Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Well, i wouldn't bet on the second part:he's an aggressive rider after all,good climber,TT-er. What is different in supporting him versus other riders?Why is worse then others,given that those,are also"dangerous medical experiments"?

Yes, yes... all true.
Imagine Froome was Kreuziger and Tinkov was Brailsford... It´s all so absurd in this place.

 

[peloton]

Potentially yes, but the key being not all. It's fair to say that a number will no doubt be influenced by the fact that Froome is British and thus believe he is clean.

Equally there will be a number of British members who think Froome is a cheat. The same pattern will be there for Contador, Nibali and the other big names. It just appears more prevalent for Froome cause he is the one with the active thread.

The big difference of course is, that no one is claiming Contador or Nibali to be clean.
And Nibali never tested positive either

 

[laurel1969]

They are all doper cheats...Froome, Contador, Valverde, possibly Nibali, probably Wiggins.Why favour one doper over another? Doesn't make sense to me regardless of their alledged (dope enabled) "attacking panache", "style" or whatever other bullsh1t that is clearly intended to mitigate their doping. A cheat is a cheat.

I personally don't warm to Froome, but that's because I've never met a nice South African. But that's got FA to do with cycling.

 

[sniper]

Pretty much sums up the applied double standards in the clinic...
I said it before: The clinic is not anti-doping. It is "your doper is worse than mine" * or the extreme posters "everybody dopes, everybody is corrupt, everybody is to blame".

and as others have said before, no sense at all to define the clinic as one coherent unit with one coherent opinion.
everybody's here for his own reasons.
some reasons sicker than others.
and a given poster's view on (anti)doping may correspond to that of several other posters, but will hardly ever be 100% identical.
just one example: among many of the posters who agree froome dopes, there is still disagreement on several other issues, e.g. whether lemond doped or not, whether JV is a blatant hypocrit or not, etc.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

and as others have said before, no sense at all to define the clinic as one coherent unit with one coherent opinion.
everybody's here for his own reasons.
some reasons sicker than others.
and a given poster's view on (anti)doping may correspond to that of several other posters, but will hardly ever be 100% identical.
just one example: among many of the posters who agree froome dopes, there is still disagreement on several other issues, e.g. whether lemond doped or not, whether JV is a blatant hypocrit or not, etc.

Yeah true. I generalized a lot... You know, the good informative well reasond posts with different opinions are difficult to extract from all the crap and personal attacks in between...

 

[No_Balls]

Pretty much sums up the applied double standards in the clinic...
I said it before: The clinic is not anti-doping. It is "your doper is worse than mine" * or the extreme posters "everybody dopes, everybody is corrupt, everybody is to blame".

You forgot the third category: "Its some of the riders fault only. Have them banned and the sport will flourish again. Long live our noble governing bodies, the flawless bio passport system and all Hail Cookson. The savior of cycling. He is tough. Harsh on cheaters. Incorruptable."

* BTW, I belong to the first group. Since nobody hates the über doper Horner, I take the major part on this. For some kind of clinic balance.

There is no need to hate a rider/riders. I dont do that with Froome but i do hate that he symbolizes what is wrong with the sport. Horner symbolizes the other end of that spectrum. Do not hate the players, hate the game.

Every sport needs heroes we can believe in and cycling has mocked this phrase for a long time. Hence why the irrational support of riders despite them being involved in what is problem with the sport/game.

Why we wanted to believe in Lance but got screwed. And in order to not get fooled again we cant believe in Froome. Horner is a different story since people probably want to believe in a man who shows that age does not matter in the pinnacle of a sport. It is the Lance myth all over and people wants to believe in a good story - everybody ages and does not want to hear they have lost it after their thirties.

Besides, i do not think Froomes book helped him one bit either as far as his persona occurs. That was probably a deal breaker for many.

 

[del1962]

You forgot the third category: "Its some of the riders fault only. Have them banned and the sport will flourish again. Long live our noble governing bodies, the flawless bio passport system and all Hail Cookson. The savior of cycling. He is tough. Harsh on cheaters. Incorruptable."



There is no need to hate a rider/riders. I dont do that with Froome but i do hate that he symbolizes what is wrong with the sport. Horner symbolizes the other end of that spectrum. Do not hate the players, hate the game.

Every sport needs heroes we can believe in and cycling has mocked this phrase for a long time. Hence why the irrational support of riders despite them being involved in what is problem with the sport/game.

Why we wanted to believe in Lance but got screwed. And in order to not get fooled again we cant believe in Froome. Horner is a different story since people probably want to believe in a man who shows that age does not matter in the pinnacle of a sport. It is the Lance myth all over and people wants to believe in a good story - everybody ages and does not want to hear they have lost it after their thirties.

Besides, i do not think Froomes book helped him one bit either as far as his persona occurs. That was probably a deal breaker for many.

Spare me the morality lecture, the clinic is full of faux outrage and you post typifies it

 

[Netbalp]

the fact that less British people like Froome does not mean that more non British people like him. The fact that everyone outside the British isles considers him to be nothing less than a dangerous medical experiment means he has pretty much no fans who aren't British.

Even the few fans he has on here from foreign countries are all convinced he dopes and support him for the humour.

The forum out of extremums (idolatry bordering jealousy and despision) is not 'everyone outside the British isles' and will never be. A dangerous medical experiment in the backroom forum language means a rider one can't stand seeing on the top. Doping is an illusion. I fail to understand how any top gc rider can be blamed for bigger or lesser doping sins on a rational basis. That's all about deeply personal preconceptions.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

You forgot the third category: "Its some of the riders fault only. Have them banned and the sport will flourish again. Long live our noble governing bodies, the flawless bio passport system and all Hail Cookson. The savior of cycling. He is tough. Harsh on cheaters. Incorruptable."

OK, I am in parts part of the 3rd group too then.
The passport is flawed and all, but at least got some cheaters. That´s good.
Not everybody is a psycho win-at-all-costs typ like Horner or LA. That´s good. There are clean riders out there. I do believe that...

There is no need to hate a rider/riders. I dont do that with Froome but i do hate that he symbolizes what is wrong with the sport. Horner symbolizes the other end of that spectrum. Do not hate the players, hate the game.

I don´t get the point here.... Horner is in the same group as Froome. There is almost no difference (only age and winning-injured differs. A big one if you ask me; which leads me to see him way more disgusting to cycling than Froome or any other doper before grandpa).
I hate Horner because he gets away with his cheating while smiling into the camera & giving absurd interviews, applying omerta, defending LA... something Froome never did.

And in order to not get fooled again we cant believe in Froome. Horner is a different story since people probably want to believe in a man who shows that age does not matter in the pinnacle of a sport. It is the Lance myth all over and people wants to believe in a good story - everybody ages and does not want to hear they have lost it after their thirties.

I try to get that understanding... but it makes no sense. If people don´t believe in Froome because they don´t wanna get cheated again, they can´t in the same time dream big that a old guy beats young/fresh/talented riders day in day out.
Either you learned from the past (there are no miracles), or you didn´t. But if some people really have this string of thinking you described, well... they are complete and utter morons then. I have no other words for this.

Besides, i do not think Froomes book helped him one bit either as far as his persona occurs. That was probably a deal breaker for many.

No, no. The hate was here full scale long before his book...

 

[BigMac]

A country where your own rider winning the world championships was considered a lesser story than the world number 2500 in tennis winning a challenger event no one had ever heard of.

I fail to see how that is relevant. I'm counting the ratio within the cycling 'population' only.

Do the Portuguese typically support Spaniards?

A great deal do, actually.

 

[The Hitch]

Well, i wouldn't bet on the second part:he's an aggressive rider after all,good climber,TT-er. What is different in supporting him versus other riders?Why is worse then others,given that those,are also"dangerous medical experiments"?

Where did I say it was worse

Ive never attacked anyone for supporting Froome.

 

[The Hitch]

I fail to see how that is relevant. I'm counting the ratio within the cycling 'population' only.

Ok if you say so. Thing is after the discussion on Rui Costa a few months ago where you said you knew him and that you knew as a result of this relationship you have with him that he is 100% clean and then it turned out you don't really know him and were just saying so to mess around in the thread, I'm a bit wary of your personal anecdotes.

You claim you see all these knew cycling fans to the extent that you can safely say cycling is growing globally, you claim to know all these Froome fans. Ok. So you say.

 

[Cycle Chic]

Quite an exaggeration to state Froome was at the back...I watched it later having recorded it.

Yep he was behind a large group right at the foot of the climb but in the next view of him ..which was after the first attack by Valverde..you could see Rodriquez just ahead.

 

[The Hitch]

The forum out of extremums (idolatry bordering jealousy and despision) is not 'everyone outside the British isles' and will never be. A dangerous medical experiment in the backroom forum language means a rider one can't stand seeing on the top. Doping is an illusion. I fail to understand how any top gc rider can be blamed for bigger or lesser doping sins on a rational basis. That's all about deeply personal preconceptions.

WHo said anything about this forum? Its quite clear from reactions in other European countries including a poll in one country that asked if Froome dopes, that everyone outside of Britain laughs at the sight of him riding up mountains. Even the commentators in some countries have been caught laughing about it on air.

 

[BigMac]

Ok if you say so. Thing is after the discussion on Rui Costa a few months ago where you said you knew him and that you knew as a result of this relationship you have with him that he is 100% clean and then it turned out you don't really know him and were just saying so to mess around in the thread, I'm a bit wary of your personal anecdotes.

You claim you see all these knew cycling fans to the extent that you can safely say cycling is growing globally, you claim to know all these Froome fans. Ok. So you say.

Umm, yes. I see what you mean. I said I knew him, and later said (to you, right?) that not ''personally''. Also said that I talked and have been with him a couple of times. Wasn't joking about the last part, as I told you If I record correctly. Anyway, regarding that, I still put my hand in the fire for him.

This, though, is different. I think if you ask any of the Portuguese here they will give you a similar answer. A great deal like him. As I said, he doesn't have as many followers as Contador, but has plenty.

 

[MBotero]

Where did I say it was worse

Ive never attacked anyone for supporting Froome.

You said:

the fact that less British people like Froome does not mean that more non British people like him. The fact that everyone outside the British isles considers him to be nothing less than a dangerous medical experiment means he has pretty much no fans who aren't British.

Even the few fans he has on here from foreign countries are all convinced he dopes and support him for the humour.

I was arguing about the humour part read again.Were do i said anything about you attacking people anyway?

 

[RownhamHill]

I forgot to add you but I thought you were just faking your Froome love

Look at all the major Froome/sky defenders over the years. All british.

Gooner, MartinVickers and Taxus are all British?

 

[OldCranky]

I personally don't warm to Froome, but that's because I've never met a nice South African. But that's got FA to do with cycling.

Well he's originally Kenyan rather than South African but assuming that was a reference to the Spitting Image song you can have a pass this time

 

[msjett]

So, Froome showed signs of full alien sit sprinting up hill in this last stage....perhaps it's all back on track for him?

 

[thehog]

So, Froome showed signs of full alien sit sprinting up hill in this last stage....perhaps it's all back on track for him?

The new Froome, alien attacks only appear off camera.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Seated acceleration lessons from Froome..schooling the rest of the GC contenders.

 

[the sceptic]

The new Froome, alien attacks only appear off camera.

Nice avatar Hog.

Who could have guessed that mutant attacks, inhalers and horse steroids in prime time TV was bad PR?

perhaps sky have removed the "full mutant attack" mode from his SRM as a way to rebrand the Dawg.

 

[thehog]

Nice avatar Hog.

Who could have guessed that mutant attacks, inhalers and horse steroids in prime time TV was bad PR?

perhaps sky have removed the "full mutant attack" mode from his SRM as a way to rebrand the Dawg.

Poor David Walsh he won't know what to do with himself. He'll want to call out those Spanish dopers and then Froome goes faster than them by coming from behind. Sneaky, tricky dicky Dawg!

He is a slave to the power meter though. He can't do anything unless it tells him to. In saying that I thought his pacing was much better than the others. Valverde & Contador went too early.

 

[msjett]

The new Froome, alien attacks only appear off camera.

Damn...there is a new Froome....I didn't believe the old Froome. I noticed that the attack starts off camera....but to the press it's renamed as "riding at my own pace". But that would be Brailsford PR Genius....

I can only hope new Froome goes the way of old Froome....out of the race preferably...

Also I get the feeling he didn't want to keep Valverde company on the climb

 

[thehog]

Damn...there is a new Froome....I didn't believe the old Froome. I noticed that the attack starts off camera....but to the press it's renamed as "riding at my own pace". But that would be Brailsford PR Genius....

I can only hope new Froome goes the way of old Froome....out of the race preferably...

Also I get the feeling he didn't want to keep Valverde company on the climb

According to Froome is his book Valverde gets attacked because he's a doper. So the Dawg being Mr. Clean and all had to blast past him to show him that drugs are not cool.