• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 661 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Walkman said:
Benotti69 said:
How can it be a level playing field?

Who is 'measuring' the quantities of dope being taken by each rider?

Who is 'measuring' the way a rider responds to each PED to balance it out so they all get the same level of response?

The only 'level playing field' possible is for everyone to ride clean.

Quoted for truth.

Thats the whole problem, but if you look at things that way, nobody would ever be on a level playing field.. due to different fysiology. they already tried to make a system that puts them on a level playing field...

IT would be very unfair even if they ride clean :D should there be a max to muscle mass ? or how tall you can be ? should we have a weight class ?? see all that is silly... because abit of the beauty is that its not a "total" level playing field, but even those you don't expect to do well can surprise
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
3
0
Visit site
BigMac said:
I think Koran believes what he's saying, so give them some slack. Let's see how it escalates. Until then refrain from public trolling accusations, please.

no offense, but I think you guys are way off on this one.

this is a classic example of a banned poster returning on a sockpuppet to troll.
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
3
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

DrSahl said:
Walkman said:
Benotti69 said:
How can it be a level playing field?

Who is 'measuring' the quantities of dope being taken by each rider?

Who is 'measuring' the way a rider responds to each PED to balance it out so they all get the same level of response?

The only 'level playing field' possible is for everyone to ride clean.

Quoted for truth.

Thats the whole problem, but if you look at things that way, nobody would ever be on a level playing field.. due to different fysiology. they already tried to make a system that puts them on a level playing field...

IT would be very unfair even if they ride clean :D should there be a max to muscle mass ? or how tall you can be ? should we have a weight class ?? see all that is silly... because abit of the beauty is that its not a "total" level playing field, but even those you don't expect to do well can surprise

That's a very good point, but unfortunately, few people are willing to go down that far into the rabbit hole. But yes, there is of course nothing fair about the distribution of biological gifts nature blessed us with.
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
Walsh can claim it's trolling and his followers will back him, but notice he wouldn't dare take any legal action over a tweet such as this. It's the problem with social media really, Walsh has the loudest mic and can shut off other peoples mics when they join his discussion and he doesn't like it.

Anyone can block anyone on twitter though you can block Walsh if you want, the fact he has a loud mic is due to his fine record as a journalist, and who said anything about legal action. I thought you where smarter than this KB
 
Mar 12, 2009
2,521
0
0
Visit site
Re:

snccdcno said:
They mean the TT.

Who knew we were looking at 2 future TdF Champs :rolleyes:
Geraint next?

55qloj.png
 
Re: Re:

DrSahl said:
Walkman said:
Benotti69 said:
How can it be a level playing field?

Who is 'measuring' the quantities of dope being taken by each rider?

Who is 'measuring' the way a rider responds to each PED to balance it out so they all get the same level of response?

The only 'level playing field' possible is for everyone to ride clean.

Quoted for truth.

Thats the whole problem, but if you look at things that way, nobody would ever be on a level playing field.. due to different fysiology. they already tried to make a system that puts them on a level playing field...

IT would be very unfair even if they ride clean :D should there be a max to muscle mass ? or how tall you can be ? should we have a weight class ?? see all that is silly... because abit of the beauty is that its not a "total" level playing field, but even those you don't expect to do well can surprise

You may be missing the point of sport. To see who is the best, to see, on a level playing field, who can do the most within the rules and with their own drive, ability, smarts and effort, can win against all comers. To celebrate excellence and the differences between us which make some people great. To emulate those who are gifted, hard-working, strong and resilient.

Not to have a pharma contest and see which freak responds the best.
 
Re: Re:

Saint Unix said:
Poursuivant said:
The Hitch said:
Froome's Ventoux stage win may have been one of the fastest ever for a HC mountain stage.

Didn't he climb that slower than a chunk of riders from 2009, including Kreuziger?
Hitch meant the stage as a whole, which was 230-ish kilometers of flats before Ventoux, and that will push the average speed up compared to most other MTFs.
And the stage was done so fast they were like an hour ahead of schedule when they hit Ventoux. Then Ventoux was done superfast by Froome as well, despite the hard stage and extremely hard stage 2 days earlier.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

del1962 said:
King Boonen said:
Walsh can claim it's trolling and his followers will back him, but notice he wouldn't dare take any legal action over a tweet such as this. It's the problem with social media really, Walsh has the loudest mic and can shut off other peoples mics when they join his discussion and he doesn't like it.

Anyone can block anyone on twitter though you can block Walsh if you want, the fact he has a loud mic is due to his fine record as a journalist, and who said anything about legal action. I thought you where smarter than this KB

Totally agree.
 
BigMac said:
Netserk said:
BigMac said:
I think Koran believes what he's saying, so give them some slack. Let's see how it escalates. Until then refrain from public trolling accusations, please.
lol

:rolleyes: Can you blame me?

There are some hardcore believers out there who refuse to face the evidence.

Thing is, the forum has a rule that if you are banned you cannot come back. Obviously many people value innocent until proven guilty, but these 2 actually clash on an internet forum because the guilty can always just get a new account and then the mods have to start

Imagine if in real life, every time a doper got caught they could just warg into another personality and try their doping again. A decade to bring down Armstrong and he just disapears into the body of another cyclist and you have to start the whole process all over again.

That's how it is here when a poster gets perma banned. They just abandon the account they used and create a totally different one. Then they cry that everyone has to act as if they are innocent until proven guilty.

This doesn't work.

When people get permabanned there is a reason. It isn't because they called someone an idiot. Hell it isn't even because they wished death on another poster, we know that because Peter70 did that last week and only got a month ban. You get a permaban when you are seriously a nuissance to this forum.

In my opinion, the forum needs to do something to protect this weapon that it has - permabans. At the moment they are worthless because any poster can come back and be granted the same rights and benefit of the doubt as respected posters who have been here for years. If someone points out its them, they get warned and the poster who has done nothing but register an account and made one or two posts, is given the trust that should be reserved only for posters that the forum is familiar with.

Back in the 2010's no one got banned for pointing out every time BPC came back. That's what BPC always cried for. But if the forum had allowed every single new account 100% rights, it would have just become a forum for trolls. In the end everytime Hugh Januss or Race Radio or whoever said that it was BPC, it was BPC. BPC and his 1 or 2 non banned Lance allies always claimed that these posters were being bullies, that they were using this to somehow stiffle opinion, but this never actually happened. It was easy to spot BPC and everytime someone identified him, they were right.

By the same token, anyone who has been a clinic regular for the last few years knows this isn't Ramon's first time. He knows very well what buttons to push. He isn't even trying to hide it. Sometimes they really do try to hide it, they register an account years in advanced, make sure to post non clinic stuff on it, then slowly edge into the clinic sometime later and are careful not to give themselves away. Ramon was created a week ago and all his posts are deliberate baits. Vickers or Lauren or whatever you want to call him has done this on a number of occasions. He puts in his usual soundbites like "Typical, someone doesnt share your point of view, you accuse him of being a troll, instead of debating your point of view" and wants to see how long he can get away with it and right now it seems, longer than ever.

Imo, just like in the early 2010's with BPC, mods should be a bit more liberal in allowing clinic regulars to call out sockpuppets. Of course there might be some trigger happy members who do this too often, and you don't want people to abuse this, but in that case you can step in and warn people if they take it too far. Most people however aren't going to use that right to bully people, only to point out when an actual sockpuppet does step in - look who it is.

Now to get to your point, the idea that there are actually people who believe what Ramon is writing, out there. I don't actually think theres that many. But anyway, it usually comes from ignorance. In any case, the way you phrased it is telling. You wrote "hardcore believers out there who refuse to face the evidence".
"Refuse to face the evidence". Exactly. They refuse to face the evidence. These are the last people that will come to the clinic to actually discuss doping.

But anyway, lets pretend for a second that they do exist, and that one of them has for some reason been compelled to join the clinic on July the 4th and become a very active poster immediately.

What is this place, its a discussion board. While people are perfectly within their rights to whatever opinion they hold, there should be some expectation that if you come here you will take part in a discussion. And not just say "I believe Walsh is great and you are all trolls", and then when challenged on it say "I believe you are all bitter". For all the 2 or 3 people that keep reregistering accounts here want to mock the clinic members as insane, irrational etc, there is not one of us who isn't prepared to defend their opinions with arguments and links and evidence.
These constant newbies just want to annoy certain posters and hopefully stir the pot by offering constant unsubstantiated observations. And its always the same observations.

Ramon for example, just by looking through a brief history of his posts in the past couple of days he has offered the following classic troll lines.

: Top riders don't dope because it would hurt their health. But 2nd tier riders might
: Froome had a linear progression
: Sky have 0 tolerance to doping
: Walsh spends time with Froome to make sure he isn't doping.
: Sky invest millions in equipment research
: Clean era
: Posters need to get a life
: Accuses others of trolling. In both clinic and road discussions
: Doubters are "bitter"
: Froome was poor because of Bilharzia

All of the above have been disproved hundreds of times in the clinic. In any case, Ramon has not been interested in arguing any of them. He just came in, scattered around all the above like a Mac 10, and moves onto the next bait. He also demonstrates prior knowledge of clinic and especially in his baits to some Nibali and Contador fans, knows exactly which buttons to push on what posters.

And that's not how rational human beings behave anyway. Thats just how people who want to come in here to annoy as much as possible behave.

And in each case he gets a response - the aim. and then moves onto the next one.

and just to be clear, I'm not saying you should ban these posters (though less evidence than for a more active poster should be needed). What I'm saying is that when clinic regulars call them out as sockpuppets, they should be given some benefit of the doubt, not the new poster who has simply created an account a few days earlier.
 
Re: Re:

del1962 said:
King Boonen said:
Walsh can claim it's trolling and his followers will back him, but notice he wouldn't dare take any legal action over a tweet such as this. It's the problem with social media really, Walsh has the loudest mic and can shut off other peoples mics when they join his discussion and he doesn't like it.

Anyone can block anyone on twitter though you can block Walsh if you want, the fact he has a loud mic is due to his fine record as a journalist, and who said anything about legal action. I thought you where smarter than this KB

You think peoples Twitter follower numbers are based on merit?
 
May 26, 2009
4,114
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
del1962 said:
King Boonen said:
Walsh can claim it's trolling and his followers will back him, but notice he wouldn't dare take any legal action over a tweet such as this. It's the problem with social media really, Walsh has the loudest mic and can shut off other peoples mics when they join his discussion and he doesn't like it.

Anyone can block anyone on twitter though you can block Walsh if you want, the fact he has a loud mic is due to his fine record as a journalist, and who said anything about legal action. I thought you where smarter than this KB

You think peoples Twitter follower numbers are based on merit?

So in Del's world, Justin Beiber has a loud mic because of his fine record as a singer.
 
@Hitch

Great post, not just literally. Very good. I totally understand where you're coming from but you'll see I wasn't dismissing the sockpuppet accusations - even though that should still be done on private, mostly - but rather saying that if we keep responding to Ramon with ''lol troll'', or something along that line, everybody loses - the thread is clogged and ultimately, as you say, if that's the case here, the troll would have achieved their purpose.

As far as sockpuppetry accusations go, I doubt any mod ignores them as long as they take the proper means. I for one encourage it. In fact, a couple of weeks ago we just had another sockpuppet of a well known perma'd member nuked, and that was because of a PM from someone who had witnessed that incarnation enough times before to have their attention caught. You may remember when I used to find the idea of members identifying sockpuppets utterly ridiculous and nonsensical, and even though I didn't change my mind when someone like red_flanders explained it was possible and that most of the times you actually got it right, I now think differently.

Anyway, I was about to PM one of you (doesn't matter who) for ideas on whom it may be, as in this new system we have to manually cross IP's most of the times. As it is, I don't get the information of another user, banned or not, sharing the same account data as Roman, so unless we miraculously stumble across the root account, no deal. So if you think we should take users' word for it even without some hard facts, you will have to take it to the higher spheres. I understand it may be frustrating, but I think that's that. As things stand, the only way Roman will be on their way to detox will be for anything trolling. You make a strong case.

Cheers.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
del1962 said:
King Boonen said:
Walsh can claim it's trolling and his followers will back him, but notice he wouldn't dare take any legal action over a tweet such as this. It's the problem with social media really, Walsh has the loudest mic and can shut off other peoples mics when they join his discussion and he doesn't like it.

Anyone can block anyone on twitter though you can block Walsh if you want, the fact he has a loud mic is due to his fine record as a journalist, and who said anything about legal action. I thought you where smarter than this KB

You think peoples Twitter follower numbers are based on merit?

That wasn't the point. It was about the reference to the loudest mic. Of course Walsh will have a bigger audience interaction considering his line of work and his past record as a journalist. That's fact.

People might not agree with his opinions and are entitled to do so. Nevertheless he's entitled to block anyone he wishes and that power on twitter isn't beholden to a select few based on a position or stature they hold. Anyone can do so and it's not done either for the vast majority of time because of a tweet which may result in some potential legal action. That is a non-sequitur argument made by KB.
 
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
PremierAndrew said:
Pfft, tbf, it's completely natural to be unable to hand on the grupettos in the mountains and suddenly become the best climber in the world within 3 years. Yeah, he had bilzharia, and yeah, he's training much harder now, but you're a fool if you actually believe that Froome is clean.

Froome is by far my favourite GC contender, as it's truly remarkable how someone born in Kenya, with limited opportunities, has reached the position he is in now. Also, by the same token, I'm pretty sure Froome and his rivals are on a completely level playing field. However, there is simply no way you can convince me that Froome is clean himself, and I struggle to see how anyone who watched cycling before this decade can believe and of the current top 4 (the best GC rider I personally believe is clean atm is probably Pinot, and there are at least 7-8 GC riders who are capable of achieving better results than him
Honestly, Froome may be from Kenya, but he grew up in South Africa, and there's a huge difference between coming from a rich, white family in Africa and a poor, black family. Froome had plenty of opportunities (of course that doesn't mean it isn't special that he's from Africa ;) )
The point is he grew up without a cycling culture. You think a proper coach in his early years wouldn't have corrected his form? even if you leave out his form he is awkward in the peloton. learned at 20 what most European kids learn in their first years on a bike. Have you seen the roads in Kenya? I haven't been to south Africa but cant imagine they are much better. from a cycling point of view he grew up poor. and as far as being rich he grew up in what we Americans would refer to as a lower middle class family. Single parent low income.
 
Re: Re:

cantpedal said:
LaFlorecita said:
PremierAndrew said:
Pfft, tbf, it's completely natural to be unable to hand on the grupettos in the mountains and suddenly become the best climber in the world within 3 years. Yeah, he had bilzharia, and yeah, he's training much harder now, but you're a fool if you actually believe that Froome is clean.

Froome is by far my favourite GC contender, as it's truly remarkable how someone born in Kenya, with limited opportunities, has reached the position he is in now. Also, by the same token, I'm pretty sure Froome and his rivals are on a completely level playing field. However, there is simply no way you can convince me that Froome is clean himself, and I struggle to see how anyone who watched cycling before this decade can believe and of the current top 4 (the best GC rider I personally believe is clean atm is probably Pinot, and there are at least 7-8 GC riders who are capable of achieving better results than him
Honestly, Froome may be from Kenya, but he grew up in South Africa, and there's a huge difference between coming from a rich, white family in Africa and a poor, black family. Froome had plenty of opportunities (of course that doesn't mean it isn't special that he's from Africa ;) )
The point is he grew up without a cycling culture. You think a proper coach in his early years wouldn't have corrected his form? even if you leave out his form he is awkward in the peloton. learned at 20 what most European kids learn in their first years on a bike. Have you seen the roads in Kenya? I haven't been to south Africa but cant imagine they are much better. from a cycling point of view he grew up poor. and as far as being rich he grew up in what we Americans would refer to as a lower middle class family. Single parent low income.
Ok, look at Daniel Teklehaimanot. One of 12! Children, grew up in Eritrea, where I imagine the roads are no better. He took up cycling when he was only a year or two younger and had a similar path to the pro peloton.

Right from the start he showed promise, coming 6th in the 2009 Tour d'lAvenir, after taking responsibility for GC after 2-3 stages. Snapped up by Orica in their first year and given a chance to race for them right away. Has never had issues moving around the peloton, has never crashed into a commisaire, has never been responsible for an avoidable crash or had to hold on to a motorbike. Similar things can be said for Merhawi Kudus, Louis Meintjes, Natnael Berhane, Reguigi and others.
 

TRENDING THREADS