Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 795 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

bigcog said:
Benotti69 said:
bigcog said:
Benotti69 said:
Would you trust an international sporting federation?

Why not, you clearly trust Tucker, someone who will readily help a team and sport with a well dodgy past. As always money talks no doubt, his 'ethics' ain't so strong then eh ?
I dont remember posting i trust Ross Tucker! But he has been right on Froome. That must hurt.

So you think money talks and you want to defend the richest team in the peloton?
I was referring to the fact the Tucker is plainly dodgy, so why the hell would I give him any credence ?
show me where tucker is dodgy or is wrong
 
Re: Re:

TheSpud said:
Oufeh said:
TheSpud said:
Oufeh said:
danielovichdk2 said:
Outputting 388 watts for a longer period (+20min) is high for a person with a low weight (~70kg). If you can push 5.5w/kg like the above for 20min., you're in good shape.

There is no definition of doped watts.
388 watts for 50 mins was enough for Froome to match Armstrong's best climbing time and put 30 secs into Quintana (and 100 into Contador...), that's the most significant point :)
What were the w/kg for that climb?


Estimation was just under 6w/kg for the two thirds of the climb shielded from the wind http://www.chronoswatts.com/en/watts/21/
Ok, so below what most people class as doping then ...

I think 388 is a high number. I also think that the w/kg table/reference in terms of how good an athlete is, is scewed and most be based on pseudo-science or a doped rider.

If you ride with a powermeter you have an indication of what I mean. I occassionally ride and train with some pro-conti riders and based on their watt-numbers, these (top-tier pros) other numbers seem totally out of this world. And these guys are not in bad shape nor amateurs.

In my own opinion it's very exceptional to push 388 for an hour. I have heard rumors and stories about how many watts some of riders are pushing, and I have a very hard time believing it's legit (clean).

I would say that, if you can push 6-7 w/kg for a longer period (+20min) you're on something. And that goes for everyone.
 
Re: Re:

Bronstein said:
Race tactics and 'craft' are't difficult to understand,
And yet Rabofail existed for all those years!

Serious question to those that think Leinders was responsible for Froome's transformation.

What was Leinders doing from the start of 2011 to the Vuelta, as we know Froome was abject over this period but was supposedly working with one of the great doping doctors. We know from his post Vuelta 2011 form that he is a good responder so that can't be an excuse why he was so poor for the first half of that year. I find it hard to believe that Sky would start doping him 2 months before the end of a contract so that they have to pay him loads for a new contract, why not do it earlier?

I suspect he must have gone rogue outside the team to get a new contract.
 
Re: Re:

bigcog said:
Benotti69 said:
bigcog said:
Benotti69 said:
Would you trust an international sporting federation?

Why not, you clearly trust Tucker, someone who will readily help a team and sport with a well dodgy past. As always money talks no doubt, his 'ethics' ain't so strong then eh ?
I dont remember posting i trust Ross Tucker! But he has been right on Froome. That must hurt.

So you think money talks and you want to defend the richest team in the peloton?
I was referring to the fact the Tucker is plainly dodgy, so why the hell would I give him any credence ?
So now you refer to your attacking of the messenger as a given fact? Tucker is now dodgy because you can't attack what he says, so you attack his character?

NOT convincing. Reprehensible, frankly.
 
Re: Re:

Bronstein said:
Citing Froome's supposed lack of tactical awareness as a reason for his lack of results during the 2007-2011 period is an indication of just how implausible Froome's transformation was. It is a good example of clutching at straws in an attempt to explain the extremely improbable.
Or a profound cluelessness about racing tactics, or a willingness to ignore the simple facts you've outlined. Truly amazing anyone buys this tripe.

Do tactics help? Of course. Do they make the difference between a mid-pack rider and a completely dominant GT winner. Of course not. One has to be willfully blind not to understand this.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
Bronstein said:
Citing Froome's supposed lack of tactical awareness as a reason for his lack of results during the 2007-2011 period is an indication of just how implausible Froome's transformation was. It is a good example of clutching at straws in an attempt to explain the extremely improbable.
Or a profound cluelessness about racing tactics, or a willingness to ignore the simple facts you've outlined. Truly amazing anyone buys this tripe.

Do tactics help? Of course. Do they make the difference between a mid-pack rider and a completely dominant GT winner. Of course not. One has to be willfully blind not to understand this.
Its funny how during sky tours a lot of the sky superfans rely entirely on a "but you don't understand tactics" message.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Re: Re:

bigcog said:
I thought the trainer from UCI Swiss camp in 2007 said he had the biggest potential he had ever seen, on a par with Hinualt, which presumably alludes to a high power output. The fact that you've got a big engine aint going to help if your race tactics are idiotic and you lack race craft. Anyway as I said before I don't know why he's bothering as he ain't going to convince the doubters, perhaps he likes winding up posters on here.
This is incredibly naive.

You only have to watch the 2012 Tour to see you are patently incorrect. If you have the power in a Tour you just have to ride hard on the front.

Win.

To my eyes it looked exactly like any of the USPS train-won Tour.

Unless you think there were tactics employed in that Tour, in which case I am all ears. Please expound on them and the difference they made.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Why did Jeroen Swart not read Grappe's analysis? It was big news at the time?

But it seems Kerrison is a beard.

Froome's transformation was massive and it appears has remained consistent since. That needs some explaining. The brakes were rubbing.....
 
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
red_flanders said:
Bronstein said:
Citing Froome's supposed lack of tactical awareness as a reason for his lack of results during the 2007-2011 period is an indication of just how implausible Froome's transformation was. It is a good example of clutching at straws in an attempt to explain the extremely improbable.
Or a profound cluelessness about racing tactics, or a willingness to ignore the simple facts you've outlined. Truly amazing anyone buys this tripe.

Do tactics help? Of course. Do they make the difference between a mid-pack rider and a completely dominant GT winner. Of course not. One has to be willfully blind not to understand this.
Its funny how during sky tours a lot of the sky superfans rely entirely on a "but you don't understand tactics" message.
I just ask them to enlighten me on what Froome should have been doing ;)
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
A thing I take notice from is a continuous distance between Froome and his team.

This is particularly the case with PR and the press in general.

Around and in doing the Tour there's a lot of comments from Brailsford regarding Froome but away from that he (froome) seems to be running his own show.

Michelle Cound told me on twitter (before she nuked her account again) that she is running all media inquiries to Froome and even answers on his behalf. She also told me that Sky pass on media requests to her when "appropriate".

Froome also being doctored in Monace by the somewhat dubious Dr. Bermon is also conveniently adding to the distance.

I think this whole arrangement is understandable for the Team because if he someday should get the axe, Brailsford can claim ignorance to some extent.
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
bigcog said:
Benotti69 said:
I did not say French was a real language. But the claim for famous is more PR.

The French, a whole nation now, have antagonism for Froome! Since when. More Sky propaganda!
What's whether it's famous or PR got to do with anything ? The bloke said Froome had a high VO2 max without much high level training back in 2007. Must hard to take I know.
Yeah, he could have had 7 TdFs by now. I am gutted, truly. I mean he had a Hinault high VO2 max. A guy would remember that number for the rest of his life, to be compared at such a young age to a 5 time winner of the TdF, you'd never forget what your vo2max was.

:rolleyes:
He should certainly have 3 (2012) - and could well have 4 (2014 - we'll never know)
 
Re:

mrhender said:
Michelle Cound told me on twitter (before she nuked her account again) that she is running all media inquiries to Froome and even answers on his behalf. She also told me that Sky pass on media requests to her when "appropriate".
So that's explains why Froome was spotted out on his bike while he was also answering questions on twitter in a Q&A :)
 
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
mrhender said:
Michelle Cound told me on twitter (before she nuked her account again) that she is running all media inquiries to Froome and even answers on his behalf. She also told me that Sky pass on media requests to her when "appropriate".
So that's explains why Froome was spotted out on his bike while he was also answering questions on twitter in a Q&A :)
hold on - that means the froomes are dishonest - who'd have thought
 
Re:

mrhender said:
A thing I take notice from is a continuous distance between Froome and his team.

This is particularly the case with PR and the press in general.

Around and in doing the Tour there's a lot of comments from Brailsford regarding Froome but away from that he (froome) seems to be running his own show.

Michelle Cound told me on twitter (before she nuked her account again) that she is running all media inquiries to Froome and even answers on his behalf. She also told me that Sky pass on media requests to her when "appropriate".

Froome also being doctored in Monace by the somewhat dubious Dr. Bermon is also conveniently adding to the distance.

I think this whole arrangement is understandable for the Team because if he someday should get the axe, Brailsford can claim ignorance to some extent.
I also think it's understandable because IMO he started whatever program he's on independent of the team. They were as surprised as anyone by his stunning form in the 2011 Vuelta, as evidenced by all the comments leading up to and during the race, as well as the team selection and tactics. No way they thought he was on a full program. They had no interest at all in him being "the guy" then, as it was all in for Wiggo leading up to London 2012.

If he ever burns they'll turn on him faster than they did on Wiggo himself.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
mrhender said:
A thing I take notice from is a continuous distance between Froome and his team.

This is particularly the case with PR and the press in general.

Around and in doing the Tour there's a lot of comments from Brailsford regarding Froome but away from that he (froome) seems to be running his own show.

Michelle Cound told me on twitter (before she nuked her account again) that she is running all media inquiries to Froome and even answers on his behalf. She also told me that Sky pass on media requests to her when "appropriate".

Froome also being doctored in Monace by the somewhat dubious Dr. Bermon is also conveniently adding to the distance.

I think this whole arrangement is understandable for the Team because if he someday should get the axe, Brailsford can claim ignorance to some extent.
I also think it's understandable because IMO he started whatever program he's on independent of the team. They were as surprised as anyone by his stunning form in the 2011 Vuelta, as evidenced by all the comments leading up to and during the race, as well as the team selection and tactics. No way they thought he was on a full program. They had no interest at all in him being "the guy" then, as it was all in for Wiggo leading up to London 2012.

If he ever burns they'll turn on him faster than they did on Wiggo himself.
This - he flew solo but then they had quite a decision to make after that vuelta - and no I don't believe there is team wide doping going on anymore. I totally accept that. But what I have been told, not about sky, is that it's still the same, just more secretive and cut throat - guys are flying solo regarding their doping.
 
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
mrhender said:
Michelle Cound told me on twitter (before she nuked her account again) that she is running all media inquiries to Froome and even answers on his behalf. She also told me that Sky pass on media requests to her when "appropriate".
So that's explains why Froome was spotted out on his bike while he was also answering questions on twitter in a Q&A :)
Really?

You have a link for this?
 
Re: Re:

Digger said:
This - he flew solo but then they had quite a decision to make after that vuelta - and no I don't believe there is team wide doping going on anymore. I totally accept that. But what I have been told, not about sky, is that it's still the same, just more secretive and cut throat - guys are flying solo regarding their doping.
I tend to agree, but I would also say that the teams are actively engaged in defensive PR and support for riders who are doping. It is expected and if not expected, it's supported. Plausible deniability is sought by the teams. They know what's going on, and are either putting pressure on riders to dope or enabling it in the best ways they can while mitigating risk and exposure for the team and sponsors. At the very least.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY