Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[deeno1975]

Wow..it's a story about his life, its going to be a "love fest" what do you want them to say, chris is a doper because some sad folk in the clinic say he is doper?

What I wanted, given the recent history of cycling (remember Lance Armstrong) is some form of objectivity in addressing why this guy who was a middle of the pack cyclist has transformed himself (literally overnight) into the greatest human specimen of cycling ability ever.

Maybe Walsh could have asked a few pertinent questions (his hounding of Lance Armstrong now looks personal) re his weight loss, TUE use, contradicting story re his "red blood cell eating disease" etc... Instead we get a cheer leading stary eyed Walsh love in.

This interview will be loved by the non critical "isn't he great" Johnny come lately but to us who followed cycling for more than 5 minutes it was nausea inducing "I've seen this before" PR spun steaming pile of horse manure. I remember Armstrong had some similar doco done. The emperor has no cloths.

 

[Digger]

Walsh saying Froome trained harder - literally identical to the words he once derided the lance fans with typewriters.

Brailsford admitting they never saw his performance from the 2011 Vuelta coming -

But I saw the comments section and it has already won over the target audience...basically people who know nothing. Who know zero about cycling prior to Sky.

If you believe in sky and froome, then that reveals so much about your lack of any knowledge of the sport.

As for the media - they should absolutely be ashamed....and walsh yet again managed to blame lance in that documentary for not believing in froome - no david - we don't believe in froome for a multitude of reasons. What david can't grasp is that the ones who don't believe in froome never believed in lance. We were never 'betrayed'. I personally knew all about lance in 2000...others knew even earlier. I grew up knowing that roche and Kelly were doping - I never believed in any of them to then get angry.

There are plenty good British fans on here and elsewhere though - really knowledgeable, life long cycling fans - they know the story. It's easy for certain people to say it's my typical irish/anti british sentiment coming through - so in that case I am anti American (lance), anti Jamaican, anti france (rugby), anti my own country (rugby, cycling, athletics etc) and on and on.

I keep asking the one question which the sky fans never ever can answer - name one rider who has transformed as dramatically as froome - one. A guy being let go by his team who only got on the vuelta squad by chance. And then like magic found form. If this guy was from a non English speaking country like a Sayar he'd have everyone, fans and riders alike, ripping him.

The irony of many sky fans is that they are as quick to apply the logic many of us apply when it comes to other riders - apply that very same logic to sky riders and the likes of me are labelled haters....I wonder do they see this in private, or are they that blind.


Regarding Bikeradar, I do head over once a month - it's identical to roadsbikereview from 2007/08 - equally clueless. And we know how that one ended.

 

[mrhender]

Kimmage havin' fun on twitter

Paul Kimmage ‏@PaulKimmage 2 min.
PK He's a ****ing cheat.
CF (Laughs) You said that.
MC I don't think Chris fully understood that (Vinokourov) had doped.
CF No, I knew.

 

[sittingbison]

MC - not fully

 

[deeno1975]

One thing that irks me is the whole sand shoe thing, Brailsford referring that he rode the TT with sand shoes when from looking at the video he is wearing proper cycling shoes. FFS... Also David Walsh is embarrassing.

 

[arvc40]

One thing that irks me is the whole sand shoe thing, Brailsford referring that he rode the TT with sand shoes when from looking at the video he is wearing proper cycling shoes. FFS... Also David Walsh is embarrassing.

Yes, that was bizarre !.

 

[deeno1975]

Yes, that was bizarre !.

It all sounds like a Monty Python sketch.... Maybe The Dead Parrott scene.

 

[peloton]

Too funny, from a man who knows a thing or two about doping...

Ruta del Sol 2015
By: Michele Ferrari
Published: 28 Feb 2015

After a good time trial (Froome lost 8" in eight kilometers of racing), the 3rd stage saw Alberto Contador attack right at the start of the climb Alto de Hazallanas, 8km from the finish.
Chris Froome, slightly distanced in the previous descent, was not able to respond promptly enough and Alberto rapidly gained thirty seconds on his pursuers, led by the Sky Team riders, with Froome in their wake.
Alberto was pedaling well, managed to retain the advantage; only in the last few kilometers Chris, left alone to chase, was able to recover ten seconds on the Spanish.
Contador climbed the 8 Km at 9% at 1800m/h (6.20 w/kg), with Froome not far at 1777 m/h (6.13 w/kg). All the other rivals were much further back.

The next day, on the ramps at 15-18% of the Alto de Allanadas, theoretically favorable to the lighter Iberian climber, Froome accelerated on the pedals: Contador tried to follow him, but after a few meters he gave up on holding to his rear wheel.
In the last 6'40" of the race the Englishman gave 29" to the Spanish: the VAM was a stratospheric 2059 m/h (6.86 w/kg), with Alberto climbing at 1938 m/h (6.46 w/kg).
Contador repeated the excellent performance of the previous day, but Froome expressed a performance that was 6.2% higher than the Spanish, which is huge considering the level and the maximal effort of the two protagonists, who were obviously first and second at the finish line, with the other riders far behind.
It's as if, after providing roughly equivalent performances in the time trial and climbs up till then, Froome had found in the legs a bonus of 25-30 watts in the last 2 km of the 4th stage compared to Contador...

Clearly Froome is cleans

 

[heart_attack_man]

Too funny, from a man who knows a thing or two about doping...



Clearly Froome is cleans

Yowzer!

Ferrari using the word "stratospheric" to describe a performance... If anyone ever had any doubt, surely this should drive you to draw the appropriate conclusion?

 

[peloton]

Yowzer!

Ferrari using the word "stratospheric" to describe a performance... If anyone ever had any doubt, surely this should drive you to draw the appropriate conclusion?

He has never used that word before, afaik

Cleans!

 

[the sceptic]

Yowzer!

Ferrari using the word "stratospheric" to describe a performance... If anyone ever had any doubt, surely this should drive you to draw the appropriate conclusion?

Ferrari is probably wondering what the hell is going on with the Dawg. All his clients are getting dropped easily!

 

[peloton]

Ferrari is probably wondering what the hell is going on with the Dawg. All his clients are getting dropped easily!

He should know, attacking while seated and spin fast.... Last time I saw that was Lance, funny

The Dawg's style makes a mockery of the sport, hell, even LA looked smooth on the bike.
While attacking seated.

 

[Saint Unix]

Lance looked like the king of the peloton when he climbed. The dude oozed authority on a bike.

Froome looks more like the fool.

 

[red_flanders]

the VAM was a stratospheric 2059 m/h (6.86 w/kg),

People often like to say there's no prof that Froome is doping. That's proof, plain and simple. And it's February.

Case well and truly closed. Not that there was doubt before.

 

[Merckx index]

People often like to say there's no prof that Froome is doping. That's proof, plain and simple. And it's February.

Case well and truly closed. Not that there was doubt before.

Not saying Froome is clean, but 6.8 - 6.9 watts/kg is certainly possible (for some riders) for just 6-7 minutes.

This early is very suspicious. Dropping AC by that much is very suspicious. Froome is suspicious, anyway, for a host of long-discussed reasons.

But that power output for such a short period of time is not necessarily suspicious.

 

[The_Juan]

Ferrari using the word "stratospheric" to describe a performance... If anyone ever had any doubt, surely this should drive you to draw the appropriate conclusion?

The more important question is how can a man with such dubious performance up and downs pass all the pertinent drug tests.

I mean, this guy HAD to be glowing SOMETHING that day.

WTF was WADA looking for? Twinkies? Gatorade?

 

[red_flanders]

Not saying Froome is clean, but 6.8 - 6.9 watts/kg is certainly possible (for some riders) for just 6-7 minutes.

This early is very suspicious. Dropping AC by that much is very suspicious. Froome is suspicious, anyway, for a host of long-discussed reasons.

But that power output for such a short period of time is not necessarily suspicious.

Yes, it is suspicious. Maybe not proof as I stated, but certainly, unquestionably suspicious.

I understand the very steep part at 3.5 km is what he was talking about, but isn't the entire climb 10k?

Do we really think someone can put in a clean performance like that? Do we really think beating an apparently well on form and likely doped (to ride like this) Contador is possible clean? By anyone? From that guy? After losing in both the TT and the previous climb.

I think people have been watching doped performances so long they have lost sight of how absurd this is.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

He should know, attacking while seated and spin fast.... Last time I saw that was Lance, funny

The Dawg's style makes a mockery of the sport, hell, even LA looked smooth on the bike.
While attacking seated.

Oh how I love it.

Nothing against you "peloton", I just use your post as an example.

Ferrari just described another performance that annoys everybody here.

Froomes performance holds up the mirror to those who didnt got as outraged against Horner. Even though almost all here think he dopes too, he got excused one way or the other (more talent than Froome, had good US results, was life long dom, blablabla).

Now ya know all how disgusted I felt with Horners performance at La Vuelta and last years Tour. Is Froome really worse than him, so that it justifies the bashing he gets, while the other gets away relatively unharmed here?

One spins off seated, the other just rides away standing on one leg for two hours with a disgusting smirk on his face. One transformed at age 26, the other slowly but steady until peaking at 42. One refuses to admit to dope, the other too - even defending a lifelong doper until the end. One looks ugly on the bike, the other looks as old and used as a retired coal mine worker - but certainly not like a bike racer.

So why hammering away at one rider, while the other rusts in peace?

 

[red_flanders]

Oh how I love it.

Nothing against you "peloton", I just use your post as an example.

Ferrari just described another performance that annoys everybody here.

Froomes performance holds up the mirror to those who didnt got as outraged against Horner. Even though almost all here think he dopes too, he got excused one way or the other (more talent than Froome, had good US results, was life long dom, blablabla).

Now ya know all how disgusted I felt with Horners performance at La Vuelta and last years Tour. Is Froome really worse than him, so that it justifies the bashing he gets, while the other gets away relatively unharmed here?

One spins off seated, the other just rides away standing on one leg for two hours with a disgusting smirk on his face. One transformed at age 26, the other slowly but steady until peaking at 42. One refuses to admit to dope, the other too - even defending a lifelong doper until the end. One looks ugly on the bike, the other looks as old and used as a retired coal mine worker - but certainly not like a bike racer.

So why hammering away at one rider, while the other rusts in peace?

No one thinks Horner is clean or even allows for the possibility. Many people think Froome is clean or allow for the possibility. That's it. That's all there is. That's the difference. As has been said a hundred times. Got it now?

This is a Froome thread. Take your incessant Horner posts to the Horner thread.

 

[red_flanders]

Oh wait, sorry, my bad. There's one more. Froome is currently racing and competitive, and has been competitive in many races over the season for a few years. See the difference? It's really not that hard.

 

[skippythepinhead]

Oh how I love it.

Nothing against you "peloton", I just use your post as an example.

Ferrari just described another performance that annoys everybody here.

Froomes performance holds up the mirror to those who didnt got as outraged against Horner. Even though almost all here think he dopes too, he got excused one way or the other (more talent than Froome, had good US results, was life long dom, blablabla).

Now ya know all how disgusted I felt with Horners performance at La Vuelta and last years Tour. Is Froome really worse than him, so that it justifies the bashing he gets, while the other gets away relatively unharmed here?

One spins off seated, the other just rides away standing on one leg for two hours with a disgusting smirk on his face. One transformed at age 26, the other slowly but steady until peaking at 42. One refuses to admit to dope, the other too - even defending a lifelong doper until the end. One looks ugly on the bike, the other looks as old and used as a retired coal mine worker - but certainly not like a bike racer.

So why hammering away at one rider, while the other rusts in peace?

Who is Horner riding for right now?

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

No one thinks Horner is clean or even allows for the possibility. Many people think Froome is clean or allow for the possibility. That's it. That's all there is. That's the difference. As has been said a hundred times. Got it now?

This is a Froome thread. Take your incessant Horner posts to the Horner thread.

I know, I know. So I take it there to hold up the mirror to whom? Nobody reads it there. And what happens then (if I write the same post there)? That I shall take the Froome issues to the Froome/various Sky threads? Other than you I havent yet found out how to square the circle. Since you seem to have, feel free to inform me. Until then names called happen in every thread "off-topic" (so will it happen with my posts), or do you honestly believe the Froome threads never mention other names than him?

And your incessant repetitions of "nobody thinks Horner is clean" doesnt make it true. Even not if you tell me this the next 1.000 times.

Got it now? You are not my teacher...

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Oh wait, sorry, my bad. There's one more. Froome is currently racing and competitive, and has been competitive in many races over the season for a few years. See the difference? It's really not that hard.

Ahh, got it. We only talk about competitive riders.
When did the LA threads got closed? I think I missed it...

 

[red_flanders]

I know, I know. So I take it there to hold up the mirror to whom? Nobody reads it there.

That should clue you into the fact that no one cares. Nor does it excuse your off-topic, incessant rants about Horner.

 

[red_flanders]

Ahh, got it. We only talk about competitive riders.
When did the LA threads got closed? I think I missed it...

I didn't say anything remotely like that, and of course you know it. I simply explained to you (again) why Froome gets ink here and Horner doesn't. And I said take it to the Horner thread. But you already knew all that.