• 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 677 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 13, 2015
949
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

pastronef said:
Eagle said:
pastronef said:
Benotti69 said:
When an ex pro like Rasmussen is calling it, he as far as i know is not selling anything currently, you have to take notice.........

I take notice. I don't know what all the fuss is about
I have no problem with Froome or Quintana or Nibali or Aru doping
You have no problem with people cheating :confused:

I'd have a problem if some of them were clean, in that case I'd shout

what I don't like is this pot/kettle behaviour of many twitter/forum users

the difference is just the more efficient doping / level of doping

today the Contador fan boys/girls were outraged
maybe Froome dopes better than Alberto or better than Quintana
but none of them does it clean

even the Clinic has not a problem with people cheating.
it's always about liking a rider/team and not liking another one
But some of them are clean, they just aren't at the front because of these cheats
 
Re:

Merckx index said:
This latter value (which I incline towards, because Gesink's SRM data should be more accurate than VAM estimates) is clearly well beyond Tucker’s view of the line, and I think very difficult for anyone to defend. If Froome is really clean, either he has an extraordinarily high V02max, in the 90s as Greg's was reported to be, and/or an exceptionally high efficiency, in the mid or even upper 20s as has been reported in a few studies with unidentified riders. If he's really intending to explain everything after the Tour, he need to provide values for all three of these parameters. But that will still leave unexplained the big jump in performance in 2011.

Of course.

So then why all the discussion of the line in the sand? It's supposed to be some edge of human performance. What possible reason would anyone have to believe that Froome is the exceedingly rare specimen who who would be at that boundary? None. That is for the rarest of creatures, those who are freaks among the freaks, and have been so from the earliest time.

It is clear that Froome doesn't even begin to fit that description, or you have to do so many jumps of logic and rational thought to think he does that it's ridiculous.

Occam's razor is instructive.
 
Re: Re:

Eagle said:
pastronef said:
Eagle said:
pastronef said:
Benotti69 said:
When an ex pro like Rasmussen is calling it, he as far as i know is not selling anything currently, you have to take notice.........

I take notice. I don't know what all the fuss is about
I have no problem with Froome or Quintana or Nibali or Aru doping
You have no problem with people cheating :confused:

I'd have a problem if some of them were clean, in that case I'd shout

what I don't like is this pot/kettle behaviour of many twitter/forum users

the difference is just the more efficient doping / level of doping

today the Contador fan boys/girls were outraged
maybe Froome dopes better than Alberto or better than Quintana
but none of them does it clean

even the Clinic has not a problem with people cheating.
it's always about liking a rider/team and not liking another one
But some of them are clean, they just aren't at the front because of these cheats

ok, so let's not focus just on Froome alors. because from what I read today from 5.30 pm it seems he's the only doper out there
Pinot clean. I don't know, he was 3rd last year and best some class riders in Romandie and Suisse this year
 
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
pastronef said:
Eagle said:
pastronef said:
Benotti69 said:
When an ex pro like Rasmussen is calling it, he as far as i know is not selling anything currently, you have to take notice.........

I take notice. I don't know what all the fuss is about
I have no problem with Froome or Quintana or Nibali or Aru doping
You have no problem with people cheating :confused:

I'd have a problem if some of them were clean, in that case I'd shout

what I don't like is this pot/kettle behaviour of many twitter/forum users

the difference is just the more efficient doping / level of doping

today the Contador fan boys/girls were outraged
maybe Froome dopes better than Alberto or better than Quintana
but none of them does it clean

even the Clinic has not a problem with people cheating.
it's always about liking a rider/team and not liking another one

You reckon guys like Pinot (possibly) aren't being cheated out of podium places by all these cheats (Froome, Contador, Nibali, Quintana, Valverde etc)?
Doubt it. If it wasn't Froome and Contador etc it would just be someone else.

Its the system and the realities of 21st century sport. The drugs exist to make the 500th best rider into the number 1 rider. Theyve existed for decades and only improve with time. You can't hide from that in sport. Its like trying to fight recreational drugs. The force of the problem is infinately greater than the will or resources of those tasked with fighting it.

You can't simply say oh but clean Pinot (assuming he is clean) came 6th so surely if the top 5 guys don't cheat he will win.

Because if the top 5 guys aren't there, then the Ferrari's and Lienders and Fuentes's and Mueller Wolfahrts of this world will just pick someone else. Someone else will be given the programmes and schedules and secrets and training tips that only the top guys can afford. And then they beat Pinot, even if right now they don't.
 
Re:

bigcog said:
The reality is:

Contador - cooked from giro
Quintana - good, but when has he beaten Froome who only beat him by 1 minute on an ideal stage for Froome
Nibali - already cooked
Froome - delivered a good performance, made to look stellar by the above

Funny, kind of like your posts. When Vickers and Joachim were regulars your post would have looked like silly and uneffective. But since they aren't here now it looks like a real effective troll attempt and will get more responses. ;)
 
Mar 13, 2015
949
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

pastronef said:
Eagle said:
pastronef said:
Eagle said:
pastronef said:
I take notice. I don't know what all the fuss is about
I have no problem with Froome or Quintana or Nibali or Aru doping
You have no problem with people cheating :confused:

I'd have a problem if some of them were clean, in that case I'd shout

what I don't like is this pot/kettle behaviour of many twitter/forum users

the difference is just the more efficient doping / level of doping

today the Contador fan boys/girls were outraged
maybe Froome dopes better than Alberto or better than Quintana
but none of them does it clean

even the Clinic has not a problem with people cheating.
it's always about liking a rider/team and not liking another one
But some of them are clean, they just aren't at the front because of these cheats

ok, so let's not focus just on Froome alors. because from what I read today from 5.30 pm it seems he's the only doper out there
Pinot clean. I don't know, he was 3rd last year and best some class riders in Romandie and Suisse this year
Surely its natural to discuss the best rider more than the guys he it beating and I also believe there are a lot more people defending him than the likes of Contador and Nibali
 
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:


You reckon guys like Pinot (possibly) aren't being cheated out of podium places by all these cheats (Froome, Contador, Nibali, Quintana, Valverde etc)?[/quote]
Doubt it. If it wasn't Froome and Contador etc it would just be someone else.

Its the system and the realities of 21st century sport. The drugs exist to make the 500th best rider into the number 1 rider. Theyve existed for decades and only improve with time. You can't hide from that in sport. Its like trying to fight recreational drugs. The force of the problem is infinately greater than the will or resources of those tasked with fighting it.

You can't simply say oh but clean Pinot (assuming he is clean) came 6th so surely if the top 5 guys don't cheat he will win.

Because if the top 5 guys aren't there, then the Ferrari's and Lienders and Fuentes's and Mueller Wolfahrts of this world will just pick someone else. Someone else will be given the programmes and schedules and secrets and training tips that only the top guys can afford. And then they beat Pinot, even if right now they don't.[/quote]
---------------------


Today is posible to win any race totally clean, and I think at leat in le Tour everybody is clean.
Cycling is not the rest of the sports, no othe team was so damaged for doping as cycling was, and no other sport, by far, has the antidoping policies cycling has.

i see you are not inside cycling world, at least WT cycling...we will talk in 10 years, or maybe 10 years is not enough? How long?
 
Re: Re:

Taxus4a said:
---------------------


Today is posible to win any race totally clean, and I think at leat in le Tour everybody is clean.
Cycling is not the rest of the sports, no othe team was so damaged for doping as cycling was, and no other sport, by far, has the antidoping policies cycling has.

i see you are not inside cycling world, at least WT cycling...we will talk in 10 years, or maybe 10 years is not enough? How long?

taxus wtf, que pasa?
 
Re:

ToreBear said:
Well done Froomey and sky, as well as movistar. As for people who say this is impossible. I'm sorry you think everything in the human body is a known and measured scientific quantity.

Ot is possible to measure andn take some conclusion, but they used methods that are notr cientific, used 15 years ago, with a lot of lacks...

They for instance talked about ventopux and dindt see videos of how wind was other years and how was in 2013.. 2013 was one of the years wind was more tailwiind at the end (was crosswind, what with corners sometimes tail, some time headwind...other years is always headwind...

if you compare numbers and you dont put a lot of thing intio consideration, that is wortless.
but a lot opf people get the conclusion they look for, and how is a lot of people and everything is agree, thet think they are agree.

But of course thay are wrong.

cheers!
 
May 8, 2015
128
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Armchaircyclist said:
http://www.aftenposten.no/100Sport/sykkel/tourdefrance/Kaggestad-fnyser-av-omstridt-Froome-video---En-ren-konspirasjonsteori-568040_1.snd

Norwegian expert and TV2 commentator Kaggestad Calls the video of Froome's datas "pure conspiracy" and says that this is speculation by People who lack basic knowledge of physiology....

I wonder what he will say if the day comes and Froome joins Armstrong...
For me this ended the fun of watching this years tour, it's just too much With the alien.

With this in mind the next three spots do get more interesting though.
 
Re:

Armchaircyclist said:
http://www.aftenposten.no/100Sport/sykkel/tourdefrance/Kaggestad-fnyser-av-omstridt-Froome-video---En-ren-konspirasjonsteori-568040_1.snd

Norwegian expert and TV2 commentator Kaggestad Calls the video of Froome's datas "pure conspiracy" and says that this is speculation by People who lack basic knowledge of physiology....

I wonder what he will say if the day comes and Froome joins Armstrong...
For me this ended the fun of watching this years tour, it's just too much With the alien.


You say this because Froomes numbers aren't even remotely comparable to Armstrongs ?
 
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
Mr.38% said:
Somebody who saw it on "Vive le vélo" may confirm.
I just saw someone else mention it... he's becoming as much of a bully as Lance..
Much was made about the stealing rabbits from toddlers to feed to snakes thing when that emerged. And it was shocking how proud Froome is about that,more than his TDF wins it seems, and how totally unmoved he was both by the squeals of the baby rabbits and to see the toddlers upset about losing their pets. Remember pythons don't eat dead prey so its not like you kill the poor thing and feed it, instead its more like the victims in the Minotaur story, you release them into the maze and watch their terror as they await what they can't escape. And Froome always watched.

I've no delusions about how cruel the natural world is and how powerless humans are to stop it, but I strongly feel at best we should not interfere and physically feed smaller powerless creatures, babies at that, to infinitely more powerful predators, for no real reason. If anything, humans should try to minimize the animals pain not maximise it.

Strangely enough, many froome fans on here at the time turned to be very anti animal rights when this story came out, ridiculing those pathetic conspiracy theorists for reacting to it. Personally I cringe when I hear about such a cold blooded sacrifice and this emotion is infinately more powerful than anything Froome can ever make me experience by his riding.

Of course that was just the tip of the iceberg since Froome spent much of his younger life seeking out prey for his snakes, particularly looking for nests of mice so he could feed the entire families to the pythons. Quite sad when one considers the pythons were incapable of showing him any affection anyway. They just existed to exist.
And searching and catching the prey wasn't always just Froome but a family activity.

His self confessed obsession in his early teens was "butterflies". This sounds nice, but what he means by this is running around all day trying to catch them and squish them so he could pin them up on his wall. This was his last "passion" before cycling became his passion.

But in The Climb he also claims that when he was young his brothers would shoot bb gun pellets at a big Turkey they had for a laugh and watch the Turkey attack Froome who at that age was the same size. Then Froome did the same when he was older, only his victim (other than the Turkey) would be the daughter of his au pair (yes, thats right, bullying behaviour directed towards a young girl who is a few years younger than him). He would also "get revenge" on the Turkey by running up to it and scaring it then laughing as it got terrified.

In some ways you can't fully blame a child for being like that, since they might not know better, and clearly the environment he grew up in played a part ( i mean if one of your first memories of your older brothers is them shooting at a poor turkey for laughs, you can see how your surroundings might play a part). But in that case the parents and guardians have a lot to answer for.

Maybe its just me though. There is nothing I feel more strongly about then that no human should ever be cruel towards animals. Its the exact same thing as bullying. Trying to get some small greater satisfaction in your own life by tormenting someone who was born weaker than you, who has no chance to defend themselves and has done you no wrong.

Maybe the adult Froome is a nicer guy. I hope he is. He came off nice to me at first in the 2011 Vuelta and he hasn't really done anything particularly bad re picking on others within the peloton as far as I remember. Not like Wiggins or Lance.
Still when I see the word "bully" mentioned about him I can't help but think back to these stories, especially considering the fact that many bullies in adulthood are known to take it out on animals in their childhood.
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Visit site
So he was finally fed today, had Nibs for breakfast, Conti as the main course, plus some TJVG-likes as side dishes, and even left some cake of Nairito for his LRP buddy.
 
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
TheSpud said:
Loving it here - Froome doing exactly what (almost) everyone on here expected him to, and you're all complaining. You even have power data and you're complaining about that. Seriously will you ever be satisfied?
Ummm, no one expected this. Many thought it would be a stalemate. I was one of the few that had Froome to win the stage.

But to 1-2 the stage and take 1 minute.03 out of the 1st best non Sky rider and 2 minutes out of the 2nd best none Sky rider. Have G beat Contador and Nibali and cruise in with a group that contained the riders that will make the podium. After pulling for Froome and taking it easy.

On a 1 climb stage which is also the first mountain of the Tour.

Nope.

exactly. using the example of Hautacam 2000 again, it was like if one of Armstrong's teammates, let's say Tyler Hamilton, rode the entire peloton off his wheel aside from Jimenez, launched Armstrong off the front, and then rode all the way back to Jimenez and dropped him inside the final 500 meters.
 
Re: Re:

Poursuivant said:
Armchaircyclist said:
http://www.aftenposten.no/100Sport/sykkel/tourdefrance/Kaggestad-fnyser-av-omstridt-Froome-video---En-ren-konspirasjonsteori-568040_1.snd

Norwegian expert and TV2 commentator Kaggestad Calls the video of Froome's datas "pure conspiracy" and says that this is speculation by People who lack basic knowledge of physiology....

I wonder what he will say if the day comes and Froome joins Armstrong...
For me this ended the fun of watching this years tour, it's just too much With the alien.


You say this because Froomes numbers aren't even remotely comparable to Armstrongs ?

Ok, so what exactly is your position?

That Froome is clean? That you don't know? Or are you like Bernie and ebandit or pastronef, aware that he dopes but trying to equal out the discussion a little?

I ask because what you are doing (and what people who defend Sky on here have always done) is picking holes in a select few stories, without ever actually addressing the wider argument.

So for example here you pick at the fact that froome's numbers today weren't as bad as Armstrongs. Ok. But what does this really say? That the poster is wrong? Maybe.
That Froome isn't as strong as Armstrong?
Hell no because even if these numbers "aren't remotely comparable" to Lance the 2013 ones ARE. He matched Armstrong on 2 climbs and according to amitpiroyaly had a final TDF climb wattage output that was lower than some of LA's TDFs and higher than others.
He also claims to have beaten Lances madone time by quite some bit and to have felt "guilty" about it afterwards.

So the point you are making in your posts, doesn't actually offer any help to the "sky doesn't dope" side. Because even if Froomie didn't go as fast as Lance today, he has on many occasions, so yes he can be comparable to Lance..

So what is your point at the end of the day? That 1 poster may have got something slightly wrong?

Ok.

But the case against Sky is not based on 1 post. Nor on 1 ascent of 1 climb in 1 TDF. Its based on everything together. The 6 month peaks, the transformations of several riders on the same teams, the 2 seperate riders who won TDFs in a dodgy era for them, the lies, the hiring of doper after doper after doper. etc etc etc. So many other things I can mention but ill keep it short.

If you are serious about adressing the "Sky dope" side of the argument and presenting your own, then you need to address all those things together, not just popping in now and again to find holes in what 1 poster may have said somewhere.
 
Ross now admits he’s changed his standard of doping a little, mentioning factors like who got dropped today, the Sky non-transparency, and others. He defended Froome in 2013, but has dropped the doping bar slightly, apparently in view of these other factors. Actually, I don't fully understand what he means, but he does admit his opinion of Froome has changed. He notes that in addition to the fairly good agreement between Gesink’s SRM and VAM, the fact that most of the best climbers fared relatively poorly argues against Froome’s time being aided by a tailwind.

Ammatti notes Froome’s time is equivalent to 39:15 up Alpe, that is very fast, almost in the top 10 all-time. Not quite as good as LA and Pantani’s best, but right up there, it’s safe to say no one has ever climbed Alpe that fast clean. Froome himself did not climb it nearly that fast a couple of years ago, as I said before, he’s on a different level in this Tour.
 
Jul 18, 2013
187
0
0
Visit site
red_flanders said:
gooner said:
They'll be made public.

It is understood that Froome plans to submit himself to a full physiological test in the wake of the Tour in an effort to demystify his performance data.

Among the things he wants to prove is how he benefits from his limb length and how he has an naturally low heart rate. Antoine Vayer, the former Festina coach turned cycling blogger, has been posting data for the last few days and weeks detailing Froome's performance data; his abnormally low heart rate, huge lung capacity and VO2 max, the maximum rate of oxygen consumption during incremental exercise.

Froome has spoken in the past of his heart rate not being able to exceed 170bpm, even when at peak power. Vayer himself included that statistic in a blog last year after talking to Michel Theze, a trainer at the World Cycling Centre where Froome was first based when he came over to Europe from Africa. It is understood that Froome plans to make the results of the tests public.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/chris-froome/11740170/Chris-Froome-commits-to-independent-testing-to-prove-he-is-clean-after-Tour-de-France.html

I'm unclear what this is supposed to prove. Does he now have a high V02 max? Certainly we know that EPO increases V02 max significantly. As before, what WOULD have been interesting were his pre-Vuelta 2011 numbers, which will never be known. As for all the others, any pro cyclist would have a low heart rate, a "huge" lung capacity, blah, blah. The question is, "compared to what"? That we will not see, making it irrelevant. If it ever happens.

And here I thought that Froome didn't have a clue what his VO2 max was.
 
I've sort of been following pro cycling for only two years now, and thusly cannot consider myself an expert by any means. But jeebuz, the way Froome took off today reminded me of Justin Gatlin at the Prefontaine Classic here in Eugene recently - no way do I think either Gatlin or Froome are clean.

Anyhoo, back to your regularly scheduled program.
 
Re:

Merckx index said:
Ross now admits he’s changed his standard of doping a little, mentioning factors like who got dropped today, the Sky non-transparency, and others. He defended Froome in 2013, but has dropped the doping bar slightly, apparently in view of these other factors. Actually, I don't fully understand what he means, but he does admit his opinion of Froome has changed. He notes that in addition to the fairly good agreement between Gesink’s SRM and VAM, the fact that most of the best climbers fared relatively poorly argues against Froome’s time being aided by a tailwind.

Ammatti notes Froome’s time is equivalent to 39:15 up Alpe, that is very fast, almost in the top 10 all-time. Not quite as good as LA and Pantani’s best, but right up there, it’s safe to say no one has ever climbed Alpe that fast clean. Froome himself did not climb it nearly that fast a couple of years ago, as I said before, he’s on a different level in this Tour.


Wait, so that number is completely subjective (basically pulled out of his ass and adjusted as he sees fit)? Damn, you actually got me intrigued a bit and I was about to do some research on those values and how he got them.
 
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
LaFlorecita said:
Mr.38% said:
Somebody who saw it on "Vive le vélo" may confirm.
I just saw someone else mention it... he's becoming as much of a bully as Lance..
Much was made about the stealing rabbits from toddlers to feed to snakes thing when that emerged. And it was shocking how proud Froome is about that,more than his TDF wins it seems, and how totally unmoved he was both by the squeals of the baby rabbits and to see the toddlers upset about losing their pets. Remember pythons don't eat dead prey so its not like you kill the poor thing and feed it, instead its more like the victims in the Minotaur story, you release them into the maze and watch their terror as they await what they can't escape. And Froome always watched.

I've no delusions about how cruel the natural world is and how powerless humans are to stop it, but I strongly feel at best we should not interfere and physically feed smaller powerless creatures, babies at that, to infinitely more powerful predators, for no real reason. If anything, humans should try to minimize the animals pain not maximise it.

Strangely enough, many froome fans on here at the time turned to be very anti animal rights when this story came out, ridiculing those pathetic conspiracy theorists for reacting to it. Personally I cringe when I hear about such a cold blooded sacrifice and this emotion is infinately more powerful than anything Froome can ever make me experience by his riding.

Of course that was just the tip of the iceberg since Froome spent much of his younger life seeking out prey for his snakes, particularly looking for nests of mice so he could feed the entire families to the pythons. Quite sad when one considers the pythons were incapable of showing him any affection anyway. They just existed to exist.
And searching and catching the prey wasn't always just Froome but a family activity.

His self confessed obsession in his early teens was "butterflies". This sounds nice, but what he means by this is running around all day trying to catch them and squish them so he could pin them up on his wall. This was his last "passion" before cycling became his passion.

But in The Climb he also claims that when he was young his brothers would shoot bb gun pellets at a big Turkey they had for a laugh and watch the Turkey attack Froome who at that age was the same size. Then Froome did the same when he was older, only his victim (other than the Turkey) would be the daughter of his au pair (yes, thats right, bullying behaviour directed towards a young girl who is a few years younger than him). He would also "get revenge" on the Turkey by running up to it and scaring it then laughing as it got terrified.

In some ways you can't fully blame a child for being like that, since they might not know better, and clearly the environment he grew up in played a part ( i mean if one of your first memories of your older brothers is them shooting at a poor turkey for laughs, you can see how your surroundings might play a part). But in that case the parents and guardians have a lot to answer for.

Maybe its just me though. There is nothing I feel more strongly about then that no human should ever be cruel towards animals. Its the exact same thing as bullying. Trying to get some small greater satisfaction in your own life by tormenting someone who was born weaker than you, who has no chance to defend themselves and has done you no wrong.

Maybe the adult Froome is a nicer guy. I hope he is. He came off nice to me at first in the 2011 Vuelta and he hasn't really done anything particularly bad re picking on others within the peloton as far as I remember. Not like Wiggins or Lance.
Still when I see the word "bully" mentioned about him I can't help but think back to these stories, especially considering the fact that many bullies in adulthood are known to take it out on animals in their childhood.

I took this to be evidence of sociopathic tendencies and, above all, evidence that he is not troubled by the concept of "right and wrong". Further evidence of that would be his hacking into federation computers to enter a championship. It doesn't make him a doper but it certainly adds to the picture of someone who doesn't mind breaking rules. Someone who is self-serving.

Note, armchaircyclist and armchairclimber are not the same person.
 
Re:

Armchaircyclist said:
http://www.aftenposten.no/100Sport/sykkel/tourdefrance/Kaggestad-fnyser-av-omstridt-Froome-video---En-ren-konspirasjonsteori-568040_1.snd

Norwegian expert and TV2 commentator Kaggestad Calls the video of Froome's datas "pure conspiracy" and says that this is speculation by People who lack basic knowledge of physiology....

I wonder what he will say if the day comes and Froome joins Armstrong...
For me this ended the fun of watching this years tour, it's just too much With the alien.

You shouldnt take anything coming from Norway serious in this matter. Norway is a Great Britain colony and part of the staunchest defenders of the cultural empire. Critics against anything coming from "the west" and you will surely have a norwegian leading the witch hunt.

They will the react the exact same scripted way as in the case with Lance. From being their own private loverboy, burn mark people as "tin foil hats" speaking out against the chosen one, to complete silence or some halfbaked excuses and apologies. They dont dare much more afraid of losing the role as GB's private call-girl.

The openmindness to doping, innuendos, and disgust of it are reserved for the designated "villains".
 
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
LaFlorecita said:
Mr.38% said:
Somebody who saw it on "Vive le vélo" may confirm.
I just saw someone else mention it... he's becoming as much of a bully as Lance..
Much was made about the stealing rabbits from toddlers to feed to snakes thing when that emerged. And it was shocking how proud Froome is about that,more than his TDF wins it seems, and how totally unmoved he was both by the squeals of the baby rabbits and to see the toddlers upset about losing their pets. Remember pythons don't eat dead prey so its not like you kill the poor thing and feed it, instead its more like the victims in the Minotaur story, you release them into the maze and watch their terror as they await what they can't escape. And Froome always watched.

I've no delusions about how cruel the natural world is and how powerless humans are to stop it, but I strongly feel at best we should not interfere and physically feed smaller powerless creatures, babies at that, to infinitely more powerful predators, for no real reason. If anything, humans should try to minimize the animals pain not maximise it.

Strangely enough, many froome fans on here at the time turned to be very anti animal rights when this story came out, ridiculing those pathetic conspiracy theorists for reacting to it. Personally I cringe when I hear about such a cold blooded sacrifice and this emotion is infinately more powerful than anything Froome can ever make me experience by his riding.

Of course that was just the tip of the iceberg since Froome spent much of his younger life seeking out prey for his snakes, particularly looking for nests of mice so he could feed the entire families to the pythons. Quite sad when one considers the pythons were incapable of showing him any affection anyway. They just existed to exist.
And searching and catching the prey wasn't always just Froome but a family activity.

His self confessed obsession in his early teens was "butterflies". This sounds nice, but what he means by this is running around all day trying to catch them and squish them so he could pin them up on his wall. This was his last "passion" before cycling became his passion.

But in The Climb he also claims that when he was young his brothers would shoot bb gun pellets at a big Turkey they had for a laugh and watch the Turkey attack Froome who at that age was the same size. Then Froome did the same when he was older, only his victim (other than the Turkey) would be the daughter of his au pair (yes, thats right, bullying behaviour directed towards a young girl who is a few years younger than him). He would also "get revenge" on the Turkey by running up to it and scaring it then laughing as it got terrified.

In some ways you can't fully blame a child for being like that, since they might not know better, and clearly the environment he grew up in played a part ( i mean if one of your first memories of your older brothers is them shooting at a poor turkey for laughs, you can see how your surroundings might play a part). But in that case the parents and guardians have a lot to answer for.

Maybe its just me though. There is nothing I feel more strongly about then that no human should ever be cruel towards animals. Its the exact same thing as bullying. Trying to get some small greater satisfaction in your own life by tormenting someone who was born weaker than you, who has no chance to defend themselves and has done you no wrong.

Maybe the adult Froome is a nicer guy. I hope he is. He came off nice to me at first in the 2011 Vuelta and he hasn't really done anything particularly bad re picking on others within the peloton as far as I remember. Not like Wiggins or Lance.
Still when I see the word "bully" mentioned about him I can't help but think back to these stories, especially considering the fact that many bullies in adulthood are known to take it out on animals in their childhood.

A perfectly valid alternative interpretation, of course, being that kids will be kids.