Re: Re:
Applied to a rider with a different history, maybe. But applied to froome it amounts to just smuggling in a premise that he developed in a regular manner, ie erasing his history. It amounts to arguing that there is more to froome than doping. This is a big leap of faith.DFA123 said:This. It just makes sense. Slightly undercooked and hampered by some swelling and muscle soreness, maybe some bad sleep after the crashes. Now his form is getting there and the soreness is gone. Of course, that's not to say he's not doping, but it's most probably just his normal program. Beating Yates, Pozzovivo and Lopez by a few seconds, is hardly Ventoux 2013 or PSM 2015 type levels either. Much more in line with his best form of the last two years.Oude Geuze said:Contador last vuelta, Nibali in the ‘16 giro are two recent examples. I find it hard to believe he just started doping yesterday and made insane progress. Why wait until now when it’s more suspicious to suddenly get a boost than being strong all the way? What would you need to take for such an improvement? Corticosteroids, high dose salbutamol, tramadol and a blood bag? Did they suddenly stop testing stage winners and top 10 in the giro? And if it’s all TUE, then that’s pretty much what they all do so why did Froome improve so much?
Alternatively, Froome came into the giro regularly TUE’ed up, a bit undercooked and then fell twice, but gradually recovered after rest day and two easy days. To say that’s physiologically impossible seems strange.