days of fatigue, he's able to hang on on the super steep stuff after having no experience whatsoever in managing fatigue over a Grand Tour.

Your argument about 'well, Froome is the same weight' doesn't work unless you are suggesting that Froome is clean. Otherwise, by your own admission, he is extremely similar to a practically known doper (believe me, nationalism can blind your eyes - I too used to be in a state of denial about Froome doping, with patriotism clouding my judgement)

I wonder when you started to watch cycling. Considering you are British, not so long ago. You're the only one who thinks that only flyweights should be able to climb.

I started watching cycling when I took up cycling back in 2001.

And the fact that you are trying to be aggressive shows that you are clearly prepared to defend your little idol and attack anyone who points out the obvious and the fact that he is at least slightly suspicious[/quote] Again, it seems like you think only flyweights should be able to climb.

In your world, only the Purito's of the peloton should finish top 10 in a mountain stage. Only riders with muscular legs can sprint etc etc. That's your world. If you notice something different than you are shocked and ''pointing out the obvious'', according to yourself.[/quote]

No, not at all. But when you consider that a higher weight is a major disadvantage, especially as the road gets steeper, so higher force acting against a climber's motion due to weight, Dumoulin needs to put out more watts than the lighter riders. Then, when you consider his fairly sudden rise in climbing ability (it's one thing to do well at the Tour de Suisse, another to do it at a Grand Tour against some of the best climbers in the world) and the nature of the sport, you have to be at least somewhat suspicious

 

[Miburo]

Re:

He might be doped. But if he is, so is the rest

Such a terrible comment from you, what happened with you? You used to not say idiotic things like that.

 

[Tonton]

When I see Dumoulin, I see Ullrich...

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

I don't find it hard to believe Dumoulin is doping (though I still hope he's not). What I find hard to believe is the inference that his rivals are not or are less doped and this is why they can't drop him. Aru, Landa, Valverde, Purito are all riding this Vuelta clean? Or are we just saying big riders benefit more than little ones?

Not quite, the inference is that the little guys are going well in their natural territory, where they have always gone well, while Dumoulin is suddenly improving in an area that a rider of his characteristics normally struggles.

Until now, Dumoulin has gone well where outright power is key, rather than power to weight - short steep climbs like those in the Ardennes and TT's. If someone like Purito, Aru, Landa, Chaves and Majka destroys the TT then there will be plenty of mud being sent their way too, whereas Dumoulin should be top 3, top 5 minimum, as you would expect from someone with his history and physical characteristics.

As an example, think back to the 2007 TdF, with Rasmussen. Nobody was surprised by how well he was climbing, as a KOM winner and previous top 10 it was expected. It was when he only lost 1'41 to Evans in the TT everyone started getting suspicious.

 

[42x16ss]

When I see Dumoulin, I see Ullrich...

Maybe. He's similar in the TT, not quite so sure if he's going to be as good in the mountains. If you take out Riis, Pantani and Armstrong, Ullrich was probably the strongest climber in the world for nearly 10 years. Dumoulin can't claim to be that ATM.

 

[Djoop]

Deleted post

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Just once, I would like to read about a GT performer doing "what's expected", and not having a "surprising" first two weeks.

Anyone who leans on Wiggins as a foundation for performance justification just nailed his doping coffin shut as far as I am concerned.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/tom-dumoulin-bradley-wiggins-showed-me-whats-possible-190234?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social

 

[Choppy Warburton]

Re:

As if I had to look up that quote on the Internet when one of the riders lamented "riders with big butts passing skinny riders uphill". :-/

Without browsing myself can I ask, was that Luis Herrera who said that first or was it maybe just a common expression I believe I heard him use in an interview?