Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1071 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

DirtyWorks said:
macbindle said:
Does anybody really believe that many, if any, of the top riders don't dope?
As has always been the case, clean riders are in there giving it their best shot. Sure, you don't know who they are immediately, always. But, to just write off the entire peloton as doping isn't accurate. More importantly, it gives actual dopers an excuse to steal from clean riders.
Yes. So the ‘clean’ rider is unknowable ... even if he never tests positive. But even like the soon-to-be-found-actual doper, he will always fall under suspicion, by someone. The doping rider is only ‘known’ after a positive test or other non- test evidence. As a race organiser, you can never guarantee a clean field ... (unless you had some type of PED-omnipotent-omniscient MRI device that riders would parade through before signing in .... :surprised: . They could all be doping or none could be doping. Same for many sports, I suppose. This is the narrative that has been written. Riders understand those parameters and react ... the way they decide to react. Implicit is a voluntary assumption of risk.

You can always rely upon the ye olde Western Canon to frame a response to cheating in sport. Few really bad guys and lots of good guys who have been abused. Maybe something’s lost in translation.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
huge said:
ontheroad said:
Former star cyclist calls for a ban for Froome. Meanwhile not one current rider to the best of my knowledge has spoken out against Froome. Nibali came closest to any sort of rebuttal before he backtracked again. Long live omerta.
That has nothing to do with omerta.

Unless you imply that Nibali was a witness and knows exactly what Froome did, but denies any knowledge.
That would be omerta.

Being cautious during the interviews, not attacking Froome, is just being sensible, especially after the arguments they had in the past. He has nothing to gain in lashing out against the Briton. But I do understand that media are crying to get Nibali say anything that could light a fire.
This is kind of a key element of Omerta.
A reasonably expected, often forgivable and sometimes admirable behaviour (depending upon the context) that has served people well from the school yard, to the sports arena, to the battlefield. More commonly known as ‘just STF up’ .... if you’ve never indulged, bit hard to wrap your brain around it ... know what I mean.
 
Re: Re:

DirtyWorks said:
macbindle said:
Does anybody really believe that many, if any, of the top riders don't dope?
As has always been the case, clean riders are in there giving it their best shot. Sure, you don't know who they are immediately, always. But, to just write off the entire peloton as doping isn't accurate. More importantly, it gives actual dopers an excuse to steal from clean riders.
See bolded. I'm not talking about the entire peloton, I'm talking about the top.

I've a mate who was a pro during the Armstrong years who told me that any rider who got to a certain level within the pro peloton would reach a point where if they wanted to be a star rider they would have a decision to make. It was more about money than morals because going on a doping programme was a huge financial commitment with no guarantee of success. Tens of thousands of pounds a year.

I can't see very much to suggest why any of that would have changed, other than possibly getting more expensive. So in relation to other riders commenting on Froome I'm not too expectant. I would expect Nibali to comment, but that is because he's a weasel.
 
Re: Re:

Breh said:
Breh said:
ontheroad said:
Former star cyclist calls for a ban for Froome. Meanwhile not one current rider to the best of my knowledge has spoken out against Froome. Nibali came closest to any sort of rebuttal before he backtracked again. Long live omerta.
Mathieu Van Der Poel said Froome should be suspended.
Dumoulin said Sunweb would've suspended him if he were in the same situation. He added that things work differently with Sky so....
Add Bakelants(ofcourse) to the list.
Add Dennis (half heartedly) https://cyclingtips.com/2018/01/dennis-froome-ive-got-zero-tolerance-sort-positive-test/
and note LPR is flabbergasted by CF
 
Re:

meat puppet said:
I like portes lets see what happens line. He was an insider afterall.
Sounds to me that he is not flabbergasted at all.

Doesn't surprise me at all that so few riders has been outspoken about CF. The cycling sport is truly naive and very easy to see right through.
 
Is there anything to stop Froome riding in the next few weeks ?

Normally he's done the Herald Sun Tour which is at the end of the month plus there is the Cadel Evans race a few days before

You'd have thought that they would go with the original plan if possible so that if he gets off or only gets a short ban then he's still on the ideal race schedule
 
Re:

Eyeballs Out said:
Is there anything to stop Froome riding in the next few weeks ?

Normally he's done the Herald Sun Tour which is at the end of the month plus there is the Cadel Evans race a few days before

You'd have thought that they would go with the original plan if possible so that if he gets off or only gets a short ban then he's still on the ideal race schedule
no Cadel's race nor Herald Sun this year. he was supposed to start with Andalucia/Algarve, then Tirreno.
 
Re: Re:

pastronef said:
Eyeballs Out said:
Is there anything to stop Froome riding in the next few weeks ?

Normally he's done the Herald Sun Tour which is at the end of the month plus there is the Cadel Evans race a few days before

You'd have thought that they would go with the original plan if possible so that if he gets off or only gets a short ban then he's still on the ideal race schedule
no Cadel's race nor Herald Sun this year. he was supposed to start with Andalucia/Algarve, then Tirreno.
Ok thanks. So 14th Feb should be his seasonal debut. It will be interesting to see if he shows up
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re: Re:

Eyeballs Out said:
pastronef said:
Eyeballs Out said:
Is there anything to stop Froome riding in the next few weeks ?

Normally he's done the Herald Sun Tour which is at the end of the month plus there is the Cadel Evans race a few days before

You'd have thought that they would go with the original plan if possible so that if he gets off or only gets a short ban then he's still on the ideal race schedule
no Cadel's race nor Herald Sun this year. he was supposed to start with Andalucia/Algarve, then Tirreno.
Ok thanks. So 14th Feb should be his seasonal debut. It will be interesting to see if he shows up
Might be a bit cold for chasing the Dawg up a mountain dressed as a giant syringe :D
 
Jun 27, 2009
373
1
0
Re: Re:

Eyeballs Out said:
pastronef said:
Eyeballs Out said:
Is there anything to stop Froome riding in the next few weeks ?

Normally he's done the Herald Sun Tour which is at the end of the month plus there is the Cadel Evans race a few days before

You'd have thought that they would go with the original plan if possible so that if he gets off or only gets a short ban then he's still on the ideal race schedule
no Cadel's race nor Herald Sun this year. he was supposed to start with Andalucia/Algarve, then Tirreno.
Ok thanks. So 14th Feb should be his seasonal debut. It will be interesting to see if he shows up
No one has told him no thus far, no reason to do anything different.... the optimist in me would like to say he gets suspended before the end of March or April, the pessimist says he'll win Giro and the Tour plus the Worlds and walk away scot free, a true legend of the sport....
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,273
2
0
Re:

Eyeballs Out said:
Is there anything to stop Froome riding in the next few weeks ?

Normally he's done the Herald Sun Tour which is at the end of the month plus there is the Cadel Evans race a few days before

You'd have thought that they would go with the original plan if possible so that if he gets off or only gets a short ban then he's still on the ideal race schedule
A sudden drying up of appearance money?
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Re: Re:

macbindle said:
DirtyWorks said:
macbindle said:
Does anybody really believe that many, if any, of the top riders don't dope?
As has always been the case, clean riders are in there giving it their best shot. Sure, you don't know who they are immediately, always. But, to just write off the entire peloton as doping isn't accurate. More importantly, it gives actual dopers an excuse to steal from clean riders.
See bolded. I'm not talking about the entire peloton, I'm talking about the top.

I've a mate who was a pro during the Armstrong years who told me that any rider who got to a certain level within the pro peloton would reach a point where if they wanted to be a star rider they would have a decision to make. It was more about money than morals because going on a doping programme was a huge financial commitment with no guarantee of success. Tens of thousands of pounds a year.

I can't see very much to suggest why any of that would have changed, other than possibly getting more expensive. So in relation to other riders commenting on Froome I'm not too expectant. I would expect Nibali to comment, but that is because he's a weasel.
Sort of the Moncoutié conundrum : You could be up there with the top boys if you started following the proper regime, or you have to go for an entirely different career of trying to pick stages and lesser races.
 
Re:

DanielSong39 said:
It's theoretically possible to make it to the top while microdosing on substances that are not on the official "banned" list and does not trigger a positive drug test.

I guess that's clean enough.
This doesn't make any sense. Why would you micro-dose something that isn't banned? If it isn't banned you can take as much as you want/need.
 
Re:

DanielSong39 said:
It's theoretically possible to make it to the top while microdosing on substances that are not on the official "banned" list and does not trigger a positive drug test.

I guess that's clean enough.
It's easier to make it to the top by having the heads of the UCI and WADA in your hip-pocket. Then you can do whatever you want.
 
I think what he means is there are substances permitted you can take up to a limit in small amounts without any risk. Not sure this applies to Froomes, but if you take a much more holistic view of performance enhancement, there's likely multiple ways you can do it and stay within the rules. Asthma drugs are just one of many permitted substances.
 
Re: Re:

Huapango said:
DanielSong39 said:
It's theoretically possible to make it to the top while microdosing on substances that are not on the official "banned" list and does not trigger a positive drug test.

I guess that's clean enough.
It's easier to make it to the top by having the heads of the UCI and WADA in your hip-pocket. Then you can do whatever you want.
This helps a lot. If only Cookie didn’t lose the election, Dawg would be getting ready to win all 3 GTs in one year. Still it’s likely Froome will get himself off as the fix is already in play.
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
DanielSong39 said:
It's theoretically possible to make it to the top while microdosing on substances that are not on the official "banned" list and does not trigger a positive drug test.

I guess that's clean enough.
This doesn't make any sense. Why would you micro-dose something that isn't banned? If it isn't banned you can take as much as you want/need.
Would love to hear an answer to this. As well as how anyone would know what is or isn't theoretically possible. I have deep doubts it's possible to do what's happening now in the "Grey Area" foisted upon us by Sky PR.

Clearly, as has just been proven, they are not in the grey area, but in the red. Not that this wasn't obvious before...
 
I think they are in both areas. We know what they do in the grey (TUE abuse, Tram, Salbutamol maybe). We don't know what they do in the red, but I cannot believe that Froome's dominance relies on the grey stuff alone.
 
samhocking said:
I think what he means is there are substances permitted you can take up to a limit in small amounts without any risk. Not sure this applies to Froomes, but if you take a much more holistic view of performance enhancement, there's likely multiple ways you can do it and stay within the rules. Asthma drugs are just one of many permitted substances.
Absolutely - 'immoral' but not breaking the (letter of the) rules ...

For instance in the past I'm sure Meldonium was in the mix, wasn't it Brad that said "they tell us - 'you cant take that anymore' ..."

I would imagine Xenon gas was there. OOC cortisone (Kenacort?) used to slim down. TUEs for Kenacort are more dodgy in my view - was it used to mask the OOC just in case?

Salbutamol as well - although oral use is outlawed I believe, so very dodgy if they did this.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS