Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 258 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Red Lobster said:
:confused: Either I suddenly can't read English or there is something seriously wrong with this sentence.

I think it makes as much sense as the sentence to which I responded...
 
King Boonen said:
I doubt it's on the banned list.
However, it does come with some nasty side effects, for which corticosteroids are apparently one of the most effective preventors, which is why it's surprising if he doesn't claim one for those, since they commonly crop up in doping discussions and Froome would actually have a legit reason to use them.
 
Nov 26, 2012
3,216
0
0
the sceptic said:
i dont really care either way
if they release them that means Brailsford thinks its good for buisness to do so

have to agree on that. does anyone know the qualifications of DB? i bet an MBA is there.
 
martinvickers said:
No, it doesn't. It does nothing of the sort.

Attack the points on the merits. The reason why the points were made is irrelevant - bollxology of the first water, and a form of ad hominem.

As i said, address the points. the rest id bullsh!t.

Before Froomes patriotic speech on how proud british he was during the press conference yesterday, he also thanked for all the support he has from Britain. The only reason for that is because he doesnt feel any support elsewhere.

This you can see anywhere during the discussions in regard of this debate.
 
No_Balls said:
Before Froomes patriotic speech on how proud british he was during the press conference yesterday, he also thanked for all the support he has from Britain. The only reason for that is because he doesnt feel any support elsewhere.

This you can see anywhere during the discussions in regard of this debate.

I missed it but I can imagine it.

"Even though I was born in Kenya, grew up in South Africa, and live in Monaco, I am proud to enrich myself by claiming to be a member of the gullible British public. God save the Queen."

Funny how even Armstrong had plenty of suckers from around the world, or at least from English speaking countries. Froome's fanbase is pretty much denizens of a failed empire who appear to have self-esteem issues.
 
May 21, 2010
808
0
0
BroDeal said:
I missed it but I can imagine it.

"Even though I was born in Kenya, grew up in South Africa, and live in Monaco, I am proud to enrich myself by claiming to be a member of the gullible British public. God save the Queen."

Funny how even Armstrong had plenty of suckers from around the world, or at least from English speaking countries. Froome's fanbase is pretty much denizens of a failed empire who appear to have self-esteem issues.

Now tell us what you really think :D
 
Jul 15, 2013
60
0
0
BroDeal said:
I missed it but I can imagine it.

"Even though I was born in Kenya, grew up in South Africa, and live in Monaco, I am proud to enrich myself by claiming to be a member of the gullible British public. God save the Queen."

Exactly, oh how proud I am to be British!!
Froome to me feels about as British as Mo Farah. i.e. not very.
Oh yeah, and about as clean ;)
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
3
0
The Hitch said:
Read on twitter that Bailsford told French tv that Froome could have gone faster on Ventoux.

Dont know if its a wind up.

Hats of to Brailsford if that is true, pretty good trolling there
 
Jul 11, 2009
283
0
0
BroDeal said:
"Even though I was born in Kenya, grew up in South Africa, and live in Monaco, I am proud to enrich myself by claiming to be a member of the gullible British public. God save the Queen."

He really is suckering the Brits twice over, isn't he?

They're deluded into thinking he's one of them, and they're deluded into thinking he's clean.
 
Aug 6, 2009
1,901
1
0
Can I ask about the VOmax thing discussed a few pages back? Why would Froome having a VOmax of 94 explain anything? Doesn't EPO improve performance exactly because it improves VOmax?
 
Nov 29, 2009
267
2
9,030
Froome

Seems Mr Froome has a new set of rules for racing


"It was too dangerous for Contador do it like that." said Froome. "He attacked on the climb, attacked on the descent. It's too much,"
 
Cerberus said:
Can I ask about the VOmax thing discussed a few pages back? Why would Froome having a VOmax of 94 explain anything? Doesn't EPO improve performance exactly because it improves VOmax?
Factors affecting VO2 max

Cardiac output, pulmonary diffusion capacity, oxygen carrying capacity, and other peripheral limitations like muscle diffusion capacity, mitochondrial enzymes, and capillary density are all examples of VO2 max determinants. The body works as a system. If one of these factor is sub-par, then the whole system loses its normal capacity to function properly.
 
Cerberus said:
Can I ask about the VOmax thing discussed a few pages back? Why would Froome having a VOmax of 94 explain anything? Doesn't EPO improve performance exactly because it improves VOmax?

Because VO2Max only increases by so much due to training. Figures of 25-30% are often given. Froome with minimal training would still have a formidable VO2Max for an amateur or a young pro. He would have dominated amateur racing at a young age right from the beginning.

This is why a rider like LeMond was able to beat full grown U.S. pros when he was a junior, and that was being handicapped with the requirement to use junior gearing. As another example, Lemond rode l'Etape due Tour a few years ago because his son was riding it. He was fat and old. He obviously was not doing much training. He still finished in the top 10%. That is against amateurs who train hard for what is a long, difficult event. LeMond's results in those examples did not come from super secret training methods. It came from being vastly physiologically superior to the average amateur.

Anyone who has done much racing, bike, running, whatever, has encountered people who are--depressingly--superior to everyone else. It does not matter what type of training you do and how hard you do it. The talent difference is so large they beat people while barely trying.

There is no possible way that Froome spent his early years as an unremarkable amateur and early pro then suddenly discovered he had the potential to peak at a VO2Max of 90+. Impossible. He is doping.
 
Aug 6, 2009
1,901
1
0
BroDeal said:
Because VO2Max only increases by so much due to training. Figures of 25-30% are often given. Froome with minimal training would still have a formidable VO2Max for an amateur or a young pro. He would have dominated amateur racing at a young age right from the beginning.

This is why a rider like LeMond was able to beat full grown U.S. pros when he was a junior, and that was being handicapped with the requirement to use junior gearing. As another example, Lemond rode l'Etape due Tour a few years ago because his son was riding it. He was fat and old. He obviously was not doing much training. He still finished in the top 10%. That is against amateurs who train hard for what is a long, difficult event. LeMond's results in those examples did not come from super secret training methods. It came from being vastly physiologically superior to the average amateur.

Anyone who has done much racing, bike, running, whatever, has encountered people who are--depressingly--superior to everyone else. It does not matter what type of training you do and how hard you do it. The talent difference is so large they beat people while barely trying.

There is no possible way that Froome spent his early years as an unremarkable amateur and early pro then suddenly discovered he had the potential to peak at a VO2Max of 90+. Impossible. He is doping.
But this is basically the argument about an implausible performance jump that many including myself have been making. If Froome was shown to have a very high VOmax it wouldn't and shouldn't convince anybody he was clean because that high VOmax could be the result of doping, right?
 
Deagol said:
LOL, attacking out of the saddle creates too much drag on a climb? someone should have told that to Contador..
Climbing out of the saddle DOES create more drag than climbing seated. That should be intuitively obvious to you. And the pedaling stroke is more efficient when seated. But both those factors are overwhelmed by the additional raw power that is available from the system as a whole (quads, glutes, lats and the rest) when out of the saddle.

When was the last time you saw a sprinter charging the finish in a field sprint ...while seated?

That Contador climbs faster out of the saddle tells you the his climbing speed is limited by the max output of his engine, not by the amount of fuel available for his engine to burn. Efficiency is subordinated to sheer power.

Why does no one time trial while out of the saddle? Because in that discipline, power is subordinate to efficiency.