Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1310 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 2, 2012
5,971
1
0
my beautiful friend think's its great that da dawg was cleared..but she only watches
tour highlights on uk tv

until now I had not commented as I really fail to make sense of recent developments....

chin up! bardet could upset the odds yet........................

Mark L
 
Oct 10, 2012
1,426
0
0
https://www.teamsky.com/article/chris-froome-writes-in-le-monde

Another attempt to rewrite history from Froomie. He had the opportunity to air his thoughts under scrutiny at the opening press conference but his answers there were short, aprupt and unconvincing. His body language there simply screamed 'please move off this subject'. It is clear that he is worried about fan reaction on the roadside and his PR team has decided to release this statement for him aimed at soothing the hostile reception.

When you're explaining you're losing.
 
Aug 2, 2012
5,971
1
0
booooo...........hisssss...................boooo..................hisssss!

looks like were gonna see a whole lot more giant inhalers around the tour this year.........

Mark L
 
Re:

ontheroad said:
https://www.teamsky.com/article/chris-froome-writes-in-le-monde

Another attempt to rewrite history from Froomie. He had the opportunity to air his thoughts under scrutiny at the opening press conference but his answers there were short, aprupt and unconvincing. His body language there simply screamed 'please move off this subject'. It is clear that he is worried about fan reaction on the roadside and his PR team has decided to release this statement for him aimed at soothing the hostile reception.

When you're explaining you're losing.
#DawgSplaining
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
Koronin said:
Huapango said:
He is going to be dropped if he does that! :D
Froome can drop Dumoulin anytime he wishes, whether is be on a flat road with cobbles, uphill, downhill, or any kind of terrain really, in any situation. What will really happen, however, is you'll see Froome fake being tired, or fake getting dropped and losing 5-10 seconds at the top of an HC climb. Then, Froome will magically have a great day and put the rest of the pretenders to shame. TDF #5 is in the bag.

Wouldn't shock me. He's basically been told he can do whatever he wants without punishment.

oh really? who told him he can basically do what ever he wants?
Craig Reedie and Murdoch
 

Singer01

BANNED
Nov 18, 2013
2,043
2
5,485
Benotti69 said:
TheSpud said:
chuuurles said:
This DATA DROP right after Froome's case being dropped is a nice distraction from the reasoned decision not being released eh :rolleyes:
There is no 'reasoned decision' to be published, this isn't Lance.
This is worse than Lance.
if you honestly think that there you lose what little credibility you have. it isn't even in the same ball park as Lance, and deep down you know that. Its people like you that push those on the fence to defend sky.
 
Sep 11, 2016
122
0
0
Singer01 said:
Benotti69 said:
TheSpud said:
chuuurles said:
This DATA DROP right after Froome's case being dropped is a nice distraction from the reasoned decision not being released eh :rolleyes:
There is no 'reasoned decision' to be published, this isn't Lance.
This is worse than Lance.
if you honestly think that there you lose what little credibility you have. it isn't even in the same ball park as Lance, and deep down you know that. Its people like you that push those on the fence to defend sky.
But if you discuss based on an assumption that Salbutamol is certainly not the only product Froome and Sky are abusing, then the case, the result and Sky's domination in recent years is pretty bad. Moreover, the general lack of positives from others than 'not important' riders in recent years.
 
Re:

ontheroad said:
https://www.teamsky.com/article/chris-froome-writes-in-le-monde

Another attempt to rewrite history from Froomie. He had the opportunity to air his thoughts under scrutiny at the opening press conference but his answers there were short, aprupt and unconvincing. His body language there simply screamed 'please move off this subject'. It is clear that he is worried about fan reaction on the roadside and his PR team has decided to release this statement for him aimed at soothing the hostile reception.

When you're explaining you're losing.
Written by Froome, or written by the team's PR person. You decide...
 
samhocking said:
I work in the concrete industry. You're thinking too much into it, my god! This place is off it's head, but so am I, so all good!
I think you're consuming to much of your own product Sam. I joked that no one would pay you to write like that, that's just your own weird way of doing things. You, on the other hand, are the one trying to write off Sky's PR attempts to rebuild Froome's - and the team's - tattered reputation as nothing more than an ad for one of the team's sponsors.
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,735
0
0
Re:

samhocking said:
That Ross Tucker ScienceofSport read my wife's mind the fu**er!

That was mine (hers) idea!
I'm glad you can see through this, now ask yourself what else is BS in what they are trying to tell me?
 
Singer01 said:
Benotti69 said:
TheSpud said:
chuuurles said:
This DATA DROP right after Froome's case being dropped is a nice distraction from the reasoned decision not being released eh :rolleyes:
There is no 'reasoned decision' to be published, this isn't Lance.
This is worse than Lance.
if you honestly think that there you lose what little credibility you have. it isn't even in the same ball park as Lance, and deep down you know that. Its people like you that push those on the fence to defend sky.
Of course it's worse, the man is right. Lance targeted only one race on the calendar, yet this clown wants doubles, multiple GT's, he wants to be in company with Merckx and Hinault :eek: I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to sweep all the Monuments later in his career...
 
Re: Re:

Winterfold said:
samhocking said:
That Ross Tucker ScienceofSport read my wife's mind the fu**er!

That was mine (hers) idea!
I'm glad you can see through this, now ask yourself what else is BS in what they are trying to tell me?
I think I explained it well enough, it's just an advertorial for SIS. Depending on your view of Froome and Sky it will be seen to be different things. In the clinic it will be seen as a fake/weak transparency attempt and not an advertorial, to Sunday's Mamil Joe Bloggs sat in his office ordering energy gels from Wiggle after listening to Bespoke Podcast, transparency will not have even entered his mind, he will see it as a reason to buy SIS Rocket Fuel or a Go Gel because that's what Froome won the Giro taking. To Porte it is fake news, because clearly he is doing exactly the same as Froome nutritionally anyway.
From SIS is simply part of their marketing departments advertising strategy, to Sky is probably a little bit of transparency attempt, little bit of team feature with BBC, little bit of an explanation how Froome did it that dovetailed nicely with SIS.
Personally, it's just clever marketing. It began on the actual day of Froomes attack where it was mentioned a new prototype energy was being used by Froome and snowballed from there really.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Singer01 said:
Benotti69 said:
TheSpud said:
chuuurles said:
This DATA DROP right after Froome's case being dropped is a nice distraction from the reasoned decision not being released eh :rolleyes:
There is no 'reasoned decision' to be published, this isn't Lance.
This is worse than Lance.
if you honestly think that there you lose what little credibility you have. it isn't even in the same ball park as Lance, and deep down you know that. Its people like you that push those on the fence to defend sky.
Lance was bad enough coming a year after Sestina, but Sky have taken USPostal and made it UKPostal and with a guy who looks at home on a bike as an Aardvark or a Sloth. And it is so obvious at this stage, oh so obvious.

No this is worse much worse as we know the history of it all. We have looked in into the well and it is rotten and has been rotting for a long time, but someone is trying to tell us that look it is not rotting it is blooming.

The Sky fans are new to the sport as lots of UK cycling fans are not buying this.
 
Aug 20, 2017
1,397
0
0
Re:

armchairclimber said:
This thread gets funnier and funnier .... I used to come in the clinic for enlightenment. Now I just come for the comedy. This is a brilliant example of people with an agenda interpreting figures to suit that agenda. Not a single hint of reflection or re-consideration. The net result of this kind of thing will be that data will be withheld. And we'll be the poorer for it. In some ways the sheet sniffers ... the cycling puritans... are worse than the dopers.

There's a big world out there ... scarcely anyone cares about cyclists and what they put in their systems. There are more important issues in life.
This.
But now it is not even comedy. That's became boring.
Could we please come back to salbutamol level of 1028 ng/ml (taking into account dehydration)?
After that we could calculate these Finestre seconds one more time.
 
TourOfSardinia said:
Tim Booth said:
UCI statement

Q&A response to public comments on the proceedings involving Mr. Froome
http://www.uci.ch/pressreleases/response-public-comments-the-proceedings-involving-froome/
a somewhat depressing read
:(
It was. The UCI looked to WADA for guidance, didn’t get much back, then were told by WADA that a PK study wasn’t needed, lowered the reading, then blamed the UCI for delays and walked away from the case.

Clear that Sky we’re working the Reedie/WADA angle to make this one go away. Smart play by SDB and Froome.
 
TourOfSardinia said:
Tim Booth said:
UCI statement

Q&A response to public comments on the proceedings involving Mr. Froome
http://www.uci.ch/pressreleases/response-public-comments-the-proceedings-involving-froome/
a somewhat depressing read
:(
"Having been tested 21 times during the Vuelta a España, Mr. Froome had access to the estimated concentration of salbutamol in his urine over three weeks. This allowed him to establish a significant variation in the way he excreted salbutamol, even at consistent, low, doses. Taking into account that he significantly increased his dose of salbutamol (to treat a chest infection) around the time of the test, it was accepted by WADA that this individual variation could explain the analytical results of his 7 September 2018 sample. Under these circumstances, a controlled pharmacokinetic study was unnecessary before closing the case, as Mr. Froome’s individual excretion could already be assessed from existing data."

I do hope they have proof of the number of puffs he took

if it's self-reported....then.....eh.......................
 
gillan1969 said:
TourOfSardinia said:
Tim Booth said:
UCI statement

Q&A response to public comments on the proceedings involving Mr. Froome
http://www.uci.ch/pressreleases/response-public-comments-the-proceedings-involving-froome/
a somewhat depressing read
:(
"Having been tested 21 times during the Vuelta a España, Mr. Froome had access to the estimated concentration of salbutamol in his urine over three weeks. This allowed him to establish a significant variation in the way he excreted salbutamol, even at consistent, low, doses. Taking into account that he significantly increased his dose of salbutamol (to treat a chest infection) around the time of the test, it was accepted by WADA that this individual variation could explain the analytical results of his 7 September 2018 sample. Under these circumstances, a controlled pharmacokinetic study was unnecessary before closing the case, as Mr. Froome’s individual excretion could already be assessed from existing data."

I do hope they have proof of the number of puffs he took

if it's self-reported....then.....eh.......................
Exactly. Sounds like they are taking Froome's word for it about the "consistent low doses".
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY