Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 520 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Comparing performances from start of pro career to now, Froome clearly makes the bigger jump. Therefore, the argument would be, has more assistance, ie is a bigger doper.
Interesting how history truly repeats. Lance going all out in 1998 after Festina breaks, Froome after Lance breaks.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
King Boonen said:
Biggest doper? Sorry, but not buying that for a second. Berto and Nibs are likely on just as much of the good stuff as Froome.
I dont think so. Froomes transformation is the most ridiculous ever seen in cycling. Plus, his mutant Armstrong esque destroyer of fields climbing is special as well. He could be just a super responder of course, but I do believe Froome is juiced up more than the rest, or that sky have a special program.

I would like to see what the believers would say to this:

Even with a body of 3 to 5% fat, hold over 450 watts with 66 pounds, thirty minutes as he does, it's amazing. This means, in terms of "V02max" (which measures the motor displacement of a human), more than 94 ml / min / kg. Never seen in any sport. If Froome was such a prodigious talent and a physics engine, you would have known from an early age, not later on. Tests we have. This would be the most remarkable athlete and talented that cycling has ever known.
 
the sceptic said:
I dont think so. Froomes transformation is the most ridiculous ever seen in cycling. Plus, his mutant Armstrong esque destroyer of fields climbing is special as well. He could be just a super responder of course, but I do believe Froome is juiced up more than the rest, or that sky have a special program.

I would like to see what the believers would say to this:
I am more interested in reality than your strange beleifs:eek:
 
Dear Wiggo said:
Comparing performances from start of pro career to now, Froome clearly makes the bigger jump. Therefore, the argument would be, has more assistance, ie is a bigger doper.
Froome started in a cycling backwater with little to no support whereas Bertie and Nibs started in cycling powerhouses in a period when doping was the norm.

It's perfectly possible that crap Froome was clean Froome and his transformation is down to getting on a program or a better one. It's also perfectly possible Bertie and Nibs have been on high quality programs since they were juniors and we have no idea what their clean performances would be like.

People seem to want a new scapegoat, Froome is a great target because he seems to be a *** like LA and has made a huge step up, to allow them to ignore riders they like or at least not discuss it. To assume he is doing anything different to guys whose teams, managers and themselves have been ingrained in doping for several decades just seems wrong.
 

Justico

BANNED
Apr 22, 2014
106
0
0
the sceptic said:
Vayer is spot on as usual. The tour is much better off without the biggest doper.
hi groupie! happy that your lesser doppers now have a chance to win ? you little clown.
 
:confused:
King Boonen said:
Froome started in a cycling backwater with little to no support whereas Bertie and Nibs started in cycling powerhouses in a period when doping was the norm.

It's perfectly possible that crap Froome was clean Froome and his transformation is down to getting on a program or a better one. It's also perfectly possible Bertie and Nibs have been on high quality programs since they were juniors and we have no idea what their clean performances would be like.

People seem to want a new scapegoat, Froome is a great target because he seems to be a *** like LA and has made a huge step up, to allow them to ignore riders they like or at least not discuss it. To assume he is doing anything different to guys whose teams, managers and themselves have been ingrained in doping for several decades just seems wrong.
Whether you think he is doping or clean, I don't know where this *** like Armstrong comes from.
 
del1962 said:
Probably they knew the state Froome was in from the day before and half expected him not to complete the stage, so plan B was already implemented prior to the stage.
No doubt, but I'd still expect them to be a little bit disappointed for the guy if they actually liked him!
 
Aug 13, 2010
3,317
0
0
RownhamHill said:
Has G renewed? I missed that - the last thing I heard (in the Telegraph podcast I think) was that he was probably going to be on his way at the end of his contract.
I think the talk of moving on was part to help contract negotiations. Plan B was to come second in the Vuelta.
 
Tinman said:
Would like to share this hope. Too many pred cycles may do serious harm to the immune response. Too little cold resistance, etc. A prolonged bout of viruses, flu's and possibly worse ahead?
Froome's reaction to everything is to take more drugs.

But it's caught up with him. First with the TUE. And now in this race he looked broken. Never seen someone look so scared and regress into their childhood self. Froome will be popping painkillers all through his recovery.

Brailsford has talent in his squad. A good load of a British stars and Porte. He should be using them. I think around the a Kimmage interview Brailsford knew it was time to move the Dawg on. And by chance it's happened to him.

Froome just wants more and more drugs and it was going to just get out if hand, in fact it was already out of hand.
 
Aug 2, 2012
5,971
1
0
subtle

Justico said:
hi groupie! happy that your lesser doppers now have a chance to win ? you little clown.
subtle humour always trumps slapstick

and to those who point to 'history repeating itself'...............remember lance crashing and abandoning the year after winning the tdf?

being a part of a team with not always a clear leader............always

Mark L
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
thehog said:
Froome's reaction to everything is to take more drugs.

But it's caught up with him. First with the TUE. And now in this race he looked broken. Never seen someone look so scared and regress into their childhood self. Froome will be popping painkillers all through his recovery.

Brailsford has talent in his squad. A good load of a British stars and Porte. He should be using them. I think around the a Kimmage interview Brailsford knew it was time to move the Dawg on. And by chance it's happened to him.

Froome just wants more and more drugs and it was going to just get out if hand, in fact it was already out of hand.
Good post. I do think its time to release the Dawg into the wild too.

he is just too obvious, and seems impossible to control. He cant help himself to put in mutant attacks left and right, even when they are not needed. At least with Wiggins there were some doubts, and bot traffic was never highe. But with Dawg, everyone just laughs at him. Now that the french journalists are smelling blood, it would be hard to continue like this for many years.

Probably best to have him do a Wiggins, and then quietly fade away and hope people will forget about him.
 
thehog said:
Froome's reaction to everything is to take more drugs.

But it's caught up with him. First with the TUE. And now in this race he looked broken. Never seen someone look so scared and regress into their childhood self. Froome will be popping painkillers all through his recovery.

Brailsford has talent in his squad. A good load of a British stars and Porte. He should be using them. I think around the a Kimmage interview Brailsford knew it was time to move the Dawg on. And by chance it's happened to him.

Froome just wants more and more drugs and it was going to just get out if hand, in fact it was already out of hand.
Yes, it's pretty interesting that they dumped him as soon as he hit the deck. I think they had Eisel and Thomas with the underdawg Richie even before Froome crashed in stage 5. In the meantime Brailsford was eating popcorns watching in awe the Nibali show. I saw an interview with Portal after the stage and he was talking with suspect admiration of Nibali for about five minutes. I hope they don't plan to snatch him from Vino.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
King Boonen said:
Froome started in a cycling backwater with little to no support whereas Bertie and Nibs started in cycling powerhouses in a period when doping was the norm.
Exactly my point. Someone who could destroy the best riders in the world at 26 (2011 Vuelta) should have been destroying amateurs in the cycling backwater of South Africa, where noone had support, not just Froome.

On Barloworld, where he pretty much had free reign, that 94ml/min/kg should have been destroying the motorbikes, not hanging onto them.

He was at the UCI world cycling centre, too, keep in mind. They don't pay for that, it's a UCI initiative to globalise the sport. So please do not tell me he didn't have training, nutrition, fitting and recovery advice from early on in his career. UCI might be pathetic but the cycling centre do VO2max tests and the like, so I refuse to believe that's all just smoke and mirrors.

King Boonen said:
People seem to want a new scapegoat, Froome is a great target because he seems to be a *** like LA and has made a huge step up, to allow them to ignore riders they like or at least not discuss it. To assume he is doing anything different to guys whose teams, managers and themselves have been ingrained in doping for several decades just seems wrong.
I ain't people, and bear him far less - heck no ill will for his personality. I am not looking for a scapegoat, and don't have a rider I like that I want to hide by attacking Froome.

Noone said anything about Froome doing something different. Just the effect is greater, and probably because he's getting a bigger boost. There's plenty of doping products in SA - the marathoners are proof enough of that, and they don't even pay for it.

Imagine a clean rider, with an incredible engine. Imagine what they do from a young age, with their natural recovery (via natural HgH and testosterone levels and continuing physical development). Imagine what they say when they do a good race. When they have nothing to hide.

Froome is not what I imagine when I imagine that god of physiological perfection.

Instead I get a bunch of excuses that never quite hang together correctly, with a domineering girlfriend who won't let him finish sentences.
 
the sceptic said:
Good post. I do think its time to release the Dawg into the wild too.

he is just too obvious, and seems impossible to control. He cant help himself to put in mutant attacks left and right, even when they are not needed. At least with Wiggins there were some doubts, and bot traffic was never highe. But with Dawg, everyone just laughs at him. Now that the french journalists are smelling blood, it would be hard to continue like this for many years.

Probably best to have him do a Wiggins, and then quietly fade away and hope people will forget about him.
Brailsdord would already be feeling better about himself. The Dawg is Top 10 at Tour of Poland at best. But when you fill a guy with so many drugs to make him mutant then you have to lie too much.

Much easier the way things are now. Just let the Dawg slip out the back door and by the time G is getting Top 5s at the Tour everyone would have forgotten Froome.

Just to think, the Dawg was talking about 7 Tours in December and all clean!

The inevitable Cound meltdown will come as the horse she backed is no longer in the race.

“I’ve got my goals and personally where I want my career to go is to target the Tour,” he told The Times. “Not just this year but for the next six or seven years and each time to line up at the Tour ready to try and contend for the yellow jersey. I am driven by that goal.”
 
Dear Wiggo said:
??? I read the posts. Hypothetical argument or not, they still stink.



I find it funny that I responded intelligently, to a suggestion by you that sending Porte back to get energy bars is evidence of tactical nouse on the part of Froome, by pointing out this is de rigeur for a teams based cycling race. Only for you to say it is unintelligent. Right. Clearly I missed the unintelligent bit, perhaps you could quote it and highlight it in bold for me?

As for personal attack: we have had a number of Sky loving newbies come on here, and my sincere question of "when did you start watch watching cycling" was to determine if you
1. have watched for a while, and therefore were trolling (re Porte going back = tactical nouse) and should be added to the ignore list OR
2. have only just started, in which case some additional info to help you understand the reality of cycling racing may assist your ongoing posting.

If you see "when did you start watching cycling?" as a personal attack it was most definitely not my intent, and I am sorry you were offended.

I also apologise for expressing surprise that you seriously thought sending Porte back for food by the current GC leader of the TdF was proof of tactical nouse.
It is laughable that you think calling someone out in the manner you did is respectful. And step 2 is now insinuating I am a troll because you disagree with my opinion. Why should I respond to your arguments when you don't treat me in a civil manner? I have followed this board for years before deciding to post. I appreciated your answer about my hypothetical scenario, but feel free to add me to your ignore list.

I admitted to not having a thorough knowledge of Froome's every victory, so I choose two examples that jumped quickly to mind. Sending Porte back for food to try to avoid the time penalty seems like a cagey move. I'm glad it didn't work because of the spirit of the rule was definitely broken. And your first argument about dropping wiggins at Angliru proves my greater point. You assume that it was either orders from the team or selfishness on Froome's part. You don't think he has tactical acumen, so any instance he looks like showing some, you disregard it because it doesn't agree with your preconceived notion.
 
King Boonen said:
Froome started in a cycling backwater with little to no support whereas Bertie and Nibs started in cycling powerhouses in a period when doping was the norm.

It's perfectly possible that crap Froome was clean Froome and his transformation is down to getting on a program or a better one. It's also perfectly possible Bertie and Nibs have been on high quality programs since they were juniors and we have no idea what their clean performances would be like.

People seem to want a new scapegoat, Froome is a great target because he seems to be a *** like LA and has made a huge step up, to allow them to ignore riders they like or at least not discuss it. To assume he is doing anything different to guys whose teams, managers and themselves have been ingrained in doping for several decades just seems wrong.
+1. I agree with all of this.

Froome shouldn't get a free pass, but he also shouldn't be made the convenient scapegoat. Like with LA, that is the way to allow doping inperpetuity without facing the problem. Arguing the semantics of 'biggest doper' is a silly exercise but I don't believe Froome has any product or technique at his disposal that Contador doesn't.
 
Mr. Vayer, what do you really think of Christopher Froome?

Ouch, this reads like the "best of thehog" translated into French.

It really doesn't appear that the Dawg will be missed by many - at least the other dopers look like cyclists and are not "disgracieux" (no translation required) as described by Vayer.

Vayer doesn't say it in so many words, but leaves the impression that "Puff the magic dragon" won't be back in the mutant form that he has had since the 2011 Vuelta.
 
frenchfry said:
Mr. Vayer, what do you really think of Christopher Froome?

Ouch, this reads like the "best of thehog" translated into French.

It really doesn't appear that the Dawg will be missed by many - at least the other dopers look like cyclists and are not "disgracieux" (no translation required) as described by Vayer.

Vayer doesn't say it in so many words, but leaves the impression that "Puff the magic dragon" won't be back in the mutant form that he has had since the 2011 Vuelta.
He's right and I'm sure he has spoken to someone at Sky who gave him the 'nod' to say as much.

In a few months Froome will be the guy cycling will just pretend never existed.
 
Rollthedice said:
Interesting that at Eurosport Germany Andreas Schultz writes the following, based on Vayer

https://de.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/andreas-schulz/doping-sauberer-neuanfang-froome-120421796.html

Doping:Cleaner new beginning without Froome?
Neuanfang alright!

or more to the point we just need to move on and pretend there was never a Dawg.

Why Brailsford let it get this far is beyond me. A Wiggins/Porte/Thomas Sky would be appealing to all. A Dawg lead Sky was just absurd and everyone could see it. Even Skyfans could see it.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY