Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[airstream]

think he won the u23 world tt. then Cunego pumped him in the final chrono of the Tour to whin the white jersey, and that is ALL about recovery doping

It seems like Gerolsteiner was one of several clean teams in the 2007 Tour. And every rider understoond how much he cost without doping. Everyone made his choice after that. Kohl and Schumacher were caught a bit later. All the rest riders couldn't find themselves since then. Honestly, I think it's possible to go crazy for some elite GC, if he decided to come back and race clean. He is doomed to hit the wall - outside of top-10, 100%. So only Contador and Basso — rich riders with significant authority and scope —could return on comparable to their best level, because they knew they could afford to take a risk yes to a lesser extent than earlier, though. Directors and sponsor don't care about doping. Riders are big business projects. In fact riders like Contador, Froome and Wiggins do not belong themselves. Too many people are tied on them financially.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I remember a conversation at the start of last season based on a Vaughters quote along the lines of TD being in top echelon, an immense natural specimen. I said he would do nothing special and a couple of obvious candidates said he would go very well.

JV also saodi Dekker was going to lose 4kg - 2kg of unnecessary muscle and 2kg of fat, while increasing his absolute power.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Not saying I don't believe in the bilharzia story, It probably is true. It is just that there are no other examples to draw a comparison upon. It is just so convenient. Whereas there are dozens and more examples of dope making a rider something he is not.

Hence the problem drawing concrete conclusions from it, it just clouds the issue. It does make his transformation plausible if you believe it, but obviously the easier conclusion is that it comes from drug use.

 

[blackcat]

JV also saodi Dekker was going to lose 4kg - 2kg of unnecessary muscle and 2kg of fat, while increasing his absolute power.

hhehehehehe

 

[Semper Fidelis]

hhehehehehe

JV on Dekker = that all makes sense.

 

[Galic Ho]

I have a question to our clinics regulars Fearless Greg Lemond, thehog and other critics. What's your version what made Froome let's say one of the best GC's? Doping from the 22th century?

There is your answer. 22nd century? If that is the case then his medical practices are 100 years ahead of the rest of the pack who are using 21st century drugs. That would explain it clearly

Look I get yours and Blackcat's points but I don't think they matter. At the end of the day, Froome clean is still garbage. BC saying he has 'talent' is a fallacy at best. He's doped. Contador was ALWAYS top notch stuff. Froome get's such a boost because his natural un-doped parameters are crap and allow him a tonne of wiggle room. JV explained all this quite well last year.

He gets his year, he goes back to mediocrity. Just like Wiggins is having to face reality, that rocking the BioPassport forever when you're naturally just a meh rider ain't gonna sit well with the establishment. There is a reason Evans, Nibali, Contador. Purito and Valverde are all still going gangbusters; they've always had it. Sure they get a boost, but the level of boost is minimal compared to Froome. Racing like they did in the 80s, they'd all be up there. Froome on the other hand would be pack fodder at best. That ain't 'talent' no matter how BC spins it and you'll find most won't buy your version of events.

That's just how it is. But by all means, continue to dispute this; just putting in my two cents.

 

[wansteadimp]

There is your answer. 22nd century? If that is the case then his medical practices are 100 years ahead of the rest of the pack who are using 21st century drugs. That would explain it clearly

Look I get yours and Blackcat's points but I don't think they matter. At the end of the day, Froome clean is still garbage. BC saying he has 'talent' is a fallacy at best. He's doped. Contador was ALWAYS top notch stuff. Froome get's such a boost because his natural un-doped parameters are crap and allow him a tonne of wiggle room. JV explained all this quite well last year.

He gets his year, he goes back to mediocrity. Just like Wiggins is having to face reality, that rocking the BioPassport forever when you're naturally just a meh rider ain't gonna sit well with the establishment. There is a reason Evans, Nibali, Contador. Purito and Valverde are all still going gangbusters; they've always had it. Sure they get a boost, but the level of boost is minimal compared to Froome. Racing like they did in the 80s, they'd all be up there. Froome on the other hand would be pack fodder at best. That ain't 'talent' no matter how BC spins it and you'll find most won't buy your version of events.

That's just how it is. But by all means, continue to dispute this; just putting in my two cents.

But how do you know that the likes of Contador, Evans etc weren't on it from such an early age that they have no untainted history, compared to Froome coming from an unsophisticated (in doping terms) background where his leap in improvement stands out.

If they've been doped from the start we have no idea what their actual talent level is.

 

[JimmyFingers]

snip

'rider x is a doper but Froome/Wiggins/Porte/Sky/any Brit rider are so much worse because rider x has always doped and has a solid palmares and 'progression' while Froome/Wiggins/Porte/Sky/any Brit rider have just started doping so have got better over night. Rider x is a doper but I prefer them to Froome/Wiggins/Porte/Sky/any Brit rider because at least they're exciting to watch and are much more naturally talented'

Posted this (or words to that effect) in the Nibali thread and got deleted for being OT (fair enough Eshnar ) but here it seems strangely approrpiate, end even prescient.....

 

[blackcat]

galic, contador was always doped. s how does that fit your theory?

 

[JimmyFingers]

Natural talent. It's in the blood, he sweats it slowly out when he rides and when it's in sunlight it shines. Like those vampires in dem Twilight films

 

[blackcat]

But how do you know that the likes of Contador, Evans etc weren't on it from such an early age that they have no untainted history, compared to Froome coming from an unsophisticated (in doping terms) background where his leap in improvement stands out.

If they've been doped from the start we have no idea what their actual talent level is.

indeed. like my post after yours, just above ^

but think even froome is on a low dose, non-O2 vector program from the start. they all are

 

[JimmyFingers]

BC I admire your consistency. You and Bennotti.

Obviously I disagree on a broad basis (although as time goes on I'm coming round) but at least you don't play favourites.

 

[Parrulo]

galic, contador was always doped. s how does that fit your theory?

Was he doped when he was crushing everyone on the climbs right from his first race as 14 year old on his brothers bike?

Thats how we know this guys were talented, Contador was already hyped as the next big thing as an 18 year old because he was by far the best climber in spain at the time.

 

[JimmyFingers]

So being good at 18 buys a free doping pass for life?

 

[Parrulo]

So being good at 18 buys a free doping pass for life?

Obviously not, but there is a difference between an improved race horse and a donkey turned into a race horse.

 

[blackcat]

Was he doped when he was crushing everyone on the climbs right from his first race as 14 year old on his brothers bike?

Thats how we know this guys were talented, Contador was already hyped as the next big thing as an 18 year old because he was by far the best climber in spain at the time.

and he won the u23 chrono as an 18yo.

this is not the point.

Contador is phenomenally talented. i doubt contest this. oscar sevilla and genevieve jeanson started doping as 16 yos. i dont see contador being different.

i dont see froome being different. his lag was because he did not take a traditional pathway, and he is being excoriated for it.

want to see a GC fraud. Sir Bradley. Could never climb a lick.

 

[blackcat]

Was he doped when he was crushing everyone on the climbs right from his first race as 14 year old on his brothers bike?

Thats how we know this guys were talented, Contador was already hyped as the next big thing as an 18 year old because he was by far the best climber in spain at the time.

anf the catchment (pool of athletes) for 14 yos in a regional spain race, aint exactly the pro sphere is it. dare say, for each rider in the peloton, there is a similar tale.

 

[wansteadimp]

Was he doped when he was crushing everyone on the climbs right from his first race as 14 year old on his brothers bike?

Thats how we know this guys were talented, Contador was already hyped as the next big thing as an 18 year old because he was by far the best climber in spain at the time.

They wouldn't be close to going pro if they weren't winning age group races in their own country at 14. There is a basic level that is required. Froome wasn't in a position to race competitively at that age so we don't know how good he was at that age.

It wouldn't surprise me if some people were on the dope by 18, I think there were amateurs dabbling in epo that died at that sort of age.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

They wouldn't be close to going pro if they weren't winning age group races in their own country at 14. There is a basic level that is required. Froome wasn't in a position to race competitively at that age so we don't know how good he was at that age.

It wouldn't surprise me if some people were on the dope by 18, I think there were amateurs dabbling in epo that died at that sort of age.

I am guessing many professional riders were winning most of their races at age 14.

 

[Miburo]

Obviously not, but there is a difference between an improved race horse and a donkey turned into a race horse.

Lucky donkey

 

[JimmyFingers]

Obviously not, but there is a difference between an improved race horse and a donkey turned into a race horse.

But that is unquantifiable, too many variables, too many unknowns. There's no degrees of cheating, you're cheat or not. Trying to grade cheating levels by imagined 'natural talent' stinks of personal bias more than anything; I don't like a rider, he's a dirty cheat, part of an evil team and global conspiracy, and really, really boring to watch. But this rider cheats too, but I like this one more, so I'll go easy on him and talk about progression, youth results and natural talent.

If you dope you dope, if you don't you don't, there is no middle ground.

BTW nothing against Contador, I think he's a stylish and entertaining rider. I do think he has doped in the past, I hope he's not at it at the moment.

 

[Miburo]

But that is unquantifiable, too many variables, too many unknowns. There's no degrees of cheating, you're cheat or not. Trying to grade cheating levels by imagined 'natural talent' stinks of personal bias more than anything; I don't like a rider, he's a dirty cheat, part of an evil team and global conspiracy, and really, really boring to watch. But this rider cheats too, but I like this one more, so I'll go easy on him and talk about progression, youth results and natural talent.

If you dope you dope, if you don't you don't, there is no middle ground.

BTW nothing against Contador, I think he's a stylish and entertaining rider. I do think he has doped in the past, I hope he's not at it at the moment.

I hope he is otherwise it'll be a boring tour

 

[Zam_Olyas]

If we cannot talk about progression because of doping that means we cant talk about previous results of most riders.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I hope he is otherwise it'll be a boring tour

Fair play Miburo, you got a laugh from me

 

[blackcat]

But that is unquantifiable, too many variables, too many unknowns. There's no degrees of cheating, you're cheat or not. Trying to grade cheating levels by imagined 'natural talent' stinks of personal bias more than anything; I don't like a rider, he's a dirty cheat, part of an evil team and global conspiracy, and really, really boring to watch. But this rider cheats too, but I like this one more, so I'll go easy on him and talk about progression, youth results and natural talent.

If you dope you dope, if you don't you don't, there is no middle ground.

BTW nothing against Contador, I think he's a stylish and entertaining rider. I do think he has doped in the past, I hope he's not at it at the moment.

this is my thoughts, except the final caveat. resigned to all at the pointy end plungingg the hypodermic and mainlining transfusions. just dont do a tommy simpson please fellas. stay gold.