Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 530 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
42x16ss said:
Excellent, better let the UCI know that they don't need to bother with anti doping anymore. Might as well disband WADA too while we're at it. Look at the amount of AAF's and bio-passport cases that the UCI has been willing to process then say that again. :rolleyes:
Antidoping is very necessary, it is maybe the only way.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
Taxus4a said:
I have said i wouldnt be surprised if that, as a lot of riders of his generation: Mollema, Gesink, Urán, etc..,
If you read the article, I talk about that, and there is a post in 2009 of another forum member, an important one in Spain, that talk about Froome as posible whrite yersey in 2009 Giro de Italia.
My article is full or new, interviws and article about Froome in those years, it seems as if you didnt read all of that.
I always argument or prof what I said, so maybe is another people who should shut up.
Is that all? I love it when people dig in Froomes history to come up with plausible results. What about that one time he came 2nd to Mathias Frank?
 
sittingbison said:
Taxus4a, just stop please. This is beyond ridiculous even for the Clinic, and indeed has been covered at length approximately ten times already.

Engage in a genuine conversation....or not. The choice is yours

cheers
bison
Genuine conversation with people that dont argue, just live in his own world?? I try for that. I dont have the proof, and I am not aseverating that, ok?? I said that is possible, and you dont have any proof of the contrary... when you rely in the word of some people, becouse sometimes that word has been proved real, you rely that people for another things, and if the reallity is ok with that words, I rely on.
I dont know your experience in cycling, I dont Know why you Know more than Hamilton, or Lemond or Walsh, i dont know what you know really about cycling world, but you look to have little idea. Sao, please, first of all, RESPECT.
I know doping is not the factor that set the pace today in the peloton... You czan believe that or not,( I always said, in my opinion, I think, but I put clear, that really, I know that, just to clearify, no more) that means no doping?, of course no, doping will be always there, always someone, but the difference with 10 years ago is big. Today I say hello to Garcelli, he is now a director, he is from another generation, with doping, but that doenst mean now his team dope, it is something that maybe you can understand.

You, anyway, allow people to aseverate that people is a doper without any evidennce or proof, it is crazy.

And now, you can banned me, I dont know if I have broken amny rules, I would say no, but I am sure I am writting with my concience, aqnd that is more important that to be in a forum.

cheers!
 
the sceptic said:
Is that all? I love it when people dig in Froomes history to come up with plausible results. What about that one time he came 2nd to Mathias Frank?
what tou call plausible result dont mean always the capacity of a rider. it is not just to win. sometime to do thrird in some circusntances, it is more importante that 4 victories to avaluate a rider for a GC.
Some people said, he only won Giro del Capo...that race wanst important, that dont show is level, he showed his level a lot of times.
But, for instance, Rafaa Chitioui has more potential that Tony Martin, but you need more than potential to be up there.
As well to win a lot with 21 years as Gesink doent mean you will be a super rider.
aqt that age Gesink has a lot of more experience that Froome.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Taxus4a said:
I am not an sky fan, I say today there is not doping in pro cycling, and I know that, it is not something that I think, it is something I know, but it is something impossible to prove totally. Of course, it would be always some people who is going to take risks, and maybe some teams could do somthing in an small scale. I dont know, I hope no, but no more.
Taxus4a said:
I know doping is not the factor that set the pace today in the peloton... You czan believe that or not,( I always said, in my opinion, I think, but I put clear, that really, I know that, just to clearify, no more) that means no doping?, of course no, doping will be always there, always someone
Perhaps if you slowed down a bit, and tried to communicate a bit more clearly, your posts would not be confused with trolling.

Using hyperbole rarely works.

As a suggestion - if I may? - post less in each post, and aim to make your message clear, and say what you think, without exaggerating the content for effect. It's unsuccessful when a native English speaker does it. When someone who is struggling with the language does it, IMO, it only exacerbates the problems and dilutes the message.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
Taxus4a said:
what tou call plausible result dont mean always the capacity of a rider. it is not just to win. sometime to do thrird in some circusntances, it is more importante that 4 victories to avaluate a rider for a GC.
Some people said, he only won Giro del Capo...that race wanst important, that dont show is level, he showed his level a lot of times.
But, for instance, Rafaa Chitioui has more potential that Tony Martin, but you need more than potential to be up there.
As well to win a lot with 21 years as Gesink doent mean you will be a super rider.
aqt that age Gesink has a lot of more experience that Froome.
I see, Froome sucking is a better way to predict future GT wins than if he hadnt sucked.
 
Apr 4, 2009
176
0
8,830
Taxus4a said:
I have said i wouldnt be surprised if that, as a lot of riders of his generation: Mollema, Gesink, Urán, etc..,
If you read the article, I talk about that, and there is a post in 2009 of another forum member, an important one in Spain, that talk about Froome as posible whrite yersey in 2009 Giro de Italia.
My article is full or new, interviws and article about Froome in those years, it seems as if you didnt read all of that.
I always argument or prof what I said, so maybe is another people who should shut up.
Froome has always been **** to mediocre at best on a bike. From his years in South Africa even. He had 2 ok results and I give him that back home but that stage is far from European PT status.

To me, Froomes rise to dominance is the same story as Lance except its from South Africa and not USA and most of South African cycling needs something to hang onto and they all as blind as the Lance fanboys back in the day.
 
Sep 18, 2013
146
0
0
The major elephant in the room with Froome is that to be capable of his Ventoux, Ax le Trois performances he needs a spectacular VO2 max AND a spectacular efficiency. These are genetic characteristics that, while not at their peak, will be very apparent from an early age. In short, he should have been winning regularly from the beginning of his career. Bilharzia is an attempt to explain this but the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment have been obfuscated so much to cover the real truth.
 
nomapnocompass said:
The major elephant in the room with Froome is that to be capable of his Ventoux, Ax le Trois performances he needs a spectacular VO2 max AND a spectacular efficiency. These are genetic characteristics that, while not at their peak, will be very apparent from an early age. In short, he should have been winning regularly from the beginning of his career. Bilharzia is an attempt to explain this but the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment have been obfuscated so much to cover the real truth.
good post...
 
Jan 29, 2010
502
0
0
The Hitch said:
Taxus says he knew in 2010 Froome would be the greatest rider ever.

I know it sounds ridiculous but I am willing to hear him out.

Go on Taxus. Show us a post of yours from before Vuelta 2011 where you had Froome as a future GT winners.

Put up or shut up.
I can't recall who it was, but I do recall someone posting here prior to the 2011 Vuelta, going on about Froome.

At the time I didn't even know the name, so I was confusing as to why anyone could be so excited about some domestique I'd never heard of.

I don't think it was Taxus, but I will say that at least one person here (they might not be here anymore) had big expectations for Froome before his coming out party.
 
May 12, 2013
78
0
0
for what its worth, I know that when BC announced that "first british rider to win tour in 5 years" objective they had three potential candidates in mind (according to shane sutton via a reliable mutual friend), those being kennaugh, froome, and one other who I can't recall... wiggins was not one of them as per my recollection.

dunno how they came up with that though... all seems rather fanciful... maybe they just figured they could come up with a great cover story for froome doping due to his unconventional cycling past
 
nomapnocompass said:
The major elephant in the room with Froome is that to be capable of his Ventoux, Ax le Trois performances he needs a spectacular VO2 max AND a spectacular efficiency. These are genetic characteristics that, while not at their peak, will be very apparent from an early age. In short, he should have been winning regularly from the beginning of his career. Bilharzia is an attempt to explain this but the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment have been obfuscated so much to cover the real truth.
This basically - firstly I don't think you can win the tour clean, but aside from that, even if we were to believe froome won it clean, his story makes no sense whatsoever...because if clean, he is one of the most talented riders ever seen, with a physiology maybe never before seen in cycling.
If that was the case, for argument sake, then he should have done far far more than he did prior to THAT Vuelta. Even if we went with the better tactics nonsense, he should still have shown moments of brilliance - the simple fact is that you have to give him every benefit of the doubt imaginable to even contemplate him being clean - yet the simplest explanation is one that fits like a glove, timeframe, motive, desperation.

People will play the bilharzia card - but amongst many holes in that story, his blood values evidently weren't effected - and froome and cound stuttered and stammered their way around that question with Kimmage.

Having said all that, sky on the whole are very far removed from the robots we saw in 2012.

Cortisone abuse is effective...but it does have a shelf life whereby it loses its benefit and riders' bodies break down - 18-24mths
 
Oct 30, 2009
527
0
0
WinterRider said:
I can't recall who it was, but I do recall someone posting here prior to the 2011 Vuelta, going on about Froome.

At the time I didn't even know the name, so I was confusing as to why anyone could be so excited about some domestique I'd never heard of.

I don't think it was Taxus, but I will say that at least one person here (they might not be here anymore) had big expectations for Froome before his coming out party.
I totally predicted his GT-destroyer future back in 2009. Well, not quite:

mortand said:
EBH, Cummings, Froome and Lövkvist for just about every TT-focused shorter stage race with some hills thrown in hither and thither.
Funny thing, for such an obvious superstar, to not be mentioned once in the Sky thread - besides my random shot in the dark.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=107489#post107489
 
R0BL4MBT0N said:
for what its worth, I know that when BC announced that "first british rider to win tour in 5 years" objective they had three potential candidates in mind (according to shane sutton via a reliable mutual friend), those being kennaugh, froome, and one other who I can't recall... wiggins was not one of them as per my recollection.

dunno how they came up with that though... all seems rather fanciful... maybe they just figured they could come up with a great cover story for froome doping due to his unconventional cycling past
Wiggins was one of them. Kennaugh was the main one. Froome was barely mentioned as a footnote. There was more talk of Geraint Thomas becoming a GT contender than there was of apparently the greatest talent since Merckx (Vos excepted, obviously).
 
As much as I hate to admit it as I don't really believe much in Froome, I know I have a quote in a magazine from somewhere in which someone from SKY had high hopes for Froome becoming a top GT rider as he had all the qualities. Don't remember whom it was but wasn't Bralisford. This was when he was first signed by SKY. Maybe it was just talk to make Froome out to be more than he was but if I can locate the copy, I will post it up sometime.
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,273
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Wiggins was one of them. Kennaugh was the main one. Froome was barely mentioned as a footnote. There was more talk of Geraint Thomas becoming a GT contender than there was of apparently the greatest talent since Merckx (Vos excepted, obviously).
That is my understanding as well. Froome was not one of the ones marked for possible future greatness.
 
Oct 30, 2009
527
0
0
pmcg76 said:
As much as I hate to admit it as I don't really believe much in Froome, I know I have a quote in a magazine from somewhere in which someone from SKY had high hopes for Froome becoming a top GT rider as he had all the qualities. Don't remember whom it was but wasn't Bralisford. This was when he was first signed by SKY. Maybe it was just talk to make Froome out to be more than he was but if I can locate the copy, I will post it up sometime.
Not quite what you're looking for, but still an inspiring quote. Cycle Sport Magazine June 2010, page 44:

Bradley Wiggins said:
"It's like setting a benchmark, and the next mark after me could be Pete Kennaugh. Long-term, the team is looking at that. If a Brit is going to win a Tour, aside from me, Pete's probably the next one. I can't think of anyone else apart from Dan Martin, who's changed his nationality, even though he's about as Irish as I am".
Michael Barry probably weren't seeing much of a superstar in Froome either. In Cycle Sport Magazine March 2010, page 43 he's asked who he thinks will surprise:

Michael Barry said:
"Tommy. Thomas Löfkvist.[...]
Another rider I think will improve is Morris Possoni[...]"
To be fair, Froomey is mentioned in the March 2010 issue on page 36 as a rider who adds depth for the Ardennes Classics. That's something, I suppose.
 
mortand said:
Not quite what you're looking for, but still an inspiring quote. Cycle Sport Magazine June 2010, page 44:



Michael Barry probably weren't seeing much of a superstar in Froome either. In Cycle Sport Magazine March 2010, page 43 he's asked who he thinks will surprise:



To be fair, Froomey is mentioned in the March 2010 issue on page 36 as a rider who adds depth for the Ardennes Classics. That's something, I suppose.
No, wasn't any of those. Think it ProCycling magazine circa when SKY were being first formed and it was a coach/manager, not a fellow rider.
 
Oct 30, 2009
527
0
0
I found something. Procycling January 2010, page 55:

"Froome was born in Kenya, brought up in South Africa and now has British citizenship thanks to his grandparents. Another climber out of the Barloworld stable, much is expected of the young rider and Sky will hope that he blossoms under their tutelage into a grand tour contender
No specific mention of who has these expectations, though. It is a presentation of the riders, titled 'Leaders of the Pack'.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Is it just me, or are they going through their list of riders and slowly mentioning each one, one by one, as someone with potential?

Seems like a scattergun approach rather than a confident, measured analysis of a rider based on VO2 max or exhaustion step test physiological testing?
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
1
0
nomapnocompass said:
The major elephant in the room with Froome is that to be capable of his Ventoux, Ax le Trois performances he needs a spectacular VO2 max AND a spectacular efficiency. These are genetic characteristics that, while not at their peak, will be very apparent from an early age. In short, he should have been winning regularly from the beginning of his career. Bilharzia is an attempt to explain this but the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment have been obfuscated so much to cover the real truth.
A concise and accurate summary of the case against Froome.
 
Did some searching, posted back in 2009:

blackcat said:
before this year, no one would have thought Brailsford was in sound mind and body when he said he would have a British winner in 5 years.

OK, it may have been PR, to get traction in the British media.

Wiggins opened a few eyes, but he is kidding himself if he thinks he can win.

They had targeted Froome because they have obviously tested him. He was mid 30's in the first chono in the Tour last year, and about 23rd in the final chrono. Not too bad. But basically he won two stages of Regioni in 2007, a mate of Robbie Hunter's, second in the world B World champs, after falling he was mid field in the world u23 tt champs.

If he wins the Tour I would love to get on what they put him on.

I don't think Martin is as good as Vaughters hyped. Allright in the baby Giro in 2006 when he was about 20. Did ok at Pomme Marseille. But nothing to indicate he can win.

I think G Thomas could be the big one. He is 70 kg. Put him on the program that Wiggins was on this year. I reckon he will be a future team leader.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY