Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

Froome turns into Donald Trump, and starts blaming fake news...what a d0uche...maybe if he quit doping, the stories would go away?

Oh irony, you are a dear.

Froome and Sky have been blaming the media since the beginning. It ain't nothing new. One thing Brailsford has never understood is how easy it was to control the media with regards to Team GB , by feeding them stories of secret squirrels and the like, yet when it comes to the road team, even with marginal gains, only a few like Syed bathe in the kool-aid.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

[quote="
Good to see Sky's PED use is a given.

Asthma treatment......is the early 2000s EPO

Pity Froome isn't asthmatic plus all the other PEDs. Only 1 reason teams have doctors. Doping.

A new low in Clinic comments ... rather nasty, to be honest. A decent forum member would retract that, Benotti.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=2276662#p2276662

This is pure ignorance of the history of the sport. Read about comments from riders in the early 90s decrying how “medical” the sport was becoming and questioning why teams needed their own doctors on staff. It was done for a hundred years without it and EPO and team wide doping ore what changed it. Period.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

This is pure ignorance of the history of the sport. Read about comments from riders in the early 90s decrying how “medical” the sport was becoming and questioning why teams needed their own doctors on staff. It was done for a hundred years without it and EPO and team wide doping ore what changed it. Period.

Sport in general had been medicalising since the 1950s. To argue that this is when doping was introduced to sport would be lunacy. There is an argument to be made that anti-doping is actually a product of the medicalisation of sport, that anti-doping was pushed through by doctors in order to protect their new role in the sport.

Yes, of course, there were puritans. Take Paul Köchli:

Köchli didn't just kick against the ***, with his no needles policy. When it came to the issue of the medicalisation of cycling he was something of a puritan. He was against the notion of teams having dedicated doctors as part of their personnel:

I never had a doctor in my team, except in the Tour de France and his only role was to treat those with a real health problem, a flu or an infection. [...] The presence of a doctor in a team is usually a bad thing. Riders are healthy, so why should they need a doctor? In my experience doctors are generally very bad physiologists because physiology is how a healthy organism functions and doctors are more used to unhealthy people. Their perspective is the wrong one.

But against that we could also take Paul Kimmage:

Back then, in 1993, Paul Kimmage too seemed to believe that the arrival of dedicated team doctors was a good thing for cycling. Here's what he had to say to Walsh for Inside The Tour De France:

The biggest problem the rider has is his own ignorance. There was no doctor in our team [RMO] to take a blood test, nobody to say 'Hold on, the exhaustion you feel is normal. You produced too much lactic acid in yesterday's time trial.' I mean there was nobody to explain what an anaerobic threshold was and I hadn't a clue. I didn't know what the B12 injection [I took during the 1986 Tour] did for me and I only agreed to it because the directeur [Bernard Thévenet] suggested it. Bringing well qualified exercise physiologists into teams should bring about an improvement. But they must explain things. Provided they do, the riders will understand their own bodies better and will be less ignorant about what they should and shouldn't be doing.

 

[macbindle]

Re: Re:

[quote="

This is pure ignorance of the history of the sport. Read about comments from riders in the early 90s decrying how “medical” the sport was becoming and questioning why teams needed their own doctors on staff. It was done for a hundred years without it and EPO and team wide doping ore what changed it. Period.

Those same riders will also tell you how utterly amateur the whole pro cycling world was in comparison to today. Did riders of the 80s and 90s jump onto a team bus at the end of a stage and have a shower? Did they pay close attention to nutrition?

Why should care for health be excluded from progress?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

[quote="

This is pure ignorance of the history of the sport. Read about comments from riders in the early 90s decrying how “medical” the sport was becoming and questioning why teams needed their own doctors on staff. It was done for a hundred years without it and EPO and team wide doping ore what changed it. Period.

Those same riders will also tell you how utterly amateur the whole pro cycling world was in comparison to today. Did riders of the 80s and 90s jump onto a team bus at the end of a stage and have a shower? Did they pay close attention to nutrition?

Why should care for health be excluded from progress?

Riders have always paid close attention to detail. Ask Sean Kelly. Ask Coppi.

 

[macbindle]

We aren't talking about "paying attention to detail".
We are talking about knowledge, expertise and the resources to provide it.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Riders have always paid close attention to detail. Ask Sean Kelly. Ask Coppi.

We seem to have gone from doctors to witch-doctors. Coppi had a blind soigneur. Kelly had Willy Voet. These people lived by a mix of hand-me-down old wives' tales and trial and error. (Sometimes the trial was very erroneous, just ask Kelly about Voet and synacthen.) Doctors helped to kick out a lot of that.

Did it take the medicalisation of the sport to bring in EPO? Anecdotal evidence suggests many experimented with EPO without medical advice. So I think we can say that no, the medicalisation of sport did not cause Gen EPO. Aided it, yes. Caused it, no.

 

[rick james]

Re: Re:

[quote="

This is pure ignorance of the history of the sport. Read about comments from riders in the early 90s decrying how “medical” the sport was becoming and questioning why teams needed their own doctors on staff. It was done for a hundred years without it and EPO and team wide doping ore what changed it. Period.

Those same riders will also tell you how utterly amateur the whole pro cycling world was in comparison to today. Did riders of the 80s and 90s jump onto a team bus at the end of a stage and have a shower? Did they pay close attention to nutrition?

Why should care for health be excluded from progress?

Riders have always paid close attention to detail. Ask Sean Kelly. Ask Coppi.

Ask them? why should we when you have all the answers!!!!

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

[quote="

This is pure ignorance of the history of the sport. Read about comments from riders in the early 90s decrying how “medical” the sport was becoming and questioning why teams needed their own doctors on staff. It was done for a hundred years without it and EPO and team wide doping ore what changed it. Period.

Those same riders will also tell you how utterly amateur the whole pro cycling world was in comparison to today. Did riders of the 80s and 90s jump onto a team bus at the end of a stage and have a shower? Did they pay close attention to nutrition?

Why should care for health be excluded from progress?

Riders have always paid close attention to detail. Ask Sean Kelly. Ask Coppi.

Ask them? why should we when you have all the answers!!!!

Well documented, but then obfuscation is your game.....

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Riders have always paid close attention to detail. Ask Sean Kelly. Ask Coppi.

We seem to have gone from doctors to witch-doctors. Coppi had a blind soigneur. Kelly had Willy Voet. These people lived by a mix of hand-me-down old wives' tales and trial and error. (Sometimes the trial was very erroneous, just ask Kelly about Voet and synacthen.) Doctors helped to kick out a lot of that.

Did it take the medicalisation of the sport to bring in EPO? Anecdotal evidence suggests many experimented with EPO without medical advice. So I think we can say that no, the medicalisation of sport did not cause Gen EPO. Aided it, yes. Caused it, no.

The sport has always been medicalised, but not by those who trained medically and yes most of it was soigneurs. It didn't kill Kelly, although idiots like Ricco could have done with a doctor on hand. I don't think doctors have brought a 'health' element to the sport, they have just brought a better understanding and uses of PEDs. Johannes Draaijer was hardly served well by team doctors.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

The sport has always been medicalised, but not by those who trained medically and yes most of it was soigneurs. It didn't kill Kelly, although idiots like Ricco could have done with a doctor on hand. I don't think doctors have brought a 'health' element to the sport, they have just brought a better understanding and uses of PEDs. Johannes Draaijer was hardly served well by team doctors.

Wow. You know more about the death of Johannes Draaijer than even his widow does. Go you.

Reality check: 'healthy' people die too.

If there's only one reason teams have doctors, and you now accept that there was doping before doctors, why do teams need doctors?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

The sport has always been medicalised, but not by those who trained medically and yes most of it was soigneurs. It didn't kill Kelly, although idiots like Ricco could have done with a doctor on hand. I don't think doctors have brought a 'health' element to the sport, they have just brought a better understanding and uses of PEDs. Johannes Draaijer was hardly served well by team doctors.

Wow. You know more about the death of Johannes Draaijer than even his widow does. Go you.

Reality check: 'healthy' people die too.

If there's only one reason teams have doctors, and you now accept that there was doping before doctors, why do teams need doctors?

Better doping, duh!

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

Riders have always paid close attention to detail. Ask Sean Kelly. Ask Coppi.

We seem to have gone from doctors to witch-doctors. Coppi had a blind soigneur. Kelly had Willy Voet. These people lived by a mix of hand-me-down old wives' tales and trial and error. (Sometimes the trial was very erroneous, just ask Kelly about Voet and synacthen.) Doctors helped to kick out a lot of that.

Did it take the medicalisation of the sport to bring in EPO? Anecdotal evidence suggests many experimented with EPO without medical advice. So I think we can say that no, the medicalisation of sport did not cause Gen EPO. Aided it, yes. Caused it, no.

That's a specious argument. First, you need to back your claim that riders were experimenting with Eli without medical assistance at the time it was introduced to the cycling world. Then you need to show that this experimenting didn't happen as a result of wider medicalisation. I don't know if the era of doctors caused or was caused by EPO. Or merely a coincidence.

John Swanson

 

[Unchained]

Is there anywhere I kind read about riders opinion on Bernard Hinault's manifesto?
I can't find much.. since it's so close to the July 7th start I am assuming that a strike looks like a real long shot

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

No no no no no.

Not the same thing. There are people who dope and come 2nd, 3rd, 4th...

He's winning at doping and cycling

That I'll grant you.

He's also winning in being a horror show to watch ride. Every time I watch is washing machine style, I get diarrhea.

There must be something deep inside you that is either terrified or excited every time you watch Froome...the only real cause for diarrhoea type response to something you've witnessed is adrenaline :lol:

It’s terror. Definitely terror. Froome makes Escartin look like VDB at his peak.

 

[red_flanders]

Because of what Froome did in the Giro, I've never cared less about the Tour or have been less likely to watch it since the boring latter years of Indurain's domination.

What kills the sport for me? Not busting and sanctioning dopers when it's so blatantly obvious to anyone watching. Catching them does not kill the sport for me. I guess this is at the core of why I don't trust the UCI. They clearly are more concerned about the appearance of doping than doping.

Horrifically difficult to watch rider, obviously cheating. At least Vandenbroucke gave you some style for his obvious doping. Would be nice to get someone with both style and a reasonable level of cleanliness again.

 

[macbindle]

A 'reasonable level of cleanliness'.

And which Tour winner was that then, and more to the point, how would you know?

 

[samhocking]

Wanting reasonably clean winners, but forgiving dirty riders if they looked good on a bike? Perhaps Anti-doping sanctions could have a style-ometer element to the tribunal. Everyone votes for rider style and each vote counts for 1 month less to a ban lol!

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re:

Wanting reasonably clean winners, but forgiving dirty riders if they looked good on a bike? Perhaps Anti-doping sanctions could have a style-ometer element to the tribunal. Everyone votes for rider style and each vote counts for 1 month less to a ban lol!

Well done Sam
you've nailed it
close the thread
I just can't stand the way CF looks on the bike
(my prejudice - finally I've seen the light)

 

[simoni]

Re: Re:

Wanting reasonably clean winners, but forgiving dirty riders if they looked good on a bike? Perhaps Anti-doping sanctions could have a style-ometer element to the tribunal. Everyone votes for rider style and each vote counts for 1 month less to a ban lol!

Well done Sam
you've nailed it
close the thread
I just can't stand the way CF looks on the bike
(my prejudice - finally I've seen the light)

Recalling Yates at the Giro, you're not allowed to look like you're smiling either.

This will be tough for some riders to get right. You've got to look both effortlessly stylish yet also like you're believeably pained. Perhaps races need to start awarding an oxymoron jersey which would somehow look both black and white?

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

Wanting reasonably clean winners, but forgiving dirty riders if they looked good on a bike? Perhaps Anti-doping sanctions could have a style-ometer element to the tribunal. Everyone votes for rider style and each vote counts for 1 month less to a ban lol!

Well done Sam
you've nailed it
close the thread
I just can't stand the way CF looks on the bike
(my prejudice - finally I've seen the light)

not really...however looking good may have gone someway to balance the most ridiculous transformation ever seen

what we have however is a doubling down...as we get the most ridiculous transformation and the most horrible style...trebled down with the (boring postal style) sky train...quadrupled down with SDB, quindupled down with the marginal gains....and "you get the picture (yes we see)"

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Riders have always paid close attention to detail. Ask Sean Kelly. Ask Coppi.

We seem to have gone from doctors to witch-doctors. Coppi had a blind soigneur. Kelly had Willy Voet. These people lived by a mix of hand-me-down old wives' tales and trial and error. (Sometimes the trial was very erroneous, just ask Kelly about Voet and synacthen.) Doctors helped to kick out a lot of that.

Did it take the medicalisation of the sport to bring in EPO? Anecdotal evidence suggests many experimented with EPO without medical advice. So I think we can say that no, the medicalisation of sport did not cause Gen EPO. Aided it, yes. Caused it, no.

That's a specious argument. First, you need to back your claim that riders were experimenting with Eli without medical assistance at the time it was introduced to the cycling world. Then you need to show that this experimenting didn't happen as a result of wider medicalisation. I don't know if the era of doctors caused or was caused by EPO. Or merely a coincidence.

John Swanson

Maybe you could lead by example in future SIC and back up all your claims with a fully footnoted argument.

As for not knowing if the era of doctors was caused by EPO. The era of doctors began in the 1950s. Look at Italian teams of the 1960s in particular. If you don't know it's not because it's not knowable, it's because you choose not to know.

 

[macbindle]

Indeed. Just think who blood doped the USA cycling team in the early 80's.

 

[spalco]

Re:

Is there anywhere I kind read about riders opinion on Bernard Hinault's manifesto?
I can't find much.. since it's so close to the July 7th start I am assuming that a strike looks like a real long shot

Nobody's going to strike. Most of the riders have different interests anyway and regardless they go to France to ride and get paid, not to make statements.

This is where Hinault is wrong imo btw, why does he put the burden of policing the sport on the riders instead of UCI and race organisers? With the pull he supposedly has, why doesn't he attack the ASO instead of making meaningless appeals for insurrection to the peloton?

 

[dacooley]

Is Hinault still having an obligation to zip jerseys and hand in lcl lion toys in podium ceremonies? It would be fun him having to award Froome with MJ after TTT.