Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 23 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 17, 2011
1,315
0
0
A tweet from Froome's GF:

Michelle Cound ‏@michellecound

Shame, I feel sorry for my ex... he named his son after Lance Armstrong!! Wahaha *not* #EPICFAIL

Lol the irony for her to be bashing another athlete about using doping.. Yea ur bf is so clean xD
 
Jul 10, 2009
918
0
0
For those who think Froome is cooked. Watch tomorrow when he does leadout in the sprint. The phenomenal recovery is a key add-on from juice. You are fresh and ready the next day from an intense workout.

Drug testing, Blood Passport etc is a failure, a joke. We shout completely dispose of these tests. I am in favor of a more subjective method. Granted the error rate will increase but Cycling needs to move forward.
 
Dec 27, 2010
6,674
0
0
It did include a trackstand or two though.

The climbing times from the longer climbs in the third week should be interesting if Contador and Froome go full gas
 
webbie146 said:
A tweet from Froome's GF:

Michelle Cound ‏@michellecound

Shame, I feel sorry for my ex... he named his son after Lance Armstrong!! Wahaha *not* #EPICFAIL

Lol the irony for her to be bashing another athlete about using doping.. Yea ur bf is so clean xD
She's awesome! She's the new spokeswoman for the Clinic!

Froome is now officially clean! :rolleyes:
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,269
1
0
Tyler'sTwin said:
For 21 min at the end of a relatively short & easy stage.
I thought the stage was really fast today?

Anyway:

"Work together with Antoine Vayer [LeMond columnist], the performance specialist, helped show the implausibility of the power generated in watts on the climbs. Moreover, it is interesting to note that the UCI has banned the publication of such real-time statistics in 2012. And we can understand why when you see that the power production by [Bradley] Wiggins and [Chris] Froome (first and second of the Tour) is comparable to the turbulent times of the late 1990s and early 2000s."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-armstrong-warned-before-all-doping-controls
 
May 2, 2010
466
0
0
Let me post it again:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-armstrong-warned-before-all-doping-controls

But folks, please pay special attention to this paragraph:

"Work together with Antoine Vayer [LeMond columnist], the performance specialist, helped show the implausibility of the power generated in watts on the climbs. Moreover, it is interesting to note that the UCI has banned the publication of such real-time statistics in 2012. And we can understand why when you see that the power production by [Bradley] Wiggins and [Chris] Froome (first and second of the Tour) is comparable to the turbulent times of the late 1990s and early 2000s."

I would include the whole SKY team. There are guys there whose results are even less credible, considering their physical limitations (Rogers, Henao, Urán, and the whole bunch of em)
 

mastersracer

BANNED
Jun 8, 2010
1,298
0
0
sartoris said:
Let me post it again:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-armstrong-warned-before-all-doping-controls

But folks, please pay special attention to this paragraph:

"Work together with Antoine Vayer [LeMond columnist], the performance specialist, helped show the implausibility of the power generated in watts on the climbs. Moreover, it is interesting to note that the UCI has banned the publication of such real-time statistics in 2012. And we can understand why when you see that the power production by [Bradley] Wiggins and [Chris] Froome (first and second of the Tour) is comparable to the turbulent times of the late 1990s and early 2000s."

I would include the whole SKY team. There are guys there whose results are even less credible, considering their physical limitations (Rogers, Henao, Urán, and the whole bunch of em)
I've been following the wattage forums for some years now, including 2012 Tour, and I haven't seen a single file or analysis supporting this claim. Can you provide links to them? In fact, the Science of Sport analysis of the Tour's fastest climb concludes that current riders would have lost at least a minute on the riders from the late 90/early 2000s:

"The difference between the current era and previous eras is startling. In the last four years, none of the Tour's decisive HC climbs have been done at greater than 6 W/kg."

"So that's what we're all getting at when we say the Tour is getting slower. It is, and it's a good sign, because it brings everything back into the realm of expected physiology."
 
May 2, 2010
466
0
0
mastersracer said:
I've been following the wattage forums for some years now, including 2012 Tour, and I haven't seen a single file or analysis supporting this claim. Can you provide links to them? In fact, the Science of Sport analysis of the Tour's fastest climb concludes that current riders would have lost at least a minute on the riders from the late 90/early 2000s:

"The difference between the current era and previous eras is startling. In the last four years, none of the Tour's decisive HC climbs have been done at greater than 6 W/kg."

"So that's what we're all getting at when we say the Tour is getting slower. It is, and it's a good sign, because it brings everything back into the realm of expected physiology."
Sorry, mastersracer. No links to be had from me. However, allow me to believe Thibault de Montbrial (the guy who writes the statements above), since he seems to know what he's talking about. I understand your doubts though. Particularly if you're a Sky/Froome fan :eek:
 
Aug 13, 2010
3,317
0
0
sartoris said:
However, allow me to believe Thibault de Montbrial (the guy who writes the statements above), since he seems to know what he's talking about. :eek:
He might be right - I have not seen the actual numbers he has mentioned. However, I wonder if you would be so happy to accept those numbers at face value if they were arguing the case that racing was clean(er)?
 
Jul 13, 2010
178
0
0
maxmartin said:
He is out of world ITT:eek:
official reason is Vuelta fatigue
Well quite - why would anyone decide to ride only one event at the World Champs after riding the Tour and Vuelta :rolleyes:
 
2008885 said:
Well quite - why would anyone decide to ride only one event at the World Champs after riding the Tour and Vuelta :rolleyes:
Yes wouldn't the number 2 TT'er in the world want to try and win a rainbow jersey when the number 1 TT'er is out.

Say it with me! "Blood bag - dopers fatigue!" :eek:
 
Jul 13, 2012
263
0
0
thehog said:
Yes wouldn't the number 2 TT'er in the world want to try and win a rainbow jersey when the number 1 TT'er is out.

Say it with me! "Blood bag - dopers fatigue!" :eek:
especially as neither has any realistic chance in the road race, makes one wonder ;)
 
World Champs

So with all the 'no shows' occurring at the Worlds.....whats happening ? do the riders think that with the UCI undergoing scutiny that the Testing will actually be enforced from now on ?
 
Froome19 said:
This may have already been mentioned but Froome's results in the Vuelta were not totally out of the blue from his previous results as he had shown some form in the previous races of the Tour de Suisse and Luxembourg...

In Luxembourg he finished 9th and in the main front group on the most decisive stage out of a group of 14 and in Suisse he finished 11th in the prologue/TT in Lugano and then he finished 12th on the following Mountain stage which was one of the most decisive in the race, he then capped the race off with a 9th in the final TT.

Though these races and these perfomances certainly can not justify his leap at the Vuelta it can go some way to explaining how he was in the midst of building form and recovering from the parasite disease which had blighted him and indeed if you look at his 2011 season you can see how he steadily improves with a convincing ride in Romandie where he finished up with the favourites on a decisive stage and Catalunya followed by the above two races.

The point is that Froome was logically going to improve as he overcame his disease and this is portrayed by the improvement in results. The only problem is the large leap for the Vuelta and this seems to be as he had really hit top form then as he seems to have done this year where he seems to have followed a similar peaking strategy.
So why didn't the guy who came 10th or 8th or 7th improve as much?

Looking at Froome in the 2009 Giro and watching him zig zag up hills its hard to believe that he become a Contador-esque climber.

Yes thats him at right angles behind Gerrans.



Full video at 7:27: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEGpv0xn0E8
 
thehog said:
So why didn't the guy who came 10th or 8th or 7th improve as much?

Looking at Froome in the 2009 Giro and watching him zig zag up hills its hard to believe that he become a Contador-esque climber.

Yes thats him at right angles behind Gerrans.



Full video at 7:27: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEGpv0xn0E8
Not saying that Froome is clean or anything but that's pretty stupid question, they don't have the same DNA. People are different. I see your point with the history of the sport but still, what do we know about Froome's training pre 2009 and post 2009?

Add to that, that the times are changing. 2009 was a dope fest as far as Lance, AC and Astana goes and probably a lot more (Di Luca, probably Menchov, Pellizotti etc) . Call me naive but I think people are scaling down their programs more and more.
 
Walkman said:
Not saying that Froome is clean or anything but that's pretty stupid question, they don't have the same DNA. People are different. I see your point with the history of the sport but still, what do we know about Froome's training pre 2009 and post 2009?

Add to that, that the times are changing. 2009 was a dope fest as far as Lance, AC and Astana goes and probably a lot more (Di Luca, probably Menchov, Pellizotti etc) . Call me naive but I think people are scaling down their programs more and more.
The problem with that is that where does it put 2009 Wiggins?
 
hrotha said:
The problem with that is that where does it put 2009 Wiggins?
Good question. Some might say he is only slightly better now than before but his competitors are slower but I don't buy that. Wigging time trial this yeas has been of the hook! Insanely good. Without any number to back my claim, I'd like to say Wiggins 2012 i wastly superior to Wiggins 2009.Could be a case of his transformation into road cycling after his time in the Velodrome did take a lot of time and he is now performing at his top level.

Another thing is I think Wiggins was REALLY good back in 2011 but never got to show it. Vuelta prep was totally messed up as he already was peaked for the Tour and then got injured. So to think Wiggins at the Vuelta 2011 was the best Wiggins is very naive and shows a lack of understanding of training imho.

No battery left on my computer now, but basically Wiggins is very strange with his newfound love of LA and his new stance on doping. Did like him a lot back in 2009 but now I not sure what to think.

What do you think?
 
Walkman said:
Not saying that Froome is clean or anything but that's pretty stupid question, they don't have the same DNA. People are different. I see your point with the history of the sport but still, what do we know about Froome's training pre 2009 and post 2009?

Add to that, that the times are changing. 2009 was a dope fest as far as Lance, AC and Astana goes and probably a lot more (Di Luca, probably Menchov, Pellizotti etc) . Call me naive but I think people are scaling down their programs more and more.
I know that. I'm just making light of the comment that Froome's improvement trajectory was normal.

When you see Contador bonk he still looks good on a bike. Dope or no dope Contador is a talented cyclist. Whereas Froome as identified in this video looks terrible.

No way you could look at him and think one day he'll be a master climber. It's not so much that he can't hold Gerrans wheel it's just he looks terrible on a bike and looks to be a very poor climber.

Froome's rise is through oxygen drugs and transfusions. There's simply no other explanation.

People can explain away Wiggins with his IP results but Froome is a joke and it then raises question marks back on Wiggins.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
thehog said:
I know that. I'm just making light of the comment that Froome's improvement trajectory was normal.

When you see Contador bonk he still looks good on a bike. Dope or no dope Contador is a talented cyclist. Whereas Froome as identified in this video looks terrible.

No way you could look at him and think one day he'll be a master climber. It's not so much that he can't hold Gerrans wheel it's just he looks terrible on a bike and looks to be a very poor climber.

Froome's rise is through oxygen drugs and transfusions. There's simply no other explanation.

People can try but ultimately will fail when they explain away Wiggins with his IP results but Froome is a joke and it then raises question marks back on Wiggins.
Fixed free of charge.

Froome does not look like someone who belongs on a bike. Almost alien.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS