Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1210 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oliwright said:
Were people getting mad about Froome when he lost 1:10 in 1km on stage 9?
Look Dumoulin, Pinot or anyone else in the peloton could be having a similar case to Froome. But some * leaked it and Froome loses his right to the correct process.
Just because you don't support Froome doesn't mean you should rage at the keyboard.
EVERY GC contender other than Froome peaked early in the race. TD was at his best in Israel. Everything just fell right for Froome.
Ha! Keep telling yourself that.
 
After yesterday and today, there is no doubt he is on harder stuff than just "allergy" medication. No way that's normal. I truly never thought ANYONE could make me actually respect Lance at all, however after this GIro Froome has actually done that. Lance was never as brazen as Froome was with his performance on these two stages. Froome also has no PR skills which Lance at least had and still has. GRRRRR..... Truthfully I'm not sure which I'm more upset about Froome's brazenness or the fact that he's made me give Lance some credit for much of anything.
 
Benotti69 said:
At this point I think Froome will get off. Remember when it comes to the big time dopers it is rare those that run the sport that take them down it is usually outside agencies, FBI or Gendarmes etc.....
I generally agree with you, there's too much money at stake, too much greed, just like the rest of the world. I would almost 100% agree with you, that this may have entirely vanished, had this not leaked. Since it's been leaked, and most of the public are already sick of the doping scandals, or just find cycling laughable, there's pressure to at least put some stamp of authority on it.

How ironic that he took both the maglia rosa and maglia verdi in the same way that one Marco Pantani did, 20 years ago. My how little things have changed. Except the methods are way more refined now.

Ross Tucker's numbers on Twitter from yesterday are compelling. Either something is going on, or Froome somehow turned into a genetic super human; the greatest endurance athlete in the history of sports.

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
Benotti69 said:
At this point I think Froome will get off. Remember when it comes to the big time dopers it is rare those that run the sport that take them down it is usually outside agencies, FBI or Gendarmes etc.....
I generally agree with you, there's too much money at stake, too much greed, just like the rest of the world. I would almost 100% agree with you, that this may have entirely vanished, had this not leaked. Since it's been leaked, and most of the public are already sick of the doping scandals, or just find cycling laughable, there's pressure to at least put some stamp of authority on it.

How ironic that he took both the maglia rosa and maglia verdi in the same way that one Marco Pantani did, 20 years ago. My how little things have changed. Except the methods are way more refined now.

Ross Tucker's numbers on Twitter from yesterday are compelling. Either something is going on, or Froome somehow turned into a genetic super human; the greatest endurance athlete in the history of sports.

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport
Ross Tucker applies some solid logic, which in general, completely hammers the pro-Froome ridiculous explanations.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
Benotti69 said:
At this point I think Froome will get off. Remember when it comes to the big time dopers it is rare those that run the sport that take them down it is usually outside agencies, FBI or Gendarmes etc.....
I generally agree with you, there's too much money at stake, too much greed, just like the rest of the world. I would almost 100% agree with you, that this may have entirely vanished, had this not leaked. Since it's been leaked, and most of the public are already sick of the doping scandals, or just find cycling laughable, there's pressure to at least put some stamp of authority on it.

How ironic that he took both the maglia rosa and maglia verdi in the same way that one Marco Pantani did, 20 years ago. My how little things have changed. Except the methods are way more refined now.

Ross Tucker's numbers on Twitter from yesterday are compelling. Either something is going on, or Froome somehow turned into a genetic super human; the greatest endurance athlete in the history of sports.

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport
Ross is great.

I think in sport (like in most things) money talks and people ignore the truth for a wedge.

Froome's rise was stratospheric and if not for Wiggins being pencilled in for Sky's 1st TdF, Froome would have had 5 TdFs.

The sport has ignored the effing obvious doping/cheating since its inception, that is not going to change.

I truly would be surprised to see Froome stripped of anything, he may get a 6 month ban after the TdF ends and gets to keep all GT wins if agrees to retire......Menchov style.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re: Re:

Arked said:
Koronin said:
After yesterday and today, there is no doubt he is on harder stuff than just "allergy" medication. No way that's normal. (...)
How would that be possible with bio passports in place?
Testing is a joke.

As for bio-passport, ask Chris Horner :lol:
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
This is exactly the sort of stage people will remember and talk about for decades - this kind of drama is precisely what keeps the sport relevant and in the mainstream.

And it would hardly be less suspicious if Froome didn't exist and a TTer like Dumoulin had ended up putting 5 minutes into his closest rivals instead.

The only people who seem to have not enjoyed it are those who are massive fanboys of other riders primarily, rather than fans of the sport. This was great entertainment.
I don't know, I think I'm a fan of the sport, and I didn't enjoy Stage 19. But you may have got me there with "The only people who seem to have not enjoyed it are those who are massive fanboys of other riders . . ." And I will admit that in my case this is probably accurate. For any race in which Froome is participating, I am indeed a massive fanboy of many, many other riders in the race -- even some with whom I am currently unfamiliar . . . as long as it isn't Froome. :D
 
Re: Re:

JosephK said:
DFA123 said:
This is exactly the sort of stage people will remember and talk about for decades - this kind of drama is precisely what keeps the sport relevant and in the mainstream.

And it would hardly be less suspicious if Froome didn't exist and a TTer like Dumoulin had ended up putting 5 minutes into his closest rivals instead.

The only people who seem to have not enjoyed it are those who are massive fanboys of other riders primarily, rather than fans of the sport. This was great entertainment.
I don't know, I think I'm a fan of the sport, and I didn't enjoy Stage 19. But you may have got me there with "The only people who seem to have not enjoyed it are those who are massive fanboys of other riders . . ." And I will admit that in my case this is probably accurate. For any race in which Froome is participating, I am indeed a massive fanboy of many, many other riders in the race -- even some with whom I am currently unfamiliar . . . as long as it isn't Froome. :D

I think this would be a lot of people who are aren't fans of Froome.

As for keeping it mainstream, must be in countries that aren't the US as it's not mainstream here and even yesterday's stage doesn't get mentioned anywhere that isn't a cycling specific publication.
 
Where are these numbers of Tucker? I don't see them on his twitter feed. Not at Alpe's link, nor at sportsscientists.com

In any case, I see a lot of "I'm so depressed, I give up, he's not going to be banned." I'm not buying that. Froome can do many seemingly impossible things, but he can't reinvent the science of salbutamol. You can drop tired, physically inferior riders, you can't drop scientific facts. Nothing that has been made public so far indicates that he will avoid a ban--including a lot of empirical data. If Froome is exonerated, and the details aren't published, there will be very justifiable accusations that the system is rigged. If he does publish the details, he will be inviting rebuttals from many scientists, including this one.

The only sop I see Froome getting is that a ban will be proactive, allowing him to keep the Giro. That can easily be rationalized by the rules, and I don't think Haas wants to nullify the Giro unless there is a compelling reason why a ban has to be back-dated. Then the main question is whether the decision will come before the Tour. If it doesn't, again, there will be very justifiable complaints that the system is rigged. Nine months is enough time.

Let's not forget that the purpose of a doping ban is not just to nullify results obtained when the rider tested positive. It's also intended to prevent him from getting other results later, even when he hasn't tested positive. Without this penalty, a rider would have little to lose by doping, if he thought he couldn't win a particular race without doing so. A message is supposed to be sent that you have a lot more to lose than just the race you doped in. By delaying the decision to after the Giro, that message has already been compromised to some extent, and if it's delayed till after the Tour, it will be compromised further.

If Froome had admitted to inhaling too much, and could perhaps provide some evidence of that, I think just stripping him of the Vuelta, without further penalty, might be justifiable, though it would be a more lenient sentence than what others have received. But he's insisted he didn't inhale too much, which puts him in a situation where lack of an explanation has to result in a serious ban. It was his choice to make this full exoneration vs. a very stiff penalty. I think allowing him to ride the Giro and maybe the Tour has seriously undercut that. He's basically been allowed to gamble with house money.
 
Re:

Merckx index said:
Where are these numbers of Tucker? I don't see them on his twitter feed. Not at Alpe's link, nor at sportsscientists.com

In any case, I see a lot of "I'm so depressed, I give up, he's not going to be banned." I'm not buying that. Froome can do many seemingly impossible things, but he can't reinvent the science of salbutamol. You can drop tired, physically inferior riders, you can't drop scientific facts. Nothing that has been made public so far indicates that he will avoid a ban--including a lot of empirical data. If Froome is exonerated, and the details aren't published, there will be very justifiable accusations that the system is rigged. If he does publish the details, he will be inviting rebuttals from many scientists, including this one.

The only sop I see Froome getting is that a ban will be proactive, allowing him to keep the Giro. That can easily be rationalized by the rules, and I don't think Haas wants to nullify the Giro unless there is a compelling reason why a ban has to be back-dated. Then the main question is whether the decision will come before the Tour. If it doesn't, again, there will be very justifiable complaints that the system is rigged. Nine months is enough time.

Let's not forget that the purpose of a doping ban is not just to nullify results obtained when the rider tested positive. It's also intended to prevent him from getting other results later, even when he hasn't tested positive. Without this penalty, a rider would have little to lose by doping, if he thought he couldn't win a particular race without doing so. A message is supposed to be sent that you have a lot more to lose than just the race you doped in. By delaying the decision to after the Giro, that message has already been compromised to some extent, and if it's delayed till after the Tour, it will be compromised further.

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1000408199080521728

At this point if the Vuelta title isn't stripped that will be the biggest disservice regardless of anything else. Also if he keeps the Giro title, a back dated ban will be seen as the system being rigged. That this point IMO it has to be a stripped Vuelta title (and possibly the Worlds results) and then a ban going forward and I think it has to be a 12 month ban as anything else (esp if it's after the Tour) won't actually be meaningful. Truthfully if it's delayed until after the Tour if they don't give a 2 year ban from the date it may still be an issue.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS