Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[The Hitch]

http://climbing-records.blogspot.ro/

Thats for the full ventoux climb which is what we should be looking at.

Of course people are trying to get the time where Froome looks the fastest so people are posting now 15km from the top where vetoo says 48:35 and other estimations give 49:00 plus or minus.

The record however is 45:47, with pantani also at 46, confirmed by Portoelau/Vayer.

Anyways it seems no one actually gives a **** ...

Vetoo said before the race that he would measure from that 15k mark, so to say its being chosen after the fact to make froome look worse is wrong.

 

[deValtos]

The Mayo one is a MTT at the Dauphine though...And the Pantani one they rode over it so I think it had a slightly different route (?).

If you want to take out those two times there's still approximately 20 other times to consider.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I think that's the most disgusting thing I've ever read on this forum. You should be ashamed of yourself. You won't be, but you should.

A dude once threatened to fly to my city, kill me, and then rape my wife...I think you are exaggerating a little bit.

 

[Benotti69]

"Never failed a test".

Funny, i am in the same position as the Skydrones in here.

The question wasnt meant for you though.



He was not alone. There was this covering up from UCI, CONI, USPS-gate and the questions was not wheter they juiced, but who didn´t. I see no problem cheering for a specific rider in this context.

Now, during the pretext of being a "cleaner peloton" (which is good if so), its not hard to see who and what´s the elephant in the room.

And i am pleased to see a "clean Contador" still is a man for the podium.

I doubt Contador is clean. I mean he is Contador and riding for Riis. He doesn't have UCI protection to same level Sky have.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

So using this site someone posted earlier...

http://climbing-records.blogspot.ro/

from the base of Ventoux, the 21.5 km climb, Froome climbed slower than Kreuziger from 2009, 5 seconds faster than Nibali and 10 seconds faster than Wiggins. It isn't as ''alien' as a lot of you want it to be. He was paced up the majority of the climb, and there was also a tailwind.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions, it is needed, but all this 'full ***' bollo*ks is becoming boring.

**** this stupid tailwind BS. Ten Dam said there was headwind from the moment they came into the moon landscape.

 

[deValtos]

Vetoo said before the race that he would measure from that 15k mark, so to say its being chosen after the fact to make froome look worse is wrong.

Ok thats a fair comment, I didn't know that.

 

[infeXio]

A bit of me is dying, but this is hilarious

Too bad its a fake twitter account, as that's not on his real one

https://twitter.com/brianholm1962

 

[vrusimov]

http://climbing-records.blogspot.ro/

Thats for the full ventoux climb which is what we should be looking at.

Of course people are trying to get the time where Froome looks the fastest so people are posting now 15km from the top where vetoo says 48:35 and other estimations give 49:00 plus or minus.

The record however is 45:47, with pantani also at 46, confirmed by Portoelau/Vayer.

Anyways it seems no one actually gives a **** ...

People actually do give a **** and it will soon become common knowledge what his actual time was ... the estimate for 15.65 kilometers is 48:35...just two seconds shy of Armstrong 2002 ...the final confirmations are forthcoming...Vetoo has 47:11 for him at the 15km banner and 48:35 for the full 15.65km...

 

[Cerberus]

Vetoo said before the race that he would measure from that 15k mark, so to say its being chosen after the fact to make froome look worse is wrong.

besides if his climbing speed for the last 15 k is physiologically implausible implausible (I'm sure som calculation will be along before to long) then they're implausible, no matter how slowly he took the previous 5 of the climb. You can't magically store up speed. You do of cause have to be careful with directly comparing his last 15 k with people going faster on the first 5 because that could throw the calculations off.

 

[roundabout]

Thats true. Everyone peaked too early and Contador isnt here.

Not that I am defending Froome, but Contador has been rather mediocre.

3:22 ahead of Peraud on GC of which 2:04 were due to the much superior team.

But maybe this is as good as Contador can be right now.

 

[Liquigas]

So using this site someone posted earlier...

http://climbing-records.blogspot.ro/

from the base of Ventoux, the 21.5 km climb, Froome climbed slower than Kreuziger from 2009, 5 seconds faster than Nibali and 10 seconds faster than Wiggins. It isn't as ''alien' as a lot of you want it to be. He was paced up the majority of the climb, and there was also a tailwind.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions, it is needed, but all this 'full ***' bollo*ks is becoming boring.

+1

Instead of talking about Froome, people should be asking themselves why Contador is climbing so much slower than in 2009, even if in 2009 he climbed Bonascre and Ventoux not pushing by any means.

 

[The Hitch]

I sort of agree, except think you are looking at it in black and white terms when reality is much more grey. Even doping sanctions are usually just a case of a certain threshold of evidence being reached. Eg. 50% hematocrit = sanction, 49.9% = no sanction. Or convincing circumstantial evidence, like blood bags found at a doping doctor's office.

A performance like Froome's today is certainly not "proof" that he is doping, but such outlier performances do contribute to the body of circumstantial evidence leading people to believe he is doping. This is not so different from statistical estimates of probability as used in science (eg. p-values, AIC/BIC).

But bailsford saying last year that repeated attacks and long range attacks are a sign of doped cycling, in order to defend wiggos win, now presiding over a rider who wins with precisely this type of racing, is proof that one can't trust a word sky say.

 

[happychappy]

Who is it? Thanks in advance...

Miguel Indurain.

 

[roundabout]

I doubt Contador is clean. I mean he is Contador and riding for Riis. He doesn't have UCI protection to same level Sky have.

Kreuziger is going well. Rogers is going well and Contador is clean.

Good one.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

We dislike doping Mengele. Unlike you.

Ahhh.... i found out after some forum guys told who it is on yor avatar. Indurain! So you dislike doping, yes?
Wake up Francisco Franco.

 

[Bakhjulet]

Dawg could have put a lot more time into Quintana and the rest if he wanted to

Quintana blew himself up trying to follow from in the end, if he would have paced himself better he could have been closer than 29s in the end. Also notice that Quintana rode more kilometers solo than Froome did, Froome was paced by Porte and Kennaugh for quiet a long time. Quintana's ride was spectacular.

 

[SundayRider]

So using this site someone posted earlier...

http://climbing-records.blogspot.ro/

from the base of Ventoux, the 21.5 km climb, Froome climbed slower than Kreuziger from 2009, 5 seconds faster than Nibali and 10 seconds faster than Wiggins. It isn't as ''alien' as a lot of you want it to be. He was paced up the majority of the climb, and there was also a tailwind.

There is nothing wrong with asking questions, it is needed, but all this 'full ***' bollo*ks is becoming boring.

Liggett and Sherwen on ITV where stating that there was a headwind they said this many times during the broadcast.

 

[vrusimov]

**** this stupid tailwind BS. Ten Dam said there was headwind from the moment they came into the moon landscape.

This goes all the way back to Verbier in 2009, when everyone (even Ross Tucker) tried desperately to use a tailwind to justify a VAM performance by Contador that surpassed even Riis at Hautacam in 1996...It is always a tailwind...always!

 

[MartinGT]

That today was laughable, just laughable.

I thought I was watching the Tour from the 90s!

 

[Cerberus]

+1

Instead of talking about Froome, people should be asking themselves why Contador is climbing so much slower than in 2009, even if in 2009 he climbed Bonascre and Ventoux not pushing by any means.

Cause he's less doped or having a bad year. See that was easy. Back to the topic.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Froome was over 3 minutes behind the record and slower than Contador/Schleck in 2009. You wouldn't have guessed reading this thread though

I read Contador was just a little slower than his own time in 2009

 

[MrRoboto]

If you want to take out those two times there's still approximately 20 other times to consider.

Not if Froome's time really was 48:33.

 

[gthx_gthx_]

Yet there is such love for the convicted cheat Contador!

Double standards alive and well

Well First of all Contador has cheated and he has been banned. The main difference with Froome is that when you believe he is doping , he is the embodiment of everything that is wrong with doping (at the present moment) . His ridiculous performance are showing that his techniques are way above everyone else. It doesn't look like he is doping to restore a level playing field , nobody seems to be able to catch him. He ride as if he was an alien with superior ability.

People dislike Froome because he is killing suspense in this tour , not only because he is allegedly a doper. He is showing a superiority that's reminding us what doping really is : an unfair advantage.
If you look at the TDF 2011 , maybe riders were doping maybe not , but at least we had the illusion that there was a level playing field and the possible doping seemed less obvious.

I don't know if Froome is doping or not , but if you believe that he is or if you are suspicious of his performance (for various reasons) , it's only natural to be focusing primarly on him. It doesn't mean that we would accept others doping. After all he is the maillot jaune , everyone is talking about him and his performance regardless of doping or not.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Of course you do Mengele. Seeing as you dont care about doping.

But you are a contador fanboy

 

[Libertine Seguros]

+1

Instead of talking about Froome, people should be asking themselves why Contador is climbing so much slower than in 2009, even if in 2009 he climbed Bonascre and Ventoux not pushing by any means.

No Bonascre in 2009. You're thinking of the trackstand championships in 2010.