Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 640 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Dear Wiggo said:
gooner said:
Dear Wiggo said:
rick james said:
veganrob said:
I think the fact that the violation was upheld tells you the testers side of the story.
Froome already said it was his fault, he took the blame...
Yeah he's a regular inhaler puffing, TUE backdating boy scout.

He'd dead to rights, at a guess, and anything else other than admitting fault would have blown up in his face. Cue Mo Farrah clips with ominous voice over.
You see ghosts everywhere.
Personal insult this should be good. Usually indicative of a neanderthal, or someone personally offended by something said of someone else with whom they identify. Let's see.

gooner said:
When asked, if he lied he would have got hammered and the same has happened when he has disclosed his past missed tests. You can't win either way.
Oh poor baby. Basically agrees with what I just wrote, but adds the personal insult for good measure.

gooner said:
You probably think Kelly Sotherton is a doper too after her admission.
You probably still live with your Mum, but I don't introduce probablies about you because it's completely irrelevant.

Kelly Sotherton went on a twitter rage like some fricken anti-doping champion defending Mo only to later reveal she herself had missed two tests. "Professional" athletes should start acting that way.

gooner said:
Kind of backs up the doping only view.
Mate, if you don't like my view, ignore my posts. Stop being a crybaby about it. The dummy spitting is not an effective counter argument. So far I have about 100 years of cycling history on my side. I only care about the pointy end of the field who use the lamest excuses regarding performance to justify their unimaginable leaps of improvement.

You sound like a whinging crybaby.

gooner said:
Froome maybe doped to the gills but some of the logic on here in coming to that conclusion is preposterous.
You are an idiot if you quote my post as if it's the logic I am employing to prove Froome is doping. An embilic, hard of reading idiot.

gooner said:
I bet nobody behind their laptops and their perfectionist wisdom missed a deadline or were late for something in their life.
If it meant losing my job, you can bet your dribble catching bib I would be on time and consistently meeting the requirements of my million plus pound per year world-wide cycling holiday. What a facetious argument.
Great post. Great responses.

It is tiring, the personal insults when posters get upset that their view of cycling doesn't match the reality. The reality that the sport is mired in cheating and doping, has been and on present course continues to be and throwing the odd sardine to the gulls to justify this cesspit doesn't cut it.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Personal insult this should be good. Usually indicative of a neanderthal, or someone personally offended by something said of someone else with whom they identify. Let's see.
Simple, I just don't take kind to stupid comments.

Oh poor baby. Basically agrees with what I just wrote, but adds the personal insult for good measure.
No, I don't.

You probably still live with your Mum, but I don't introduce probablies about you because it's completely irrelevant.

Kelly Sotherton went on a twitter rage like some fricken anti-doping champion defending Mo only to later reveal she herself had missed two tests. "Professional" athletes should start acting that way.
Obviously you haven't even read Sotherton's reasons for missing those tests. Again is she dodgy as you suggested about Froome in this situation? I would like an answer.

Sotherton brought balance to the whereabouts debate saying it happens quite a bit and there's good reasoning for many of them. Other respected people in the athletics world have said similar. These are insiders in the sport but you turn your nose up as it doesn't fit in with you religious beliefs that are set in stone.

Secondly, if I was an athlete and 100% clean, I would be wary too of mentioning anything about missed tests even if there was a sufficient basis for doing so. Precisely the innuendo that comes on the back of it from your ilk would be one of the reasons. Especially when social media is used by some as an abuse of power. The framing of people's minds come in it. There's an influence there.

She hasn't defended anything regarding Mo's association with Salazar.

Mate, if you don't like my view, ignore my posts. Stop being a crybaby about it. The dummy spitting is not an effective counter argument. So far I have about 100 years of cycling history on my side. I only care about the pointy end of the field who use the lamest excuses regarding performance to justify their unimaginable leaps of improvement.

You sound like a whinging crybaby.
I care about the top, middle and end of the field and am not interested in solely select "trophy" names as you are above.

Decades of a doping culture doesn't give you the right or a free hit to come up with crackpot theories as you have done multiple times across various topics.

You are an idiot if you quote my post as if it's the logic I am employing to prove Froome is doping. An embilic, hard of reading idiot.
On this issue, you have. Don't revise.

If it meant losing my job, you can bet your dribble catching bib I would be on time and consistently meeting the requirements of my million plus pound per year world-wide cycling holiday. What a facetious argument.
Your daily job is your livelihood too. That to many people is just as precious to them as a guy who's cycling a bike for a big fat contract. Or is it only in sport that a livelihood is precious and genuine mistakes aren't allowed? Again points to the fact of hotshots like you behind their laptops who live in their mister perfect world where they have never been late for anything or have fall foul of any rule.

Professionalism doesn't mean you're flawless. Grasp it.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Great post. Great responses.

It is tiring, the personal insults when posters get upset that their view of cycling doesn't match the reality. The reality that the sport is mired in cheating and doping, has been and on present course continues to be and throwing the odd sardine to the gulls to justify this cesspit doesn't cut it.
Way to miss the point.

Even if it's widespread, it's the responding to the logic and substance of someone's view in discussing it as a general means or alternatively to a specific rider and team.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
gooner said:
Your daily job is your livelihood too.
Wow. How ever did you come to that break through? Are you like omniscient or something. How could I have possibly missed this. I mean. Here I was thinking it was my job, but it's my livelihood as well? Words fail me.

gooner said:
That to many people is just as precious to them as a guy who's cycling a bike for a big fat contract.


gooner said:
blah blah blah

Professionalism doesn't mean you're flawless. Grasp it.
If you miss 3 tests within 12 months, that's a rule violation and you get suspended for 2 or is it now 4 years?

Grasp it.

That's, you know, the implied contract you sign with the UCI when you get added to their testing pool. Gooner's "I'm a professional not perfect" argument will be thrown out by CAS, guaranteed.

Not sure what planet you're on, but this is an incontrovertible fact. Whinging about people avoiding meetings and deadlines so they can continue to cheat their employer and fellow employees out of their livelihood is misguided, facetious and downright dumb.
 
gooner said:
Your daily job is your livelihood too. That to many people is just as precious to them as a guy who's cycling a bike for a big fat contract. Or is it only in sport, genuine mistakes aren't allowed? Again points to the fact of hotshots like you behind their laptops who live in their mister perfect world where they have never been late for anything or falling foul of any rule.

Professionalism doesn't mean you're flawless. Grasp it.
I would be careful to compare (my second round draft pick :cool: ) Dawg to a normal Joe. The normal Joe, at best, has a wife who will kick him out of bed, not an entire organization behind him pretty much managing all aspects of his life, including damage control when his performance is called suspicious or mistakes happen.

Mistakes that you call "genuine". How do you know? How do we know? Obviously some don't find the mistake "genuine", don't find Froome's rise to the top "genuine", his bilharzia story "genuine", or find his Cancellara on Mont Ventoux "genuine", let alone his ITT exploits without wind tunnel training "genuine"...

Professionalism doesn't mean you're flawless, as you wrote. It's not about me or you being "mister perfect". It is Froome and Sky who have portrayed themselves as such. Innovators, perfectionists. And cracks keep appearing in that facade. I don't think it is unreasonable to wonder what the truth is behind that "flawless" PR.

I don't think the reactions have as much to do with Dawg missing a test, but rather about the timing and the rhetoric. If it starts with "once upon a time", well, it's not a true story. And that's how it feels.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Tonton said:
gooner said:
Your daily job is your livelihood too. That to many people is just as precious to them as a guy who's cycling a bike for a big fat contract. Or is it only in sport, genuine mistakes aren't allowed? Again points to the fact of hotshots like you behind their laptops who live in their mister perfect world where they have never been late for anything or falling foul of any rule.

Professionalism doesn't mean you're flawless. Grasp it.
I would be careful to compare (my second round draft pick :cool: ) Dawg to a normal Joe. The normal Joe, at best, has a wife who will kick him out of bed, not an entire organization behind him pretty much managing all aspects of his life, including damage control when his performance is called suspicious or mistakes happen.

Mistakes that you call "genuine". How do you know? How do we know? Obviously some don't find the mistake "genuine", don't find Froome's rise to the top "genuine", his bilharzia story "genuine", or find his Cancellara on Mont Ventoux "genuine", let alone his ITT exploits without wind tunnel training "genuine"...

Professionalism doesn't mean you're flawless, as you wrote. It's not about me or you being "mister perfect". It is Froome and Sky who have portrayed themselves as such. Innovators, perfectionists. And cracks keep appearing in that facade. I don't think it is unreasonable to wonder what the truth is behind that "flawless" PR.

I don't think the reactions have as much to do with Dawg missing a test, but rather about the timing and the rhetoric. If it starts with "once upon a time", well, it's not a true story. And that's how it feels.
Thank you. Far more patient than I.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
not to mention far more elegant than Dear Wiggo :p

my consistent refrain is, people lie. pro cyclists lie. one may point out, it is a hobbes choice.

yes blackcat, that was so so eloquent, and so so profound you freekin numbskull.

hey, shuddup inner dialogue, folkx gonna think i got schizophrenia now you muppet /internal dialogue and mad grammar, no, bad grammar
 
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Thanks for the insight Joe.
You're welcome.

TheSpud said:
veganrob said:
I think the fact that the violation was upheld tells you the testers side of the story.
I'd be interested to know how many violations are overturned - I would imagine not many. Probably about as many successful doping appeals ...

They may have accepted it was a mistake but ultimately its a miss - a bit like the strict liability rule.
The test I keep mentioning that I missed was actually "overturned", to use your word.

Basically, I submitted an explanation (not an appeal - since, at least then, the ADO gave you a chance to explain what was up before declaring a violation) for why I was unavailable and missed the test and why I hadn't been able to update Whereabouts for that window beforehand.

I included sworn testimony from a witness and hospital documentation that confirmed the timeline (medical emergency in which I assisted someone else), and verified details re. lack of mobile/internet signal w/in the depths of the hospital facility where we ended up (kinda ironic).

The missed test was resultingly not adjudicated as a whereabouts failure. I'll have to see if I have any of the paperwork around - or even the notice of my explanation having been accepted.
 
joe_papp said:
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Thanks for the insight Joe.
You're welcome.

TheSpud said:
veganrob said:
I think the fact that the violation was upheld tells you the testers side of the story.
I'd be interested to know how many violations are overturned - I would imagine not many. Probably about as many successful doping appeals ...

They may have accepted it was a mistake but ultimately its a miss - a bit like the strict liability rule.
The test I keep mentioning that I missed was actually "overturned", to use your word.

Basically, I submitted an explanation (not an appeal - since, at least then, the ADO gave you a chance to explain what was up before declaring a violation) for why I was unavailable and missed the test and why I hadn't been able to update Whereabouts for that window beforehand.

I included sworn testimony from a witness and hospital documentation that confirmed the timeline (medical emergency in which I assisted someone else), and verified details re. lack of mobile/internet signal w/in the depths of the hospital facility where we ended up (kinda ironic).

The missed test was resultingly not adjudicated as a whereabouts failure. I'll have to see if I have any of the paperwork around - or even the notice of my explanation having been accepted.
Thanks Joe - good information. Sounds like you had a full stack of info to prove it, and special circumstances.

A question though - if that was your only miss why go to so much trouble to have it struck off? I'm not having a pop at you or suggesting anything, just want to understand your thinking.
 
TheSpud said:
Thanks Joe - good information. Sounds like you had a full stack of info to prove it, and special circumstances.

A question though - if that was your only miss why go to so much trouble to have it struck off? I'm not having a pop at you or suggesting anything, just want to understand your thinking.
I made the effort to have it struck off firstly b/c I didn't want any blemish on my record, which is what a missed test whereabouts violation would've caused if it was not appealed successfully. Secondly, I thought I should avail myself of the process offered to athletes who miss a test and want to contest a Whereabouts violation - not only for my own circumstances - but to then be able to act as a resource (informally) for athletes facing similar situations who might need some assistance to navigate the process, or who had questions, or whatever.

If the missed test had purely resulted from laziness or unprofessionalism on my part, I probably wouldn't've appealed it, but mine was a very unique set of circumstances that seemed likely to be viewed as act-of-god type stuff that wouldn't be held against me - so in that case - submitting an explanation in one's "defense" hardly seemed like much of an effort...it seemed like the obvious thing to do, in fact.
 
thats amazing how thanks to the paltry forum the people far removed from applied cycling - not coaches, not sports physicians and even not cycling craftmasters - begin to imagine themselves enlightening messiahs who ostensibly waft the ultimate truth. to be honest about it, the thread is one big 'hey i know how it goes and you are a stupid skybot, idiot, moron so just stfu' saga. astoundingly low level of the debate.
 
Re:

dacooley said:
thats amazing how thanks to the paltry forum the people far removed from applied cycling - not coaches, not sports physicians and even not cycling craftmasters - begin to imagine themselves enlightening messiahs who ostensibly waft the ultimate truth. to be honest about it, the thread is one big 'hey i know how it goes and you are a stupid skybot, idiot, moron so just stfu' saga. astoundingly low level of the debate.
...and yet, here you are :p .
 
May 12, 2015
345
0
0
Re: Re:

joe_papp said:
Well, that's the beauty of the current anti-doping system: it's unbiased. Whether you're a TdF champ, or an inactive rider coming to end of his ban, the responsibilities and expectations are the same. But, likewise, so is the application of the rules.

Two missed tests in five years doesn't even come close to being an ADRV...
Well, you have to lower the bar considerably to come to that conclusion. Froome isn't that dumb. He is aware most do not believe his story. What you are saying would be OK if the sport of professional cycling were as clean as a whistle. The problem is: It isn't. In fact, it's far from it; and every time there's a rumor about one of the top cyclists skipping a test, nothing needs be said IMO. He ****** up. That's why he came out and made it public.

Like I said, I rather hear of someone bitching and complaining about the testing being done during private events (ala Oscar Pereiro,) even cussing at the testers, but allowing the testing to be done, than someone coming up with what is an obvious ******** story about the receptionists not allowing the testers to go up to the room. Especially someone like Chris, who is obviously ON something but is so Goddamn dumb as to let his significant other go on a heavy flow-rampage of the other cyclists.
 
Aug 4, 2011
3,647
0
0
Re:

dacooley said:
thats amazing how thanks to the paltry forum the people far removed from applied cycling - not coaches, not sports physicians and even not cycling craftmasters - begin to imagine themselves enlightening messiahs who ostensibly waft the ultimate truth. to be honest about it, the thread is one big 'hey i know how it goes and you are a stupid skybot, idiot, moron so just stfu' saga. astoundingly low level of the debate.
Your here, what's you views? I would like to hear them. Is it possible you could answer a couple of points from you post....cheers
Applied cycling can you explain what you mean by this?
what is a cycling craftmaster?
 
Re: Re:

ray j willings said:
dacooley said:
thats amazing how thanks to the paltry forum the people far removed from applied cycling - not coaches, not sports physicians and even not cycling craftmasters - begin to imagine themselves enlightening messiahs who ostensibly waft the ultimate truth. to be honest about it, the thread is one big 'hey i know how it goes and you are a stupid skybot, idiot, moron so just stfu' saga. astoundingly low level of the debate.
Your here, what's you views? I would like to hear them. Is it possible you could answer a couple of points from you post....cheers
Applied cycling can you explain what you mean by this?
what is a cycling craftmaster?
Maybe he was talking about you, craftmaster. I looked on another thread. That black ITT bike of yours. Crafted.
 
Re: Re:

The_Cheech said:
joe_papp said:
Well, that's the beauty of the current anti-doping system: it's unbiased. Whether you're a TdF champ, or an inactive rider coming to end of his ban, the responsibilities and expectations are the same. But, likewise, so is the application of the rules.

Two missed tests in five years doesn't even come close to being an ADRV...
Well, you have to lower the bar considerably to come to that conclusion. Froome isn't that dumb. He is aware most do not believe his story. What you are saying would be OK if the sport of professional cycling were as clean as a whistle. The problem is: It isn't. In fact, it's far from it; and every time there's a rumor about one of the top cyclists skipping a test, nothing needs be said IMO. He f*cked up. That's why he came out and made it public.

Like I said, I rather hear of someone bitching and complaining about the testing being done during private events (ala Oscar Pereiro,) even cussing at the testers, but allowing the testing to be done, than someone coming up with what is an obvious *** story about the receptionists not allowing the testers to go up to the room. Especially someone like Chris, who is obviously ON something but is so Goddamn dumb as to let his significant other go on a heavy flow-rampage of the other cyclists.
He didnt exactly come out on his own accord - he was asked by a journo wasnt he?
 
May 12, 2015
345
0
0
Froome's testgate explained by one of the biggest steroid...

... Experts the world has ever known: Balco's Victor Conte.

Video here. Fast forward to 43:45.

This guy practically wrote the book on PEDs protocol, and the famous athletes he used to work with have won multiple medals in the Olympics.

Note, he IS NOT talking about Christopher Froome.
 
TheSpud said:
veganrob said:
I think the fact that the violation was upheld tells you the testers side of the story.
I'd be interested to know how many violations are overturned - I would imagine not many. Probably about as many successful doping appeals ...

They may have accepted it was a mistake but ultimately its a miss - a bit like the strict liability rule.
Not many.
If the tester turns up when you are taking your wife to give birth, or a child to the ER, you have a good shot.
Outside of a legitimate medical emergency like that, not many get overturned
 
Re: Froome's testgate explained by one of the biggest steroi

The_Cheech said:
... Experts the world has ever known: Balco's Victor Conte.

Video here. Fast forward to 43:45.

This guy practically wrote the book on PEDs protocol, and the famous athletes he used to work with have won multiple medals in the Olympics.

Note, he IS NOT talking about Christopher Froome.
Off topic but the minute you linked to - 43, has something very significant - VC saying he knows people who saw Memo with Bolt. THat's by far the strongest link of Bolt to memo that i have seen.
 
May 12, 2015
345
0
0
Re: Froome's testgate explained by one of the biggest steroi

The Hitch said:
The_Cheech said:
... Experts the world has ever known: Balco's Victor Conte.

Video here. Fast forward to 43:45.

This guy practically wrote the book on PEDs protocol, and the famous athletes he used to work with have won multiple medals in the Olympics.

Note, he IS NOT talking about Christopher Froome.
Off topic but the minute you linked to - 43, has something very significant - VC saying he knows people who saw Memo with Bolt. THat's by far the strongest link of Bolt to memo that i have seen.
I don't care about either Memo or Bolt to be honest. What I like is how he, a PED expert, basically lays out publicly the blueprint of how to beat a test even when you're glowing.

Our guy, Christopher Froome, just did what this guy said every glowing athlete ought to do should the WADA folks show up unannounced. And this interview took place years ago because he mentioned the 18 month suspension period, which is now 12.

Let's see, guy walks around with an inhaler even though he never told anyone he had asthma, he avoids tests, et cetera. What more can he do?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Re: Froome's testgate explained by one of the biggest steroi

The_Cheech said:
Let's see, guy walks around with an inhaler even though he never told anyone he had asthma, he avoids tests, et cetera. What more can he do?
Win the Tour?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY