• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 204 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Visit site
darwin553 said:
Not up to me to answer any of your questions. You are the one accusing Froome of doping, not me and all I ask is what evidence you have that can support your knowledge of his doping? You did say you know he's a doper, right?

Hahaha. Deflecting like a toddler again.

Three hundred posts in a month and you've got zip. Still asking all the wrong questions. You can't even get that right.

It's clear as day now you're a fanboy. As I said, go back and read all the THREAD. Then all of the SKY thread. Your answers are in there.

But you won't. You haven't lifted a finger yet, because learning isn't your imperative. Defending Sky with troll logic is. It's not working out for you. Time to go the way of the dodo me thinks! ;)
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
Visit site
Galic Ho said:
Hahaha. Deflecting like a toddler again.

Three hundred posts in a month and you've got zip. Still asking all the wrong questions. You can't even get that right.

It's clear as day now you're a fanboy. As I said, go back and read all the THREAD. Then all of the SKY thread. Your answers are in there.

But you won't. You haven't lifted a finger yet, because learning isn't your imperative. Defending Sky with troll logic is. It's not working out for you. Time to go the way of the dodo me thinks! ;)

Not one skerrick of proof to support your contention that you 'know' Froome is a doper. Talk about deflection :(
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Visit site
blackcat said:
ill stand by what you know too galic

I'll just quote thehog from last years Tour. Okay I am paraphrasing but he said you don't need to know per se because Sky failed the basic look test. The eyes don't lie.

It's like you said about those AFL players faces in perspective...you see it and go, "that ain't right." Sky have been like that for two years now.

It's not like we're all saying Movistar and Saxo are clean is it? Nobody defends them because there isn't a need to. It's this Anglo attitude of ingrained superiority simply because 'we are better morally' or whatever spin the pundits place on it.

Lot of rot IMO. They're all doing what they can get away with which at this time means some people can do more. Is it a mandate, luck or carelessness? I don't think it matters, but it's obvious who is on the extreme side of things.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Galic Ho said:
I'll just quote thehog from last years Tour. Okay I am paraphrasing but he said you don't need to know per se because Sky failed the basic look test. The eyes don't lie.

It's like you said about those AFL players faces in perspective...you see it and go, "that ain't right." Sky have been like that for two years now.

It's not like we're all saying Movistar and Saxo are clean is it? Nobody defends them because there isn't a need to. It's this Anglo attitude of ingrained superiority simply because 'we are better morally' or whatever spin the pundits place on it.

Lot of rot IMO. They're all doing what they can get away with which at this time means some people can do more. Is it a mandate, luck or carelessness? I don't think it matters, but it's obvious who is on the extreme side of things.

Yes. Sky have found something or somethings that give them the edge. They may not be on a list yet, but it is cheating, because it is performance enhancing. Froome aint no LeMond, he is more of an Armstrong.
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
Visit site
blackcat said:
ill stand by what you know too galic

What he purports to know isn't any different to what is already out there in the public domain and what is out there is insufficient to take any action against Froome anyway.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
darwin553 said:
What he purports to know isn't any different to what is already out there in the public domain and what is out there is insufficient to take any action against Froome anyway.

In case you didn't notice, the clinic cannot take action. Opinions are expressed.

To most who have followed the sport, Froome is doping. Beating other dopers climbing times is pretty hard evidence. The only thing harder than that would be a positive. We already know the team hired a doping doctor. We know Froome came from nowhere to a GT podium. He is so skinny he looks like something from Belsen. He can climb better than anyone in the peloton and yet time trial to within 12 seconds of one of the best TTers the world has seen.

What more would one like apart from the positive, which UCI are not going to let happen, does one require?
 
Dec 13, 2012
1,859
0
0
Visit site
The hypocrisy is the worst bit, they spent all of last year and some of this year saying 'we are only winning because it is slower now/more human' now they are saying 'we are just as fast as doping times, this was also going to happen due to natural progression'.
 
Aug 19, 2012
386
0
0
Visit site
SundayRider said:
The hypocrisy is the worst bit, they spent all of last year and some of this year saying 'we are only winning because it is slower now/more human' now they are saying 'we are just as fast as doping times, this was also going to happen due to natural progression'.

and they also said we're not going to see any insane climbing like the bad old days.....

all of a sudden walsh kerrison and brailsford are all saying that the time has come for clean guys to ride like dopers.....


which is convenient given whats happening
 
SundayRider said:
The hypocrisy is the worst bit, they spent all of last year and some of this year saying 'we are only winning because it is slower now/more human' now they are saying 'we are just as fast as doping times, this was also going to happen due to natural progression'.

Not sure the Sky boys could answer that one.
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
In case you didn't notice, the clinic cannot take action. Opinions are expressed.

To most who have followed the sport, Froome is doping. Beating other dopers climbing times is pretty hard evidence. The only thing harder than that would be a positive. We already know the team hired a doping doctor. We know Froome came from nowhere to a GT podium. He is so skinny he looks like something from Belsen. He can climb better than anyone in the peloton and yet time trial to within 12 seconds of one of the best TTers the world has seen.

What more would one like apart from the positive, which UCI are not going to let happen, does one require?

Let him take the tour win and all the glory that goes with it then if this is all you got.
 
Mar 12, 2009
553
0
0
Visit site
Galic Ho said:
I've touched on ectomorphs and what they naturally look like. Froome is not a pure ectomorph. His pre Sky physiology says as much. Andy Schleck is a pure ectomorph. My brother is. I know how bloody physically gifted their types are. They are elite. Naturals. They can do it all.

Just wanted to point out that somatotypes are the biggest pile of junk science since phrenology.

Galic Ho said:
I can go down to Sydney, walk into a Fitness First gym and get any drug I'd want. There are tons of people selling Clenbuterol like it's Tic Tac's. The dealers make a LOT OF MONEY doing it. Talk about a GRAND per week.

Being the stringent voice of anti doping I hope you have reported the above mentioned-people to the police? Given that you seem to have knowledge on what they are selling and how much they are making.
 
Benotti69 said:
In case you didn't notice, the clinic cannot take action. Opinions are expressed.

To most who have followed the sport, Froome is doping. Beating other dopers climbing times is pretty hard evidence. The only thing harder than that would be a positive. We already know the team hired a doping doctor. We know Froome came from nowhere to a GT podium. He is so skinny he looks like something from Belsen. He can climb better than anyone in the peloton and yet time trial to within 12 seconds of one of the best TTers the world has seen.

What more would one like apart from the positive, which UCI are not going to let happen, does one require?

Good post. Darwin553 will get it one day.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
darwin553 said:
Let him take the tour win and all the glory that goes with it then if this is all you got.

It will all out in the end about the doping. It always does when there is doping invloved.

I hope he gets caught before the end of the tour. I want to watch a clean sport. I want all sport to be clean. i want kids to have the chance to shine on their ability not the teams quacks ability.

Froome aint riding this TdF naturally looking like he escaped Belsen beating the times of dopers.
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
It will all out in the end about the doping. It always does when there is doping invloved.

I hope he gets caught before the end of the tour. I want to watch a clean sport. I want all sport to be clean. i want kids to have the chance to shine on their ability not the teams quacks ability.

Froome aint riding this TdF naturally looking like he escaped Belsen beating the times of dopers.

Hey if you're right I am prepared to eat my words and tell him to **** off.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
darwin553 said:
Hey if you're right I am prepared to eat my words and tell him to **** off.

Better put those words in the Freezer so they dont go off, because the same people are still running the sport that ingored all the evidence against Armstrong and tried to bury the evidence against Contador so if you want those words to be edible, freeze them;)
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
Tapeworm said:
Just wanted to point out that somatotypes are the biggest pile of junk science since phrenology.



Being the stringent voice of anti doping I hope you have reported the above mentioned-people to the police? Given that you seem to have knowledge on what they are selling and how much they are making.
pre-phrenology, there was a respected science called craniology. obviously is cr@ap in the light of modern day.

how about the BodyMassIndex. we would take away the "knowledge" from BMI, that about 30% of the Olympians are overweight, underweight, sick, obese...

now pro sport is by no means the most healthy pursuit. but the counter factual is sitting on your couch, with a tube of pringles, a pack of fags, and a 6 pack of beer,
 
Benotti69 said:
Yes. Sky have found something or somethings that give them the edge. They may not be on a list yet, but it is cheating, because it is performance enhancing. Froome aint no LeMond, he is more of an Armstrong.

I have always said Froome is more bizarre then Armstrong. Armstrong had at least something under his belt before turning into man of Steel.
 
darwin553 said:
Not one skerrick of proof to support your contention that you 'know' Froome is a doper. Talk about deflection :(

Well of course you know that the only thing that tends to be the final "proof" is a positive, and even then there are lots of people who do not accept it until there is a ban (and some don't even after :eek:).

One of the reasons Sky ramps up people's tempers is that they have seen this before. To quote Barrie "All of this has happened before, and it will all happen again". The typical precursors are there and things just seem a bit too unbelievable.

Another reason for the emotions around the issue are not the folks who think that Sky is doping, but the folks who come out and so strongly defend Sky. Anyone who dares say doping is a hater, should be prepared to go to court, does not have proof, is practicing pseudo-science, is racist, does not know cycling, etc. You do not tend to see such staunch support of other teams. Interestingly, it does remind one of the vehement support that previous dopers received before getting popped :D
 
Jul 8, 2009
323
0
0
Visit site
Ripper said:
Well of course you know that the only thing that tends to be the final "proof" is a positive, and even then there are lots of people who do not accept it until there is a ban (and some don't even after :eek:).

One of the reasons Sky ramps up people's tempers is that they have seen this before. To quote Barrie "All of this has happened before, and it will all happen again". The typical precursors are there and things just seem a bit too unbelievable.

Another reason for the emotions around the issue are not the folks who think that Sky is doping, but the folks who come out and so strongly defend Sky. Anyone who dares say doping is a hater, should be prepared to go to court, does not have proof, is practicing pseudo-science, is racist, does not know cycling, etc. You do not tend to see such staunch support of other teams. Interestingly, it does remind one of the vehement support that previous dopers received before getting popped :D

Yep, with Armstrong we believed the methods, the fables, the myths, the fairy tales and the miracles...but in the end it was merely a slick-willy con job of the highest order. When all else fails, the myth prevails!
 

TRENDING THREADS