Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 782 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
"I think Froome is the most difficult rider I've faced"

"In terms of talent I think that Andy [Schleck] was ahead. He was class. Remember, he was in [Tinkoff] Saxo before I came here so I know a bit about his training, so I know that he was super, super class.

"He wasn't stronger than me in the time trials and that's really the problem with Froome, especially now in the flat time trials.

"He wasn't stronger than me in the time trials and that's really the problem with Froome, especially now in the flat time trials.

"If it's an uphill or hard time trial then I don't have too much of a problem but when it's flat like the one we had in Mont-Saint-Michel in 2013 and you look at his average of 55kph, I can't do that with my weight. If the speed is down at 49-50 then I have a chance."


http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/contador-exclusive-the-tour-de-france-is-the-focus-my-legacy-can-wait/

55kph avg for 63kg Dawg... that is insane :eek:
Alberto says "with my weight I will struggle in 55kph ITTs but I can do well in 49-50kph ITTs" his weight is 62kg but Dawg with 63kg can win 55kph ITTs :rolleyes:
both of them are strong TTers
they´ve beat Cancellara and T.Martin
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
Re:

LaFlorecita said:
Contador: "I think Froome is the most difficult rider I've faced. In terms of talent I think that Andy [Schleck] was ahead."


Alberto seeing right through Dawg. Legend :eek: :cool:
"most difficult" is omerta-speak for most doped.

I think what he is saying is that back in the day, everyone knew what everyone else were doing, but now he is up against this alien rider who has access to something beyond what the peloton considers as normal.
 
Re: Re:

the sceptic said:
LaFlorecita said:
Contador: "I think Froome is the most difficult rider I've faced. In terms of talent I think that Andy [Schleck] was ahead."


Alberto seeing right through Dawg. Legend :eek: :cool:
"most difficult" is omerta-speak for most doped.

I think what he is saying is that back in the day, everyone knew what everyone else were doing, but now he is up against this alien rider who has access to something beyond what the peloton considers as normal.
Contador threw Shleck in there just to make sure everyone knew he actually meant “doping” rather than actual term “talent”.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
Re: Re:

pastronef said:
LaFlorecita said:
"I think Froome is the most difficult rider I've faced"

"In terms of talent I think that Andy [Schleck] was ahead. He was class. Remember, he was in [Tinkoff] Saxo before I came here so I know a bit about his training, so I know that he was super, super class.

"He wasn't stronger than me in the time trials and that's really the problem with Froome, especially now in the flat time trials.

"He wasn't stronger than me in the time trials and that's really the problem with Froome, especially now in the flat time trials.

"If it's an uphill or hard time trial then I don't have too much of a problem but when it's flat like the one we had in Mont-Saint-Michel in 2013 and you look at his average of 55kph, I can't do that with my weight. If the speed is down at 49-50 then I have a chance."


http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/contador-exclusive-the-tour-de-france-is-the-focus-my-legacy-can-wait/

55kph avg for 63kg Dawg... that is insane :eek:
Alberto says "with my weight I will struggle in 55kph ITTs but I can do well in 49-50kph ITTs" his weight is 62kg but Dawg with 63kg can win 55kph ITTs :rolleyes:
both of them are strong TTers
they´ve beat Cancellara and T.Martin
When did Contador ride a TT with 55 km/h average?
 
Re: Re:

Race Radio said:
SeriousSam said:
Is there any believable indication Froome put out phenomenal w/kg before his transformation? Ie not just Sky saying so afterwards.
If Froome does not provide anything from Pre 2011 Vuelta then the testing is worthless.

While Froome likes to say his transformation is due to Sky's innovative training the fact are he was not Part of Sky's "A" team until 2012. Didn't start working with Kerrison until 2013. Most indications are that he has not improved his output in this time.

Grappe was given 17 of Froome's post 2011 SRM files and he said

power he develops over two years is relatively stable
The calculations of the "Pseudo Scientists" confirm this. Veetoo's calculations for Froome's W/kg show that since the 2011 Vuelta he has not progressed as a climber. If Sky's training program is so good why no improvement in 4 years?

There have been rumors of some good tests in 2007 at the UCI cycling center
http://www.lavoixdunord.fr/sports/michel-theze-froome-ne-vient-pas-de-nulle-part-jna0b0n575753

It would be interesting if they found those tests. Froome has lost a large amount of weight since then though.

One other outlier is Froome and Porte's self reported times and Watts up the Madone. Froome has had some impressive performances in races but breaking 30 minutes on that climb and hitting 6.95 w/kg for 30 minutes is really insane.
this is after the event though.....if 'Froomey' was/is, as Grappe states, "close to currently known physiological limits" youwould have thought that somebody in the cycling world might have mentioned it over the course of 4 years?
but?
...nothing...only post transformation...if a physiologist had the world's fittest ever individual ever (or thereabouts)...you would have thought it might have sparked some interest...but no...nothing...just a bottom of the class from sir dave.....
 
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
Alberto says "with my weight I will struggle in 55kph ITTs but I can do well in 49-50kph ITTs" his weight is 62kg but Dawg with 63kg can win 55kph ITTs :rolleyes:
Froome never close to 63 kg that I know of. IIRC, Grappe said his weight never fluctuated much from 69 kg during the post-2011 period for which he was given data. I think the lowest speculated on might be 66-67.

Froome has the body type for an ITT specialist, it's always been his climbing that has been hard to understand. That said, don't forget ScienceisCool's analysis that found an increase in power of about 15% in ITTs from pre- to post-2011. So it can't all be just weight loss.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
So Froome was down with the lurgy in the last week of the race. That we knew. We knew that TVG exited with the lurgy. That Quintana was (yet again) fighting off the lurgy. The lurgy, after a wet stage like Plateau de Beille, of course there's going to be riders suffering with it later in the race.

That Frome was - on the start line - holding back a cough, what does that tell us? That he was a bit chesty or that he was coughing up a lung? There's a world of difference between the two. Some assume the worst, he was coughing up a lung.

What, though, is most interesting, is not that Froome had the lurgy, it's that Sky thought to treat it with a TUE. It's Sky's TUE policy that this story demands we look at. And maybe the way TUEs can get given out at the Tour, with the sign off of the race doctor - whither the star chamber that replaced Zorzoli's say so?

On a related note: Froome makes the point it was Sky suggested the TUE and he turned it down; Froome makes the point it was he who wanted the independent testing, despite pushback from Sky. He's opening a lot of distance between himself and the team. If only there was another team with really really deep pockets who could lure him to their ranks with promises of wealth undreamth of...
one who's main GC rider is retiring next season...
 
Re: Re:

Merckx index said:
LaFlorecita said:
Alberto says "with my weight I will struggle in 55kph ITTs but I can do well in 49-50kph ITTs" his weight is 62kg but Dawg with 63kg can win 55kph ITTs :rolleyes:
Froome never close to 63 kg that I know of. IIRC, Grappe said his weight never fluctuated much from 69 kg during the post-2011 period for which he was given data. I think the lowest speculated on might be 66-67.

Froome has the body type for an ITT specialist, it's always been his climbing that has been hard to understand. That said, don't forget ScienceisCool's analysis that found an increase in power of about 15% in ITTs from pre- to post-2011. So it can't all be just weight loss.
I'd say he is 64-65kg in this 2015 photo. In 2012 he was even skinnier. 2013 he was 65kg.

Contador is right. 55km p/hour is pure insanity for Froome.

 
Sep 10, 2013
183
0
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
Merckx index said:
LaFlorecita said:
Alberto says "with my weight I will struggle in 55kph ITTs but I can do well in 49-50kph ITTs" his weight is 62kg but Dawg with 63kg can win 55kph ITTs :rolleyes:
Froome never close to 63 kg that I know of. IIRC, Grappe said his weight never fluctuated much from 69 kg during the post-2011 period for which he was given data. I think the lowest speculated on might be 66-67.

Froome has the body type for an ITT specialist, it's always been his climbing that has been hard to understand. That said, don't forget ScienceisCool's analysis that found an increase in power of about 15% in ITTs from pre- to post-2011. So it can't all be just weight loss.
I'd say he is 64-65kg in this 2015 photo. In 2012 he was even skinnier. 2013 he was 65kg.

Contador is right. 55km p/hour is pure insanity for Froome.

That is ridiculous. It is not possible to estimate any persons weight within 3 - 4 kg even if you are standing in front of them, and you certainly can't from a photograph, or even comparison of photographs.
 
Re: Re:

Archibald said:
fmk_RoI said:
So Froome was down with the lurgy in the last week of the race. That we knew. We knew that TVG exited with the lurgy. That Quintana was (yet again) fighting off the lurgy. The lurgy, after a wet stage like Plateau de Beille, of course there's going to be riders suffering with it later in the race.

That Frome was - on the start line - holding back a cough, what does that tell us? That he was a bit chesty or that he was coughing up a lung? There's a world of difference between the two. Some assume the worst, he was coughing up a lung.

What, though, is most interesting, is not that Froome had the lurgy, it's that Sky thought to treat it with a TUE. It's Sky's TUE policy that this story demands we look at. And maybe the way TUEs can get given out at the Tour, with the sign off of the race doctor - whither the star chamber that replaced Zorzoli's say so?

On a related note: Froome makes the point it was Sky suggested the TUE and he turned it down; Froome makes the point it was he who wanted the independent testing, despite pushback from Sky. He's opening a lot of distance between himself and the team. If only there was another team with really really deep pockets who could lure him to their ranks with promises of wealth undreamth of...
one who's main GC rider is retiring next season...
Well, Tinkov likes Froome after all I think. Sky wants Thomas to lead a grand tour / the Tour some day and wants to make Landa the new Pantani.

I've seen stranger things happen in cycling than Tinkoff signing Froome.

Still not likely, of course.
 
Oct 10, 2015
2,059
0
0
pastronef said:
Froome, like Indurain, will not sign with other teams. I don´t see him in another environment
I don't know if I agree with that, he's a cocky guy and I think once one of Brailsfords other mutations come through the system and the money's right he will leave Sky. Big ego and big money are to seperate
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
pastronef said:
Froome, like Indurain, will not sign with other teams. I don´t see him in another environment
As long as there is no internal threat to his position in sky (being surpassed by Thomas, other) then i don't see him leaving the team.

It would be interesting though, to see how he would fare in another outfit.

On the other hand, perhaps at some point Sky will rather ship him off, producing another TDF winner.

That of course depends on their risk assessment regarding the Froome marvel.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
It's not always a good idea having all your country's good riders on one team. Some races accrue points towards nation totals that determine team size at things like the olympic road race.
 
Re: Re:

Farcanal said:
thehog said:
Merckx index said:
LaFlorecita said:
Alberto says "with my weight I will struggle in 55kph ITTs but I can do well in 49-50kph ITTs" his weight is 62kg but Dawg with 63kg can win 55kph ITTs :rolleyes:
Froome never close to 63 kg that I know of. IIRC, Grappe said his weight never fluctuated much from 69 kg during the post-2011 period for which he was given data. I think the lowest speculated on might be 66-67.

Froome has the body type for an ITT specialist, it's always been his climbing that has been hard to understand. That said, don't forget ScienceisCool's analysis that found an increase in power of about 15% in ITTs from pre- to post-2011. So it can't all be just weight loss.
I'd say he is 64-65kg in this 2015 photo. In 2012 he was even skinnier. 2013 he was 65kg.

Contador is right. 55km p/hour is pure insanity for Froome.
That is ridiculous. It is not possible to estimate any persons weight within 3 - 4 kg even if you are standing in front of them, and you certainly can't from a photograph, or even comparison of photographs.
But its not ridiculous. He states his weight as being "66kg" in his book. Which makes it a very easy task to predict his "actual" weight.

Besides law enforcement ask witnesses to predict a persons weight all the time and release those values. Good enough for them good enough for the Clinic :)
 
More smack from the Dawg:

Chris Froome, the Kenyan-born professional road racing cyclist who competes for the U.K., told CNBC that the anti-doping agencies in cycling had really "stepped up their game."

"I think anti-doping, it's been a massive part of the evolution of the sport over the past 10 years. Especially moving on from the whole Lance Armstrong era," he said Tuesday in an interview at the annual Web Summit in Dublin
"We are now the only sport to have 24 hour testing, so they could come and wake us up at 2 o'clock in the morning, 365 days a year," he added. "And (there's) a no needles policy so they've gone above and beyond to try and get rid of doping within the sport."
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/03/tour-winner-froome-says-anti-doping-agencies-have-stepped-up-their-game.html
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
thehog said:
More smack from the Dawg:

Chris Froome, the Kenyan-born professional road racing cyclist who competes for the U.K., told CNBC that the anti-doping agencies in cycling had really "stepped up their game."

"I think anti-doping, it's been a massive part of the evolution of the sport over the past 10 years. Especially moving on from the whole Lance Armstrong era," he said Tuesday in an interview at the annual Web Summit in Dublin
"We are now the only sport to have 24 hour testing, so they could come and wake us up at 2 o'clock in the morning, 365 days a year," he added. "And (there's) a no needles policy so they've gone above and beyond to try and get rid of doping within the sport."
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/03/tour-winner-froome-says-anti-doping-agencies-have-stepped-up-their-game.html
Yet the peloton is rife with doping, dope, dopers, past dopers, future dopers.

The sponsorship spigot has slowed to a trickle, the thinking is if Froome serves some Kool Aid the sponsors will drink it up.
 
thehog said:
More smack from the Dawg:

"We are now the only sport to have 24 hour testing, so they could come and wake us up at 2 o'clock in the morning, 365 days a year," he added. "And (there's) a no needles policy so they've gone above and beyond to try and get rid of doping within the sport."
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/03/tour-winner-froome-says-anti-doping-agencies-have-stepped-up-their-game.html
24 hour testing and no needles are WADA policies and applicable to *all* WADA affiliated sports. They are not cycling-only policies.
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
fmk_RoI said:
irondan said:
The sponsorship spigot has slowed to a trickle
What's the evidence for this? Has there been a comparison between total WT teams' budgets this year and last? Any statistics to back it up or is it just an opinion?
It was my personal feeling/opinion based on various news reports.

I may be wrong, and I hope I am. If I'm wrong then cycling is alive and healthy, as it should be.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY