From a doping point of view, what do you expect Froom in the vuelta?

[maxmartin]

not bad. "well done" CF

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

What a hero this young talent. Like his gear pedalling, so light.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Difficult to estimate how "effective" his doping regimen will work on him, since the circumstances around are different-for example, having already ridden the tour & not knowing how his "fitness" will respond with such load on his legs-then is the "physical" response to get a "second peak" in such short time-& last-how is his body going to respond to a challenge imposed by an exceptional contender like Contador when the attacks come.....

Yates claimed the other day that Sky is going to 'replicate" somewhat the tour Formula in Spain-but he's forgetting who's Froome riding against this time around....

+1 to this. Prior to the start of the Vuelta, I thought it would go one of two ways, but now there's a third.

1: Field crushing win for Froome.
2: Froome well off the podium in terms of time. The common hero to zero doper performance.
3: Contador's attacking style, and the Vuelta's time bonuses invalidates the Sky train.

I think tomorrow will be telling which Froome we'll get for the rest of the Vuelta. I only realized until waaaay too late that Uran was a Sky rider. Sky got their medal...

 

[maxmartin]

+1 to this. Prior to the start of the Vuelta, I thought it would go one of two ways, but now there's a third.

1: Field crushing win for Froome.
2: Froome well off the podium in terms of time. The common hero to zero doper performance.
3: Contador's attacking style, and the Vuelta's time bonuses invalidates the Sky train.

I think tomorrow will be telling which Froome we'll get for the rest of the Vuelta. I only realized until waaaay too late that Uran was a Sky rider. Sky got their medal...

don't think he can win the whole thing. he will be here and there make the podium.

even that happens, that is slap to everybody's face who think cycling is getting cleaner

 

[JimmyFingers]

don't think he can win the whole thing. he will be here and there make the podium.

even that happens, that is slap to everybody's face who think cycling is getting cleaner

Unlike proven dopers Valverde and Contador?

Sorry but I really think you have to have seen him needle in hand to be making those sort of statements

 

[JimmyFingers]

You won't find much - everyone here assumes Cobo is doping (which is correct). The only reason there are so many Froome/Wiggins threads is because there's a legion of people who think that white people who speak english are less likely to dope. Therefore much discussion on the subject of Sky.

Right, because those are the people starting all the threads. In the clinic. The ones who think Sky aren't doping.

And just for clarity, who are the non-white, non-English-speaking people you infer everyone thinks do dope? Hushovd? Contador? Voeckler? Or are do you mean Teklehaymanot?

 

[lemoogle]

I think it's way too early to get excited and assume Contador will spoil sky's plans. It's only stage 3, I for one don't really see him taking minutes off froome no matter how much he attacks in the later stages

 

[lemoogle]

Unlike proven dopers Valverde and Contador?

Sorry but I really think you have to have seen him needle in hand to be making those sort of statements

Noone has seen Contador (or valverde really) needle in hand. You have just managed to contradict yourself in one line.

I think tomorrow will be telling which Froome we'll get for the rest of the Vuelta. I only realized until waaaay too late that Uran was a Sky rider. Sky got their medal...

EBH came third, Sky got two medals there.

 

[BroDeal]

don't think he can win the whole thing. he will be here and there make the podium.

even that happens, that is slap to everybody's face who think cycling is getting cleaner

Sky looks to be a slap in the face of clean cycling. A year ago Vroome getting another contract was in question. Now Cyclingnews describes him and Cntador as the "big two" in the Vuelta. This is more ludicrous than the transformation of Armstrong. At least Armstrong had a history of wins in single day races plus the occasional short but uncompetitive stage race.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

It´s funny. Froome who has yet to be linked to any doping scandal is crucified, while AC, an at least 3 times convicted doper is getting a free pass...

Again, if Froome wins this thing by 5 mins or whatever, it says nothing about his doping, but the lack of (heavy doping) on the side of AC, b/c he might be scared finally.

 

[thehog]

It´s funny. Froome who has yet to be linked to any doping scandal is crucified, while AC, an at least 3 times convicted doper is getting a free pass...

Again, if Froome wins this think by 5 mins or whatever, it says nothing about his doping, but the lack of (neavy doping) on the side of AC, b/c he might be scared finally.

That's because Fromme has been pack fodder his entire career until he found his super TT'ing and climbing abilities under a rock.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

That's because Fromme has been pack fodder his entire career until he found his super TT'ing and climbing abilities under a rock.

I am doubting Froome (& Wiggins, and Sky in general) as much. But i don´t like the applied double standards by many here. AC is as bad as Froome, may even worse. We don´t know how good AC in reality is. He blood doped (at least) since his beginning days atop of CG standings.

 

[lemoogle]

It´s funny. Froome who has yet to be linked to any doping scandal is crucified, while AC, an at least 3 times convicted doper is getting a free pass...

Again, if Froome wins this thing by 5 mins or whatever, it says nothing about his doping, but the lack of (heavy doping) on the side of AC, b/c he might be scared finally.

This is a Froome thread. AC hasn't yet shown anything , how can he be crucified before we can even judge him. And anyway, there is a Contador thread for every Froome thread.
Froome has peaked for 8 months ( or something ) and Contador is completely fresh. If Froome wins by 5 minutes it will say a lot more than what you think

Also you might want to realise that people will still like AC better no matter what , because he makes things interesting, today's Vuelta was more entertaining than the whole tour de france, and that's not thanks to Froome/Sky.

I will add that Contador is Contador, Froome is Sky. If you get what I'm trying to say.

 

[trompe le monde]

Sky looks to be a slap in the face of clean cycling. A year ago Vroome getting another contract was in question. Now Cyclingnews describes him and Cntador as the "big two" in the Vuelta. This is more ludicrous than the transformation of Armstrong. At least Armstrong had a history of wins in single day races plus an occasional rare short stage race.

I'm beginning to think that for some at Sky - Froome, Wiggins - a cyclist's form cycle is a binary condition: either he is 'on' and perpetually peaking or he is resting and not racing. They are not subject to the regular peaks and valleys that 99.9 per cent of the Peloton experiences.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

This is a Froome thread. AC hasn't yet shown anything , how can he be crucified before we can even judge him. And anyway, there is a Contador thread for every Froome thread.
Froome has peaked for 8 months ( or something ) and Contador is completely fresh. If Froome wins by 5 minutes it will say a lot more than what you think

Also you might want to realise that people will still like AC better no matter what , because he makes things interesting, today's Vuelta was more entertaining than the whole tour de france, and that's not thanks to Froome/Sky.

I will add that Contador is Contador, Froome is Sky. If you get what I'm trying to say.

AC is a slap in the face of clean cycling, the same way as Valv-Piti & Pharmstrong...
Froome/Sky is dubious. I made that clear many times. But they havn´t been yet linked to any doping scandal.
AC peaked year long in 2009 & 2010 (like for example Wiggins this year).
Pharmstrong & Ullrich OTOH peaked only for three weeks in July.
So a 5 min win by Froome would say nothing about doping or lack of.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

AC is NOT a proven doper. He is a very, very likely doper, but proven? Nope. We don't know for sure if he was a Fuentes client. We know there was an "AC" in the files and we know Franke claims Contador was given test & insulin by Fuentes. Hardly constitutes proof. As for the clen issue, did you actually read the CAS-verdict? If you did, you'll know it cannot be considered proof of intentional doping. AC has a mountain of circumstantial evidence against him (Marti, Saiz, Hog, OP, Ashenden's comments on retics, plasticizer, anonymous team mate, anonymous soigneur), but the proof is missing.

 

[maxmartin]

Unlike proven dopers Valverde and Contador?

Sorry but I really think you have to have seen him needle in hand to be making those sort of statements

This is how you prove someone doped?? No wonder no british cyclist ever doped. Or better no cyclist ever doped, because I never seen one. Get some brain to think logically

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

AC is NOT a proven doper. He is a very, very likely doper, but proven? Nope. We don't know for sure if he was a Fuentes client. We know there was an "AC" in the files and we know Franke claims Contador was given test & insulin by Fuentes. Hardly constitutes proof. As for the clen issue, did you actually read the CAS-verdict? If you did, you'll know it cannot be considered proof of intentional doping. AC has a mountain of circumstantial evidence against him (Marti, Saiz, Hog, OP, Ashenden's comments on retics, plasticizer, anonymous team mate, anonymous soigneur), but the proof is missing.

OK, AC is no proven doper. He just ate the wrong steak. Ullrich is no proven doper, Armstrong isn´t, Valv isn´t at all... nobody is...

 

[maxmartin]

It´s funny. Froome who has yet to be linked to any doping scandal is crucified, while AC, an at least 3 times convicted doper is getting a free pass...

Again, if Froome wins this thing by 5 mins or whatever, it says nothing about his doping, but the lack of (heavy doping) on the side of AC, b/c he might be scared finally.

give Froom another two or three years LOL
he is just new to the ring

 

[maxmartin]

AC is a slap in the face of clean cycling, the same way as Valv-Piti & Pharmstrong...
Froome/Sky is dubious. I made that clear many times. But they havn´t been yet linked to any doping scandal.
AC peaked year long in 2009 & 2010 (like for example Wiggins this year).
Pharmstrong & Ullrich OTOH peaked only for three weeks in July.
So a 5 min win by Froome would say nothing about doping or lack of.

why do you keep discussing AC in Froom-Vuelta thread, let's keep things on topic. If you really want to discuss AC, open a AC-vuelta thread.

 

[Hayabusa]

AC is NOT a proven doper. He is a very, very likely doper, but proven? Nope. We don't know for sure if he was a Fuentes client. We know there was an "AC" in the files and we know Franke claims Contador was given test & insulin by Fuentes. Hardly constitutes proof. As for the clen issue, did you actually read the CAS-verdict? If you did, you'll know it cannot be considered proof of intentional doping. AC has a mountain of circumstantial evidence against him (Marti, Saiz, Hog, OP, Ashenden's comments on retics, plasticizer, anonymous team mate, anonymous soigneur), but the proof is missing.

Yeah, that "steak" just leaped into his mouth, it's also just a co-incidence that he's worked in some dodgy teams with some dodgy employees (like Froome is now) and has been able to perform to such a high standard consistently...

But ofcourse it's Alberto, he attacks and stuff so he must be a good guy right?

He's as dirty as the rest of them, not on an Armstrong level but he's a bad one for sure.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

why do you keep discussing AC in Froom-Vuelta thread, let's keep things on topic. If you really want to discuss AC, open a AC-vuelta thread.

It´s very much Froome related since many here think AC must beat him hard.
I just make the point that a Froome win over AC is proof of nothing.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

but the proof is missing.

Please rewatch the 2007 Tour and have a laugh. Proof? Nah.....

Froome in last years Vuelta; just the same old ****, different rider.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

He's as dirty as the rest of them, not on an Armstrong level but he's a bad one for sure.

Why not on a Armstrong-Level?
He was protected by UCI until Seppelt of ARD made the clen positive public.
He blood doped from the very beginning (see Fuentes). He lies up today. He was found a 2nd time of doing blood doping (plasticzisers in the "steak case").
Even CAS couldn´t get around it and found him guilty.

I do not think Froome is an angel, but i would like it very much if AC is kept off winning any more GT´s.

 

[maxmartin]

It´s very much Froome related since many here think AC must beat him hard.
I just make the point that a Froome win over AC is proof of nothing.

I didn't get it. If AC is doped like you suggested, and CF beats doped AC in vuelta means nothing??