Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 976 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
carolina said:
pastronef said:
Beech Mtn said:
Froome is a greedy SOB who needs to be popped positive ASAP.

Also: Lefevere never forgets. I hope when Quickstep pays Froome back, it's at a really, really huge moment.
I heard a rumor Trentin and a few others finished outside time limit on the Angliru and were reinstated in the race. If I know more I will let you know
Not a rumor. I checked the rules. Time limit was 25 minutes. He (and also Villella btw) missed the time limit by about a minute and a half.
KOM misses time cut on mountain stage!!! Time to change the rules for that competition.
usually if you miss the time cut you get reinstated but you get ducked some points in the points classification. Froome won by 2 points (the 2 points he gained in the intermediate sprint in Andorra, eheheh!) he could have won by more if Trentin got ducked some points
 
Re: Re:

Huapango said:
ontheroad said:
I don't have a problem with Froome racing for green today, I'd have a bigger problem if he was handing out gifts which is one of my bug bears in cycling. I do however have a major problem with all the other doubts that persist about his transformation and super human performances.
Gift? You mean like when Froome gifted Contador the Angliru yesterday?
Yeah, he "gifted" it by not allowed Poels off the leash earlier...
Sheesh, I knew people would be calling it a gift as soon as Sky finished 2nd and 3rd. Froome was even pretty vocal after the stage he had hoped they would catch Contador so Poels could win.
 
Jun 27, 2009
373
1
0
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
Huapango said:
ontheroad said:
I don't have a problem with Froome racing for green today, I'd have a bigger problem if he was handing out gifts which is one of my bug bears in cycling. I do however have a major problem with all the other doubts that persist about his transformation and super human performances.
Gift? You mean like when Froome gifted Contador the Angliru yesterday?
Yeah, he "gifted" it by not allowed Poels off the leash earlier...
Sheesh, I knew people would be calling it a gift as soon as Sky finished 2nd and 3rd. Froome was even pretty vocal after the stage he had hoped they would catch Contador so Poels could win.

Total class, our boy, Froome... Happy to try and help steal the local hero's last bit of glory... one day it'll be you, mate....
 
Re: Re:

S2Sturges said:
Total class, our boy, Froome... Happy to try and help steal the local hero's last bit of glory... one day it'll be you, mate....
Well, a race is a race, and I'm happy Alberto won this way and not through a gift :) but yeah, not the nicest thing to say, and our commies were suggesting it wouldn't have been great for their image if they had caught Alberto :lol:
 
I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.
 
MartinGT said:
I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.
If anyone thinks the tour vuelta double is acceptable, its probably the same people who are still minimizing how out of this world sky's performances are.

Remember how Wiggins and Froome only won the Tour because everything fell for them. Cadel was injured, Contador suspended etc. It was how clean riders win.

Sky have since won 2 more individual Tours and now a Tour Vuelta double.

But don't worry its not suspicious like Pantani or US postal was. Its just the tailwind always appears every time froome starts climbing a mountain. So lucky
 
Sep 11, 2016
122
0
0
MartinGT said:
I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.
Martin, spot on. I posted this in the first week of the Vuelta where Froome had won the red jersey:

So now that Froome is in pole-position to win the Vuelta as well, what happened to the argument, that 'Doing the double and winning the Tour and Vuelta or a bit more realistic, the Giro and Vuelta is not possible anymore in this, our clean era of cycling...'?

Moreover, that this circumstance, is used as an argument that cycling and Sky and Froome in particular are all clean as snow?
On the positive side, Sky seems to be a lot quieter about their cleanliness currently unless directly asked (in which case all cyclists would claim innocence). Hopefully, because they themselves realise, that the double makes their operation and Froome look even more ridiculous.
Or perhaps, it is just because, I do not see the news stories from Denmark. I don't know what gets written in the UK.

One could argue, that they don't feel the need to profess their non-doping, cutting-edge training methology, since they believe, that is has long since been firmly established.

But doing the double should serve to put some doubt into the mind of even the fiercest Sky-supporter.

Looking at the general strength of the pro-cyclists excluding Sky, doing the double (Giro/Tour, Tour/Vuelta) does not seem like a realistic target. Even Giro/Vuelta would be a tough job, in my opinion.
 
MartinGT said:
I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.
Looking at Bardet and Nibali, Bardet with a Tour in his legs wasn't much chop. Nibali with no Tour in his legs still couldn't match the tempo set by Sky and said as much. Dawg mind you had issues of tiredness, won stages a ITT and was still standing at the end. Extremely dubious.
 
Froome has worn the leaders jersey for 34 out of the last 42 stages of grand tours. Surely must be some kind of record as that mean's his team are riding on the front an awful lot. Simply crushed his opponents into oblivion.
 
MartinGT said:
I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.
I'm not judging the "acceptable" part, but the Vuelta sure looks like the easiest GT to win (in terms of competition, not the difficulty of the stages). Most riders in the Vuelta have already raced a GT earlier in the season, whether it be the Giro or the Tour. Many others focus on the Worlds, and may even simply ignore the Vuelta. That's also one of the reasons that the Vuelta produces more once-in-a-lifetime high GC finishes such as Velits, Monfort, Deignan, ... I believe many riders who routinely go for GC in various GTs have their highest placings in the Vuelta. Especially the lower end of the top ten often looks less spectacular than Tour and Giro.

Going for the Vuelta after the Tour *is* different than winning the Giro and then having to face fresh competition, the strongest in the world, in the hardest GT of them all.
 
The curious part is that the level of competition was higher in the Vuelta this year than in any other Grand Tour this season. Numbers back this up, and Nibali commented on this as well.

If anything this provides support for giving the Vuelta (and the Giro) more comparable prestige compared to the Tour.
 
Gung Ho Gun said:
MartinGT said:
I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.
I'm not judging the "acceptable" part, but the Vuelta sure looks like the easiest GT to win (in terms of competition, not the difficulty of the stages). Most riders in the Vuelta have already raced a GT earlier in the season, whether it be the Giro or the Tour. Many others focus on the Worlds, and may even simply ignore the Vuelta. That's also one of the reasons that the Vuelta produces more once-in-a-lifetime high GC finishes such as Velits, Monfort, Deignan, ... I believe many riders who routinely go for GC in various GTs have their highest placings in the Vuelta. Especially the lower end of the top ten often looks less spectacular than Tour and Giro.

Going for the Vuelta after the Tour *is* different than winning the Giro and then having to face fresh competition, the strongest in the world, in the hardest GT of them all.
Aye, I get what you're saying.

3 Weeks after a Tour win by the Dawg and he seemed to dominate the Vuelta as much as he does the Tour. We mustn't forget that cycling especially a GT relies on a strong team. Sky have been lucky with lack of injuries / sickness. That's big thing.

We had though at the Vuelta a Nibali who didnt ride the Tour. Chaves who seemed rejuvinated after a difficuly personal issues and seemed motivated. Kruijswijk too.

The big contendors in Aru, Bardet etc who rode the Tour seemed cooked.

Are some of Sky's 'lesser' doms THAT much stronger than the 'lesser' doms of Lotto et al?
 
Gung Ho Gun said:
MartinGT said:
I asked this around the final week of the Tour.

Why does it seem acceptable that the Tour & Vuelta double in the modern area is seemed as acceptable when there is less time to recover than the Giro & Tour double?

Dawg has done the double now and his post Tour 'racing' he was smashing post tour crits which included a decent amount of travelling.
I'm not judging the "acceptable" part, but the Vuelta sure looks like the easiest GT to win (in terms of competition, not the difficulty of the stages). Most riders in the Vuelta have already raced a GT earlier in the season, whether it be the Giro or the Tour. Many others focus on the Worlds, and may even simply ignore the Vuelta. That's also one of the reasons that the Vuelta produces more once-in-a-lifetime high GC finishes such as Velits, Monfort, Deignan, ... I believe many riders who routinely go for GC in various GTs have their highest placings in the Vuelta. Especially the lower end of the top ten often looks less spectacular than Tour and Giro.

Going for the Vuelta after the Tour *is* different than winning the Giro and then having to face fresh competition, the strongest in the world, in the hardest GT of them all.
There are a few factors that affect the difference between a Giro-Tour double and a Tour-Vuelta double that have to be considered when comparing them and in your points above.

Firstly, in general, the average speed of the péloton is higher at the Tour than the Vuelta. The importance of Tour stages to the sponsors, the propensity for baking heat in southern Vuelta stages, the proliferation of sprinters' stages at the Tour with a full strength sprinting field vs. fewer bonanza sprinters fighting over the limited spinters' opportunities at the Vuelta (also, at the Vuelta even much of what looks flat isn't truly so, hence why Spanish cycling has produced few real superstar power sprinters, instead having a history of those who are more durable, like Tarzán Sáez, Óscar Freire and to the present day with the likes of Lobato and Barbero), so there are fewer teams as intent on forcing sprint outcomes at the Vuelta. The first reason is the most important, though; the Tour is the most important race of the season to pretty much every team save for the wildcard teams at the Giro and Vuelta (Cofidis excepted). The high average pace at the Tour means sticking with it and backing up a Giro GC performance with being among the strongest at the Tour is harder than being able to go great guns on a Unipuerto stage design after staying in a péloton going at a lower average speed in the Vuelta after a Tour GC performance. Landa is the best doubling up from Giro to Tour form we've had in a long time, but his form at the end of the Giro was affected by the crash in the Blockhaus stage and not being so clearly marked as a result towards the end of the race as there was no longer pressure on him to stay up near the front of the péloton at all times to protect his GC position.

Another thing with the Vuelta's GC race is that, especially when there is a hilly Worlds, there is a ready-made out for underperformance for several riders. Many of them, therefore, when their GC bid starts to fail, will let go rather than continue on. Take Cunego in 2009. After winning on Aitana and going well on Xorret del Catí and Velefique, he was well-placed but started suffering badly in the Sierra Nevada stage. Instead of trying to protect the GC position as he might have done otherwise, the fact that the Mendrisio Worlds suited him was the perfect "out" - he let go, came in with the autobus, went in the break the next day to win another stage and then, seeing no further stages to his liking, went home to prepare for the Worlds. On years with flatter Worlds, this is less common, although in 2011 we had a very odd race anyway owing to the underperformances of several pre-race favourites. The GC field drawn by the Vuelta can be - it is becoming less so but certainly was for a while - dependent on the nature of the World Championships course and how well it suits the hilly classic riders who can also do a strong GC.

Many riders who have gone really deep at the Tour don't fancy another go round so soon; this is the same with the Giro, but for a lot of riders, and certainly with riders who've not done the Tour before, they're unlikely to turn down the chance to compete at the Grand Boucle, whereas if you've already raced the biggest race of them all, it's perhaps a bit easier to turn down the Vuelta. We do see some freak GC performances, the likes of Velits, Deignan, Monfort and so on, at the Vuelta, but then we're less than 20 years removed from Paolo Bettini making the top 10 of the Giro. Deignan in fairness got given several minutes in a break, but the other two are striking. Monfort in fairness profited from the number of underperformances - he has 10 GT results between 11th and 20th - had Antón, Scarponi, Nibali and Rodríguez all been on more typical form at that Vuelta, they may well have had him down to the fringes of the top 10, which wouldn't seem that out there compared to the rest of his career. Velits, well, who knows. HTC were very good at wrestling GC results out of people you mightn't expect, and not just at the Vuelta, but Velits was the biggest success they had, but he seems to have been a one-hit wonder.
 
hazaran said:
math tells us the average speed in the Tour was 39.76 km/h versus 40.18 km/h in the Vuelta. Not to mention that sitting in the peloton all day for a 200k transition stage in the Tour is basically active recovery.
I take it you didn't catch the words "in general"?

2014: Tour 40,67km/h vs. Vuelta 39,20
2013: Tour 40,54km/h vs. Vuelta 39,70
2012: Tour 39,72km/h vs. Vuelta 38,96
2011: Tour 40,04km/h vs. Vuelta 39,06
2010: Tour 39,58km/h vs. Vuelta 37,18
2009: Tour 40,32km/h vs. Vuelta 37,73
2008: Tour 40,49km/h vs. Vuelta 40,49 (almost identical speeds)
2007: Tour 39,23km/h vs. Vuelta 40,49
2006: Tour 40,78km/h vs. Vuelta 39,48
2005: Tour 41,65km/h vs. Vuelta 40,85
2004: Tour 40,55km/h vs. Vuelta 39,04
2003: Tour 40,94km/h vs. Vuelta 42,52

As you can see, editions where the Tour is run at a faster overall speed vastly outnumber those where the Vuelta has a higher average speed.
 
I dont know how anyone can state that Froome should be up there in the record books...this is a professional cyclist with a more or less paltry 6 years under his belt

Froome last raced the Giro d'Italia back in 2010,when he was disqualified on stage 19 to Aprica, when he accepted a tow while trying to get to the feed zone to abandon because of knee pain
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/hinault-froomes-next-target-should-be-the-giro-ditalia/

WHY arent the journailsts picking up on the miniscule amount of pro cycling years he has.

He has only been racing since 2008- its just ludicrous that this is not being highlighted !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Kenyan-born rider competed for his homeland until switching to a British racing licence in 2008, the start of a successful relationship with the Great Britain Cycling Team
Read more at https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/gbcyclingteam/new/bio/Chris_Froome#3tl6kGCbAlorrj3p.99
 
Cycle Chic said:
I dont know how anyone can state that Froome should be up there in the record books...this is a professional cyclist with a more or less paltry 6 years under his belt

Froome last raced the Giro d'Italia back in 2010,when he was disqualified on stage 19 to Aprica, when he accepted a tow while trying to get to the feed zone to abandon because of knee pain
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/hinault-froomes-next-target-should-be-the-giro-ditalia/
Its an absolute sham that they accept Chris Froome's explanation for his cheating here.

He got disqualified for holding onto a bike.

That is a fact.


Then after he got disqualified he came up with a story about how he wanted to abandon. Because cheaters never make up fake explanations for why they did bad right :eek: ?

Its even more ridiculous than that because in his book he claims the motorcyclist made him hang onto his bike. Froome didn't actually want to. AND a few seconds after Froome started to hold on (not his own choice) the comisars dqd him. It was classic Italian (those cheats) entrapment of poor innocent froomie.

Lets reprint his word as fact. While we are at it lets, write in articles that "Tyler Hamilton was mistakenly found positive for testostrone because he had a twin". I mean its his word so it must be fact right?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS