Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1119 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
simoni said:
@craigee

You know nothing about me.

If you're interested I like to consider evidence as its put to me and make my own mind up.

Most of the stuff we've found out about sky/froome, esp over the last 18months is extremely incriminating to my eye. It needs expaining properly and hasn't been so far and I doubt it ever will.

But more than anything else I hate to see valid evidence and worthwhile conversation blurred by nonsense. The analysis of this video I see above, to my mind, is utter crap.
A perfect summary. Well said Sir :)
 
ScienceIsCool said:
brownbobby said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Don't be so lazy!

I picked two obvious spectators as markers and timed each rider a few times. Quintana took 5 seconds and Froome took 3, with a measurement error of ~0.5 seconds. So not quite twice as fast, but a rough estimate is that Froome was going ~160% of Quintana's speed. That would be on the order of 25 km/hr for Quintana and 40 km/hr for Froome.

Uness you think the original video is a fake? I guess if there were some evidence of that I could accept it. Otherwise it's obvious that Froome is the fake.

John Swanson
Quintana took 5 seconds, Froome 3.

The video clip i watched was 2 seconds long....how on earth did you get those timings :confused:
The original video is much longer

John Swanson

edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFxHD0P51-I <--- See? It's only 19 seconds long so it won't take much effort.
Ok, let's have some context here. Froome is going around that corner literally only five seconds after attacking Contador. Of course, he's going superfast.

(Go and look at the stage again - Froome goes from Contador to Quintana in about a minute. There's only one corner like that - I've teed it up for you: https://youtu.be/XOHBIEh9FSU?t=1974).
 
Parker said:
ScienceIsCool said:
brownbobby said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Don't be so lazy!

I picked two obvious spectators as markers and timed each rider a few times. Quintana took 5 seconds and Froome took 3, with a measurement error of ~0.5 seconds. So not quite twice as fast, but a rough estimate is that Froome was going ~160% of Quintana's speed. That would be on the order of 25 km/hr for Quintana and 40 km/hr for Froome.

Uness you think the original video is a fake? I guess if there were some evidence of that I could accept it. Otherwise it's obvious that Froome is the fake.

John Swanson
Quintana took 5 seconds, Froome 3.

The video clip i watched was 2 seconds long....how on earth did you get those timings :confused:
The original video is much longer

John Swanson

edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFxHD0P51-I <--- See? It's only 19 seconds long so it won't take much effort.
Ok, let's have some context here. Froome is going around that corner literally only five seconds after attacking Contador. Of course, he's going superfast.

(Go and look at the stage again - Froome goes from Contador to Quintana in about a minute. There's only one corner like that - I've teed it up for you: https://youtu.be/XOHBIEh9FSU?t=1974).
and lets also not forget that the original clip posted, the one that started this particular debate, was only 2 seconds long and artificially sped up, presumably by a child who has been allowed to play with an adults editing software, to make the speed differential look even greater :lol:
 
brownbobby said:
red_flanders said:
brownbobby said:
Yesterday's quote, the one i specifically referred to:

Brailsford declined to specify Team Sky's precise role in Froome's legal defence but said the rider had the team's backing.

"I'm not going to go into great detail about it, but 100 percent we're behind him and 100 percent backing him. We've got full knowledge of the situation and we're working closely to resolve the situation," Brailsford said.

100%. It doesnt get more unequivocal than that.

That's not to say i don't agree with your other points, or that he wont say something different next time out. But that wasn't what i said in my post which you've chosen to quote.

Any leader, in any walk of life, with responsibility for the longevity of an organisation and the employ of hundreds of people, would be absolutely crazy to tie him/herself irreversibly to the outcome of one individuals fate. So i'm more surprised that he came out with what he did yesterday, than what he's said previously.
Not sure why this is surprising . It sounds good now, so it’s useful for him to say it. He’ll simply say whatever he needs to later, no matter if it is 180 degrees from his stance today, like he has on a hundred other topics.
For once we're not far from being in agreement; I said i was more surprised at yesterdays statement than previous ones. Which didn't surprise me at all...
My point is that nothing he says now or later will tie him 100% to anything. He's demonstrated that he will say anything, at any point, if he thinks it's advantageous to whatever circumstance he's addressing, and he will (and has) say the opposite later.

100%. It doesnt get more unequivocal than that.
Disagree. All he's making is a euphemistic statement of support. What does "100%" mean? "We're behind you 100%, Chris!". It's nothing but an evasion of the pointed question he was apparently asked. He declines to comment on the actual question, which appears to be whether Sky would be aiding in the legal defense.

Brailsford spews spin and little else.

When wondering in the future why people have come to dislike Sky so much, I would point to that as a key element.
 
Parker said:
Ok, let's have some context here. Froome is going around that corner literally only five seconds after attacking Contador. Of course, he's going superfast.

(Go and look at the stage again - Froome goes from Contador to Quintana in about a minute. There's only one corner like that - I've teed it up for you: https://youtu.be/XOHBIEh9FSU?t=1974).
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
 
red_flanders said:
brownbobby said:
red_flanders said:
brownbobby said:
Yesterday's quote, the one i specifically referred to:

Brailsford declined to specify Team Sky's precise role in Froome's legal defence but said the rider had the team's backing.

"I'm not going to go into great detail about it, but 100 percent we're behind him and 100 percent backing him. We've got full knowledge of the situation and we're working closely to resolve the situation," Brailsford said.

100%. It doesnt get more unequivocal than that.

That's not to say i don't agree with your other points, or that he wont say something different next time out. But that wasn't what i said in my post which you've chosen to quote.

Any leader, in any walk of life, with responsibility for the longevity of an organisation and the employ of hundreds of people, would be absolutely crazy to tie him/herself irreversibly to the outcome of one individuals fate. So i'm more surprised that he came out with what he did yesterday, than what he's said previously.
Not sure why this is surprising . It sounds good now, so it’s useful for him to say it. He’ll simply say whatever he needs to later, no matter if it is 180 degrees from his stance today, like he has on a hundred other topics.
For once we're not far from being in agreement; I said i was more surprised at yesterdays statement than previous ones. Which didn't surprise me at all...
My point is that nothing he says now or later will tie him 100% to anything. He's demonstrated that he will say anything, at any point, if he thinks it's advantageous to whatever circumstance he's addressing, and he will (and has) say the opposite later.

100%. It doesnt get more unequivocal than that.
Disagree. All he's making is a euphemistic statement of support. What does "100%" mean? "We're behind you 100%, Chris!". It's nothing but an evasion of the pointed question he was apparently asked. He declines to comment on the actual question, which appears to be whether Sky would be aiding in the legal defense.

Brailsford spews spin and little else.

When wondering in the future why people have come to dislike Sky so much, I would point to that as a key element.
There we go; back to the position of disagreement. That feels more....familiar. Comforting even.
 
red_flanders said:
Parker said:
Ok, let's have some context here. Froome is going around that corner literally only five seconds after attacking Contador. Of course, he's going superfast.

(Go and look at the stage again - Froome goes from Contador to Quintana in about a minute. There's only one corner like that - I've teed it up for you: https://youtu.be/XOHBIEh9FSU?t=1974).
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
The original clip, you can make a credible argument from both sides of the motor debate. The 2 second clip, the starting point for this thread within a thread? Now that's comically unbelievable.
 
Froome lying again:

Tim Wellens (Lotto-Soudal) was among the most outspoken. He told Belgian journalists Wednesday that the reaction inside the peloton to Froome’s presence is not as rosy as the Sky captain would paint it.

“Froome said he has seen incredible support inside the peloton,” Wellens said. “That’s not what I’ve experienced.”

Wellens has been among the most critical voices about the Froome case since it blew open via a leak in December. Over the winter, Wellens even equated taking puffs on asthma medication with cheating. Last year, Wellens abandoned the 2017 Tour de France after refusing to use a TUE to treat an allergic reaction to heat and pollen.

“If you did a poll, nine out of 10 riders would say it’s better that he’s not here,” Wellens said Wednesday. “On camera, a lot of riders are afraid to say what they think. Behind the cameras, they are not so happy about it.”

Speaking to Cycling Pro Net at the Volta ao Algarve in nearby Portugal, Katusha-Alpecin rider Tony Martin also had harsh words: “It’s super-bad for cycling. I absolutely don’t understand Team Sky and Froome that he comes back before this case is clear. It’s a shame.”
http://www.velonews.com/2018/02/news/road/top-riders-contradict-froomes-claims-of-peloton-camaraderie_457279
 
brownbobby said:
red_flanders said:
Parker said:
Ok, let's have some context here. Froome is going around that corner literally only five seconds after attacking Contador. Of course, he's going superfast.

(Go and look at the stage again - Froome goes from Contador to Quintana in about a minute. There's only one corner like that - I've teed it up for you: https://youtu.be/XOHBIEh9FSU?t=1974).
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
The original clip, you can make a credible argument from both sides of the motor debate. The 2 second clip, the starting point for this thread within a thread? Now that's comically unbelievable.
What you can't make a credible argument for is that it was in any way possible clean.

thehog said:
Froome lying again:

Tim Wellens (Lotto-Soudal) was among the most outspoken. He told Belgian journalists Wednesday that the reaction inside the peloton to Froome’s presence is not as rosy as the Sky captain would paint it.

“Froome said he has seen incredible support inside the peloton,” Wellens said. “That’s not what I’ve experienced.”

Wellens has been among the most critical voices about the Froome case since it blew open via a leak in December. Over the winter, Wellens even equated taking puffs on asthma medication with cheating. Last year, Wellens abandoned the 2017 Tour de France after refusing to use a TUE to treat an allergic reaction to heat and pollen.

“If you did a poll, nine out of 10 riders would say it’s better that he’s not here,” Wellens said Wednesday. “On camera, a lot of riders are afraid to say what they think. Behind the cameras, they are not so happy about it.”

Speaking to Cycling Pro Net at the Volta ao Algarve in nearby Portugal, Katusha-Alpecin rider Tony Martin also had harsh words: “It’s super-bad for cycling. I absolutely don’t understand Team Sky and Froome that he comes back before this case is clear. It’s a shame.”
http://www.velonews.com/2018/02/news/road/top-riders-contradict-froomes-claims-of-peloton-camaraderie_457279
My first reaction to Froomes comments was surprise, then wondering if it was in any way true. Just a den of liars.
 
I can't help thinking that if this had happened 10 or 15 years ago Froome's comments and the reported rider reactions would have been exactly the same.

Everybody in this has an angle..Froome...The journalist...The other riders whether pro or anti. It's just business as usual.
 
Re:

macbindle said:
I can't help thinking that if this had happened 10 or 15 years ago Froome's comments and the reported rider reactions would have been exactly the same.

Everybody in this has an angle..Froome...The journalist...The other riders whether pro or anti. It's just business as usual.
Re: Journalists; Have a look at Matt Rendell on this thread pretending everything is normal with Froome Ventoux 2013:

https://twitter.com/maximus_hoggus/status/963799724724752384
 
Re:

DanielSong39 said:
It's a 1000+ watt acceleration over an 18% gradient for 30 seconds.

Goes from ~400 watts to 1000+ in less than 5 seconds without causing the bike to sway.

Hmmmm. 18% .... hmmmmmmm 18%?

WhereTF is the 18% on Ventoux out of Bedoin?

Just askin.
 
red_flanders said:
Parker said:
Ok, let's have some context here. Froome is going around that corner literally only five seconds after attacking Contador. Of course, he's going superfast.

(Go and look at the stage again - Froome goes from Contador to Quintana in about a minute. There's only one corner like that - I've teed it up for you: https://youtu.be/XOHBIEh9FSU?t=1974).
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
Red ... pal. You’ve ridden the Ventoux, yourself, right?

And ... you were/are of the caliber (of rider) ... ie. pro or semi pro ... so that you could easily discern the acceleration potential of pro riders.

Just askin, pal.
 
ClassicomanoLuigi said:
red_flanders said:
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
Lesser-known video clip from the same Ventoux stage 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTcNaM6ghpQ



Froome walked away from the mountaintop finish on the Ventoux
Whereas Quintana was destroyed, delirious, unable to stand or to respond to reporters' questions, mumbling something to the Movistar soigneur

maybe it was only the heat, he doesn’t like it I think

After a furious charge towards the foot of the Ventoux, the climb itself – 20 kilometres long, relentlessly rising to 1,900 metres, with temperatures touching 40 degrees at its base and strong headwinds in the final segment – http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cycling/tour-de-france-2013-historic-climb-on-mont-ventoux-gives-us-chris-froome-with-a-view-8708080.html
 
ClassicomanoLuigi said:
red_flanders said:
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
Lesser-known video clip from the same Ventoux stage 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTcNaM6ghpQ



Froome walked away from the mountaintop finish on the Ventoux
Whereas Quintana was destroyed, delirious, unable to stand or to respond to reporters' questions, mumbling something to the Movistar soigneur
And ... your point is ......
 
ClassicomanoLuigi said:
red_flanders said:
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
Lesser-known video clip from the same Ventoux stage 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTcNaM6ghpQ



Froome walked away from the mountaintop finish on the Ventoux
Whereas Quintana was destroyed, delirious, unable to stand or to respond to reporters' questions, mumbling something to the Movistar soigneur
What was Quintana thinking? He should be warming down like the Sky riders. Schoolboy error :cool:
 
ClassicomanoLuigi said:
red_flanders said:
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
Lesser-known video clip from the same Ventoux stage 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTcNaM6ghpQ



Froome walked away from the mountaintop finish on the Ventoux
Whereas Quintana was destroyed, delirious, unable to stand or to respond to reporters' questions, mumbling something to the Movistar soigneur
IIRC Froome needed oxygen at the finish on the day. But I guess that was all just an act yeah...just to make it look like he was actually trying. Right?
 
red_flanders said:
brownbobby said:
red_flanders said:
Parker said:
Ok, let's have some context here. Froome is going around that corner literally only five seconds after attacking Contador. Of course, he's going superfast.

(Go and look at the stage again - Froome goes from Contador to Quintana in about a minute. There's only one corner like that - I've teed it up for you: https://youtu.be/XOHBIEh9FSU?t=1974).
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
The original clip, you can make a credible argument from both sides of the motor debate. The 2 second clip, the starting point for this thread within a thread? Now that's comically unbelievable.
What you can't make a credible argument for is that it was in any way possible clean.

thehog said:
Froome lying again:

Tim Wellens (Lotto-Soudal) was among the most outspoken. He told Belgian journalists Wednesday that the reaction inside the peloton to Froome’s presence is not as rosy as the Sky captain would paint it.

“Froome said he has seen incredible support inside the peloton,” Wellens said. “That’s not what I’ve experienced.”

Wellens has been among the most critical voices about the Froome case since it blew open via a leak in December. Over the winter, Wellens even equated taking puffs on asthma medication with cheating. Last year, Wellens abandoned the 2017 Tour de France after refusing to use a TUE to treat an allergic reaction to heat and pollen.

“If you did a poll, nine out of 10 riders would say it’s better that he’s not here,” Wellens said Wednesday. “On camera, a lot of riders are afraid to say what they think. Behind the cameras, they are not so happy about it.”

Speaking to Cycling Pro Net at the Volta ao Algarve in nearby Portugal, Katusha-Alpecin rider Tony Martin also had harsh words: “It’s super-bad for cycling. I absolutely don’t understand Team Sky and Froome that he comes back before this case is clear. It’s a shame.”
http://www.velonews.com/2018/02/news/road/top-riders-contradict-froomes-claims-of-peloton-camaraderie_457279
My first reaction to Froomes comments was surprise, then wondering if it was in any way true. Just a den of liars.
Well...you can. Indeed many have. It's just that having made up your own mind, you choose not to give any credibility to anyone who may try to present an 'argument' conflicting with your opinion. That's different. That's blurring the lines between opinion and fact.
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
Alpe73 said:
red_flanders said:
Parker said:
Ok, let's have some context here. Froome is going around that corner literally only five seconds after attacking Contador. Of course, he's going superfast.

(Go and look at the stage again - Froome goes from Contador to Quintana in about a minute. There's only one corner like that - I've teed it up for you: https://youtu.be/XOHBIEh9FSU?t=1974).
Linking to that clip is only helping the argument that he's using a motor. Proof? No. Comically unbelievable acceleration? Yep. Covered many times over.
Red ... pal. You’ve ridden the Ventoux, yourself, right?

And ... you were/are of the caliber (of rider) ... ie. pro or semi pro ... so that you could easily discern the acceleration potential of pro riders.

Just askin, pal.
Well that goes for you too then! You are also uniquely unqualified to discern whether or not that was ridiculous.

PS - It was.

John Swanson
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY