Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 977 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Feb 21, 2017
1,019
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
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.
That Vuelta speed though.... I wonder if they were going so fast because of the EPO or the attempt to escape Nozal's stinky pits? Top three are hilarious, but I guess it was de rigueur then.
 
Apr 23, 2013
103
1
8,835
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/

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
I honestly do not understand what you are getting at. Minuscule amount of pro cycling years? He became pro in 2008 at age 22 - nothing special there. He was a decent talent but his African connection was the most remarkable about him. His first pro year was quite good, of course expectations weren't that high. There was nothing really that pointed to the astonishing capabilities he exhibited all of a sudden in the Vuelta three years later, but you know, that's practically the whole raison d'être of this thread, so what's your point? :confused:
 
Libertine Seguros said:
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.
It would also be interesting to know the difference between the average speed of the first and of the last riders.
 
Cycle Chic said:
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 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of the top 20 in the Vuelta, only Nibali, Contador and Roche have been pro riders longer than Froome

What a peculiar argument
 
GraftPunk said:
That Vuelta speed though.... I wonder if they were going so fast because of the EPO or the attempt to escape Nozal's stinky pits? Top three are hilarious, but I guess it was de rigueur then.
Yea, the 2003 Vuelta (and the 2001 one) were run at a speed faster than any Tour has ever been, 2001 is at the height of the Vueltas for the time triallists era (Casero won) with short mountain stages on roads everybody had come to know by then, and 2003... well, it opened up with a supersonic TTT and then was almost all about 5% uphill rumblings, which Isidro and his body odour was able to overcome until the last. The race started in Asturias and wound its way eastward, precluding all that tricky terrain across the Sierra Cantabrica in the north that includes all those false flats, unmarked repechos, inconsistent climbs and steep gradients, and instead filling the race with tempo climbing. There was also 96km of individual flat time trialling, which we pretty much never see now, to go with the super-fast TTT and the final MTT.

These were the decisive stages that year:
Stage 2: Cangas de Onis - Cangas de Onis, 148km


Stage 7: Huesca - Cam Basque (Cauterets), 190km (MTF of 16km @ 5,1%, only the last 5km of any real toughness)


Stage 8: Cauterets - Pla de Beret, 166km (MTF of 20km @ 4%, not like the 2008 version over Bonaigua!)


Stage 9: Vielha-Val d'Aran - Andorra-Estaciò de Grandvalira, 175km (MTF of 26,8km @ 5,1%)


Stage 15: Valdepeñas - Sierra de la Pandera, 172km (very steep MTF, but Unipuerto stage)


Stage 16: Jaén - Sierra Nevada, 162km (MTF of 30km @ 5,7%, but the conventional side of the climb which by this time was ceasing to be as selective and was on a Unipuerto stage)


Stage 19: La Vega de Alcobendas - Collado Villalba, 164km (one of the easier Sierra de Madrid finishes of recent years, and Navacerrada is a climb that pretty much everybody knew like the backs of their hands at this point)


Stage 20: San Lorenzo de El Escorial - Alto de Abantos, 11,2km (CRI)(one of only two really inconsistent, misleading climbs compared to the great many in the last few years, and the stage where Isidro finally cracked)


In addition to this it was high end late EPO era, of course, and there was also two sprint stages that finished a fair way below their start points, encouraging a high speed - Stage 5 from Soria to Zaragoza and stage 12 from Cuenca to Albacete. There were also multiple stages with just one hilly obstacle late on - Stage 11 to Cuenca and stage 17 to Córdoba, for example.
 
Parker said:
Cycle Chic said:
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 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of the top 20 in the Vuelta, only Nibali, Contador and Roche have been pro riders longer than Froome

What a peculiar argument
The argument about Froome being a late comer to the sport has been used a few times before, but as far as I can recall not as an argument for him doping but instead as an argument for why his late blossoming talent is explicable. Notwithstanding that he has been racing longer than since 2008 anyway - he was a pro with Konica Minolta in 2007, but it was in 2008 that he switched national allegiance from Kenya to Great Britain. And he had been with the UCI's World Cycling Center in Aigle before that (that's where the alleged test that Vaughters brought up where he showed he had the numbers to be a GT winner was taken). While he may not have had the instant development that young talents in places like Belgium, France or Italy get, he's also far from a Primož Roglič or a Michael Woods either - genuine late converts to the sport after competing in another.

Therefore, the crux of the issue should not be how long he was a pro, but why it took him until he was about to lose his contract at the end of his 5th pro season to discover the level that he now has, which several possible reasons have been mooted for but little satisfactorily explains, as it either raises further unanswered questions or doesn't convince as a justification for such a marked performance increase. Sure, his time at the top has been comparatively short as a result of that late emergence, but his pro career is already as long or longer than long-established legends of the sport like Jan Janssen, José Manuel Fuente, Luís Ocaña, Fred de Bruyne, Abraham Olano, Marco Pantani. Rominger is perhaps your best parallel in terms of career path to Froome's, although he turned pro much later on than Froome did so it's difficult to judge as a direct comparison doesn't really match up.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
Parker said:
Cycle Chic said:
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 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of the top 20 in the Vuelta, only Nibali, Contador and Roche have been pro riders longer than Froome

What a peculiar argument
The argument about Froome being a late comer to the sport has been used a few times before

his pro career is already as long or longer than long-established legends of the sport like
The poster wasn't saying any of that. It was quite the opposite.
 
The Hitch said:
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?

he is such a gentleman as well(your words)
 
http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/41218253
When asked whether it was possible to win all three Tours in one year, he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I wouldn't say it's impossible, nothing's impossible, but certainly it would take some doing."
http://news.sky.com/story/chris-froome-should-go-for-grand-tour-treble-next-year-says-bernard-hinault-11030362
And 62-year-old Bernard Hinault, one of only six riders in history to win the Vuelta, the Tour de France and the Giro d'Italia, sees no reason why Froome cannot attempt to win all three Tours in the same year.

"He should try that," said five-time Tour de France winner Hinault.
 
Re:

From the Guardians piece:

Last week Jeremy Whittle, respected author of the classic cycling book Bad Blood, said he had “never seen a collective performance to compare with Sky in La Vuelta - that includes Banesto, Telekom, Mapei, USP” in his 24 years of covering grand tours. And that strength was emphasised on the penultimate stage, up the steepest 24% incline of the Alto de l’Angliru. While the Italian Vincenzo Nibali, who was more rested having missed the Tour, wobbled and then wilted, Froome and his loyal lieutenant Wout Poels made a devastating incline look like a minor inconvenience.
Sky are so cleans they make Mapei look legit!

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/sep/11/chris-froome-mo-farah-united-success-disputed-legacy
 
Re: Re:

veganrob said:
TourOfSardinia said:
veganrob said:
TourOfSardinia said:
btw nibali hung on to a car in a GT too.
Everybody knows that. So what is your point?
none really - just fair play
Entirely different circumstances. And nobody gives Nibali a pass.
entirely diferent. Nibali was fighting for the win, got that tow not to lose time.
Froome was ininfluent for the race
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS