• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team. Thanks!

Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 466 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 20, 2012
6,320
0
0
Visit site
His new bike gives him 99% less drag so I dont see any problem here. Its all about the bike.

Little sidenote, when exactly was Conti a short TT specialist?

The only one in that field who is able to beat Chris Skywalker in a short TT is Lars Boom, when in top form.
 
Franklin said:
Let's wait and see. As I said, the gap is MUCH smaller than I expected, which tells me AC is really, really strong. Remember, he hasn't been close in a TT in many years. Last year AC got indeed trounced , so obviously the gap is smaller right now.

AC 8 seconds from the best TT specialist of that field is pretty shocking.

Froome is not a prologue specialist though.

I expected them to be about even. It's clear Contador will lose loads of time in the TDF TT unless Froome burns up all his energy before the third week.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
2
0
Visit site
LaFlorecita said:
Froome is not a prologue specialist though.
Sorry Flo, that won't fly either. If you go over cycling's history you will see GT winners doing extremely well in the prologue, so it's quite simply not strange at all.

Usually a prologue winner is not a prologue specialist but a TT specialist. Even Thierry Marie and Jelle Nijdam stood their own in long TT's and more specialistic riders than those two I can't think of.

And besides, the example I gave was won by a GT specialist (and so were the others in that top 10).

Here's another.

1: 11min 3sec
2 @ 17sec
3 @ 20sec
4 s.t.
5 @ 21sec
6 s.t.
7 @ 22sec
8 @ 27sec
9 @ 28sec
10 s.t.
11 s.t.

So no, I'm not believing in the virtusity of Froome. But this outcome is not nearly as crazy as you guys say it is. And indeed, I took pre epo years in a spread of ten years to find these examples.

Calm down... this is not proof of anything, nor is his shoe size, the color of his eyes or the size of his nose. there are much, much more worrisome things.
 
Mar 9, 2013
1,996
0
0
Visit site
LaFlorecita said:
Froome is not a prologue specialist though.

I expected them to be about even. It's clear Contador will lose loads of time in the TDF TT unless Froome burns up all his energy before the third week.

I may be wrong but did you not say anything under 15 would be good? I no someone said it it may not be you though. I think he rode ok what i meant by rival is compared to lat year surely this is good from him i mean he would been around 10th last year.
 
Jul 29, 2012
11,703
4
0
Visit site
I'm a contador fan but i don't get why some of you get upset.

Froome is absolutely hilarious and i'm sure he'll get caught so whatever. It's just a matter of time, meanwhile it's just too ****ing funny.

This dude almost made the forum crash cause of a dauphine 10 k ITT LMAO

You're gonna tell me that's not hilarous? :D
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
2
0
Visit site
Franklin said:
Sorry Flo, that won't fly either. If you go over cycling's history you will see GT winners doing extremely well in the prologue, so it's quite simply not strange at all.

Usually a prologue winner is not a prologue specialist but a TT specialist. Even Thierry Marie and Jelle Nijdam stood their own in long TT's and more specialistic riders than those two I can't think of.

And besides, the example I gave was won by a GT specialist (and so were the others in that top 10).

Here's another.

1: 11min 3sec
2 @ 17sec
3 @ 20sec
4 s.t.
5 @ 21sec
6 s.t.
7 @ 22sec
8 @ 27sec
9 @ 28sec
10 s.t.
11 s.t.

So no, I'm not believing in the virtusity of Froome. But this outcome is not nearly as crazy as you guys say it is. And indeed, I took pre epo years in a spread of ten years to find these examples.

Calm down... this is not proof of anything, nor is his shoe size, the color of his eyes or the size of his nose. there are much, much more worrisome things.

oh please. Froome is a clown on a bike and has never won a prologue before in his mutant life. Now he wins by 8 seconds over a Contador who is clearly stepping up his doping this year as well.
 
Franklin said:
Sorry Flo, that won't fly either. If you go over cycling's history you will see GT winners doing extremely well in the prologue, so it's quite simply not strange at all.

Usually a prologue winner is not a prologue specialist but a TT specialist. Even Thierry Marie and Jelle Nijdam stood their own in long TT's and more specialistic riders than those two I can't think of.

And besides, the example I gave was won by a GT specialist (and so were the others in that top 10).

Here's another.

1: 11min 3sec
2 @ 17sec
3 @ 20sec
4 s.t.
5 @ 21sec
6 s.t.
7 @ 22sec
8 @ 27sec
9 @ 28sec
10 s.t.
11 s.t.

So no, I'm not believing in the virtusity of Froome. But this outcome is not nearly as crazy as you guys say it is. And indeed, I took pre epo years in a spread of ten years to find these examples.

Calm down... this is not proof of anything, nor is his shoe size, the color of his eyes or the size of his nose. there are much, much more worrisome things.

What race is that?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Franklin has an interesting argument, yet i tend to agree with others that in a level doping field you,d expect contador to be closer to froome.
it appears not to be a level doping field.

the sceptic said:
Walsh is TANK91?
Thats hilarious.
 

TRENDING THREADS