Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[happychappy]

Is weight gain the new weight loss? Or perhaps it's getting too risky to keep using whatever is making everyone Alien-thin.

 

[the sceptic]

Why are sky so eager to everyone that theyre adding weight?

 

[brilleaben]

Marginal gains are being replaced by massive gains.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Marginal gains are being replaced by massive gains.

margarine gains!!

 

[sittingbison]

margarine gains!!

Sounds like it's more like butter, lard and dripping pork crackle sandwiches washed down with a few pints of Guinness

 

[darwin553]

Really? I read this as more Froome couldn't be bothered putting in any effort in this race, so didn't bother. However saying this is a nothing race Froome doesn't care about defeats the purpose of paying him to turn up, so best say instead he feels a little under the weather.

You really think Sky's going to slap his wrists over his performances in the Pro Challenge given his potential to win the next three TdFs at least

 

[happychappy]

the next three TdFs at least

Thought it was five? Especially if he keeps gaining weight. No stopping him!

 

[sniper]

but credits to Froome and Sky.
i mean, this is mcquaid re-election year, that is: dope-all-you-want-cuz-there-aint-gonna-be-no-positives year.
only Froome and Sky seem to have properly understood this.

 

[Ferminal]

Yeh, because Kreuziger is a shadow of the man who once worked with Ferrari.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Yeah, only Sky are doping. Or at least they are doping much more than everyone else, and with much more evil intent of course.

They do have some super secret stuff too, it is distilled from the tears of orphans apparently. Makes Froome go like a rocket.

 

[happychappy]

Yeah, only Sky are doping. Or at least they are doping much more than everyone else, and with much more evil intent of course.

They do have some super secret stuff too, it is distilled from the tears of orphans apparently. Makes Froome go like a rocket.

I'm fine with Sky doping. Can't let the Spanish and Italians have it all their own way, much to the displeasure of the majority of "cycling fans" on this forum.

 

[JimmyFingers]

You can add Horner to the Spanish and Italians too. Apparently he's good in an interview

 

[happychappy]

You can add Horner to the Spanish and Italians too. Apparently he's good in an interview

But but! He always had the "talent", according to certain people. It's not that Sky are the only ones that are doping, it's that they are the only team made up entirely of riders with no "talent". Apparently.

And yeah, Richie Porte gives bad interviews. Practically proof Sky are the only team using performance enhancing drugs!

 

[JimmyFingers]

Ah yes, talent, ambiguous, complex, difficult to quantify and define yet usually a quick glance at a riders palmares suffices. Consistency is the key even though all that may prove is a rider is a consistently doping.

Still as long as they look good on a bike, attack multiple times on any given mountain and give funny interviews all is forgiven

 

[Ferminal]

Nope, anyone who dopes is evil and should be sent to Australia.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I'm evil and I dope, can I go?

 

[The Hitch]

Since you are so convinced that most of the forum that critisizes froome supports other riders doping, maybe you can give us a list of some names.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Go and read the Horner thread for a start. Basically reads like 'well he's probably doping but he's not as bad as Froome'

 

[The Hitch]

Since you are so convinced that most of the forum that critisizes froome supports other riders doping, maybe you can give us a list of some names.

 

[Alphabet]

Froome is unpopular, certainly, but even if he was as liked as say Vino is around here, he would come in for almost as much stick. I won't deny that a fair bit of the antagonism is sourced by the fact that his transformation has been utterly ludicrous, and his style on the bike equally so.

Generally I differentiate dopers firstly by personality, secondly by how naturally talented they appear to me, and finally, their riding style. Froome seems a genuinely nice person, but I refuse to be a part of something as ridiculous as this; therefore I'm not a fan of his.

 

[Alphabet]

Ah yes, talent, ambiguous, complex, difficult to quantify and define yet usually a quick glance at a riders palmares suffices. Consistency is the key even though all that may prove is a rider is a consistently doping.

Of course it is. Are you telling me somebody like Nairo Quintana, who dominated junior and amateur level races, is an entirely test tube baby chemical creation like the Dawg?

I believe Quintana to possess huge reserves of natural talent because I don't believe he would have been able to dope until he turned professional. His family were dirt poor, so much so that he couldn't even afford to enter races with payment up front. They probably barely had enough to feed and clothe themselves, spending thousands on PEDs would have been totally out of the question. As he was wildly successful before turning professional, it is entirely plausible that he was one of the greatest talents of his generation, and thus it is entirely plausible that in a clean world he would still be podiuming Grand Tours.

 

[gillan1969]

Ah yes, talent, ambiguous, complex, difficult to quantify and define yet usually a quick glance at a riders palmares suffices. Consistency is the key even though all that may prove is a rider is a consistently doping.

Still as long as they look good on a bike, attack multiple times on any given mountain and give funny interviews all is forgiven

jimmy

its taking the pi**
people can take talented riders doping because, all other things being equal, they would still be at the front end of the the peleton without it..

Froome on the other hand would be pushing teamate back into the race after giving up his wheel, or zig zagging up a climb

and...to add to his faults....he pointed to the sky logo when crossing the finish line after winning a stage of this year's tour...jesus..talk about a lack of class - you don't expect from a GC winner of a Grand Tour. These guys should transcend the sport...not grubbily point to sponsor's logo a la bunch sprinter. Sponsors should be lucky to be attached to him, not vice versa...might give some idea of his 'debt' though.....

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

jimmy

its taking the pi**
people can take talented riders doping because, all other things being equal, they would still be at the front end of the the peleton without it..

Froome on the other hand would be pushing teamate back into the race after giving up his wheel, or zig zagging up a climb

and...to add to his faults....he pointed to the sky logo when crossing the finish line after winning a stage of this year's tour...jesus..talk about a lack of class - you don't expect from a GC winner of a Grand Tour. These guys should transcend the sport...not grubbily point to sponsor's logo a la bunch sprinter. Sponsors should be lucky to be attached to him, not vice versa...might give some idea of his 'debt' though.....

I agree, pointing out the team sponsor is irrefutable proof of doping. All those riders who do so should be banned for life.

 

[Alphabet]

He never said that.

Why must every Sky thread devolve into petty one-upsmanship and snide comments? Can't we be friends?

 

[gillan1969]

I agree, pointing out the team sponsor is irrefutable proof of doping. All those riders who do so should be banned for life.

indeed, I never said that......

if you have a substantive and accurate response?