- May 27, 2012
- 6,458
- 0
- 0
- Jul 21, 2012
- 9,860
- 3
- 0
sittingbison said:
good post sittingbison
could you remove mont vonteux from the thread as well?
just reading the kimmage piece in today's independent.ie
i'd heard about this before, as it has been reported by many sources, and is used as an explanation for froome's poor form a couple of years back. But this time i did a quick search on the treatment bolded...
a bit further down in the wiki article on it, under 'Side-Effects'
i've searched 'Biltricide' and only one post a few months back in this thread pops up, and no mention of this connection. i would search corticoids, but i would not expect to find just the one result....
just from a couple of wiki articles of course, but has the connection between Biltricide and corticoids been looked at before?
i'd heard about this before, as it has been reported by many sources, and is used as an explanation for froome's poor form a couple of years back. But this time i did a quick search on the treatment bolded...
a bit further down in the wiki article on it, under 'Side-Effects'
i've searched 'Biltricide' and only one post a few months back in this thread pops up, and no mention of this connection. i would search corticoids, but i would not expect to find just the one result....
just from a couple of wiki articles of course, but has the connection between Biltricide and corticoids been looked at before?
This MV guy is doing a good job of trolling you guys hard. But it went from subtle to over the top with his latest comments. Trolls are more effective when they are subtle. The Wiggo nonsense earlier was much better trolling material. Saying "Lemond backs Froome, thus debate over" is pretty lol-worthy.
- Jul 5, 2012
- 2,878
- 1
- 11,485
- Jul 8, 2009
- 501
- 0
- 0
Grayguard said:
There's a fairly substantial "Lemond thread" that has something like 158 pages and there is still no evidence to suggest that Lemond doped.
- Jul 15, 2010
- 464
- 0
- 0
Mont Vonteux said:
"You can't compare it to before. I don't like it when people ask me questions like that and I want to believe in what I'm seeing. There can be spectacular performances without doping."
It isn't really backing. He is giving the rider the benefit of the doubt. With Armstrong, it was obvious what he was doing when he found out that he was working with Dr.Ferrari. Maybe, Lemond is unaware of Sky's association with doping doctor Leinders.
"There can be spectacular performances without doping." - Greg Lemond
That's what people said about Lance in 1999.
That's what people said about Lance in 1999.
sittingbison said:
What if it's not an accusation, but fact, re; troll?
Sorry, I'm still a noob, I'll shut up about this. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Screw pseduo-science, Froome doesn't pass the eyeball test, and in this dirty-azz sport, that's pretty damning right there. Apparently he's also not passing the eyeball test to some of the European media as well, based on headlines and comments. I agree with others who say the TT stuff is what's really alarming. No one clean has ever climbed like this before, but it's inarguable that the TT aspect is very convincing evidence against him.
- Nov 7, 2009
- 11,100
- 5,291
- 28,180
Thank you sittingbison. Now we can get back to talking about Froome's "performance" today.
The one thing that sticks out is the fact that not many riders are speaking out. So, either people are still doping or people are still afraid of stating their thoughts.
The one thing that sticks out is the fact that not many riders are speaking out. So, either people are still doping or people are still afraid of stating their thoughts.
- Nov 7, 2009
- 11,100
- 5,291
- 28,180
- Nov 7, 2009
- 11,100
- 5,291
- 28,180
veganrob said:
Yep, you're correct. My error. They're not either/or. Likely both are true. Unfortunately. Honestly, I wish this were not true. Cycling is too magnificent a sport to be sullied by these buffoons.
- May 27, 2012
- 6,458
- 0
- 0
Look, I want to believe Froome. He seems like a likable enough guy...but his dominance and climbing times cannot be ignored with the history we have of rides made by doped riders on the same mountains. If you watch his ride, look at his time, and say to yourself "nothing suspicious there, I believe him when he says he's doing it clean," I have to question how you can mentally surmount that hurdle.
Even Lemond said he hated to be questioned when he "wanted" to believe...he didn't say Froome is clean, and his tell is clearly visible. I don't mind someone being clearly better than everyone else because that is how things in sports work many times. But when they are clearly better AND the measure of that puts them in the ranks of riders who were doped to the gills...AND the rider in question never showed that kind of ability until a very short time ago...well, like I said, I'd like to believe in the guy, but I can't.
Even Lemond said he hated to be questioned when he "wanted" to believe...he didn't say Froome is clean, and his tell is clearly visible. I don't mind someone being clearly better than everyone else because that is how things in sports work many times. But when they are clearly better AND the measure of that puts them in the ranks of riders who were doped to the gills...AND the rider in question never showed that kind of ability until a very short time ago...well, like I said, I'd like to believe in the guy, but I can't.
Froome is matching the 2002-2007 dopers despite high average speeds. So what's the excuse? The "cycling is clean now" brigade have nothing to back-up their claims. Over the last few years, we've been told how much slower the riders are now, and fed comparisions with times set by 60% Pantani or LA going full *** on Alpe d'Huez. But now that we have a far better comparision with the 2002-2007 blood doping era (the dpvam), it turns out Chris Froome is right up there with the blood dopers who podiumed GT's in 2002-2007! Speeds on the flats aren't lower. Speeds on the climbs aren't lower (for Chris). Froome aint slower, period! There is no excuse. Your entire argument has collapsed. Why do you think Brailsford and Kerrison have switched to "superior training will allow us to beat the blood dopers of years gone by clean" all of a sudden? Because Chris is evidently right up there! Not slower.
- Jul 21, 2012
- 9,860
- 3
- 0
Moose McKnuckles said:
Lots of media are almost openly suggesting he is doping though, at least thats something.
Comparing him to Lance, "extraterrestial" headline, french tv debating whether he slowed down on purpose to look more normal, Tinkof on twitter (ok he is biased) etc
Will be interesting to see what kind of questions he will get tomorrow. Hopefully some tough ones.
- May 27, 2012
- 6,458
- 0
- 0
- Dec 7, 2010
- 5,507
- 0
- 0
mudbone said:
This post should not get lost in the shuffle. It's one of the things I've been meaning to look into myself. The quoted parts (that don't appear here) deserve special scrutiny.
Good post.
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 40K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s ITT, September 21- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 942
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram