• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 100 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
the sceptic said:
Spalco, your thoughts about Riis, Cobo, Aitor Gonzalez, Santi Perez, Ricco etc? did you think they were clean?

Froome is a bigger fraud than all of them. The only one that is close to Froome when it comes to donkey-racehorse transformation is Wiggins.
Show me the evidence? :p
 
the sceptic said:
Spalco, your thoughts about Riis, Cobo, Aitor Gonzalez, Santi Perez, Ricco etc? did you think they were clean?
No, probably no, who?, who?, ****ing hell no (still love him though).

Froome is a bigger fraud than all of them. The only one that is close to Froome when it comes to donkey-racehorse transformation is Wiggins.
That may be so, but I want to believe until convinced of the opposite.
 
Jul 29, 2012
8,832
0
0
spalco said:
No, probably no, who?, who?, ****ing hell no (still love him though).



That may be so, but I want to believe until convinced of the opposite.
What evidence do you need to be convinced? Crazy W/Kg numbers or doctors?
 
Or LA for that matter. I think the most important lesson we learned after Lance was proven guilty after so many years is that you definitely can get away with doping while winning as many TDFs as possible. Froome's overnight transformation from gregario to GT monster is highly suspicious and the fact he hasn't been proven a doper does not mean he's clean.
 
the sceptic said:
Spalco, your thoughts about Riis, Cobo, Aitor Gonzalez, Santi Perez, Ricco etc? did you think they were clean?

Froome is a bigger fraud than all of them. The only one that is close to Froome when it comes to donkey-racehorse transformation is Wiggins.
Froomes background is totally different from those guys.
 
@JimmyFingers

Netserk said:
I don't think you understood my point.

Tested positive: Doped*
No positive: Could be clean. Could be doped.

Inhuman performances: Doped*
Human performances: Could be clean. Could be doped.

From zero to hero: Doped*
Normal progression: Could be clean. Could be doped.

*With the minor possibility of a false positive.
 
Apr 21, 2012
292
0
0
Miburo said:
38 minutes on the alpe won't do the trick?
Come on, Froome will never give such a proof, riding at 6.00 W/kg will be enough to climb in 40' and put 30 seconds into his opponents. On more minute in each ITT on Contador and he will win easily without being compared to Pantani or Armstrong.
 
Jun 18, 2009
891
0
0
OT Every time I enter the forum this thread appears as the last with reply. Sometimes I press on it (like now) maybe maybe you got something on him. But then I realize this and Seinfeld have a lot in common: This is the thread about nothing.
 
Zam_Olyas said:
Show me the evidence? :p
Fergoose said:
With the rapidly expanding Team Sky thread, many different issues were being discussed.
- Do Sky have a team wide doping regime? (best kept in the Sky thread)
- Is Bradley Wiggins' improvement through blood sweat and tears or cheating? (Wiggins a man in love thread?)
- Chris Froome - where did that come from?

This thread is for the latter if you think it would be easier reading if the different issues were split up. For example, some believe Froome is likely doping, but that there isn't much to suggest the rest of the team are.

Froome rose to prominence in the 2011 Vuelta where his ability to singlehandedly guide Bradley Wiggins through numerous steep hills and mountains initially raised eyebrows. Later in the race a mightily impressive ITT followed despite Froome continuing his energy sapping shepherding of Bradley Wiggins. In the final moments of the Vuelta, Froome was released from the shackles of Wiggins, first on the Angliru and finally on a decisive stage that saw Froome and Cobo gain 20 seconds+ on every other person on the stage in the last kilometre with a sprint up 20% gradients. Froome had announced his presence to the world and finished second overall.

Taken at face value, his performance in terms of balancing pacesetting and domestique duties for Wiggins, aceing an ITT and managing to rival the dubious Juan Jose Cobo on the steepest of gradients was arguably one of the most impressive and hard fought in recent years.

Explanations for that performance and his subsequent assault on the podium of the 2012 TdF remain, as yet, unclear.

The link below is to previous discussion on Froome that isn't in the Clinic but touches on much of the relevant historic debate from the 2011 Vuelta.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15116
McLovin said:
OT Every time I enter the forum this thread appears as the last with reply. Sometimes I press on it (like now) maybe maybe you got something on him. But then I realize this and Seinfeld have a lot in common: This is the thread about nothing.
Not really.

If you read the very first post in the thread the points raised remain today unanswered.

Sky have done very little in making us believe cycling is now clean.

In fact all they've done is raise more questions.
 
spalco said:
Well, as I said, or meant to say: I understand your point, but I like Froome too much to agree, so yeah, I need more. ;)
So why "probably no" for Cobo?

There's no more against Cobo than there is against Froome.

From a drugs in sport perspective the only difference between the two is that when Cobo's teammates tested positive at the 2008 Tour, the team pulled out of the race, whereas when it happened to Froome's team they didn't.

As for Taxus' explanations for Froome's rise, yes there are potential reasons for his rise that don't involve drugs... but doping is a much easier explanation. And in view of all the other leaps of faith needed for all the other rises around him, it becomes ever easier in comparison to the amount of facts required to be searched for to justify the cleanliness.

I've read plenty of justifications for Froome's rise, and some of them can even be moderately convincing. But there just isn't even remotely enough in my opinion to counterbalance the performances I'm seeing and the context in which it's being done.

Again, I'm sure I'll be stupid enough to open this thread some other time, but really what is the point? After everything calms down again, there'll be a new race with new ridiculous performances, or a new member will try to convince us of Froome's cleanliness by pointing at facts or interpretations that have been seen many times before in the annals of the thread, and then a slanging match will break out again, and it all becomes as tedious, repetitive and inevitable as watching the man himself in action.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Gregga said:
Come on, Froome will never give such a proof, riding at 6.00 W/kg will be enough to climb in 40' and put 30 seconds into his opponents. On more minute in each ITT on Contador and he will win easily without being compared to Pantani or Armstrong.
I believe Sastre was a clean rider, that is assume he was very strong, but I think so, for three weeks, with my doubts. I think Froome could reach the same time as Sastre... Sastre was a solo attack.. if he si behind Porte till three kms of the end, he could even do it in 38 min, and I still believe in that. It depends how unfold the stage as well, and all the Tour. Sastre did a big time if he was clean, but he was saving and saving all the Tour to that attack.

Froome that day was very comfortable even after that Sastre attack, he had a mistake with food, he faded up...anyway he was 30, but that day he had legs to be maybe top ten...it is normal think that years later, that young rider could have improve till Sastre's time.

We have as well Ventoux to compare.
 
Jun 18, 2009
891
0
0
thehog said:
Not really.

If you read the very first post in the thread the points raised remain today unanswered.

Sky have done very little in making us believe cycling is now clean.

In fact all they've done is raise more questions.
Just look the very two post under you and see how they start:
I believe....
What if....
245 pages of beliefs....a very spiritual and religious thread indeed.
 
Mar 29, 2011
4,283
0
0
McLovin said:
OT Every time I enter the forum this thread appears as the last with reply. Sometimes I press on it (like now) maybe maybe you got something on him. But then I realize this and Seinfeld have a lot in common: This is the thread about nothing.
I disagree. This thread doesn't pamper with abundance of matters certainly, but the same cues are pedaled day by day

1. Froome is a joke
2. Froome can't ride his bike. If I were him, I'd do that way better
3. Froome doesn't respect opponents
4. Froome dares beat best rider of generation.
5. Froome dared come into GC superelite. Clinic regulars didn't call him, but he came.
6. Froome makes people not to watch the races with his participation due to the lack of intrigue
7. Froome is a climber in no way, because a real climber would've easily pushed 39x25 at 22% at San Luca

etc
etc
etc

The thread is bottomless. That was only start... :)


Libertine, you dislike english speaking riders, as I got from you posting you handle Contador, Sanchez, italians, Schleck, dutchies without enthusiasm too. Sky is a little personal tragedy for you, because there's no need to watch the 100th TdF.... Who do you support then? Spanish-Portuguese underground like Cobo and Machado?
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
McLovin said:
Just look the very two post under you and see how they start:
I believe....
What if....
245 pages of beliefs....a very spiritual and religious thread indeed.
Which hypothesis makes the fewest assumptions? Froome is doping, or Froome is clean?
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
So why "probably no" for Cobo?

There's no more against Cobo than there is against Froome.
.
You are not going to believe me, but Cobo is almost as strong as Froome, he is one of the most powerfull riders currently in three weeks... his problem is in his mind.

I cant say he never doped, he was with Saunier, I would say he did, but he is not the same case as Ricco or Piepoli, or Marchante or a lot of... he was very tested, UCI wanted him, but never could do anything againts him.

Cobo dont like cycling, he is not reliable, he can be in the middle of August in a party in his village, but if he is ok in legs and mind, he is really strong.

He have had bad luck last two years in some key moments.

In cycling, as in some movies, the murderer is not the man who seems more.

Some times is, but some times is not.

Some times the murderer is the best person at our eyes.

You can believe me or not, and I understand if no, but I know this to have been inside cycling. Inside, people know a lot of things and talk about.
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
Taxus4a said:
You are not going to believe me, but Cobo is almost as strong as Froome, he is one of the most powerfull riders currently in three weeks... his problem is in his mind.

I cant say he never doped, he was with Saunier, I would say he did, but he is not the same case as Ricco or Piepoli, or Marchante or a lot of... he was very tested, UCI wanted him, but never could do anything againts him.

Cobo dont like cycling, he is not reliable, he can be in the middle of August in a party in his village, but if he is ok in legs and mind, he is really strong.

He have had bad luck last two years in some key moments.

In cycling, as in some movies, the murderer is not the man who seems more.

Some times is, but some times is not.

Some times the murderer is the best person at our eyes.

You can believe me or not, and I understand if no, but I know this to have been inside cycling. Inside, people know a lot of things and talk about.
Ah yes Cobo just wants to win more than everyone else (except for when he doesnt and finishes in the gruppetto)

Just another bs excuse
 
Jan 20, 2013
663
0
0
Heckler said:
This is as succinctly as it can be put.



Froome's transformation alone is nothing but miraculous, then you add to that the rise of Porte...

I believe one of the biggest issues is that if it is not 100% natural, it is probably 100% legal within the existing rules. It is also Very Expensive.
As I say I have my suspicions about what Sky/BC and Froome are doing and more over how they are getting away with it. However, if I stated here on the forum the exact and explicit nature of those suspicions I could well be:

a. at best just deleted or banned.
b. highly libellous and dragged through the courts.
c. get an instant rebuttal from Jimmy Fingers.:eek:
 
Jun 18, 2009
891
0
0
the sceptic said:
Which hypothesis makes the fewest assumptions? Froome is doping, or Froome is clean?
I am not going into this. I was just OT. I have nothing to say until we have a proof. I don't like and don't hate him. I just wish for him, assuming he is clean, to win a GT because he got two brutally stolen.
 
Aug 12, 2012
3,991
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
...but what about if he does 38 minutes while putting 2 minutes into the field in a two-man ride away from the field with Leonardo Portepoli?
Porte cant do that. I think he is strong, but in this Tour at least, IMO: Froome, Evans, Hesjedal, Purito and Valverde are stronger in the mountains, and maybe Contador, Mollema, Andy, JVdB, Quintana and Pinot, these two last ones, for sure in one day. Even Dan Martin, Kreuziger and Tejay could be similar. And maybe I miss some people...

One day Porte could be amazing, but not everyday, he is improving a lot and who knows, but now that is my opinion, this is not Ospedale or Nice.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS