Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Granville57]

One thing to be said about Froome Dog: he lined up for Paris-Roubaix in 2008 with Barloworld. Maybe he DNFd? Didn't see his name with the finishers. Either way, when was the last time a Tour winner even uttered the word "Roubaix"? Stephen Roche?

Go Dawg!

 

[Zam_Olyas]

One thing to be said about Froome Dog: he lined up for Paris-Roubaix in 2008 with Barloworld. Maybe he DNFd? Didn't see his name with the finishers. Either way, when was the last time a Tour winner even uttered the word "Roubaix"? Stephen Roche?

Go Dawg!

In the year of our lance 2001?

I may be wrong.

I am wrong.

 

[Ferminal]

Wiggins 2009 of course.

 

[Granville57]

Wiggins 2009 of course.

LOL. Well f'k me! Couldn't even place that image so I didn't even look there.
25th place

Well then folks, there you have it. That's the Sky secret!

 

[Flux Capacity]

 

[Flux Capacity]

 

[pedaling squares]

Even when he's banned, the hog still manages to get heard in The Clinic.

 

[sugarman]

Apologies if someone has already asked this, just looking at all new posts now, but...Can anyone think of another rider who has attacked like that before? i.e remained seated and pulled away up a mountain just by a ridiculous cadence increase.. Has Froome even shown that before? was certainly a different style to his attack on A3D

 

[Opalius]

Froome Dawg pictured at the 2008 Herald Sun Tour in Oz.

Def a different physique.

Great pictures for comparison. No full body shots. One where he's grinding he's teeth up a mountain, the other relaxed, while lifting a trophy. You do know people change when they get older...?

Of course the pictures does not look alike. At least have the decency to conjure up something which is worthwhile to compare in the first place.


Anyways... Hope Froomalien will be caught soon. Either that or his peers should step up their game. Nothing as bad as seeing a one-sided show.

 

[Opalius]

By the way. Danish Ekstrabladet got something entirely different out of Lemond

http://ekstrabladet.dk/sport/cykling/article2041122.ece

Translated snips:

"I'd have to see his data before determining if I can trust him"

"Is anyone capable of what Froome did today? Well... I am not exactly thrilled since we do not know his number, but I guess it could be possible. But we need his data in order to establish if what he did is possible."

 

[darwin553]

I reckon Froome proved that it is humanly possible to go faster up a slope than on a flat during yesterday's stage.

 

[bewildered]

Long time lurker on here.

I don't see how any long time cycling fan can be anything other than hugely sceptical of CF's performances this year, when similar previous performances have been charged, when DB said that long and repeated attacks on climbs are a sign of doping and can't happen any more and where CF appears to have a readymade excuse for blood passport fluctuations, dominates both climbs and TTs and with the same scumbags in charge of testing and the sport in general. Nothing has changed IMO

However, whether he is doped or not, the romance of the sport has been removed by technology of one sort or another and that is what leaves me most disappointed as a fan after watching yesterday. Whether it is doping technology/techniques or SRMs etc, training to numbers/formula and 'financial doping' by the richest teams is irrelevant to me. The future of the sport and competition within the sport looks very bleak to me for the foreseeable future. It is less and less about who is the most talented rider (I don't for a second think CF is the most naturally talented) and more about the rider/team with the best technology/most money

I don't believe any of the top GC contenders are fully clean, but it still makes me sad to see a guy like Quintana break his neck yesterday and still be easily beaten.

All this talk about power estimates not being proof of doping, they are not proof IMO but they have shown in the past that they are fairly convincing evidence/indicators. SRMs in race should be banned. And if you believe that riders can get around the blood passport and still dope then it occurs to me that tracking the power of riders in race (without the riders/teams having access to the info, ie only the UCI have access) might actually be just as effective as the passport in highlighting suspicious performances. Of course that would depend on having honest, trustworthy people in charge which we do not.

 

[darwin553]

Sorry, you are very, very wrong here.

We do not have definitive evidence (a test, a confession), but there is a decent list of problematic circumstances which could indeed be evidence of wrongdoing. A doping-doctor, crazy wattages, they are all evidence.

Is it ironclad ready to sentnce him evidence? Nope. But it's evidence.

Well said.

And the very interpretation of this evidence can cause the various reactions from people that we see in this thread.

 

[lemoogle]

By the way. Danish Ekstrabladet got something entirely different out of Lemond

http://ekstrabladet.dk/sport/cykling/article2041122.ece

Translated snips:

"I'd have to see his data before determining if I can trust him"

"Is anyone capable of what Froome did today? Well... I am not exactly thrilled since we do not know his number, but I guess it could be possible. But we need his data in order to establish if what he did is possible."

Yeah I'm a bit surprised, his first reaction on french TV was pretty much that it's obvious that it's likely to cause doubt.

The second time he spoke, he was like "We shouldnt doubt him at all !" all that in the space of 10 minutes, weird

 

[Cycle Chic]

Bilharzia link

At the risk of running this circular discussion into the ground, here's the video interview I was referring to:

The bit about bilharzia begins at 11:00.

Theres also the Telegraph interview - link in the Media TDF thread where he states its every 6 months he takes medication for the Bilzharzia.

BUT although the Bilharzia is a good investigation it doesn't correlate with the fact that it is TEAM SKY who are all riding 'doped'.

Froome may just be taking more because he's prepared to take the risk of being caught.

Also - he IS looking very pale..which someone else pointed out. And the COUGHING was bad when he finished top of Montoux.

Whatever he's taking lots of - is affecting his lungs.

 

[Cimber]

The Chicken about Froome (google-translated):

- The very short answer when I asked if I trust Chris Froome is: 'No'. The slightly longer answer is that it is simply going too fast. It was too violent, what we saw on Mont Ventoux, writes Michael Ramussen.

'Chicken' even drove from everything and everyone in the mountains during the Tour de France in 2007 with illegal doping drugs in the blood. And it is precisely the experience he draws on when he sees Team Sky rider blow all opposition backwards in this year's edition.

- When one has had its time in the field for many, many years and have been on the wrong side of right and wrong, then you can still get a pretty clear sense of when something is fast, and when something is To fast. What we saw yesterday was TO fast, writes Michael Rasmussen

http://www.bt.dk/cykling/kyllingen-jeg-tror-ikke-paa-chris-froome

 

[Coolair2970]

One thing for sure about Froome - he comes across as a very nice guy. Almost no ego shows - whatever plan Brailsford has dreamt up for him I'd bet he's followed it to the letter/second/last gram of food.

But being nice is not related to doping. He is a PR dream though in his demenaour.

All the ego went to his girlfriend Michelle

 

[LaFlorecita]

Which makes the obvious Sky shennanigans all the more tragic. What a 100th tour it would have been...

This. Everyone is looking human, except for Froome. Perhaps he'll get stripped off his win, but the memories will always stay, whether they're positive or negative.

 

[Alphabet]

They will be good memories, though. Lots of laughter.

 

[Rollthedice]

Anybody who follows cycling for some time and is not biased should be suspicious about Froome's performances. Given the doping past of this sport and the fact that LA won 7 TDFs being doped and not being caught is the ultimate proof that one can get away with cheating big time. Froome is just too good to be true, we haven't seen this level since Lance. In fact he's even better. He is an exceptional climber and a fantastic time trialist. On top of that he doesn't seem to suffer at all. He is the first yellow jersey to win on the Ventoux since Eddy Merckx in 1970. He has won every race he participated this year (except TA where he was outsmarted by Nibali). He doesn't know what a bad day is. He is the most consistent GC rider over a season since I've been following the sport.

 

[Parker]

Shots taken 5.7km out, 5.4km out, 3.7km out, 3.9km for chasers, 2km out, 1.2km out...

Click on the photo for full-size

Have you noticed that in the shots which you say are taken 5.7 and 5.4 km out both show the exact same Belgian/Lotto flag. The 5.4 shot is when Fuglsang etc went through, not Froome. The wind was a cross/tailwind.

That shot was chosen because it showed a lot of flags. If you show a shot with just one flag (as someone did with a British flag) it may just be a person waving it.

 

[bikelizard]

I've measured the times for the final kilometers of the Mont Ventoux climb and thought I'd share these. This is based on the eurosport videos and I've used the roadbanners as measuring points. Not sure if the position of the banners was identical in both years, since Mont Ventoux is a classic climb I'd assume they use roughly the same spots every time. The racing situation was certainly comparable.
Unfortunately they had no banners in 2000 because of strong wind. It would have been interesting to get times of the Armstrong/Pantani chase.


Kilometer 4-2:
Virenque 2002: 6:15 minutes
Armstong 2002: 5:43 minutes
Froome 2012: 5:37 minutes

Kilometer 2-0:
Virenque 2002: 7:00 minutes
Armstrong 2002: 6:17 minutes
Froome 2013: 6:18 minutes

Looking at the wind charts Froome hat some tailwind and some headwind in 2013 since the course changes direction a few times. The row of spectators on the last 2 kilometers has possibly covered them to some degree though.

The were considerably faster in 2013 (5:48 hours 242km) compared to 2002 (5:43 hours 221km).

It's certainly suspicious when Froome rides as fast a 100% determined and doped to the gills Lance Armstrong. Or maybe it's simply evolution ;-)

 

[Cerberus]

Theres also the Telegraph interview - link in the Media TDF thread where he states its every 6 months he takes medication for the Bilzharzia.

BUT although the Bilharzia is a good investigation it doesn't correlate with the fact that it is TEAM SKY who are all riding 'doped'.

Froome may just be taking more because he's prepared to take the risk of being caught.

Also - he IS looking very pale..which someone else pointed out. And the COUGHING was bad when he finished top of Montoux.

Whatever he's taking lots of - is affecting his lungs.

You're way overinterpreting some coughing and some supposed paleness. Things that mess with you lungs are not likely to be performance enhancing - not in cycling. As I've said manuy times before, just because he's almost certainly doping doesn't mean that everything he does is related to the doping

 

[Cycle Chic]

You're way overinterpreting some coughing and some supposed paleness. Things that mess with you lungs are not likely to be performance enhancing - not in cycling. As I've said manuy times before, just because he's almost certainly doping doesn't mean that everything he does is related to the doping

The coughing has been discussed before in the thread and its link with bilharzia and asthma.

 

[Cimber]

Only extreme fanboism or patriotism can prevent any one from beinng extremely suspicious about what we have seen from Froome in this Tour