- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
red_flanders said:Pantani Attacks said:It's definitely heat activated dope...he looked normal today
This is what passes for a "bad day" for Froome.
rainman said:I think quite a bit of this undermines what should be the arguement here.
, ie is he doping and are Sky lying through their teeth.
Like his 'dirty weekend' - he was with his wife for Gods sake. References to the Python story are no longer helpful either. If he had a cruel streak as a kid it doesn't mean he's still delinquent. Why undermine the valid points you make with ridiculous asides that just show you up as vindictive with some axe to grind that has nothing to do with the doping question?
No that is all fine for me apart from the rabbits bit. As I said you make valid points, questions that need answering, so there is never any reason to muddy the waters with stuff that sounds like schoolboys swapping smutty stories behind the bike shed.blackcat said:rainman said:I think quite a bit of this undermines what should be the arguement here.
, ie is he doping and are Sky lying through their teeth.
Like his 'dirty weekend' - he was with his wife for Gods sake. References to the Python story are no longer helpful either. If he had a cruel streak as a kid it doesn't mean he's still delinquent. Why undermine the valid points you make with ridiculous asides that just show you up as vindictive with some axe to grind that has nothing to do with the doping question?
mate, read my recent post where i explain why all the top GC riders will be p!$$ed. I have an empathy for them. They are in the no-win situation. They have to "publicly" lie. the quotes are referring to the Insider v the Outsider. They are not lying to me and the Insider, when we full well know they are charged to their eyeballs, like most of the peloton.
But I did however calculate the pattern of the mistruths. Or "public" lies. The problem with one in the media and on the record, it allows those who are following to go back and search this record. And triangulate contradictions and conflicts. Armstrong left an entire congressional archive to be mined on his lies.
yes, I always navigate life with a conscious brain, you might try it, and with respect to cycling, if something sounds like bull$h!t invariable it will be bovine scatology of the highest order cos it had to pass thru six cow stomachs and associate enzymes, so if it comes out with a bit of bile, that is the half-dozen parts of cow stomach.
you might like triangulating a series of mistruths?
:
hacking i)
hotel OOC ii)
rabbits iii)
tenerife limited hangout^ iv)
post tdf testing limited hangout* v)
freeze blood and urine samples limited hangout* vi)
LRP
punched by one i)
confronts another fan ii)
*from Radcliffe script
there will be myriad of others. do you wish me to start a thread for it?
red_flanders said:Pantani Attacks said:It's definitely heat activated dope...he looked normal today
This is what passes for a "bad day" for Froome.
rainman said:No that is all fine for me apart from the rabbits bit. As I said you make valid points, questions that need answering, so there is never any reason to muddy the waters with stuff that sounds like schoolboys swapping smutty stories behind the bike shed.
Pantani Attacks said:It's definitely heat activated dope...he looked normal today
70kmph said:Better than a motor would be a device which reduces the force of gravity
Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
bigcog said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
As did all the rest, are they all doped ?
BYOP88 said:bigcog said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
As did all the rest, are they all doped ?
As they say in France.........OUI!
bigcog said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
As did all the rest, are they all doped ?
The Hitch said:red_flanders said:Pantani Attacks said:It's definitely heat activated dope...he looked normal today
This is what passes for a "bad day" for Froome.
Has there been any stage of the race on which Contador has finished ahead of Froome? Even on one of the sprints?
Dear Wiggo said:Cycle Chic said:bigcog said:Cycle Chic said:**** 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 ?
to the team car - could explain why he gets on the radio before every attack and while he was climbing on Ventoux...they control the speed.
Bluetooth has a standard range of ~10m. Wireless makes far more sense - the range there is far more easily ~2km.
Where is the receive module mounted?
Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
TI-Raleigh said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
This is why Froome -and the peloton as a whole- is hard to believe in. He has a day where he doesn't look great, still matches Lance 2002 (where he won the stage, dominated the Tour). Lance was a doper beating dopers. And Froome climbs as well as Lance, but claims to be clean. Something isn't right here.
TI-Raleigh said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
This is why Froome -and the peloton as a whole- is hard to believe in. He has a day where he doesn't look great, still matches Lance 2002 (where he won the stage, dominated the Tour). Lance was a doper beating dopers. And Froome climbs as well as Lance, but claims to be clean. Something isn't right here.
What if Froome's PSM performance happened today on PdB? How fast would he have gone? Faster than Contador/Rasmussen '07? That's not going to sell the skeptics that you are clean, at all.
And now this independent testing thing...sounds like a repeat of Ed Coyle. The PR machine churns on.
Clean cycling is not here, probably not even close to being here. The sport is STILL pretty much impossible to believe in.
bigcog said:TI-Raleigh said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
This is why Froome -and the peloton as a whole- is hard to believe in. He has a day where he doesn't look great, still matches Lance 2002 (where he won the stage, dominated the Tour). Lance was a doper beating dopers. And Froome climbs as well as Lance, but claims to be clean. Something isn't right here.
What if Froome's PSM performance happened today on PdB? How fast would he have gone? Faster than Contador/Rasmussen '07? That's not going to sell the skeptics that you are clean, at all.
And now this independent testing thing...sounds like a repeat of Ed Coyle. The PR machine churns on.
Clean cycling is not here, probably not even close to being here. The sport is STILL pretty much impossible to believe in.
What you're ultimately saying is that there can be no improvement in performance in the last 15-20 years approaching Armstrongs, Ulrichs, Patanis performances, otherwise it's a doped performance. What would you say is the clean performance or performance figures that are the clean limit ? It's weird field where they can be no improvement in decades aint it ? If that's the case pretty much all endurance sport is by definition doped.
Nope. Not even in the Vuelta a Whocares back in the day. He's always been better.The Hitch said:red_flanders said:Pantani Attacks said:It's definitely heat activated dope...he looked normal today
This is what passes for a "bad day" for Froome.
Has there been any stage of the race on which Contador has finished ahead of Froome? Even on one of the sprints?
Stage 6The Hitch said:red_flanders said:Pantani Attacks said:It's definitely heat activated dope...he looked normal today
This is what passes for a "bad day" for Froome.
Has there been any stage of the race on which Contador has finished ahead of Froome? Even on one of the sprints?
bigcog said:TI-Raleigh said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
This is why Froome -and the peloton as a whole- is hard to believe in. He has a day where he doesn't look great, still matches Lance 2002 (where he won the stage, dominated the Tour). Lance was a doper beating dopers. And Froome climbs as well as Lance, but claims to be clean. Something isn't right here.
What if Froome's PSM performance happened today on PdB? How fast would he have gone? Faster than Contador/Rasmussen '07? That's not going to sell the skeptics that you are clean, at all.
And now this independent testing thing...sounds like a repeat of Ed Coyle. The PR machine churns on.
Clean cycling is not here, probably not even close to being here. The sport is STILL pretty much impossible to believe in.
What you're ultimately saying is that there can be no improvement in performance in the last 15-20 years approaching Armstrongs, Ulrichs, Patanis performances, otherwise it's a doped performance. What would you say is the clean performance or performance figures that are the clean limit ? It's weird field where they can be no improvement in decades aint it ? If that's the case pretty much all endurance sport is by definition doped.
Franklin said:TI-Raleigh said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
This is why Froome -and the peloton as a whole- is hard to believe in. He has a day where he doesn't look great, still matches Lance 2002 (where he won the stage, dominated the Tour). Lance was a doper beating dopers. And Froome climbs as well as Lance, but claims to be clean. Something isn't right here.
Meh I'm sure they could have gone a minute faster if it was truly neccesary.
You win a prize.bigcog said:[Snipped]TI-Raleigh said:Dear Wiggo said:Just matched Armstrong's 2002 climb time.
This is why Froome -and the peloton as a whole- is hard to believe in. He has a day where he doesn't look great, still matches Lance 2002 (where he won the stage, dominated the Tour). Lance was a doper beating dopers. And Froome climbs as well as Lance, but claims to be clean. Something isn't right here.
What if Froome's PSM performance happened today on PdB? How fast would he have gone? Faster than Contador/Rasmussen '07? That's not going to sell the skeptics that you are clean, at all.
And now this independent testing thing...sounds like a repeat of Ed Coyle. The PR machine churns on.
Clean cycling is not here, probably not even close to being here. The sport is STILL pretty much impossible to believe in.
If that's the case pretty much all endurance sport is by definition doped.
Paul Chamberlain @PCNutrition 13 Dec 2012
British cycling training for ketone use as fuel. Part training part diet strategy but details are secret! #isenc12