• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 986 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.
 
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.
Cured?????? it never goes away does it?
 
rick james said:
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.
Cured?????? it never goes away does it?

According to Froome it’s gone.... likely he never had it...

“At last I am free of the debilitating disease bilharzia," Froome told The Independent. "I had a test when I went back to Kenya recently and it is the first time it has come back negative since the diagnosis [in 2011 – ed.]. That is fantastic news for me. I'm not going to have to worry about that any more. That should be it gone now.”
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
4
0
Visit site
rick james said:
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.
Cured?????? it never goes away does it?
It isn't herpes...

The worms mature, lay eggs, then die. The eggs gestate in veins that lead to the bladder, kidneys, or intestine so that they can be excreted.

John Swanson
 
rick james said:
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.
Cured?????? it never goes away does it?

It's pretty easy to treat with praziquantel actually, that's why froome claim that he needed multiples treatments over a long time period is a bit... outlandish, unless he was getting reinfected regularly, but you would think he had learned not to swim in african lakes by then.
 
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
Valv.Piti said:
It isn't a closed shop and it shouldn't be. Your opinions are well informed and your posts are balanced. Thing is the consensus around here is that Froome is 100% doping and while it is very likely he is, given history and all the information we have put together, one simply can't be 100%. At least not in my opinion. Your points about what went on between, say summer 2011 and Vuelta 2011 stand, its hard to believe Sky invested in him and also that he wen't solo on a very pricey programme when he didn't earn much.

And I think Hog think you are a former poster on the forum, hence the obvious-comment.

Thanks (Iron Dan too) for making me feel a bit more welcome. Hopefully over time i can gain Hog's acceptance that i'm not who he thinks i am, whoever that may be!

so you presumably don'y buy the "he just lost the fat" line taken by Moore/Swart

they didn't even mention badzilla......

swart being a 'scientist' and all (the parenthesis for snipers benefit :) )
 
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.

The curious part is why? Not due to ride the Vuelta, about to be dropped by Sky.

Why are Sky/BC keen to give him expensive meds at this point? So he can prove how great he is that they have to give him a fat contract.

Leinders has been on the scene for virtually a full season at this point and not succeeded (more likely not tried given Froome's spot on SDBs graph!).
 
gillan1969 said:
Parker said:
bigcog said:
The only way to know with some certainty would be to see his medical records and that ain't going to happen.
He gave a journalist called Nick Harris full access to all his records and documentation after he wrote an article questioning him. Harris has said everything was in order.


nothing to see here...harris said it was in order

good work ;)

As we all know British cycling journalists never get caught in the headlights and resort to praise without investigation :arrow:
 
rick james said:
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.
Cured?????? it never goes away does it?

a 'story' can always be made to go away...please can we move on to the fat that he's lost...that is new narrative...they even went to the bother of 'the fax' so please...stick to the script!
 
wansteadimp said:
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.

The curious part is why? Not due to ride the Vuelta, about to be dropped by Sky.

Why are Sky/BC keen to give him expensive meds at this point? So he can prove how great he is that they have to give him a fat contract.

Leinders has been on the scene for virtually a full season at this point and not succeeded (more likely not tried given Froome's spot on SDBs graph!).

Because his job was to help Wiggins win the Vuelta, which he was doing in the first week very well.
 
Ruby United said:
I direct those who are asking questions about Froome's Bilharzia to this biased, yet informative article:
http://froome19.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/chris-froome-bilharzia.html


....and I direct those asking questions about it to a sports scientist who, when asked to postulate on the 'transformation', managed to omit any mention of bilharzia altogether......

bilharzia, diet or PEDS???????? I wonder :)
 
gillan1969 said:
Ruby United said:
I direct those who are asking questions about Froome's Bilharzia to this biased, yet informative article:
http://froome19.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/chris-froome-bilharzia.html

because its biased its not that informative

it's as though those WMDs could be fired in 45 mins...
Ah i remember this :D

It was written by a froome fanboy who used to post here under the name "Froome19" (pure coincidence no doubt). Froome 19 is supposedly the brother of Ruby united.

The kid was about 15 years old at the time and not the brightest 15 either. He wanted to become a cycling journalist. He even demanded that cycling news publish his "articles" on their own website to give you an idea of the kind of mind that wrote this.

He posted a lot here for a short period of time but then run away to TeamSkyforums (or velorooms as it was known at the time) just as they were implementing their new ban any poster who doesn't say wiggins is clean policy (ok its an exageration, it wasn't that black and white though they did certainly send pms to non sky fans warning them not to take part in sky discussions)

The kid did have the right balance of stupidity, self delusion and nationalistic bias to become a very succesful cycling journalist so who knows, maybe he has acheived his dream. Personally I hope he matured a bit and can pursue a more honorable profession.

As for the page itself (i'm done attacking the man, lets focus briefly on the ball), it's even more full of holes than Froome's own Bilharzia story, which says something.

Still, the kid was young at the time and god knows I was stupid and impressionable at that age as well so lets not be too hard on him. If you are reading this, you were all right froome19, but for the love of god take down that nonesence. Its embarrasing and hopefully not representative of the man you are now.
 
wansteadimp said:
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.

The curious part is why? Not due to ride the Vuelta, about to be dropped by Sky.

Why are Sky/BC keen to give him expensive meds at this point? So he can prove how great he is that they have to give him a fat contract.

Leinders has been on the scene for virtually a full season at this point and not succeeded (more likely not tried given Froome's spot on SDBs graph!).
He might have bribed Nordhaug to give up his Vuelta place ... or hacked into his email account and sent "sorry Dave, can't do this Vuelta thing 'cause I'm a bit sick, you should select Froomey in my place" ... or poisoned him ... threatened to feed him to his snakes ... so many options

Do we have a timeline on when Froome knew he was gonna ride the Vuelta? Was it a last-minute replacement?
 
Re:

Merckx index said:
We’ve discussed all of this extensively before, of course. Schisto can affect HT, not by the worms eating the cells (they don’t eat enough to make a significant impact) but by antigens (proteins) released from the eggs which react with hemoglobin on red cells, reducing their oxygen-carrying capacity. If the damage is significant, it should noticeably affect Hb without affecting HT, which ought to result in passport anomalies; yet there is no indication that Froome ever had this symptom revealed in passport tests. Back in 2013 Froome/Sky let Grappe look at his passport data going back to I think 2011, and the researcher claimed everything was fine.

Also, a few years ago I posted a timeline (6/28/14 upthread) of Froome’s praziquantel treatments for the disease, five of them documented. Beyond the fact that needing this many treatments seems to be virtually unprecedented (one or at most two generally suffice; one authority was quoted as saying “I can’t believe he would still be infected after four treatments”), the timing of the treatments doesn’t correlate particularly well with his race results. E.g., his second treatment was in June 2011. Apparently it didn’t help in Poland, but then a few weeks later he has his breakout in the Vuelta. Yet that second treatment apparently didn’t solve the problem, because he returned for a third treatment in November 2011. And of course, as mentioned above, he was not the Froome we know now earlier in his career at a time when he didn’t have the disease.

The question of how he could have transformed to such a large degree in such a short length of time is a good one. As far as the magnitude of the change, I wouldn’t dismiss good old-fashioned blood doping. Riders respond differently to transfusions and/or EPO. If Froome had actually been squeaky clean prior to the 2011 Vuelta, blood manipulation could certainly have a significant effect on his performance.

But there are conceptual/logistical problems here. He presumably didn’t have the resources to separate cells from plasma and freeze them. He would most likely have to go low tech, and make regular withdrawals/transfusions throughout the season. That’s fine if you’re targeting a particular big race, but in his position, he wouldn’t have known what to target. He might have targeted the TDF, e.g., but then he didn’t make the team. When he got sent to Poland, you might think he would use any blood bags he had available, since at that time that seemed like his last chance to impress Sky; he didn’t know he was going to be in the Vuelta. But if he did, they didn’t help much, and then he would have nothing for the Vuelta.

That leaves EPO. He could acquire that at any time, of course, and use it at any time. But he would have to be careful about doses. Achieving a large transformation might not be impossible with small doses, but probably not very likely. Also, again, if he were going to do that, why wouldn’t he use it in Poland? Maybe he did use a little, and not seeing much of an effect, decided, upon making the Vuelta team, to try more?

I freely admit that trying to explain how doping could explain the transformation is very difficult. However, that is not an argument in favor of not doping. If it’s hard to explain with doping, it’s even harder to explain without it.

Good post with some interesting theories....Im still not convinced that EPO alone could bring about the type of transformation we saw, unless we're talking about seriously high doses. Maybe combined with some good old fashioned transfusions. If this was what he was doing there's obviously the risk of testing (yes, yes i know there are ways around the tests) but before this Sky's team would have picked up on what he was doing (his blood levels would have been all over the place and i'm sure their medical team are all over things like that). So then what.....Sky see the effect the 'program' is having and think its now worth bringing him into the inner circle?

As always as more questions than answers, but i think the last line of your post just about sums it up as well as anything i've seen written before
 
Electress said:
brownbobby said:
Ive been a long time follower of this forum and this thread in particular, but posting for the first time to get an answer/opinions on one question that i've never really found an explanation to that satisfies my curiosity...

The most oft repeated reason for peoples absolute certainty of Froomes doping is the magical 3 week transformation from pack fodder/donkey/insert your own put down....to the best GT rider of a generation. Its the timing and sheer unprecedented nature of this transformation that leaves me so unsure, rather than convincing me as it seems to have done many others.

I think it can be taken as fact that Sky were about to offload Froome before his magical transformation, so this is what i dont understand; Why would Sky invest so much and take such a big risk on a rider they were looking to let go? Surely they wouldn't, so do we assume that Froome went freelance with the most successful doping programme ever undertaken in such a short space of time?

Again i find this hard to believe, the type of programmes being spoken about i would imagine would be both prohibitively expensive (ive read that an effective use of Aicar/GW5156 would be in the region of £1m at the time) for a rider of Froomes status at the time and extremely difficult to undertake without the knowledge of the full team/medical support. Im pretty sure old school EPO couldn't bring about this transformation alone.

The second theory, that he suddenly began using motors seems even less plausible to me unless it was done with the full knowledge of his team, mechanics, suppliers etc. Same question sticks in my mind, why on earth would sky take such a huge risk with a rider about to be let go?

Theres a third theory, that he had a tropical disesase which, catastrophically for an endurance athlete, destroyed red blood cells and held him back from reaching his full potential, and it was finally getting on top of this condition that began the transformation. Again i agree that this seems to have been very conveniently talked about only after the transformation, but the possibility seems just as plausible as the other 2 to me.

I'm genuinely on the fence about this one, not a Froome/Sky fan, but also not a hater convinced beyond any doubt that he's cheating.

Yours are legitimate questions regarding the nature of any programme and how it might have worked. But you seem to be starting from the principle that any team were either clean or all on the same programme. I don't. I assume that any team invests its money and takes the risks only where they think there is most need and potential. Hence a lowly dom. isn't going to be on much, if their role is mere pack fodder.

Would such a dom., who perhaps knows what a full programme might be, and that they aren't on it, and currently at risk of losing their job, be prepared to freelance and supplement whatever they were on with a whole kitchen sink of dope to demonstrate to management that they are worth keeping on and investing in as a contender in future? Yeah, I think so. And a million quid sounds a bit too much for a short term pump up the volume programme.

But Hitch sums up my perspective. At this point, I simply do not understand how anyone believes they are trustworthy. They have demonstrably lied. They have lied about stupid little things. There has been a whole world of BS and terrible failures to even stick to or demonstrate they follow their own policies. Jiffygate alone should show even a person with a passing interest in the sport that they are about as trustworthy or credible as a Nigerian Prince claiming to give you a share of their inheritance if you'll just send your credit card details over the internet. This, to me, means the default has shifted not from one of innocence, but to one of guilt, and as time goes on, less and less challenges that perspective.

What have they done to which shows they are credible? Where have the showed that they have walked the talk and lived up to their claims ? Not much that springs to mine. Even where there might have been opportunities - Froome's tests, or reports (altitude natives) - those have turned into yet another trail of half truths, disappearances into the ether and dodgy faxes etc.

What on earth would make anyone believe in these guys when virtually everything they do appears so mendacious?

I got the million quid figure from an article i read a couple of years back, tried to find it again but can't. I cant remember exact details but it was based around scaling up doseages of Aicar shown to be effective in rats to an equivalent dose per kg in humans. Obviously i've no idea how accurate these numbers were.

On the subject of Sky in general...let me be clear that in my eyes they have zero credibility. Before the whole jiffy bag scandal, I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but the handling of that whole issue, particularly SDB's performance was just cringeworthy, utterly embarassing and as you say made it impossible for anyone to have any trust in what they say going forward. Clearly whatever they're up to Froome will have been at the centre of it, at least post 2011/12.

Still doesn't really provide any insight into what may or may not have up happened leading up to that point though, indeed in some cases just muddies the waters even further
 
thehog said:
Parker said:
bigcog said:
The only way to know with some certainty would be to see his medical records and that ain't going to happen.
He gave a journalist called Nick Harris full access to all his records and documentation after he wrote an article questioning him. Harris has said everything was in order.

That’s makes no sense. Why would it all be in order if he suffered from a debilitating parasitic blood disease?
And where did Nick Harris get his dgeree in medicine from?
 
rick james said:
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.
Cured?????? it never goes away does it?

This is hillarious.

Chris Froome once claimed that Bilharzia never goes away.

All medical literature clearly says that it does.
The fact that you are asking this quesitons shows that you pretty much take everything Chris Froome says as gospel.
 
The Hitch said:
gillan1969 said:
Ruby United said:
I direct those who are asking questions about Froome's Bilharzia to this biased, yet informative article:
http://froome19.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/chris-froome-bilharzia.html

because its biased its not that informative

it's as though those WMDs could be fired in 45 mins...
Ah i remember this :D

It was written by a froome fanboy who used to post here under the name "Froome19" (pure coincidence no doubt). Froome 19 is supposedly the brother of Ruby united.

The kid was about 15 years old at the time and not the brightest 15 either. He wanted to become a cycling journalist. He even demanded that cycling news publish his "articles" on their own website to give you an idea of the kind of mind that wrote this.

He posted a lot here for a short period of time but then run away to TeamSkyforums (or velorooms as it was known at the time) just as they were implementing their new ban any poster who doesn't say wiggins is clean policy (ok its an exageration, it wasn't that black and white though they did certainly send pms to non sky fans warning them not to take part in sky discussions)

The kid did have the right balance of stupidity, self delusion and nationalistic bias to become a very succesful cycling journalist so who knows, maybe he has acheived his dream. Personally I hope he matured a bit and can pursue a more honorable profession.

As for the page itself (i'm done attacking the man, lets focus briefly on the ball), it's even more full of holes than Froome's own Bilharzia story, which says something.

Still, the kid was young at the time and god knows I was stupid and impressionable at that age as well so lets not be too hard on him. If you are reading this, you were all right froome19, but for the love of god take down that nonesence. Its embarrasing and hopefully not representative of the man you are now.
Meh, I think there's maybe 1 Sky fan among the forum regulars so not really fair to refer to it as TeamSkyFans forum. There are a few more that post on BikeRadar as well but most of them are alright and not delusional. Tell you what, I think this forum has developed into a way more hostile environment for Sky sceptics than Velorooms. Well, not so much the Clinic but PRR subforum is a mess.
Haven't seen froom19 in ages on VR either.
 
LaFlorecita said:
The Hitch said:
gillan1969 said:
Ruby United said:
I direct those who are asking questions about Froome's Bilharzia to this biased, yet informative article:
http://froome19.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/chris-froome-bilharzia.html

because its biased its not that informative

it's as though those WMDs could be fired in 45 mins...
Ah i remember this :D

It was written by a froome fanboy who used to post here under the name "Froome19" (pure coincidence no doubt). Froome 19 is supposedly the brother of Ruby united.

The kid was about 15 years old at the time and not the brightest 15 either. He wanted to become a cycling journalist. He even demanded that cycling news publish his "articles" on their own website to give you an idea of the kind of mind that wrote this.

He posted a lot here for a short period of time but then run away to TeamSkyforums (or velorooms as it was known at the time) just as they were implementing their new ban any poster who doesn't say wiggins is clean policy (ok its an exageration, it wasn't that black and white though they did certainly send pms to non sky fans warning them not to take part in sky discussions)

The kid did have the right balance of stupidity, self delusion and nationalistic bias to become a very succesful cycling journalist so who knows, maybe he has acheived his dream. Personally I hope he matured a bit and can pursue a more honorable profession.

As for the page itself (i'm done attacking the man, lets focus briefly on the ball), it's even more full of holes than Froome's own Bilharzia story, which says something.

Still, the kid was young at the time and god knows I was stupid and impressionable at that age as well so lets not be too hard on him. If you are reading this, you were all right froome19, but for the love of god take down that nonesence. Its embarrasing and hopefully not representative of the man you are now.
Meh, I think there's maybe 1 Sky fan among the forum regulars so not really fair to refer to it as TeamSkyFans forum. There are a few more that post on BikeRadar as well but most of them are alright and not delusional. Tell you what, I think this forum has developed into a way more hostile environment for Sky sceptics than Velorooms. Well, not so much the Clinic but PRR subforum is a mess.
Haven't seen froom19 in ages on VR either.

Havent been there in years so am speaking about how it was back in the day.

There were some truly great posters there that are amongst my favourites and several who were friends to the extent that any anonymous forum name can be a friend. And if I was still following cycling like I used to i would definately check in there. (search is definately one that comes to mind)


But its definately no small exageration to call it Team Sky forums, at least at the time. Many of the biggest hypocrites who would liberally accuse anyone of doping, then suddenly found their faith in the cycling justice system in July 2012, ran there with their tails between their legs.

Im thinking of Jamsque for example (used to have a old video game pic as his profile here).
Boy I would love to find out what he thinks of Michal Kwiatkowski these days. He accused Kwiatkowski openly of doping in 2011 when Kwaitkowski came 3rd in the 3 days of depanne time trial. But then he got really upset that anyone would dare ask the same questions of a guy (bradley wiggins) who didnt just come 3rd in time trials but won every one he rode in 2012.
He ran away from the clinic when he found out a hypocrite assylum existed at velorooms. I tried to ask him on velorooms why it was ok to attack kwiatkowski but not wiggins. crickets

Then we have melow velo who was a cool guy but lets be honest, he obfuscates any question on Sky, whereas pre 2011 he was the one preaching about how doped cycling is and how bad the tests are. daveinzambia is another one.

And of course the founder of the forum and its cultish leader "dimspace" who's screen name here was "Team Sky Fans" (hence my play on the name), and who matched these guys for hypocrisy so well he even makes David Millar look like a half honest bloke. Its hillarious that after starting his website to "boycott" cn forums he came back here as a sockpuppet.

But like any extremist nut job movement, its not so much the hardcore nutters that facilitate it, its the weak ordinary men in the middle. As there was no real reason to leave the clinic at the height of the Lance and Contador wars, (the premise for the move was a protest against cn forum adds) the other type of person who left completely for velorrooms were internet pacifists who's opinion of the clinic was- "its not nice, its mean that everyone fights here" and in return for a peaceful friendly loving forum where everyone gets on well, offered to accept dimspace as cycling's King Solomon, and of course gravitated naturally to the sunny flowerly portrayal of cycling as a sport that is beating doping, and inherently distrusted the idea that these heroic men would ever do anything bad.

Since dimspace said sky were clean the other regulars said the same, and all these people wanted was a "friendly forum" focused on racing not discussing not nice things like doping, it became unfriendly to argue against the status quo. They would post in the sky threads "maybe sky are doping but they probably aren't", and that it was negative to believe cycling wouldnt become clean.

These are the ones who would become mods and then carryout the immediate banning of Bro Deal from the forum after 1 harmless post (because he was an enemy of dimspaces from here), or who would send pm warnings about staying out of the sky threads because, and i *** you not- it was upsetting for several of their memebers to read.
Meanwhile old trolls from here were welcomed with open arms (joachim) but ironically got frustrated because the mod sponsored support for Sky left no one left to troll.

What happened after that, you can tell me better.
 
rick james said:
The Hitch said:
rick james said:
thehog said:
Re: Froome. He did the Olympic test race after Poland in London. He then went to Manchester then to the Vuelta.

As for EPO use, I don’t think it would help anyone in Poland. A largely flat course ridden flat out. My theory is something occurred in Manchester, GW516 & AICAR, fitness in a pill.

In 2012 Froome went missing again for Badzhilla said he had another treatment and came back to the Tour absurdly skinny and in amazing form.

In 2013 Froome claims he has been “cured”.
Cured?????? it never goes away does it?

This is hillarious.

Chris Froome once claimed that Bilharzia never goes away.

All medical literature clearly says that it does.
The fact that you are asking this quesitons shows that you pretty much take everything Chris Froome says as gospel.
i'm here to be proved wrong, all I was doing was asking because I've never looked into an African diseases, I doubt me being in Scotland i will ever haver to deal with it...sorry I don't have the sort of agenda you have with froome that makes you check every single details of his life...sad really

...and yet one makes a concerted effort to constantly post bs in the Contador thread further promoting an "agenda" there and then cry foul when getting called on it. Don't take the holier than thou attitude. You're no better than the rest of us. Really sad.
 
The Hitch said:
LaFlorecita said:
The Hitch said:
gillan1969 said:
Ruby United said:
I direct those who are asking questions about Froome's Bilharzia to this biased, yet informative article:
http://froome19.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/chris-froome-bilharzia.html

because its biased its not that informative

it's as though those WMDs could be fired in 45 mins...
Ah i remember this :D

It was written by a froome fanboy who used to post here under the name "Froome19" (pure coincidence no doubt). Froome 19 is supposedly the brother of Ruby united.

The kid was about 15 years old at the time and not the brightest 15 either. He wanted to become a cycling journalist. He even demanded that cycling news publish his "articles" on their own website to give you an idea of the kind of mind that wrote this.

He posted a lot here for a short period of time but then run away to TeamSkyforums (or velorooms as it was known at the time) just as they were implementing their new ban any poster who doesn't say wiggins is clean policy (ok its an exageration, it wasn't that black and white though they did certainly send pms to non sky fans warning them not to take part in sky discussions)

The kid did have the right balance of stupidity, self delusion and nationalistic bias to become a very succesful cycling journalist so who knows, maybe he has acheived his dream. Personally I hope he matured a bit and can pursue a more honorable profession.

As for the page itself (i'm done attacking the man, lets focus briefly on the ball), it's even more full of holes than Froome's own Bilharzia story, which says something.

Still, the kid was young at the time and god knows I was stupid and impressionable at that age as well so lets not be too hard on him. If you are reading this, you were all right froome19, but for the love of god take down that nonesence. Its embarrasing and hopefully not representative of the man you are now.
Meh, I think there's maybe 1 Sky fan among the forum regulars so not really fair to refer to it as TeamSkyFans forum. There are a few more that post on BikeRadar as well but most of them are alright and not delusional. Tell you what, I think this forum has developed into a way more hostile environment for Sky sceptics than Velorooms. Well, not so much the Clinic but PRR subforum is a mess.
Haven't seen froom19 in ages on VR either.

Havent been there in years so am speaking about how it was back in the day.

There were some truly great posters there that are amongst my favourites and several who were friends to the extent that any anonymous forum name can be a friend. And if I was still following cycling like I used to i would definately check in there. (search is definately one that comes to mind)


But its definately no small exageration to call it Team Sky forums, at least at the time. Many of the biggest hypocrites who would liberally accuse anyone of doping, then suddenly found their faith in the cycling justice system in July 2012, ran there with their tails between their legs.

Im thinking of Jamsque for example (used to have a old video game pic as his profile here).
Boy I would love to find out what he thinks of Michal Kwiatkowski these days. He accused Kwiatkowski openly of doping in 2011 when Kwaitkowski came 3rd in the 3 days of depanne time trial. But then he got really upset that anyone would dare ask the same questions of a guy (bradley wiggins) who didnt just come 3rd in time trials but won every one he rode in 2012.
He ran away from the clinic when he found out a hypocrite assylum existed at velorooms. I tried to ask him on velorooms why it was ok to attack kwiatkowski but not wiggins. crickets

Then we have melow velo who was a cool guy but lets be honest, he obfuscates any question on Sky, whereas pre 2011 he was the one preaching about how doped cycling is and how bad the tests are. daveinzambia is another one.

And of course the founder of the forum and its cultish leader "dimspace" who's screen name here was "Team Sky Fans" (hence my play on the name), and who matched these guys for hypocrisy so well he even makes David Millar look like a half honest bloke. Its hillarious that after starting his website to "boycott" cn forums he came back here as a sockpuppet.

But like any extremist nut job movement, its not so much the hardcore nutters that facilitate it, its the weak ordinary men in the middle. As there was no real reason to leave the clinic at the height of the Lance and Contador wars, (the premise for the move was a protest against cn forum adds) the other type of person who left completely for velorrooms were internet pacifists who's opinion of the clinic was- "its not nice, its mean that everyone fights here" and in return for a peaceful friendly loving forum where everyone gets on well, offered to accept dimspace as cycling's King Solomon, and of course gravitated naturally to the sunny flowerly portrayal of cycling as a sport that is beating doping, and inherently distrusted the idea that these heroic men would ever do anything bad.

Since dimspace said sky were clean the other regulars said the same, and all these people wanted was a "friendly forum" focused on racing not discussing not nice things like doping, it became unfriendly to argue against the status quo. They would post in the sky threads "maybe sky are doping but they probably aren't", and that it was negative to believe cycling wouldnt become clean.

These are the ones who would become mods and then carryout the immediate banning of Bro Deal from the forum after 1 harmless post (because he was an enemy of dimspaces from here), or who would send pm warnings about staying out of the sky threads because, and i **** you not- it was upsetting for several of their memebers to read.
Meanwhile old trolls from here were welcomed with open arms (joachim) but ironically got frustrated because the mod sponsored support for Sky left no one left to troll.

What happened after that, you can tell me better.

I went to BotRooms once. JV was the messiah, he’d get quoted all the time as the only person to know anything about cycling. It’s was scary.

Does BotRooms still exist or did it close down?