Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[macbindle]

Why not?

He is just too fishy

 

[Parker]

On paper he is up there with the greatest tour riders, but nobody (me included) really accepts this.

Plenty of people do. Maybe none of the people on the forums frequent do or people you follow on social media do. But that's a self-selected bubble chosen to reinforce your opinion. And everyone does that to a certain extent.

Over the summer the Spanish sports newspaper Marca chose the 100 greatest sportsmen (just men) of the 21st century. Froome was 17th, the highest cyclist, 12 places ahead of Contador. And one place ahead of Tom Brady, but two behind LeBron James.

 

[Merckx index]

Over the summer the Spanish sports newspaper Marca chose the 100 greatest sportsmen (just men) of the 21st century. Froome was 17th, the highest cyclist, 12 places ahead of Contador. And one place ahead of Tom Brady, but two behind LeBron James.

That is just nuts. Brady is generally regarded as the best QB of all time, and James the no. 1 or 2 NBA player of all time. Even Froome's staunchest defenders wouldn't claim that he is the best or close to the best rider of all time. His legacy is all about GTs, and he's tied for fourth in those, fifth in TDF wins. He has nothing to add in terms of classics.

You could make a case for Froome as a top 10 rider all time, though I'm sure it would be vigorously disputed by many cycling fans, but Froome is nowhere remotely close to the standing in his sport that Brady and James have in theirs.

But then Marca's list is a joke. They have Kobe Bryant ahead of James--there is almost no NBA fan in the world who would claim that. Pacquiao ahead of Mayweather--when the two were both active, Mayweather was consistently ranked over him, and defeated Pacquiao in their one, sadly past their prime match. Wiggins ahead of Barry Bonds!!! I can't take their list seriously, not unless by sportsmen, they are referring to the athlete's personality or public demeanor, it certainly has no relationship to athletic accomplishement.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Why not?

Because like so many dopers before him, he somehow stumbles onto a Vuelta podium with no indication prior he had a huge engine. Follow this up with absurd stories about somehow a disease made him stronger?

A legitimate grand tour winner can 'just show up' to most races, one day or many days, and show podium potential and do it for most of a season. Froome did none of those things. Ever.

And now a multiple grand tour champion, has feet of clay when the tarmac goes up. Somebody isn't doping.

 

[macbindle]

Plenty of people do. Maybe none of the people on the forums frequent do or people you follow on social media do. But that's a self-selected bubble chosen to reinforce your opinion. And everyone does that to a certain extent.

I dont follow anyone on social media. But, yes, I'm not immune to confirmation bias, I agree.

What I'm getting at is the lack of celebration of Froome as a GT legend, in the same way that other top riders have been feted, whether by media, fans or even (and perhaps especially) his racing peers.

The respect just doesnt seem to be there.

 

[DFA123]

Froome is definitely a GT legend and, as long as he doesn't get caught, I'm sure his reputation will continue to grow over time. Some Anglos might never fully warm to him, because he was the outsider who lives in Monaco and who upset their darling Wiggins. And the French might not like him because he dominated the Tour - although they apparently didn't hate him enough to punch him the kidney. But elsewhere, he'll generally be viewed as one of the greatest.

Essentially, he's not a ***, like Armstrong, so he'll end up being held in similar esteem to someone like Indurain - a rider who was certainly no more clean than Froome.

 

[Pantani Attacks]

You can take the rider out of Barloworld but you can't take the Barloworld out of the rider. Sad to see

I'm all for seeing the Giro 09 Voeckler impressions and cycling sideways again!

As for Froome, does anyone think he'll escape the real pop down the line ala Lance? Sky did the smart thing by getting their name out of cycling so that the trace back to Froome, Wiggins, Thomas et al will eventually fade away as will the suspicion but surely someone will have had enough and let the cat out of the jiffy bag at some point.

Contador and Valverde got slaps on the wrist but they were hammerings compared to what Froome got...he didn't even get anything except a tongue-lashing online. Surely someone will come for vengeance.

I wonder about Nibali too. He's the only guy in the modern era whose won more than 2 who hasn't had any real doping scandal. Obviously with the Astana connection he's always been suspicious but never anything concrete. The nearest guy who escaped is Rominger who strikes a parallel, 4 GTs and the looming connection like Nibali/Astana in his connection to Ferrari.

 

[PhiLiz]

Probably fair to say for the time being. Also fair to say that was not what the team was hoping for from him this year, or anything like the expectations that were leaking out in the media. He's not where he thought he'd be, that much seems clear.

I for one am thrilled if the Froome era is over, I just don't like him as a rider or a personality, but for his sake I hope he finds something to hang onto or concludes that it's just over and he's able to move on. I think calling this training miles even feels like a stretch. He just can't hold on to power for any length of time.

I hope he keeps going in this same level until he's 40 years old. Proves nothing one doesn't already know, but it'll be a blast to watch. I for one I'm hoping for a Dawg permanent cam in the gruppetto.

 

[Red Rick]

That is just nuts. Brady is generally regarded as the best QB of all time, and James the no. 1 or 2 NBA player of all time. Even Froome's staunchest defenders wouldn't claim that he is the best or close to the best rider of all time. His legacy is all about GTs, and he's tied for fourth in those, fifth in TDF wins. He has nothing to add in terms of classics.

You could make a case for Froome as a top 10 rider all time, though I'm sure it would be vigorously disputed by many cycling fans, but Froome is nowhere remotely close to the standing in his sport that Brady and James have in theirs.

But then Marca's list is a joke. They have Kobe Bryant ahead of James--there is almost no NBA fan in the world who would claim that. Pacquiao ahead of Mayweather--when the two were both active, Mayweather was consistently ranked over him, and defeated Pacquiao in their one, sadly past their prime match. Wiggins ahead of Barry Bonds!!! I can't take their list seriously, not unless by sportsmen, they are referring to the athlete's personality or public demeanor, it certainly has no relationship to athletic accomplishement.

Sounds like one of those things that's a healthy mix of recency bias + not even knowing the sports all that well.

Basically every list I ever see that ranks athletes from different sport seems super weird to me.

 

[Red Rick]

I hope he keeps going in this same level until he's 40 years old. Proves nothing one doesn't already know, but it'll be a blast to watch. I for one I'm hoping for a Dawg permanent cam in the gruppetto.

I'm not getting my hopes up. I think he's just fulfilling his contract, realised he's not winning this Vuelta so he didn't get on the new program but might go all out next year.

 

[Bolder]

By the standards that riders are expected to conform to, Froome is definitely one of the top 5 GT riders in my lifetime, going back to Hinault. You could make a good case that he's the best, because he's won all three tours bla bla bla. Unlike Contador, who I thought was the most beautiful rider to watch on a bike, he hasn't served a doping suspension.

It doesn't matter what I THINK about whether he is/was doping. He's following the rules, like it or not. If he found a loophole or the UCI caved to pressure, that's the UCI's fault, not his.

But -- and Pantani Attacks raises a great point -- once he's out of Skyneos, will someone rat him out? It's a distinct possibility, but unlikely. Lance only got snitched on bc he was such a jerk, we know that Contador was doping and yet no one has come forth with any of the gory details. Because he is/was a decent person. I dont think I've heard the same about Froome. Robotic, mechanical, boring -- yes, but not an ass.

 

[Parker]

But -- and Pantani Attacks raises a great point -- once he's out of Skyneos, will someone rat him out? It's a distinct possibility, but unlikely. Lance only got snitched on bc he was such a jerk, we know that Contador was doping and yet no one has come forth with any of the gory details. Because he is/was a decent person. I dont think I've heard the same about Froome. Robotic, mechanical, boring -- yes, but not an ass.

You have to allow for the possibility that there's nothing to rat out. I know this is difficult given how much time you have devoted to the opposing opinion. But they are opinions almost entirely based on riders not fitting the very narrow standard career path that you think is acceptable.

Also do we know Contador was doping? We know he had a minute amount of a banned substance in his body, but he can't be sure how it got there.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Froome is definitely one of the top 5 GT riders in my lifetime, going back to Hinault. You could make a good case that he's the best, because he's won all three tours bla bla bla.

A good case he's the best? LMFAO.

It doesn't matter what I THINK about whether he is/was doping. He's following the rules, like it or not.

If he's doping he's not following the rules, clearly.

we know that Contador was doping and yet no one has come forth with any of the gory details. Because he is/was a decent person. I dont think I've heard the same about Froome. Robotic, mechanical, boring -- yes, but not an ass.

I think the jury is out on whether Froome is a decent person. There's clearly a public face and a private face and the private is far more vindictive than the public.

 

[red_flanders]

You have to allow for the possibility that there's nothing to rat out. I know this is difficult given how much time you have devoted to the opposing opinion. But they are opinions almost entirely based on riders not fitting the very narrow standard career path that you think is acceptable.

Also do we know Contador was doping? We know he had a minute amount of a banned substance in his body, but he can't be sure how it got there.

He returned a positive test which was whitewashed. The case before the positive was overwhelming. I can’t fathom the blinders one would have to have on to imagine he was clean, it’s a patently absurd and demonstrably false proposition.

 

[macbindle]

You have to allow for the possibility that there's nothing to rat out. I know this is difficult given how much time you have devoted to the opposing opinion. But they are opinions almost entirely based on riders not fitting the very narrow standard career path that you think is acceptable.

Froome didn't just slightly not fit that 'narrow' career path, his was a galaxy-sized overlay.

He went from being an utter nobody, about to be ditched by his team, combining 85th in the Tour of Poland to winning the Vuelta a few weeks later and becoming the greatest Tour rider of his generation, only a bike crash away from equalling the record of Merckx, Anquetil, Hinault and Indurdain.

I mean, come on.

 

[Parker]

Froome didn't just slightly not fit that 'narrow' career path, his was a galaxy-sized overlay.

He went from being an utter nobody, about to be ditched by his team, combining 85th in the Tour of Poland to winning the Vuelta a few weeks later and becoming the greatest Tour rider of his generation, only a bike crash away from equalling the record of Merckx, Anquetil, Hinault and Indurdain.

I mean, come on.

Ah, the Tour of Poland. A sure sign of someone grasping for straws. It's the tent pole of the conspiracy isn't it? How did someone some who did domestique duties in a race won by Sagan win a race which Sagan came 121st. Now I'm guessing that you have never seen that Tour of Poland.

The GC contenders were largely decided by splits in the peloton on stage 4. So here it is for you. The only stage with any actual climbs in it, stage 6. When we first see the peloton in this clip, a Sky rider is bringing Kennaugh up to the front. At 1.33 he hits the front and strings it out up a 20% climb, for 3 and a half minutes to set up attacks. He then sits up, job done. Trundles in 8 minutes down. Not really the struggling in the autobus narrative you've fed is it? The first attacker is Dan Martin who wins the stage. The other stages were won by Kittel (4) and Sagan (2) - hardly a race for GC riders.

Maybe if he had known that for some this would be the defining race of his career maybe he would have refused to do the job.

View: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xkdegu

 

[macbindle]

The Tour of Poland wasnt an outlier. It was just the nearest of his crap performances to the GT he won. That is why it gets mentioned. 47th in the Tour de Suisse,45th in the Brixia tour. All real indicators of GT winning talent that was to emerge a few months later.

 

[Parker]

The Tour of Poland wasnt an outlier. It was just the nearest of his crap performances to the GT he won. That is why it gets mentioned. 47th in the Tour de Suisse,45th in the Brixia tour. All real indicators of GT winning talent that was to emerge a few months later.

The Tour de Suisse he rode well, if inconsistently. He was riding with the GC group who were going to the Tour. 12th on Crans Montana despite a dumb attack with 11km to go. He was 9th in the TT. Here he is attacking the GC group near the end of stage 7:

View: https://youtu.be/A4cydOghC7Y?t=609


Videos tell you so much more than a results sheet can

 

[Merckx index]

The Tour de Suisse he rode well, if inconsistently. He was riding with the GC group who were going to the Tour. 12th on Crans Montana despite a dumb attack with 11km to go. He was 9th in the TT. Here he is attacking the GC group near the end of stage 7

The TdS in no way anticipates his Vuelta. After that stage 2 finish, he finished ten minutes down on the following stage. He was more than four minutes down on stage 7, and more than 40 minutes down at the end, "Inconsistent" is a very polite way of putting it, falsely implying that if he always rode the way he did for a few isolated moments in the TdS, a Vuelta performance was easily possible.

In that final TT at TdS, he finished a minute behind Cancellara, a very decent performance (maybe made possible by all the rest he was apparently getting in the previous stages), but in no way comparable to the TT at the Vuelta, where he finished 30" behind Martin in a much longer TT, and ahead of Wiggins and Cancellara, among others. After which, totally unlike the TdS or any other previous stage race, he suddenly found climbing legs that had never been exhibited before, not even in outlier attacks in the TdS, let alone in every key stage to the rest of the race.

Remember that the TdS is a training ride for Tour hopefuls, they don't necessarily have to perform well on every stage. For Froome, in contrast, performing well was a matter of keeping his job. If his performance in the TdS was so impressive, why was Sky about to dump him?

 

[Oldermanish]

That is just nuts. Brady is generally regarded as the best QB of all time, and James the no. 1 or 2 NBA player of all time. Even Froome's staunchest defenders wouldn't claim that he is the best or close to the best rider of all time. His legacy is all about GTs, and he's tied for fourth in those, fifth in TDF wins. He has nothing to add in terms of classics.

You could make a case for Froome as a top 10 rider all time, though I'm sure it would be vigorously disputed by many cycling fans, but Froome is nowhere remotely close to the standing in his sport that Brady and James have in theirs.

But then Marca's list is a joke. They have Kobe Bryant ahead of James--there is almost no NBA fan in the world who would claim that. Pacquiao ahead of Mayweather--when the two were both active, Mayweather was consistently ranked over him, and defeated Pacquiao in their one, sadly past their prime match. Wiggins ahead of Barry Bonds!!! I can't take their list seriously, not unless by sportsmen, they are referring to the athlete's personality or public demeanor, it certainly has no relationship to athletic accomplishement.

I haven't researched the list and generally am interested in all serious breakthrough athletes that are legitimate.
There is one candidate that pound for pound is probably the strongest and most accomplished athlete of the past several decades and is probably not part of the discussion:
Simone Biles

 

[spalco]

As for Froome, does anyone think he'll escape the real pop down the line ala Lance?

Yeah I do, unless he does something stupid at ISN trying to push somewhere his body can't take him anymore.

I think Sky got away with whatever it was they were doing.

And I do think Froome is one of the greatest of all time. Not #1, not #3 or 4, but up there.

 

[Pantani Attacks]

You have to allow for the possibility that there's nothing to rat out. I know this is difficult given how much time you have devoted to the opposing opinion. But they are opinions almost entirely based on riders not fitting the very narrow standard career path that you think is acceptable.

Also do we know Contador was doping? We know he had a minute amount of a banned substance in his body, but he can't be sure how it got there.

I've the guy in my avi, but come on now. You could nearly smell the petrol fumes coming from Contador in that 07-11 period through the TV he was so strong. Utterly insane attacks but it made for some of the most memorable moments. I'd like to think he toned it down post ban but the comeback Vuelta was mental, albeit him not having the devastating sprint attacks like old. Barring accident I'm certain he'd have smashed Nibali in the 2014 Tour. The form he showed in that Vuelta a month after fracturing his leg just shows the condition he was in.

 

[Parker]

I've the guy in my avi, but come on now. You could nearly smell the petrol fumes coming from Contador in that 07-11 period through the TV he was so strong. Utterly insane attacks but it made for some of the most memorable moments. I'd like to think he toned it down post ban but the comeback Vuelta was mental, albeit him not having the devastating sprint attacks like old. Barring accident I'm certain he'd have smashed Nibali in the 2014 Tour. The form he showed in that Vuelta a month after fracturing his leg just shows the condition he was in.

You're confusing having a strong opinion and knowing. We don't 'know'. Opinion is not fact,.

 

[TheSpud]

Because like so many dopers before him, he somehow stumbles onto a Vuelta podium with no indication prior he had a huge engine. Follow this up with absurd stories about somehow a disease made him stronger?

A legitimate grand tour winner can 'just show up' to most races, one day or many days, and show podium potential and do it for most of a season. Froome did none of those things. Ever.

And now a multiple grand tour champion, has feet of clay when the tarmac goes up. Somebody isn't doping.

Contador had an impressive Palmares from the age of 16, but then he was riding for a team run by Manolo Saiz. Does that make him more plausible?

 

[TheSpud]

You have to allow for the possibility that there's nothing to rat out. I know this is difficult given how much time you have devoted to the opposing opinion. But they are opinions almost entirely based on riders not fitting the very narrow standard career path that you think is acceptable.

Also do we know Contador was doping? We know he had a minute amount of a banned substance in his body, but he can't be sure how it got there.

Dont forget the traces of plasticiser, albeit with an unproven test.