Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 178 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
It's pretty amazing how he was ever a professional cyclist given how lazy he was at the beginning of his career. Fat and slow. All he needed to do was train hard, which allowed him to lose the excess weight making him a better climber, and with better training he has also excelled against the clock.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Look haters, it's obvious that all that's happened is that he paid close attention to his diet and got his body fat down to negative numbers. Thanks Jenny Craig!
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
Ferminal said:
It's pretty amazing how he was ever a professional cyclist given how lazy he was at the beginning of his career. Fat and slow. All he needed to do was train hard, which allowed him to lose the excess weight making him a better climber, and with better training he has also excelled against the clock.
Yep pretty good, huh? Gives us all something that we can aspire to :)
 
Boeing said:
btw what were those pads Froome had on his thighs under his bibs when he sat resting after the trubo warm up? At first I thought his quads grew overnight then he made a few adjustments to them. Ice? Heat? they were thigh length. Clearly it must be something superior to all other teams that only Brainsford thought of right?
HaHaHaHaHa. So hard to be an expert and discredit something
you don't have a clue about. HaHaHaHaHa.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
I would like to know has Froome ever said one real anti-doping statement of note in the last couple of years. I remember he was asked during the Vuelta about USADA/Lance and he evasive and gave no criticism to Armstrong. At least with Wiggins even if it was less frequent than other years he did criticise Contador's participation in the Tour in 2011 and said after the CAS case in 2012 it was the right decision to ban him. After the Lance debacle he had a pop at McQuaid and the UCI and finally had a go at Armstrong after the Oprah interview. I just don't see any of this with Froome for some reason. I can't remember one comment off the top my head.
 
Jul 17, 2009
4,317
1
0
oldcrank said:
HaHaHaHaHa. So hard to be an expert and discredit something
you don't have a clue about. HaHaHaHaHa.
wow they thought of everything. awesomeness never misses a beat. but you didn't and do

I know he doesn't have Palsy in his hands. they are just ideally shaped and suited to fit a drop bar unlike any other human
 
Jul 8, 2013
57
0
0
darwin553 said:
This data confirms it. No-one can be in the company of Millar and Armstrong without being a doper. Therefore, Martin is a doper. ;)
The Time Trials you are basing this on are at least 14K longer than the one done today (yesterday depending on your locale). There is not enough data from this tour to qualify either Martin or Froome are doping. The time gaps to those Froome is riding against for GC are on par with those he gained on the climb to Bonascre. The Time Trial was under 45 minutes in duration and well within sustained maximum effort power outputs at sea level for that length of time. Today was .5K longer than the Dauphine TT and slightly faster. Contador is the one with the biggest improvement since the Dauphine in the TT.

I really want to see how Froome and everyone else in the GC climbs Ventoux and Le Alpe in relation to Bonascre times before I start making claims as those are truly high mountain finishes and where the benefits of EPO and transfusions really start to show. The only thing I can draw from up til now is that BMC is either least doped, worst doped, or worst trained team for the Tour this year with any GC ambitions. Froome is pushing the limits between clean and dirty, but nothing to raise flags like Contador in 2009 on Verbier.
 
Jul 17, 2009
4,317
1
0
gooner said:
I would like to know has Froome ever said one real anti-doping statement of note in the last couple of years. I remember he was asked during the Vuelta about USADA/Lance and he evasive and gave no criticism to Armstrong. At least with Wiggins even if it was less frequent than other years he did criticise Contador's participation in the Tour in 2011 and said after the CAS case in 2012 it was the right decision to ban him. After the Lance debacle he had a pop at McQuaid and the UCI and finally had a go at Armstrong after the Oprah interview. I just don't see any of this with Froome for some reason. I can't remember one comment off the top my head.
Dude he can't even identify one true challenger in this peloton when asked he stutters and chuckles
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
sprenten said:
The Time Trials you are basing this on are at least 14K longer than the one done today (yesterday depending on your locale). There is not enough data from this tour to qualify either Martin or Froome are doping. The time gaps to those Froome is riding against for GC are on par with those he gained on the climb to Bonascre. The Time Trial was under 45 minutes in duration and well within sustained maximum effort power outputs at sea level for that length of time. Today was .5K longer than the Dauphine TT and slightly faster. Contador is the one with the biggest improvement since the Dauphine in the TT.

I really want to see how Froome and everyone else in the GC climbs Ventoux and Le Alpe in relation to Bonascre times before I start making claims as those are truly high mountain finishes and where the benefits of EPO and transfusions really start to show. The only thing I can draw from up til now is that BMC is either least doped, worst doped, or worst trained team for the Tour this year with any GC ambitions. Froome is pushing the limits between clean and dirty, but nothing to raise flags like Contador in 2009 on Verbier.
Did you see my wink? ;)
 
Posting in threads underneath the stories is so much fun. Soooooo many skydiot fanboys (or is it froomeboys).

As for today - ba ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Nearly won the TT.

Won the first major MTF.

Sooooooooo believable.

I am going to cuddle with my unicorn now.
 
Jul 8, 2009
323
0
0
luckyboy said:
Anybody seen this article by the guy who speaks like a pirate on Twitter (@veloclinic)?

Analysing Froome's Performance - wraps all the figures and w/Kg etc about his Tour so far into a single article.

If he somehow turned out to be clean then this guy is one of the most talented cyclists in history, who somehow managed to hide this for years of his career.
The irritating thing about the article is the apologism of "everyone was fresh for the first mountain" as a caveat but I guess Froome was a little fresher than all the others who were at or below the cleanVAM level.:rolleyes:
 
Jul 8, 2009
323
0
0
sprenten said:
The Time Trials you are basing this on are at least 14K longer than the one done today (yesterday depending on your locale). There is not enough data from this tour to qualify either Martin or Froome are doping. The time gaps to those Froome is riding against for GC are on par with those he gained on the climb to Bonascre. The Time Trial was under 45 minutes in duration and well within sustained maximum effort power outputs at sea level for that length of time. Today was .5K longer than the Dauphine TT and slightly faster. Contador is the one with the biggest improvement since the Dauphine in the TT.

I really want to see how Froome and everyone else in the GC climbs Ventoux and Le Alpe in relation to Bonascre times before I start making claims as those are truly high mountain finishes and where the benefits of EPO and transfusions really start to show. The only thing I can draw from up til now is that BMC is either least doped, worst doped, or worst trained team for the Tour this year with any GC ambitions. Froome is pushing the limits between clean and dirty, but nothing to raise flags like Contador in 2009 on Verbier.
Really? What will Ventoux tell you that AX3 didn't? The benefits of EPO didn't show in a performance on par with dopers from 2002-2007? Froome will hardly need to press the gas any more than his weaker rivals demand of him. His lead is formidable and he only needs to employ the Indurain doctrine going forward.
You tell me who will challenge him. The also-rans and "ex-dopers" are losing huge chunks of time when the VO2 requirements hit the redline. Like Phil Liggett said before..."this race, once a fight for seconds, is now becoming a fight for minutes"...
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Ferminal said:
Why does it matter?
I'm not saying it's the be all end all in deciding if a rider is clean or not but I still find it strange. This was something Kimmage said about Lance when he did an interview in 1998 where he was far from outspoken on doping at the time. He said it was his responses to the doping questions that immediately drew his suspicion. This was also the same question that he threw at Contador in the press conference before the Tour in 2011. Froome has had opportunities and I found his answer to Lance/USADA very evasive at the Vuelta and at the Tour route announcement where there was nothing hugely again critical of Lance. Just my opinion, if I was a clean rider I'm not so sure I would be as reserved as this in my responses.
 
Jul 8, 2013
57
0
0
vrusimov said:
Really? What will Ventoux tell you that AX3 didn't? The benefits of EPO didn't show in a performance on par with dopers from 2002-2007? Froome will hardly need to press the gas any more than his weaker rivals demand of him. His lead is formidable and he only needs to employ the Indurain doctrine going forward.
You tell me who will challenge him. The also-rans and "ex-dopers" are losing huge chunks of time when the VO2 requirements hit the redline. Like Phil Liggett said before..."this race, once a fight for seconds, is now becoming a fight for minutes"...
I am not saying Froome is clean, he definitely sits at the top of the segment between definitely not doped and definitely doped. However, 3-6 minutes is not a huge lead when you still have 5 HC climbs left in the tour and you are bound to lose fitness, not improving it or keeping it if you are clean. I suspect a huge attack will come on Ventoux when they reach 1200-1400m and I am positive one will come as they reach the summit of Le Alpe the first time and on the Glandon at around 1600m. If Froome is doped then Ventoux ascent records (minus the time trials) are in peril.

VO2 requirements at sea level and altitude are two entirely different things. I don't try to confuse VO2 and power outputs, some guys are maxed on muscle power output but not on VO2 at sea level primarily because they don't do enough lowland training. They need a steep hill, crazy gear ratios, and altitude to bring them into balance because that happens to be a substansial portion of their training.
 
Jul 21, 2012
287
0
0
Bexon30 said:
"No no you've got me there" rather than having a discussion then it's best you carry on with the pointless jibes about Spanish dopers on a Froome talk only page. :cool:
There you go you got there in the end

There is no point having discussions on this part of the forum as everyones mind is made up and all that is left are pointless jibes
 
Mar 20, 2009
249
0
9,030
I think this is an Occam's Razor kind of situation where Froome's performances are clearly doped up but the public, for whatever reason, wants to believe it is clean.

Froome has pretty much raised all red flags and Brailsford sounds like a Bruyneel 2.0 with his BS rationalizations. Why are there still individuals, media and pros alike, still defending him? With so many red flags, Froome does not deserve the benefit of the doubt anymore.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS