Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

I'm open minded to be informed with any substantial info.

Sadly that doesn't include your style of posting.

It's disingenuous of Benotti to come on here and call for data releases, transparency as if it would somehow make a difference to his position when he has a religious view of thinking everyone dopes.

The sport has long forgone the right to be given the benefit of the doubt.

The sport has not had some monumental change of heart, never mind culture that would indicate that there has been a change. All that happened was the guy who everyone knew doped finally admitted it. That was used to claim that the sport somehow changed. False.

Do you believe Sky? They have talked a lot like previous dopers, yet shown nothing. When asked how they did it they got a Murdoch journalist to talk about things Sky claimed to have invented, better training, better diet, washing hands, special pillows, nutella bans, a squirt of pineapple juice in the bidons, which all were disproved as being invented by sky nor were they revolutionary.

So Froome and Sky want to be believed but instead of being transparent, have told a bunch of lies and you attack posters like me for calling it.

But those bits ARE the marginal gains - remove as much 'noise' as possible from the day to day things, even if they only give 1% improvement it still adds up in total (and in their view important). The big gains are the training, diet, ketones, etc (in your view / world - doping) but you're NEVER going to hear about what they are (legal or not) since they are 'trade secrets'.

You're talking like Sky is some kind of Real Madrid and all other teams are 2nd division teams. The training can't be much different and some diet and good night sleep doesn't give you such a humongous advantage over the others.

No, I'm just saying I don't get hung up on the pineapple juice / nutella being the big story like people on here do (that was never a Sky story, it was Walsh) - its just part of the 1% daily routine in my view. As I have said before - I wouldn't be surprised if they were chemically (ketone?) enhanced but within the rules (more the words than the spirit). An example would be using Xenon before it was banned - a grey area.

 

[mrhender]

Re:

Everyone...

Calm down and quit the personal stuff..

Cheers
mrhender

In case anyone missed this..

I've deleted a handful posts, and some of you have to check your inbox..

If you all cannot keep it civil from here you will very likely face a ban.

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

But those bits ARE the marginal gains - remove as much 'noise' as possible from the day to day things, even if they only give 1% improvement it still adds up in total (and in their view important). The big gains are the training, diet, ketones, etc (in your view / world - doping) but you're NEVER going to hear about what they are (legal or not) since they are 'trade secrets'

They are not 'marginal gains' as all the teams do them or similar, so no gain.

Sky dont do Ketones, if you believe Brailsford. Sean Kelly talked about his attention to detail of his diet with Di Gribaldy. So did Armstrong, Merckx, etc etc......There are no trade secrets when the riders rarely stay at a team for long. So dont believe the hype (or as calling a spade a spade, lies)

As you have so readily pointed out - you don't believe Sky / DB. So when they say they aren't using Ketones you all of a sudden believe them ...

As for the 'marginal' stuff - I dont deny / disagree with your comment. Maybe they are not the gain they once were - but why not keep looking for them. For example - Wiggo's chain for the hour record reputedly cost in excess of £10k. Not because it was necessarily special materials but because the manufacturer took 10 chains (I think) and analysed them to the highest degree to find the one with the least resistance. After that they then cleaned / lubed it over and over to make it better still - it was labour hours that made the cost. THAT is a marginal gain.

So what if Sky have that for the tour? What if that saves enough energy to go at 395W instead of 400W? Thats a 1.25% gain ...

And if that can be done for chains - what about hubs, bottom brackets, etc.???

Costly in £ terms but when you have the biggest budget on the planet you can pay for it. Do BMC, SAXO, others have that kind of ££?


*** APOLOGIES ON THE QUOTE AT THE TOP - I HAD TO DELETE STUFF AND GOT IT WRONG, NOT TRYING To MISREP BENOTTI ***

 

[Mr.38%]

Chris Picavet
‏@ChrisPicavet

Chris Froome maakt een veel voorkomende en begrijpelijke vergissing. Volgens toeschouwers was het geen urine maar Heineken bier.

(Leffe would have be an exogen doping product)

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

But those bits ARE the marginal gains - remove as much 'noise' as possible from the day to day things, even if they only give 1% improvement it still adds up in total (and in their view important). The big gains are the training, diet, ketones, etc (in your view / world - doping) but you're NEVER going to hear about what they are (legal or not) since they are 'trade secrets

As you have so readily pointed out - you don't believe Sky / DB. So when they say they aren't using Ketones you all of a sudden believe them ...

No there are plenty of examples of where it says it is part of Sky program.

As for the 'marginal' stuff - I dont deny / disagree with your comment. Maybe they are not the gain they once were - but why not keep looking for them. For example - Wiggo's chain for the hour record reputedly cost in excess of £10k. Not because it was necessarily special materials but because the manufacturer took 10 chains (I think) and analysed them to the highest degree to find the one with the least resistance. After that they then cleaned / lubed it over and over to make it better still - it was labour hours that made the cost. THAT is a marginal gain.

All the teams keep looking for them, not just Sky and when riders, DS, Coaches, doctors move so to do the 'trade secrets'..... So Sky cannot claim in 2015 when having jettisoned so many people to still have the culmination of all those gains in their favour agaisnt dopers. The doping is too good. It has had decades to be tweeked and bettered to make it so important to teams. Marginal gains is PR speak.

So what if Sky have that for the tour? What if that saves enough energy to go at 395W instead of 400W? Thats a 1.25% gain ...

And if that can be done for chains - what about hubs, bottom brackets, etc.???
Costly in £ terms but when you have the biggest budget on the planet you can pay for it. Do BMC, SAXO, others have that kind of ££?

We heard all this before with Armstrong. We actually had it with LeMond developing stuff that did make a difference. Now with all the wind tunnel testing and sports science, the teams get micro gains not marginal. The saddest thing is their #1 rider wasn't in a wind tunnel, looks so inefficient on a bike and the excuses they come up with to explain his stratotspehric rise they cant even get storeis right in interviews.

If Sky were clean and had a 'legal' but 'amoral advantage' they could still tell the world, bit like Ferrari had an exclusive deal with Armstrong not to work with anyone else.

Sorry but Sky's excuses only work with those new to the sport or those from the UK who have waited a long time for a cycling superstar since Tom Simpson, who they all worship, in Sky anyway.

 

[Benotti69]

Chris Picavet
‏@ChrisPicavet

Chris Froome maakt een veel voorkomende en begrijpelijke vergissing. Volgens toeschouwers was het geen urine maar Heineken bier.

(Leffe would have be an exogen doping product)

Leffe would have been a real marginal gain

 

[neineinei]

If Froome was so absolutely terrible pre-2011 then why did SKY sign him?

They must have seen some natural ability there, I mean Sir David B is no dummy is he?

Someone on here was claiming Teklehaimanot destroyed Froome in an African championship race. Well, why didn't SKY sign him then?

The point I am making is that SKY would not sign any old hack entitled to a British passport with the expectation their methods would turn them into champion.

Froome MUST have had something about him to catch their interest and invest so much time, effort and money into project Chris.

Brailsford signed quite a few who didn't turn into champions. http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/team.asp?year=2010&teamcode=SKY

Inside the mind of Dave Brailsford:
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/inside-the-mind-of-dave-brailsford-2615

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

We heard all this before with Armstrong.

And there we go again - Armstrong did /said this therefore they (Sky) must be doping ...

The point I was making on budget was that if you have the biggest you can get the best. I have read that Sky/FOX have in the past paid £30m a year to the team, and I have heard that this is the biggest budget in the peloton.

I don't know how much bigger it is than the others, but lets say - all things equal (# of riders, salaries, etc) that Sky have another £2-3m more than others. Thats only 10% more (doesn't sound a lot does it). I'm sure that could pay for a lot of research in to Ketones (and yes other things aswell). So clearly a bigger budget COULD mean some big differences.

 

[Tonton]

Re:

Also, if it was, in fact, Heineken, then it's just perfectly fine, isn't it..

As you hint, Heineken or not, it's unacceptable. IMO, it would be different had someone done it to Wonderboy this year: the guy has no business being anywhere near the Tour. He has done enough damage. But these guys are doing their job, a tough job, and they deserve respect. The public cannot be judge, jury, and executioner. Booing, I don't mind, from a safe distance. But not running alongside a guy and cursing in his face. And certainly not trowing things.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

We heard all this before with Armstrong.

And there we go again - Armstrong did /said this therefore they (Sky) must be doping ...

The point I was making on budget was that if you have the biggest you can get the best. I have read that Sky/FOX have in the past paid £30m a year to the team, and I have heard that this is the biggest budget in the peloton.

I don't know how much bigger it is than the others, but lets say - all things equal (# of riders, salaries, etc) that Sky have another £2-3m more than others. Thats only 10% more (doesn't sound a lot does it). I'm sure that could pay for a lot of research in to Ketones (and yes other things aswell). So clearly a bigger budget COULD mean some big differences.

Sorry, but that Sky are repeating old used mantras cannot be unchanged no matter how much the fan would wish it.

Astana is a state funded team. Katusha is a state funded team. Where do Sky have more money or resources say than these?

Oleg a Billionaire with Tinkoff. BMC are not millions behind Sky.

Sky dont have the massive bigger budget that can lend them to using stuff other teams cannot afford. That does not cut it. Other teams use doping, which gives a massive advantage that cannot be beaten by so called 'marginal gains'. So it leads to one conclusion that has been proven many times before in cycling. Doping.

 

[Benotti69]

Neanderthals, aliens, performance data & context

http://sportsscientists.com/2015/07/neanderthals-aliens-performance-data-context/

When performances are close or better than what they were during periods of known, relatively unregulated doping, that’s a worrying SIGN, certainly, and the physiological improbability of performance is worth paying attention to, as one piece of a complex, very noisy puzzle.

For the clinic, as has been stated plenty of times, we dont have to prove anything, it is a forum, we are all free to post our opinons (as the forum rules dictate).

Sky were the team that took the "we are clean" up to the nth degree with little transparency and when called on it have delivered the same rhetoric and excuses as the teams that doped, ie shoot the messengers, blame jealous French, blame the media, hide behind a disease, train harder, others are unprofessional, better diets, no rubbish foods, yadayadayadayadayada......

 

[autologous]

Re: Re:

As for the 'marginal' stuff - I dont deny / disagree with your comment. Maybe they are not the gain they once were - but why not keep looking for them. For example - Wiggo's chain for the hour record reputedly cost in excess of £10k. Not because it was necessarily special materials but because the manufacturer took 10 chains (I think) and analysed them to the highest degree to find the one with the least resistance. After that they then cleaned / lubed it over and over to make it better still - it was labour hours that made the cost. THAT is a marginal gain.

So what if Sky have that for the tour? What if that saves enough energy to go at 395W instead of 400W? Thats a 1.25% gain ...

And if that can be done for chains - what about hubs, bottom brackets, etc.???

assuming that they have some secret marginal gains, explain how those marginal gains kicked in for Froome between 2011 Poland and 2011 Vuelta. You're going to have to come up with something better than 1.25%.

Must be a fantastic bottom bracket they developed in those couple of months.

 

[Rackham]

What bothers me - which also includes other teams as well - is the fact Sky & Froome react with 'outrage' & veritable anger at accusations which are quite frankly normal & should now be considered par of the course.

Hello Sky, we're in the 'post-Lance' era, remember? Why express such indignation at all the 'suspicions' many have raised? Hell, 'if' they were 100% clean, they should theoretically be proud as hell about the fact they're matching ascent times of known dopers & performing at such a high level, i.e. when taken at face value & according to the data, Froome is an extraterrestrial athlete.

A clean Froome should = a happy Froome, IMO, because he would have achieved stratospheric results whilst riding clean, thus making him one of the best cyclists of all time, ergo I don't quite understand Sky's outbursts of fury.

Instead of Sky saying to the media "shut up, we're clean! *insert stereotypical 'hurt feelings' angry diatribe, why not just say "we understand the reasons for the suspicions, but, we're extremely proud of our performances which will endure for eternity because we're clean".

Be happy & content with your performances, Sky, because you'll never silence the accusations, which for the most part are actually beneficial for the Tour because people no longer swallow miracles & a fairytale hook, line & sinker.

 

[buckle]

By way of retaliation I'm hopeful that tomorrow Froome will throw his urine at the fans who might then do a better job with it then the testers.

 

[zlev11]

Chris Picavet
‏@ChrisPicavet

Chris Froome maakt een veel voorkomende en begrijpelijke vergissing. Volgens toeschouwers was het geen urine maar Heineken bier.

(Leffe would have be an exogen doping product)

Leffe would have been a real marginal gain

if it was Bud Light I wouldn't blame him for thinking it was piss

 

[SeriousSam]

What bothers me - which also includes other teams as well - is the fact Sky & Froome react with 'outrage' & veritable anger at accusations which are quite frankly normal & should now be considered par of the course.

Hello Sky, we're in the 'post-Lance' era, remember? Why express such indignation at all the 'suspicions' many have raised? Hell, 'if' they were 100% clean, they should theoretically be proud as hell about the fact they're matching ascent times of known dopers & performing at such a high level, i.e. when taken at face value & according to the data, Froome is an extraterrestrial athlete.

A clean Froome should = a happy Froome, IMO, because he would have achieved stratospheric results whilst riding clean, thus making him one of the best cyclists of all time, ergo I don't quite understand Sky's outbursts of fury.

Instead of Sky saying to the media "shut up, we're clean! *insert stereotypical 'hurt feelings' angry diatribe, why not just say "we understand the reasons for the suspicions, but, we're extremely proud of our performances which will endure for eternity because we're clean".

Be happy & content with your performances, Sky, because you'll never silence the accusations, which for the most part are actually beneficial for the Tour because people no longer swallow miracles & a fairytale hook, line & sinker.

It's just insulting how Sky and others repeatedly ask people to shut their brain off. They literally paraphrase Lances good old "I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles" line in just about every statement they make.

 

[86TDFWinner]

IIRC, Didn't Froome boast not too long ago about missing some sort of testing, due to being in the shower or some other lame excuse? or am I thinking of someone else?

 

[buckle]

I suspect it might take more than thirty years for SKY to be exposed. They are that well protected. To give an example, Germany pulled down the Berlin Wall twenty five years ago. What people don't know is that the British army built a five km "peace wall" in Belfast more than forty years ago and it is still operational but nobody knows about it. If you can keep a huge wall secret for that length of time, a doping program is child's play.

 

[dottigirl]

The biggest 'marginal gain' I've heard of is Sky reorganising the allocations so the riders get their own hotel rooms (aided by using beds in their vehicles).

From personal experience, that's not 'marginal', that's massive. One decent night's sleep may not make much of a difference, but sleeping well for the duration? Not having to put up with the nocturnal habits of another (snoring, loo visits, noise due to injuries, general restlessness, etc)?

I've seen sarky comments about pillows, etc, but the same people haven't mentioned this. Sleep is so important, and how many other teams manage a room per rider?

 

[86TDFWinner]

What bothers me - which also includes other teams as well - is the fact Sky & Froome react with 'outrage' & veritable anger at accusations which are quite frankly normal & should now be considered par of the course.

Hello Sky, we're in the 'post-Lance' era, remember? Why express such indignation at all the 'suspicions' many have raised? Hell, 'if' they were 100% clean, they should theoretically be proud as hell about the fact they're matching ascent times of known dopers & performing at such a high level, i.e. when taken at face value & according to the data, Froome is an extraterrestrial athlete.

A clean Froome should = a happy Froome, IMO, because he would have achieved stratospheric results whilst riding clean, thus making him one of the best cyclists of all time, ergo I don't quite understand Sky's outbursts of fury.

Instead of Sky saying to the media "shut up, we're clean! *insert stereotypical 'hurt feelings' angry diatribe, why not just say "we understand the reasons for the suspicions, but, we're extremely proud of our performances which will endure for eternity because we're clean".

Be happy & content with your performances, Sky, because you'll never silence the accusations, which for the most part are actually beneficial for the Tour because people no longer swallow miracles & a fairytale hook, line & sinker.

Excellent post.

 

[Eagle]

IIRC, Didn't Froome boast not too long ago about missing some sort of testing, due to being in the shower or some other lame excuse? or am I thinking of someone else?

No, he missed one test when he was in a hotel in Italy and the hotel didn't allow the testers access to him and the other missed test a few years back he went for a ride I think and forgot about whereabouts. Mo Farah recently missed a test by not hearing the doorbell, you might be thinking of that

 

[86TDFWinner]

By way of retaliation I'm hopeful that tomorrow Froome will throw his urine at the fans who might then do a better job with it then the testers.

They should've saved their urine for Wonderboy. God knows he's worthy of it.

 

[86TDFWinner]

IIRC, Didn't Froome boast not too long ago about missing some sort of testing, due to being in the shower or some other lame excuse? or am I thinking of someone else?

No, he missed one test when he was in a hotel in Italy and the hotel didn't allow the testers access to him and the other missed test a few years back he went for a ride I think and forgot about whereabouts. Mo Farah recently missed a test by not hearing the doorbell, you might be thinking of that

I think the latter is indeed what I'm thinking of.

How convenient for Froome those times, eh?

 

[buckle]

IIRC, Didn't Froome boast not too long ago about missing some sort of testing, due to being in the shower or some other lame excuse? or am I thinking of someone else?

He showers a lot because people keep throwing pi'ss at him.

 

[86TDFWinner]

I suspect it might take more than thirty years for SKY to be exposed. They are that well protected. To give an example, Germany pulled down the Berlin Wall twenty five years ago. What people don't know is that the British army built a five km "peace wall" in Belfast more than forty years ago and it is still operational but nobody knows about it. If you can keep a huge wall secret for that length of time, a doping program is child's play.

More "protected" than Wonderboy? Doubtful. Someone from Sky will piss someone else off, and voila! The hammer will fall. Wonderboy was WELL protected for over a decade, but cracks showed almost immediately.