Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Lyon]

Re:

Kaggestad did his usual history lesson bit today with some British so-and-so apparently being the first person to realize the potential for recreational climbing in the area, and that hundreds of Brits travelled to those mountains to do some rock climbing in their holidays and I was absolutely certain he was going to twist it into a "but there are other Brits doing the climbing here today" line, but he didn't. He's probably kicking himself at the lost opportunity, though

Walsh would never pass on an opportunity like that. That's why he is a top class journalist...

Kaggestad is basically retelling every myth and half-truth out there. He was the same during the Armstrong era and every era since. Like many Norwegians his generation he has a special affinity for all things British though - anglophiles all of them.

 

[markene2]

Re:

-snip-

I very much agree with you about the talk they had after Ax-3, that's when i was finding myself actually angry, and he even went as far to say "If we have to question Froome, then we would have to question Johaug and Bjørgen, and that would be ridicolous to do." "blabla best training program, inovators, Vinokourov should learn from Brailsford."

I just dont see how Kurt Asle would justify them having bias towards Sky more than Kristoff and Edvald. I think it has to do with the central role Kaggestad has. They dont even attempt to interview Arvesen or anything, unlike Norwegian Eurosport, when Arild Eriksen calls Arvesen up every day during the Giro and gets a status report, or gets him to co-commentate during some races. And even then they dont give Sky more mentions, Eriksen remains perfectly proffesional and un biased. I would go so far to say that Eriksen and Knut Walther Baldersheim are the perfect match for commentating. But for some reason we keep watching TV2, guess traditions are hard to break..

Paasche is catching on as you say, and when you start to notice the small comments, i dont think that it was "how do we make it interesting now that it's over." Paasche is extremly anti doping, he enjoys when former banned riders dont perform. Heck, he even seems to have more knowledge in regards to cycling as a whole then Kaggestad. And thats what brings me hope that the whole thing wont derail into a 5 hr commentary about Sky. So it will be interesting to follow how Paasche develops during the Tour.


If our discussion are off topic i apologize to themods, but i think it brings something to the discussion that we realy are entering a new, but old era in certain countries. It's like the Lance farce over again.

 

[Singer01]

Re: Re:

Ross Tucker interview on Ireland's 'Off the Ball' sport radio program

https://soundcloud.com/offtheball/ross-tucker-on-chris-fromme

David Walsh was 'otherwise engaged' to appear.

At the end of the interview Ger Gilroy mentions Walsh not available at same time as Ross Tucker, but they will try and get him on to give his(sky's) side of the argument that they are clean.

Will post that here and Walsh thread, IF, it happens. Ger Gilroy is well up on his cycling having interviewed Walsh, Nico Roche, Dan Martin, Kimmage and McQuaid plenty of times.

Like I said back in 2012. No one from Sky will EVER accept a debate with one of the accusers. Which is why Walsh was unavailable for Kimmage and unavailable for Tucker. It all has to come through monlogues to the press where they can control the narrative and avoid counterarguments.

Put Walsh/ Brailsford/ moore/ sloberingham/ millar, any of these idiots in a room with Tucker or Kimmage or anyone from here for 2 minutes and they get blown out of the park.

being good at debating and being in the right are 2 completely different things. if all of the sky accusers on here sat in a room with Michael Mansfield QC you would all come out thinking sky were as clean as fresh snow.

because tripping someone up over an off the cuff remark they made a few years ago is easy, but ask kimmage and tucker to provide some actual proof (and i mean proof, not what the clinic thinks is proof) and they will be found sorely wanting.
that being said there 'there is something rotten in the state of denmark' is a sensible opinion to have right now.

 

[Cycle Chic]

*** the hypocrisy ‏@Digger_forum 10m10 minutes ago
Vayer asks about the violent accelerations and the heart rate not moving and asks is it a motorised bike connected to a blue tooth system

Finally !!

 

[rainman]

LOLs Carlton Kirby completely sold on Froome - 'accusations without foundation', Kelly deftly circumventing the matter, defering quickly to the campervan debacle.

 

[doperhopper]

**** the hypocrisy ‏@Digger_forum 10m10 minutes ago
Vayer asks about the violent accelerations and the heart rate not moving and asks is it a motorised bike connected to a blue tooth system

Finally !!

Sudden tornado tailwind. Next topic.

 

[Tommy79]

Re:

LOLs Carlton Kirby completely sold on Froome - 'accusations without foundation', Kelly deftly circumventing the matter, defering quickly to the campervan debacle.

In Kirby's defense.... that is exactly what the accusations are.

 

[Tommy79]

Re: Re:

Ross Tucker interview on Ireland's 'Off the Ball' sport radio program

https://soundcloud.com/offtheball/ross-tucker-on-chris-fromme

David Walsh was 'otherwise engaged' to appear.

At the end of the interview Ger Gilroy mentions Walsh not available at same time as Ross Tucker, but they will try and get him on to give his(sky's) side of the argument that they are clean.

Will post that here and Walsh thread, IF, it happens. Ger Gilroy is well up on his cycling having interviewed Walsh, Nico Roche, Dan Martin, Kimmage and McQuaid plenty of times.

Like I said back in 2012. No one from Sky will EVER accept a debate with one of the accusers. Which is why Walsh was unavailable for Kimmage and unavailable for Tucker. It all has to come through monlogues to the press where they can control the narrative and avoid counterarguments.

Put Walsh/ Brailsford/ moore/ sloberingham/ millar, any of these idiots in a room with Tucker or Kimmage or anyone from here for 2 minutes and they get blown out of the park.

Moore will have Vayer on the cycling podcast doping special next week.... behind a paywall. Should be interesting.

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

LOLs Carlton Kirby completely sold on Froome - 'accusations without foundation', Kelly deftly circumventing the matter, defering quickly to the campervan debacle.

I don't get why people still watch Kirby. If its your only option on tv then you can use a foreign stream for the commentary.

The number of idiotic things Kirby has said is bigger than the number of Sky posts in the clinic.

But an on topic one for this thread I remember from 2 years ago was him saying repeatedly that Froome had proved he was clean by releasing the files to Grappe. There were a number of increasingly insane ways he would put this. On one stage he said that the doubters all "shut up" and aknowledged defeat after Froome had done this.
After the Alpe d huez stage he said that it was frustrated French people angry at France not doing well in the Tour who chose to take out their anger on Froome. But that once a Frenchman won a stage of the Tour, they all calmed down and admitted Froome was just better.

I really would like to know what goes through the head of someone like Kirby who was a defender of Armstrong, and learned nothing from the feeling of betrayal. Most probably its an act, he knows cycling has dope problems but also knows his finance is directly linked to the myth of clean sport so will sell it, and his soul, no matter the cost.

Then again, some of the other mistakes he continues to make after commentating on cycling for 15 years, suggests its just an individual with some sort of mental problems.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

Ross Tucker interview on Ireland's 'Off the Ball' sport radio program

https://soundcloud.com/offtheball/ross-tucker-on-chris-fromme

David Walsh was 'otherwise engaged' to appear.

At the end of the interview Ger Gilroy mentions Walsh not available at same time as Ross Tucker, but they will try and get him on to give his(sky's) side of the argument that they are clean.

Will post that here and Walsh thread, IF, it happens. Ger Gilroy is well up on his cycling having interviewed Walsh, Nico Roche, Dan Martin, Kimmage and McQuaid plenty of times.

Like I said back in 2012. No one from Sky will EVER accept a debate with one of the accusers. Which is why Walsh was unavailable for Kimmage and unavailable for Tucker. It all has to come through monlogues to the press where they can control the narrative and avoid counterarguments.

Put Walsh/ Brailsford/ moore/ sloberingham/ millar, any of these idiots in a room with Tucker or Kimmage or anyone from here for 2 minutes and they get blown out of the park.

being good at debating and being in the right are 2 completely different things. if all of the sky accusers on here sat in a room with Michael Mansfield QC you would all come out thinking sky were as clean as fresh snow.

because tripping someone up over an off the cuff remark they made a few years ago is easy, but ask kimmage and tucker to provide some actual proof (and i mean proof, not what the clinic thinks is proof) and they will be found sorely wanting.
that being said there 'there is something rotten in the state of denmark' is a sensible opinion to have right now.

Umm I was talking about an actual debate. Not a court case. Learn to read. My god do people actually believe court favour prove those who are "in the right"?????

Anyone with a bit of money can win a court case just by shooting the witnesses. There's a serious flaw in the system if that's how easy it is. Another athlete, Greg Hardy just got off a prison sentence by paying off the witness After they had testified against him

I'll repeat the point I made just so that there is no confusion for people who can't read well:

Put Walsh/ Brailsford/ moore/ sloberingham/ millar, any of these idiots in a room with Tucker or Kimmage or anyone from here for 2 minutes and they get blown out of the park.

That includes your Michael Mansfield guy.

 

[SeriousSam]

Re: Re:

Seems like there are still some confused souls who think what happens in courts is the gold standard for how the evidence in favour or against some claim is to be analysed.

That must explain why science does things completely differently.

 

[Andreasjs]

I do not like Sky, Froome, Porte etc at all and I do "feel" they are doping but if I am objective, what is the most realiable indications that they are doping? I say indications because there are no hard evidence, true?

What I see is:
- Froome almost coming out of nowhere becoming the pretty much the best TTer and climber around

- the team dominating TdF for 4 years and looking with a lot of potential for another few years of victories (Froome would be podium last year probably if it had not been for his crash)

- super strong domestiques

- performances at the edge of what supposedly is humanly possible

- performances which is in line with times of the "good old days"

- a couple of TUE events

Honestly, what I feel is the strongest indication, is the super strong domestique performance. It could be that froome is really just super super strong, who knows. Real genetic freaks that can do superior performances, do exist although rare. He could be one. But seeing eg. how Porte in the Giro was pretty week and suddenly he pulls the peleton and beats Quintana, just smells. Two genetic freaks on the same team, no....

What else should I add to my list? What do you think is the strongest indication of doping

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

Honestly, what I feel is the strongest indication, is the super strong domestique performance. It could be that froome is really just super super strong, who knows. Real genetic freaks that can do superior performances, do exist although rare. He could be one.

Have a read through the sections of Froome's book where he is proud to finish in the top 40 on a mountain stage and you'll understand why we can confidently dismiss "Froome genetic freak" as a theory.

 

[bigcog]

**** the hypocrisy ‏@Digger_forum 10m10 minutes ago
Vayer asks about the violent accelerations and the heart rate not moving and asks is it a motorised bike connected to a blue tooth system

Finally !!

How would that work then ? Blue tooth connection from what to where exactly ? Or is it another bs fantasy ?

 

[arthurvandelay]

Re: Re:

Seems like there are still some confused souls who think what happens in courts is the gold standard for how the evidence in favour or against some claim is to be analysed.

That must explain why science does things completely differently.

That is why I LOVE science. In the courts one can connive and massage data and opinion if you have the $$$ to spare. In science it is "put up or shut up". If you don't like the results or conclusions of somebody elses experiments repeat them yourself and challenge the validity of their results.

Granted we are having fraud in academic science now as well which breaks my heart.

As a young medical student I was privileged to be involved with some very basic cardiovascular research. My mentor was very scrupulous about accuracy, honesty and conservatism in our testing methods and conclusions that we drew. This made a big impression on me.

 

[Singer01]

Re: Re:

Ross Tucker interview on Ireland's 'Off the Ball' sport radio program

https://soundcloud.com/offtheball/ross-tucker-on-chris-fromme

David Walsh was 'otherwise engaged' to appear.

At the end of the interview Ger Gilroy mentions Walsh not available at same time as Ross Tucker, but they will try and get him on to give his(sky's) side of the argument that they are clean.

Will post that here and Walsh thread, IF, it happens. Ger Gilroy is well up on his cycling having interviewed Walsh, Nico Roche, Dan Martin, Kimmage and McQuaid plenty of times.

Like I said back in 2012. No one from Sky will EVER accept a debate with one of the accusers. Which is why Walsh was unavailable for Kimmage and unavailable for Tucker. It all has to come through monlogues to the press where they can control the narrative and avoid counterarguments.

Put Walsh/ Brailsford/ moore/ sloberingham/ millar, any of these idiots in a room with Tucker or Kimmage or anyone from here for 2 minutes and they get blown out of the park.

being good at debating and being in the right are 2 completely different things. if all of the sky accusers on here sat in a room with Michael Mansfield QC you would all come out thinking sky were as clean as fresh snow.

because tripping someone up over an off the cuff remark they made a few years ago is easy, but ask kimmage and tucker to provide some actual proof (and i mean proof, not what the clinic thinks is proof) and they will be found sorely wanting.
that being said there 'there is something rotten in the state of denmark' is a sensible opinion to have right now.

Umm I was talking about an actual debate. Not a court case. Learn to read. My god do people actually believe court favour prove those who are "in the right"?????

Anyone with a bit of money can win a court case just by shooting the witnesses. There's a serious flaw in the system if that's how easy it is. Another athlete, Greg Hardy just got off a prison sentence by paying off the witness After they had testified against him

I'll repeat the point I made just so that there is no confusion for people who can't read well:

Put Walsh/ Brailsford/ moore/ sloberingham/ millar, any of these idiots in a room with Tucker or Kimmage or anyone from here for 2 minutes and they get blown out of the park.

That includes your Michael Mansfield guy.

awesome, accusing others of not reading well, show me where i said court case. go on, i beg you. since the rest of your erroneous argument hinges on that i'll not bother with the rest of your post.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

being good at debating and being in the right are 2 completely different things. if all of the sky accusers on here sat in a room with Michael Mansfield QC you would all come out thinking sky were as clean as fresh snow.

awesome, accusing others of not reading well, show me where i said court case. go on, i beg you. since the rest of your erroneous argument hinges on that i'll not bother with the rest of your post.

Michael Mansfield QC kinda implies we're in a court room yeah?

That aside, your claim that Mr Mansfield could convince me Sky are clean is a bit of a piss take yeah? It's not an emotional response I have, thinking Sky riders are doped.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

being good at debating and being in the right are 2 completely different things. if all of the sky accusers on here sat in a room with Michael Mansfield QC you would all come out thinking sky were as clean as fresh snow.

awesome, accusing others of not reading well, show me where i said court case. go on, i beg you. since the rest of your erroneous argument hinges on that i'll not bother with the rest of your post.

Michael Mansfield QC kinda implies we're in a court room yeah?

That and asking for cast iron "proof". Was quite clear he was suggesting a court room. That or he has no idea what a debate actually is and thinks its the same thing as a court room.

 

[Pantani Attacks]

Froome and Sky will have a bad day today if it stays raining. I am convinced the super dope he's on is heat activated. Once his body reaches a certain temperature he explodes literally and figuratively.

 

[Singer01]

Re: Re:

being good at debating and being in the right are 2 completely different things. if all of the sky accusers on here sat in a room with Michael Mansfield QC you would all come out thinking sky were as clean as fresh snow.

awesome, accusing others of not reading well, show me where i said court case. go on, i beg you. since the rest of your erroneous argument hinges on that i'll not bother with the rest of your post.

Michael Mansfield QC kinda implies we're in a court room yeah?

That and asking for cast iron "proof". Was quite clear he was suggesting a court room. That or he has no idea what a debate actually is and thinks its the same thing as a court room.

2 separate paragraphs discussing 2 different things, keep up.

 

[Singer01]

Re: Re:

being good at debating and being in the right are 2 completely different things. if all of the sky accusers on here sat in a room with Michael Mansfield QC you would all come out thinking sky were as clean as fresh snow.

awesome, accusing others of not reading well, show me where i said court case. go on, i beg you. since the rest of your erroneous argument hinges on that i'll not bother with the rest of your post.

Michael Mansfield QC kinda implies we're in a court room yeah?

That aside, your claim that Mr Mansfield could convince me Sky are clean is a bit of a piss take yeah? It's not an emotional response I have, thinking Sky riders are doped.

a) no
b) how can you state that you believing sky are not doping is not an emotional thing, then suggest that someone would be unable to convince you, no matter how powerful their argument or use of facts, that this was not the case? i hope you never get to serve on a jury.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

being good at debating and being in the right are 2 completely different things. if all of the sky accusers on here sat in a room with Michael Mansfield QC you would all come out thinking sky were as clean as fresh snow.

awesome, accusing others of not reading well, show me where i said court case. go on, i beg you. since the rest of your erroneous argument hinges on that i'll not bother with the rest of your post.

Michael Mansfield QC kinda implies we're in a court room yeah?

That aside, your claim that Mr Mansfield could convince me Sky are clean is a bit of a piss take yeah? It's not an emotional response I have, thinking Sky riders are doped.

a) no
b) how can you state that you believing sky are not doping is not an emotional thing, then suggest that someone would be unable to convince you, no matter how powerful their argument or use of facts, that this was not the case? i hope you never get to serve on a jury.

Good god.

a. QC means queen's counsel. That's a term for a court lawyer / barrister.
b. State one single fact that clears Sky. Go on. Just one. That's where my confidence comes from. I hope you never breed.

 

[Bronstein]

Re:

I do not like Sky, Froome, Porte etc at all and I do "feel" they are doping but if I am objective, what is the most realiable indications that they are doping? I say indications because there are no hard evidence, true?

What I see is:
- Froome almost coming out of nowhere becoming the pretty much the best TTer and climber around

- the team dominating TdF for 4 years and looking with a lot of potential for another few years of victories (Froome would be podium last year probably if it had not been for his crash)

- super strong domestiques

- performances at the edge of what supposedly is humanly possible

- performances which is in line with times of the "good old days"

- a couple of TUE events

Honestly, what I feel is the strongest indication, is the super strong domestique performance. It could be that froome is really just super super strong, who knows. Real genetic freaks that can do superior performances, do exist although rare. He could be one. But seeing eg. how Porte in the Giro was pretty week and suddenly he pulls the peleton and beats Quintana, just smells. Two genetic freaks on the same team, no....

What else should I add to my list? What do you think is the strongest indication of doping

Extreme weight loss whilst significantly increasing power output (Froome in particular).

Refusal to publish biological passport data.

Refusal to publish pre Vuelta 2011 power data (Froome).

Leinders.

Consistently training at altitude to make it easier to mask blood doping.

Constantly beating other known and probable blood dopers.

 

[blackcat]

love the Sky pr releases in full swing.

today in Fairfax the Aus company that owns the Age and the Sydney Morning Herald, they had Rupert Guinness publishing a piece that LRP was punched on the stage yesterday!

so we have LRP getting called a doper yesterday after the stage.
during the stage someone punched him
last week or ten days back, Froome was in a hotel when he was not available for the target testing because of the hotel butler

Sky are in full swing with their command of the media and BS pr releases,

 

[Dear Wiggo]

being punched is not on. was it a mistimed push perhaps?