Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1230 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

thehog said:
If ASO force a ban, it becomes somewhat public and Sky will have to show their hand at what type of defense they are currently putting up - to a degree.
The Chambre does not publish its decisions. You will remember you yourself made much of this when trying to dismiss the relevance of the Boonen case in previous discussions of this topic.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
I don’t think anyone knows but at this point the UCI can’t say anything due to the process being confidential. If ASO force a ban, it becomes somewhat public and Sky will have to show their hand at what type of defense they are currently putting up - to a degree. Right now, Sky are winning the war on the road and in the press.
Well maybe, if ASO can build a case around Sky deliberately delaying things and thereby knowingly causing detriment to the Tour's brand in the future. That Sky should reasonably believe the AAF case will go against them (precedent?) and are planning to win the race having the full expectation that it will be stripped. That they're deliberately dragging things out with no foreseeable outcome other than embarrassment for the race. Perhaps then it's irrelevant whether we the public know about the case or not at this point, only that Sky are unnecessarily dragging ASO into their mess. Then maybe Sky have to say "No, we're certain we'll be cleared because [...]" or "This is taking extra long because we're doing [...]". But even then they can probably avoid saying anything interesting.

The rules are absolute sheeite.

fmk_RoI said:
[quote="VO2 Max":251nfnyi]So what happens if/when ASO do make their move?
We've been through this multiple times already this year. The last time here.[/quote]
I know. So on the surface they're flying a kite for a court case they know they can't win. So either they have a different legal point of view on things or it's part of a different strategy. Maybe ASO only want to say that at least they tried?
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
thehog said:
If ASO force a ban, it becomes somewhat public and Sky will have to show their hand at what type of defense they are currently putting up - to a degree.
The Chambre does not publish its decisions. You will remember you yourself made much of this when trying to dismiss the relevance of the Boonen case in previous discussions of this topic.
Surprised you’d show your face after your Gazetta fiasco :cool:

However perhaps you should read what I wrote. I make no mention of a “decision”, mearly that the defense would push it (somewhat) into the public domain. Hence why I wrote “to a degree”.

Please for the life of all of us, read the post rather than posting because you want to show off. You demand accuracy then ignore what people actually write, it’s kinda funny if not ironic :cool:
 
Re: Re:

ontheroad said:
brownbobby said:
ontheroad said:
macbindle said:
https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/the-secret-pro-an-insiders-view-on-chris-froomes-crazy-giro-attack/
This piece reads as a justification for Froome's performance, and as with much media commentary I have seen peddled in recent days, it seeks to downplay the absolute brilliant nature of the ride......but why try and dampen it?

When we witness something brilliant I cannot get my head around why so much of the commentary is based on trying to downplay the performance. He put almost 8.5 minutes into the 7th place finisher on the satge and looked fresh enough to do the same again the next day if required. Apart from the sheer inaccuracy peddled in terms of time gained on the descent, other nonsense put forward about aeros, refuelling, hi-viz jackets, tactics, gravel tracks etc is a basic insult to the intelligence of many cycling fans. It does not explain such dominance.

It appears that every single reason other than the sheer physical supremacy of Froome is being put forward as an explanation for the performance. So if you are a Froome fan or a sky fan why be afraid to herald a performance for the ages?
Well that's an easy one to answer....this is cycling, extraordinary performances don't just happen, they are met with suspicion and the performers are immediately judged to be doping until proven otherwise...which of course they never can be :sad:
The question was slightly rhetorical of course!

I listened to initial comments directly after the stage from Ashley House who said he was lost for words, from Brian Smith who asked 'was that real?', from Sean Kelly who referred to it as unbelievable, from Matt White who said he never seen a performance like that in a grand tour.....ever! Then you had Lance Armstrong who said it was one of the most monumental performances of all time and certainly of the last 10 years whilst you had George Bennett who was laughing at the absurdity of it (yes, I know he then rowed back some time later).

On the other hand the Sky camp and their supporters were much more subdued. I watched Froome and Brailsford interviewed after the stage and you would expect them to be positively buzzing but a body language expert would have been amazed to have been told that they had just effectively won the Giro and produced a performance for the ages in the process. IIRC Brailsford even said directly after the stage that he thought that morning that there was a strong possibility of getting the maglia rosa at the end of the day and acted like it was totally normal. He must have been one of the few who had believed this prior to the stage.

Some of the UK media commentary since the race ended has continued with this same theme of downplaying the performance and achievement of his Giro victory. If there is nothing to hide well then why not salute the magnitude of his achievement rather than put it down to the inability of his opponents to perform and other even more absurd factors. Otherwise it just ends up looking like PR bluster to divert away from the sheer physical supremacy that Froome had over 95% of the field.
Well Sky/froome are hardly going to blow their own trumpet as they knew what was coming their way from the media etc, anybody could foresee that.
 
Stop dreaming.

The CADF isn't getting it done. Lappartient is doing his best bullfighter impression. There is no way CAS is getting ASO out of this mess. And the notoriously labor-friendly French courts are not where you want to go from there. Maybe the French Goverment could step in, but it would be very unusual and it would look really Chauvinistic, not an impression Macron has given off so far.

Unless things are much farther along than they seem, or ASO takes a heroic stand, Froome is racing the Tour.

Let's hope it doen't turn into a literal s--tshow. We had enough of that last year.
 
Re: Re:

ontheroad said:
brownbobby said:
ontheroad said:
macbindle said:
https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/the-secret-pro-an-insiders-view-on-chris-froomes-crazy-giro-attack/
This piece reads as a justification for Froome's performance, and as with much media commentary I have seen peddled in recent days, it seeks to downplay the absolute brilliant nature of the ride......but why try and dampen it?

When we witness something brilliant I cannot get my head around why so much of the commentary is based on trying to downplay the performance. He put almost 8.5 minutes into the 7th place finisher on the satge and looked fresh enough to do the same again the next day if required. Apart from the sheer inaccuracy peddled in terms of time gained on the descent, other nonsense put forward about aeros, refuelling, hi-viz jackets, tactics, gravel tracks etc is a basic insult to the intelligence of many cycling fans. It does not explain such dominance.

It appears that every single reason other than the sheer physical supremacy of Froome is being put forward as an explanation for the performance. So if you are a Froome fan or a sky fan why be afraid to herald a performance for the ages?
Well that's an easy one to answer....this is cycling, extraordinary performances don't just happen, they are met with suspicion and the performers are immediately judged to be doping until proven otherwise...which of course they never can be :sad:
The question was slightly rhetorical of course!

I listened to initial comments directly after the stage from Ashley House who said he was lost for words, from Brian Smith who asked 'was that real?', from Sean Kelly who referred to it as unbelievable, from Matt White who said he never seen a performance like that in a grand tour.....ever! Then you had Lance Armstrong who said it was one of the most monumental performances of all time and certainly of the last 10 years whilst you had George Bennett who was laughing at the absurdity of it (yes, I know he then rowed back some time later).

On the other hand the Sky camp and their supporters were much more subdued. I watched Froome and Brailsford interviewed after the stage and you would expect them to be positively buzzing but a body language expert would have been amazed to have been told that they had just effectively won the Giro and produced a performance for the ages in the process. IIRC Brailsford even said directly after the stage that he thought that morning that there was a strong possibility of getting the maglia rosa at the end of the day and acted like it was totally normal. He must have been one of the few who had believed this prior to the stage.

Some of the UK media commentary since the race ended has continued with this same theme of downplaying the performance and achievement of his Giro victory. If there is nothing to hide well then why not salute the magnitude of his achievement rather than put it down to the inability of his opponents to perform and other even more absurd factors. Otherwise it just ends up looking like PR bluster to divert away from the sheer physical supremacy that Froome had over 95% of the field.
I agree with some of this. I was a few feet away from Brailsford as he was giving his first interviews outside the bus straight after the stage....he was going through all the spiel about how they'd planned it, all the staff out on the course keeping Froome fuelled etc, but rather than taking glory in a perfectly executed plan, it definitely had the feel of a pre prepared explanation/excuse.

But again, I'm not sure what to read in to this....wether he's somewhat reserved in his celebrations and making up explanations for the performance because he's guilty of something, or simply because he knows exactly what the reaction is going to be from certain sections of the media/cycling 'fans'.....I guess the net effect on how he presents himself is going to be similar in both scenarios.

I'm not so much in agreement about the UK media/public response in general, he's getting plenty of kudos for winning the Giro, but the ongoing salbutamol saga continues to divide opinion, hot on the heels of Wiggins troubles...and I think it's this rather than any reservations specific to what he did in Italy holding back any national hero worship (not that he was ever destined to win a popularity contest with the wider UK public)
 
Re:

bigcog said:
He misses one point that Dopeolgy prints in the comments section;

There are several points of distinction between the cases of Boonen in 2009 and Froome in the present.

The less important ones have to do with the obvious differences in circumstances: the potential damage done by a green jersey and/or stage winner versus the top favourite for the overall title; the positive tests being out-of-competition for an obviously recreational drug versus an in-competition AAF at suspiciously high levels; a fait accompli versus the uncertainty of an ongoing case etc.

However, the most important one is that in 2009, written evidence (supplied by the UCI no less) showed that ASO had declared itself willing to let Boonen ride and then subsequently flip-flopped under pressure from the French government, lending considerable weight to the argument that ASO had acted in bad faith.


Presumably ASO learned from that and all the other instances of difficult historymaking since then (which have only served to increase reputational risk) and has tightened up its procedures with regard to invitations. Indeed every public indication suggests that no such flip-flop has occurred and one assumes that, this time at least, the UCI can be relied upon not to rock the boat.
 
Jul 11, 2009
267
0
0
Having read a lot of this thread and others, what kind of performance would any rider have to produce to win a GT that wouldn't arouse suspicion ? It's a genuine question as from what I see any rider who manages to do well or win (without exception from what I've read) seems to be instantly shrouded by the doom and gloom of the clinic. Is this place maybe just a caricature of somewhere that used have something genuine to say. It's a little like a bitter sewing circle. Sagan, Yates, Froome....etc. Not seen much on Nibali but realistically if it weren't for others misfortune in the GT's he's won he'd probably not have one to his name.
 
Re:

ad9898 said:
Having read a lot of this thread and others, what kind of performance would any rider have to produce to win a GT that wouldn't arouse suspicion ? It's a genuine question as from what I see any rider who manages to do well or win (without exception from what I've read) seems to be instantly shrouded by the doom and gloom of the clinic. Is this place maybe just a caricature of somewhere that used have something genuine to say. It's a little like a bitter sewing circle. Sagan, Yates, Froome....etc. Not seen much on Nibali but realistically if it weren't for others misfortune in the GT's he's won he'd probably not have one to his name.
A rider would have to have a name like Albert Aardvark.....then finish at the end of the 3 week GT on exactly the same time as all other entrants, having rolled across the finish line and all intermediate sprints in perfect alignment with all other entrants to avoid accumulating any bonus points over the 21 stages.

He would then be awarded the victory as first on the list of alphabetically ordered surnames.

We would still know he was doping, they all are, but at least he wouldn't be taking the p***
 
all the troubles income from not wanting to see froome a winner of big races. get over yourself boys and girls and cycling will bloom in all its brilliance.while reading the thread you can see pretty much nothing but anger, envy, cynism, innuendos and unconcealed double standarts which is the saddest one, because one doper gets preferred to another one. just a few people are really willing to be objective, all the others for year bathe in the good old so called arguments such as 'only not froome', 'froome is a joke', 'i'm sick of froome' etc. eventually there's good news too and the story of froome as an active cyclist is nearing to its end, but you, ladies and gentlemen, will be missing him like no one else, as once he quits or gets banned, you will have no cyclist to insult, make fun of, mock and compete in black humor. no rider will arise so many low emotions in your aflutter fan souls, so have a special moment to cherish as long as christopher cleeve froome is still riding. ;)
 
Kiwi rider George Bennett was involved in a clash with Chris Froome on the eighth stage of the Giro d'Italia.

Froome, who came off his bike during a climb five kilometres from the finish, then barged into Bennett as he sought to fight back.

The Tour de France winner isn't the greatest bike handler at the best of times, but was said to be "pedalling with a crazed, frantic cadence" prior to the collision, according to Eurosport.
https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/103856635/george-bennett-and-chris-froome-clash-during-frantic-finish-to-giro-ditalia-stage

Just to add to the ever bizarre nature of the Clinic’s favorite Dawg :cool:
 
Jul 11, 2009
267
0
0
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
ad9898 said:
Having read a lot of this thread and others, what kind of performance would any rider have to produce to win a GT that wouldn't arouse suspicion ? It's a genuine question as from what I see any rider who manages to do well or win (without exception from what I've read) seems to be instantly shrouded by the doom and gloom of the clinic. Is this place maybe just a caricature of somewhere that used have something genuine to say. It's a little like a bitter sewing circle. Sagan, Yates, Froome....etc. Not seen much on Nibali but realistically if it weren't for others misfortune in the GT's he's won he'd probably not have one to his name.
A rider would have to have a name like Albert Aardvark.....then finish at the end of the 3 week GT on exactly the same time as all other entrants, having rolled across the finish line and all intermediate sprints in perfect alignment with all other entrants to avoid accumulating any bonus points over the 21 stages.

He would then be awarded the victory as first on the list of alphabetically ordered surnames.

We would still know he was doping, they all are, but at least he wouldn't be taking the p***
As I suspected ! :)
 
thehog said:
Kiwi rider George Bennett was involved in a clash with Chris Froome on the eighth stage of the Giro d'Italia.

Froome, who came off his bike during a climb five kilometres from the finish, then barged into Bennett as he sought to fight back.

The Tour de France winner isn't the greatest bike handler at the best of times, but was said to be "pedalling with a crazed, frantic cadence" prior to the collision, according to Eurosport.
https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/103856635/george-bennett-and-chris-froome-clash-during-frantic-finish-to-giro-ditalia-stage

Just to add to the ever bizarre nature of the Clinic’s favorite Dawg :cool:
So how about Froomes crashes being unable to control the motor ? that uphill crash, was his rear wheel sliding out on the corner due to that ? his crashes may not be crap bike handling but inability to control the motor at times.

Whatabout the downhill pedalling on the crossbar which 'he invented' - maybe because of the motor ?? other rides copying that now - Froome must be laughing about that one.
 
Cycle Chic said:
thehog said:
Kiwi rider George Bennett was involved in a clash with Chris Froome on the eighth stage of the Giro d'Italia.

Froome, who came off his bike during a climb five kilometres from the finish, then barged into Bennett as he sought to fight back.

The Tour de France winner isn't the greatest bike handler at the best of times, but was said to be "pedalling with a crazed, frantic cadence" prior to the collision, according to Eurosport.
https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/103856635/george-bennett-and-chris-froome-clash-during-frantic-finish-to-giro-ditalia-stage

Just to add to the ever bizarre nature of the Clinic’s favorite Dawg :cool:
So how about Froomes crashes being unable to control the motor ? that uphill crash, was his rear wheel sliding out on the corner due to that ? his crashes may not be crap bike handling but inability to control the motor at times.

Whatabout the downhill pedalling on the crossbar which 'he invented' - maybe because of the motor ?? other rides copying that now - Froome must be laughing about that one.
Dunno about Froome...but I’m certainly laughing :lol:
 
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
ad9898 said:
Having read a lot of this thread and others, what kind of performance would any rider have to produce to win a GT that wouldn't arouse suspicion ? It's a genuine question as from what I see any rider who manages to do well or win (without exception from what I've read) seems to be instantly shrouded by the doom and gloom of the clinic. Is this place maybe just a caricature of somewhere that used have something genuine to say. It's a little like a bitter sewing circle. Sagan, Yates, Froome....etc. Not seen much on Nibali but realistically if it weren't for others misfortune in the GT's he's won he'd probably not have one to his name.
A rider would have to have a name like Albert Aardvark.....then finish at the end of the 3 week GT on exactly the same time as all other entrants, having rolled across the finish line and all intermediate sprints in perfect alignment with all other entrants to avoid accumulating any bonus points over the 21 stages.

He would then be awarded the victory as first on the list of alphabetically ordered surnames.

We would still know he was doping, they all are, but at least he wouldn't be taking the p***
:lol:
That is brilliant.





Plot twist, he actually is an aardvark.
 
Re:

ad9898 said:
Having read a lot of this thread and others, what kind of performance would any rider have to produce to win a GT that wouldn't arouse suspicion ? It's a genuine question as from what I see any rider who manages to do well or win (without exception from what I've read) seems to be instantly shrouded by the doom and gloom of the clinic. Is this place maybe just a caricature of somewhere that used have something genuine to say. It's a little like a bitter sewing circle. Sagan, Yates, Froome....etc. Not seen much on Nibali but realistically if it weren't for others misfortune in the GT's he's won he'd probably not have one to his name.
People will always be suspicious if you win a GT. Very hard to avoid given the history of cycling. Having said that, you are writing in the Froome thread, you know. There are suspicious performances and then there is Froome.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re:

ad9898 said:
Having read a lot of this thread and others, what kind of performance would any rider have to produce to win a GT that wouldn't arouse suspicion ? It's a genuine question as from what I see any rider who manages to do well or win (without exception from what I've read) seems to be instantly shrouded by the doom and gloom of the clinic. Is this place maybe just a caricature of somewhere that used have something genuine to say. It's a little like a bitter sewing circle. Sagan, Yates, Froome....etc. Not seen much on Nibali but realistically if it weren't for others misfortune in the GT's he's won he'd probably not have one to his name.
Hard to tell since we dont know of any clean winners of a GT, do you?

GT winners keep racing them faster than previous editions and we know in the modern era at least that testing a joke, doping is endemic and part of the culture so till we see some serious money been put into an independent authority that tests regularly and with full transparency and those in the sport embrace this it will be a full on doping sport as per usual.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY