Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Craigee]

Re: Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

This piece: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features...me-and-trying-to-understand-the-unbelievable/

It has a lot of ***, re not riding into shape for the 3rd week & Froome's form is painted as worse than it was.
We've seen the likes of Quintana & Nibali ride into shape and people didn't fuss. We've also seen riders collapse in the 3rd week.
Also I think it's easy to forget that Froome looked great on Etna & then crashed again.

The piece makes some interesting points, but CN editorial staff seem to like the exceptionally sceptical narrative whenever Sky do well. I agree with their scepticism to a point, but they need to be consistent with it. You can't not mention it when Froome & Sky aren't winning and then bring it back up so strongly when they do.

I think Cyclingnews forget that there are reasons (maybe less maybe more of them) to doubt every team with failed tests from riders. EG: Astana they're Astana, yet nothing is written about Lopez. I understand Cycling's past, but the sport has the most comprehensive drug testing in the world and I wish people would trust results more than the opposite. It feels like every results from Sky is questioned but Quickstep win everything with nobodies and everyone is like well duh. I wonder how long it will take for the sport to get back to people being presumed innocent rather than taking a 50/50 approach.

Na mate, I'll go with Philippa York's theory over yours here. Their's makes more sense. That or Froome is twice as good as the best athlete who ever lived. Shouldn't be called Froomy. He should be called Hercules from now on.

 

[thehog]

Froome results Age 21-26

2006
1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Tour of Mauritius

1st Stages 2 & 3

2nd Anatomic Jock Race
2007
1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Mi-Août en Bretagne
1st Stage 5 Giro delle Regioni
1st Stage 6 Tour of Japan
2nd Berg en Dale Classic
2nd Silver medal blank.svg Time trial, UCI B World Championships
3rd Road race, All-Africa Games
8th Tour du Doubs
2008
2nd Overall Giro del Capo
3rd Giro dell'Appennino
4th Overall Herald Sun Tour
6th Overall Volta ao Distrito de Santarém
2009
1st Stage 2 Giro del Capo
1st Anatomic Jock Race
4th Road race, National Road Championships
9th Gran Premio Nobili Rubinetterie
2010
2nd Time trial, National Road Championships
5th Time trial, Commonwealth Games
9th Overall Tour du Haut Var

2nd in the Jock Race 2006, to winning it in 2009. That’s some progression

 

[Andon]

This thread made me Google image search "anatomic jock" :geek: Grats on the win, Chris.

 

[Saint Unix]

I always found Giro del Capo funny. It sounds like a grandiose Italian race reserved for the most Euro superstars, but in reality it's a small South African stage race that only attracted Barloworld, Lotto and a bunch of extremely average Conti teams, and Froome was beaten by the likes of Daniel Spence, Johann Rabie and Hichem Chaabane in the TT stages of the editions he rode.

But yeah, obviously a future six time Grand Tour winner.

 

[rata de sentina]

Re: Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

The piece makes some interesting points, but CN editorial staff seem to like the exceptionally sceptical narrative whenever Sky do well.

It's an opinion piece. You don't think York is reasonably well qualified to comment on this subject?

 

[terribleone]

'Anatomic Jock race' sounds like something you'd expect to see happen in High School locker-rooms.

 

[terribleone]

Re: Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

This piece: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features...me-and-trying-to-understand-the-unbelievable/

It has a lot of ***, re not riding into shape for the 3rd week & Froome's form is painted as worse than it was.
We've seen the likes of Quintana & Nibali ride into shape and people didn't fuss. We've also seen riders collapse in the 3rd week.
Also I think it's easy to forget that Froome looked great on Etna & then crashed again.

The piece makes some interesting points, but CN editorial staff seem to like the exceptionally sceptical narrative whenever Sky do well. I agree with their scepticism to a point, but they need to be consistent with it. You can't not mention it when Froome & Sky aren't winning and then bring it back up so strongly when they do.

I think Cyclingnews forget that there are reasons (maybe less maybe more of them) to doubt every team with failed tests from riders. EG: Astana they're Astana, yet nothing is written about Lopez. I understand Cycling's past, but the sport has the most comprehensive drug testing in the world and I wish people would trust results more than the opposite. It feels like every results from Sky is questioned but Quickstep win everything with nobodies and everyone is like well duh. I wonder how long it will take for the sport to get back to people being presumed innocent rather than taking a 50/50 approach.

Na mate, I'll go with Philippa York's theory over yours here. Their's makes more sense. That or Froome is twice as good as the best athlete who ever lived. Shouldn't be called Froomy. He should be called Hercules from now on.

"It has a lot of ***, RE not riding into form... blah blah blah". My problem with most of the comments on that piece is that they're calling it bs, but PHILIPPA KNOWS! She's done it for 12yrs!!! IN ALL OF THE GRAND TOURS! With jerseys and podiums to back it up! FFS!!!

I think it's a great piece and it would be interesting to see a correlation between nationalities of fans commenting, and what era they got interested in pro cycling. I think most are from 2012 TdF onwards. Long term fans of the sport have seen enough of those performances to know when to smell a rat, especially with past experiences. My palmares include the EPO explosion, the Tour of Redemption, Tylers twin in utero, que CERA CERA and most recently lost laptops, delivery of enough testosterone to give a nation a sex change, jiffy bags and evading questions in front of a parliamentary committee.

My question is what is he on. Sure "he's on his bike, busting his ass 8hrs a day", but is it some far flung gene therapy or manipulation? AICAR? What else? :Question:

 

[thehog]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

 

[Red Rick]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

It's so dumb that they can just lie and disregard people who actually do the math as nothing more than trolls.

 

[Saint Unix]

Any journalist with a little bit of integrity would check the numbers and tell their readers that Froome is full of hogwash.

Sky being able to control the narrative in the media without getting called on it is exactly why people who aren't clued up on cycling think his riding is normal, that Sky are the paragons of clean cycling and that Froome was always a generational talent. It's a shambles that journalists aren't even trying to do a bit of critical thinking before they publish their swill, but I guess Murdoch would have their hides if they did.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Any journalist with a little bit of integrity would check the numbers and tell their readers that Froome is full of hogwash.

Sky being able to control the narrative in the media without getting called on it is exactly why people who aren't clued up on cycling think his riding is normal, that Sky are the paragons of clean cycling and that Froome was always a generational talent. It's a shambles that journalists aren't even trying to do a bit of critical thinking before they publish their swill, but I guess Murdoch would have their hides if they did.

The problem lies in he first line you wrote, outside of Benson, I’ve not seen one journalist to both to account for the time differences on their own. This is despite the amount of *** that has come from Sky in the last 6 months.Integrity doesn’t exist.

 

[pastronef]

Major Tom on Froome

https://www.twitter.com/faustocoppi60/status/1001029739874783237

 

[thehog]

Major Tom on Froome

https://www.twitter.com/faustocoppi60/status/1001029739874783237

Froome on Froome and his rivals lack of data

 

[burning]

Major Tom on Froome

https://www.twitter.com/faustocoppi60/status/1001029739874783237

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/racing/giro-ditalia/tom-dumoulin-situation-froome-not-378299

What happened between these two interviews?

 

[wouterkaas]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

During the final climb there were moments that the chasing group went from 3:30 to 3:00. I can understand that he perceived it as them closing in on him there. To say he is pushing a false narrative here seems a bit paranoïde to me

 

[burning]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

During the final climb there were moments that the chasing group went from 3:30 to 3:00. I can understand that he perceived it as them closing in on him there. To say he is pushing a false narrative here seems a bit paranoïde to me

He gained more time on climbs and false flat to Jafferau compared to the descents, what he says here is utterly horseshit.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Ain't that the truth...

 

[thehog]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

During the final climb there were moments that the chasing group went from 3:30 to 3:00. I can understand that he perceived it as them closing in on him there. To say he is pushing a false narrative here seems a bit paranoïde to me

He gained more time on climbs and false flat to Jafferau compared to the descents, what he says here is utterly horseshit.

Agreed. But it appears to be working as the “I gained time on the descents narrative” has found its way through the media and bots on twitter.

 

[DFA123]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

During the final climb there were moments that the chasing group went from 3:30 to 3:00. I can understand that he perceived it as them closing in on him there. To say he is pushing a false narrative here seems a bit paranoïde to me

He gained more time on climbs and false flat to Jafferau compared to the descents, what he says here is utterly horseshit.

But he was climbing for a much longer proportion of the time than he was descending. So pound for pound (so to speak) he did gain more time on the descents than climbs and false flat.

This is the problem with micro-analysing the words every statement when there are different ways to interpret the data.

 

[thehog]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

During the final climb there were moments that the chasing group went from 3:30 to 3:00. I can understand that he perceived it as them closing in on him there. To say he is pushing a false narrative here seems a bit paranoïde to me

He gained more time on climbs and false flat to Jafferau compared to the descents, what he says here is utterly horseshit.

But he was climbing for a much longer proportion of the time than he was descending. So pound for pound (so to speak) he did gain more time on the descents than climbs and false flat.

This is the problem with micro-analysing the words every statement when there are different ways to interpret the data.

Wait, what!?! Do you want to step us through this math?

 

[DFA123]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

During the final climb there were moments that the chasing group went from 3:30 to 3:00. I can understand that he perceived it as them closing in on him there. To say he is pushing a false narrative here seems a bit paranoïde to me

He gained more time on climbs and false flat to Jafferau compared to the descents, what he says here is utterly horseshit.

But he was climbing for a much longer proportion of the time than he was descending. So pound for pound (so to speak) he did gain more time on the descents than climbs and false flat.

This is the problem with micro-analysing the words every statement when there are different ways to interpret the data.

Wait, what!?! Do you want to step us through this math?

I'm not sure I can actually phrase it any more simply than above.

Basically, for each minute he spent descending, Froome gained significantly more time than he did for each minute he spent climbing.

So the statement "I made up more time on the descent than on the climbs or the flats" is not actually innacurate.

 

[topcat]

This is some ***. He made more time proportionally on the descent. But he made twice as much time on the climbing and false flat. It was a power descent too. He made most of the time because he's mutant.

 

[thehog]

Re:

This is some ***. He made more time proportionally on the descent. But he made twice as much time on the climbing and false flat. It was a power descent too. He made most of the time because he's mutant.

Agreed.

Because his immediate statement after was, “they were closing on me on the climbs”. Climbs, as in plural. He meant what he said, which is completely false.

 

[carton]

I'm getting tempted by the dark-side (detached cynicism, not dewy-eyed hero worship) thanks to all these over-the-top Froome takes. He's sharing the podium with a guy who had an even bigger transformation than he did (at least Froome actually lost some weight), and a guy racing on Alexander Nikolayevich's team. I mean, I like both of those guys, and I'd much rather any of them have won, even given their comparatively passive racing, but this is pro cycling.

Yeah, he got popped for Salbutamol. Yeah, he shouldn't be racing. But Contador fans being apoplectic about a guy achieving incredible feats while under investigation is truly something else. I can't stop myself from laughing.

 

[bigcog]

Froome continues to push a false narrative... makes you wonder why, considering he is clean. Now he tells us the chase group was making up time on the climbs

During the final climb there were moments that the chasing group went from 3:30 to 3:00. I can understand that he perceived it as them closing in on him there. To say he is pushing a false narrative here seems a bit paranoïde to me

He gained more time on climbs and false flat to Jafferau compared to the descents, what he says here is utterly horseshit.

But he was climbing for a much longer proportion of the time than he was descending. So pound for pound (so to speak) he did gain more time on the descents than climbs and false flat.

This is the problem with micro-analysing the words every statement when there are different ways to interpret the data.

Wait, what!?! Do you want to step us through this math?

The math on here is based on the times a guy on twitter said. I noticed Eurosport stated different figures the following day, so it would interesting to know who is correct.