Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 91 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 12, 2010
1,998
0
0
Miburo said:
What about liberti seguros? Half the team was called to dope (tour'06) but not their team leader?

Granted 7 years ago the mentality was clearly different. Now it's just "Yea i called it..."
Yeah, but the links with Vinokourov himself were rather tenuous, he had only just joined the team, it wasn't clear if he was a Fuentes client etc. Of course, it's hard to recall what the communis opinio was 7 years ago, but from what I remember, he wasn't really suspected as much as you would assume based on his results, teams etc. Although to be honest, I never liked Vino, so I was glad he got caught :p

I think the triple combo of the 2006 (Puerto, Landis), 2007 (Vino, Rasmussen) and 2008 (Ricco, Schumacher, Piepoli, Kohl) Tours really took the blinders off of a lot of people, and even naieve cycling fans discovered that doping wasn't restricted to some dirty Italians and dubious eastern block riders, but that everyone was doing it. The almost universal suspicion that people like Santambrogio and Froome now get was unheard of only 5 years ago.
 
Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
hrotha said:
Why? People who have accepted the role of doping and are still able to watch are at peace. People who need to fool themselves into believing in fairies are the ones that are in a predicament, as their world might crumble at any time.
No.
Accepting the role of doping is tantamount to resignation, giving up, cashing in the chips, ordering a silk-lined coffin. They may be at peace, but that is peace as in everlasting-peace.

I know a lot about EBH, and guess what? He ain't a fairy.
 
May 28, 2012
2,779
0
0
hektoren said:
No.
Accepting the role of doping is tantamount to resignation, giving up, cashing in the chips, ordering a silk-lined coffin. They may be at peace, but that is peace as in everlasting-peace.

I know a lot about EBH, and guess what? He ain't a fairy.
Who is a fairy according to you? It's hard to determine who's most unlikely doping.
 
hektoren said:
No.
Accepting the role of doping is tantamount to resignation, giving up, cashing in the chips, ordering a silk-lined coffin. They may be at peace, but that is peace as in everlasting-peace.

I know a lot about EBH, and guess what? He ain't a fairy.
That's your opinion ... your experience. To suggest that it is the "truth" is absurd. For myself, and for numerous others, accepting doping occurs in riders and not disliking the rider because of the doping is an acceptance of the complex world we live in instead of trying to exert our moral "ruler" in situations where it truly does not work.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Ferminal said:
I liked him until he tested positive.
Vino was the proof that a rider from a backward cycling nation could reach te top. He only needed some marginal gains on bikehandling and technique.

I like him for his gungho riding style but he was a pharmaceutical product optima forma. He doped to please :D
IIRC, rumors about Vinokourov started at the Dauphiné 2007.
Dont you mean Dauphinee 1999?
What do they say in the Angliru clip (me no understand
They are referring to Cobo's second profession, being a cook. So, they wonder what 'ingredients he has used for this tastfull Angliru stew', well, if that isnt a clear indication on what they think of him, it doesnt get much better.

Must be said, they never ask anything when Boonen does a 50K TT in Paris-Roubaix like he is a clone of der Fabian...
 
Jul 29, 2012
11,703
3
0
roundabout said:
I can't think of any other explanations why a rider who would win 3 stages and the overall would lose 2 minutes on the first MTF.

Don't think he even made top 20 on that stage.
Not the first time then, tour '07 plateau de beille. Also in tour '05, stage valverde won he was under his normal level. Maybe just a bad day, can be.
 
Jul 11, 2012
87
0
0
hektoren said:
No.
I know a lot about EBH, and guess what? He ain't a fairy.
Impressive stuff. No need to back up your statements. Where I can only post 'utter BS', you are clearly on another plane of omniscience.
 
Jul 29, 2012
11,703
3
0
roundabout said:
Ullrich was also below his "normal" level on the way to Courchevel.

More like a bad day for the doctor/delivery man :D
I don't think so, you can say a lot of bad things about vino but he would never **** up his doping!

Only caught one time, not that bad. Although rasmussen was doped to the max in '07 and he didn't caught, also DC.
 

DirtyDennis

BANNED
Jun 14, 2013
68
0
0
You guys here seem to have some very entrenched positions, both from those making accusations against particular riders, and those defending particular riders.

I see a lot of supposition and not much hard evidence from either the accusers or the defenders. I don't think you can prove a negative which is why I'm uncomfortable with pointing the finger OR steadfastly defending a rider or indeed a whole team. I'm afraid I'm cynical, but it seems to me you either give up watching the sport and find something else to do with your life, or you watch it and accept that you have to suspend your disbelief until if and when there's a positive test result, an arrest or a properly credible juicy rumour.I can't see that there I any other intelligent position to hold

*I'm also a hypocrite, as my wife will attest. She saw me shout in rage at the TV when Santambrogio pulled a Ricco :)
 

airstream

BANNED
Mar 29, 2011
5,123
0
0
roundabout said:
I can't think of any other explanations why a rider who would win 3 stages and the overall would lose 2 minutes on the first MTF.

Don't think he even made top 20 on that stage.
that was a vino feature, he liked to lose the times at first mtfs. seemingly bbs refused to work instantly.
 
Oct 16, 2009
3,868
0
0
Lanark said:
I don't think so. People mostly complain about Sky because they win so much, not because they are much more suspect than the rest of the big cyclists. Aside from that, they generate a lot of discussion because a lot of British fans started watching cycling with the rise of Sky, and spend a lot of time and energy defending them.

If Contador and Schleck were winning I wouldn't be any happier from a perspective of a clean sport, they cheat just as much as Sky does. I would still care about a clean sport if the guys dominating are exciting. Besides, Froome isn't even really that bad, he is a lot more exciting to watch than Wiggins, yet he generates a lot more discussion.
Another thing is that everyone working in or reporting on cycling refuses to accept that there's any chance that Sky are doping. In fact, they keep calling Sky a clean team, despite the obviously doped up performances we're seeing year round from UK Postal. It's just frustrating.
 
Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
Ripper said:
That's your opinion ... your experience. To suggest that it is the "truth" is absurd. For myself, and for numerous others, accepting doping occurs in riders and not disliking the rider because of the doping is an acceptance of the complex world we live in instead of trying to exert our moral "ruler" in situations where it truly does not work.
No. It's not MY experience. Accepting doping and not disliking the rider because he's doped is like bending over, getting bung-holed, asking for more, and buying a bus-ticket for the rapist so he can get away. I'm not into that. Maybe you are. Sure, it's a complex world. Having rules, sticking to them and condemning those who break the rules makes the world a bit LESS complex. It's the basis for any civilized society I can think of.
 
hektoren said:
No. It's not MY experience. Accepting doping and not disliking the rider because he's doped is like bending over, getting bung-holed, asking for more, and buying a bus-ticket for the rapist so he can get away. I'm not into that. Maybe you are. Sure, it's a complex world. Having rules, sticking to them and condemning those who break the rules makes the world a bit LESS complex. It's the basis for any civilized society I can think of.
Hey there H - you just described your opinion ... your experience, wrt doping. Obviously it is not everyone's.

BTW - there's a difference between accepting doping and accepting that doping occurs, my apologies as I was unclear. I don't "accept" doping, I would actually love it to be eradicated. However, I do not throw all the riders who dope under the bus because they dope. That does not condone it or even mean I don't condemn it. It means I separate it from the person. Moreover, my skepticism about the 'cleanliness' of the sport has no impact on my joy in participating or watching it (note I said skepticism and not cynicism).

BTW #2 - nice analogy dude :eek:
 
Oct 17, 2011
1,315
0
0
lol I was watching a video on youtube of Froome sprinting uphill in the Vuelta 2011 and wrote a comment in the comment sections how I though Froome's 'transformation' was remarkable to say the least.

Sure enough a sky fanboy helped me out a bit lol:

"you're just one of tousands of retards who know nothing about cycling and training. there is so much edge to be gained in cycling in terms of training, you have no idea. just bring any other top runner or swimmer and they will easily dominate, because they know how to train, cyclists up until now only knew how to dope."

So now you know guys other teams don't know how to train. Only sky knows.
 
Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
Ripper said:
Hey there H - you just described your opinion ... your experience, wrt doping. Obviously it is not everyone's.

BTW - there's a difference between accepting doping and accepting that doping occurs, my apologies as I was unclear. I don't "accept" doping, I would actually love it to be eradicated. However, I do not throw all the riders who dope under the bus because they dope. That does not condone it or even mean I don't condemn it. It means I separate it from the person. Moreover, my skepticism about the 'cleanliness' of the sport has no impact on my joy in participating or watching it (note I said skepticism and not cynicism).

BTW #2 - nice analogy dude :eek:
You have to separate cause and effect. While there might be, on an individual level, many "causes" making riders want to get on the bus, ("causes" that makes it more or less understandable why they dope) the effect is in sum that the sport we all know and love is decided by factors that shouldn't have a bearing on the sport and thus makes it a sport of marginal interest; a sport that sponsors will ultimately shy away from.

I'm willing to throw any rider who doesn't ride clean today under 13 steam-rollers (which is supposed to bring bad luck, AFAIK). Out of the sport for good.
I know the ridiculous 2 yrs sentence is under attack, and at the latest UCI meet in Bergen, Norway, as well as during consultations with David Howman of WADA in Oslo, it was made pretty clear that things may be about to change. For the good of the sport, for the good of clean competition, and not the least for the good of the spectators.
 
goggalor said:
... despite the obviously doped up performances we're seeing year round from UK Postal
Really? They're obvious, are they? There have been so many performances from Sky this year which have not been abnormal, but those tend to get overlooked. The only thing the clinic fixates on is the performances for which they have planned and trained for months. If it's that simple i.e. dope, and you can dominate certain races, why don't other teams do this? How come other riders get caught doping, and yet Sky can dominate, despite other well-funded and well-connected teams in the peloton?

Still waiting for Pat to lever a positive from the British team to discredit Cookson. He must be pulling his hair out.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY