Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[The Hitch]

The predictions were out by 3 minutes, or nearly 8%. This proves that the posters making the predictions are either clueless, wind-up-merchants or so lost in their dislike of Froome that they've lost all objectivity.



That must make life easier. Why bother with objective data when you've already made your mind up?

Froome has 3 mega suspcious performances at this Tour and a yellow jersey.

He did nothing today. He still has 3 mega suspicious performances at the Tour and a yellow jersey.

If he does nothing tomorrow he still has 3 mega suspicious performances at the Tour and probably a yellow jersey.

If he does nothing on Saturday he still has 3 mega suspicious performances at the Tour and probably a yellow jersey.

Do bad performances change what he has already done in this Tour?

No they do not.

 

[Alphabet]

Not to mention the Dawg actually attacked a couple of times early doors into the climb. Had he saved that energy, he could have rolled in on the same time as Quintana.

 

[Jahudor]

You are aware that dopers bonk too?...

Or perhaps that dopers have to eat regularely also?

 

[Lanark]

I agree with you on Porte. He clearly had to wait for Froome and could have gone a lot faster. Froome however is an even more remarkable case, because he hasn't shown the same potential as Porte did early in his career.

They don't differ that much, Porte did his first top-10 in a GT at age 25, Froome at 26.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Where is your prediction that Froomestrong would do 41 minutes today?

It was in one of the Sky/Froome/Climbing speeds are lower now threads from months ago.

I predicted 48 minutes for the first ascent and 41-42 for the leaders for the second ascent.

 

[hrotha]

They don't differ that much, Porte did his first top-10 in a GT at age 25, Froome at 26.

There's a major difference: that was Porte's first GT and his first season as a real pro.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

He's saying that there're 20 pages predicting a record ascent of Ad'H by Froome, and it didn't happen.

It was pretty clear to me.

Yea, knowing the fact that Froome is a tactical moron, we should have expected he'd bonk because he didn't feed properly. Bad on us.

 

[thehog]

It was in one of the Sky/Froome/Climbing speeds are lower now threads from months ago.

I predicted 48 minutes for the first ascent and 41-42 for the leaders for the second ascent.

They did 39 for the first accent. Sky that is

 

[hrotha]

They did 39 for the first accent. Sky that is

Link? Source?

 

[Ferminal]

That's because it was about 1500m shorter...

 

[kingjr]

They did 39 for the first accent. Sky that is

A little bit faster than Van Garderen on the first ascent. Impressive!

plus what Ferminal said

 

[Alphabet]

39? But from memory they hardly pulled back the break... that must mean Riblon and Tejay did a 39 climb as well (give or take), which I can't believe.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Do bad performances change what he has already done in this Tour?

I thought falling performance levels in the final week of a GT were good signs re doping.

 

[The Hitch]

That's because it was about 1500m shorter...

And it was made clear but hog obv thought he could get away with it.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Are you kidding me? You did just watch the stage, right? He could be doped up on every drug known to man, riding his hardest, and yet that stage would be exactly the same because clearly his issue was food related. We'll never know how fast he could, or would have attempted today.

lol @ thinking this issue was food related. you've obviously never been on a bike. a hungerlfat you lose many minutes, not just 1 minute over 5 km. he simply rode in the red way too long trying to follow quintana's counter after purito and he blew. in complete panick mode he screams for food in his radio, which didn't help

 

[Bakhjulet]

They did 39 for the first accent. Sky that is

First ascent was only 12.3k long, 1.5k shorter than the second. Riders were less fatigued when they rode it and the pace was quiet mediocre because the distance to the break didn't change that much.

 

[thehog]

Link? Source?

Veetoo on twitter and posted in power estimate thread.

 

[hrotha]

That's because it was about 1500m shorter...

Makes sense. Silly Hog.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

They did 39 for the first accent. Sky that is

yes, which was normal

 

[thehog]

Veetoo on twitter and posted in power estimate thread.

@vetoo: Stage 18. Alpe d'Huez 1 (12.15 km, 8.56 %, 1039 m). Maillot Jaune group: 39 min 26 sec, 18.49 Kph, VAM 1581 m/h, 5.54 W/kg [DrF].

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Veetoo on twitter and posted in power estimate thread.

oh silly you, you hadn't noticed that the first ascend was shorter by 1.5 km

 

[ChewbaccaD]

The predictions were out by 3 minutes, or nearly 8%. This proves that the posters making the predictions are either clueless, wind-up-merchants or so lost in their dislike of Froome that they've lost all objectivity.



That must make life easier. Why bother with objective data when you've already made your mind up?

Yea, it's the people questioning him that have lost perspective...doped-up cycling is so far in the past, and Tour winners are so trustworthy, and climbing mountains in times equal to known dopers is nothing suspicious...bunch of losers are going to lose perspective because losing thing is what losers do...Only righteous dudes like you know how to read the landscape...BTW where are you from again?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

39? But from memory they hardly pulled back the break... that must mean Riblon and Tejay did a 39 climb as well (give or take), which I can't believe.

riblin started with 8 minutes and fiinioshed with 2 minutes on quintana

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

1st ascent was shorter.

 

[The Hitch]

I thought falling performance levels in the final week of a GT were good signs re doping.

For falling performance look at Mollema. A guy with 5.30 gc lead and 3 stage wins to his belt, needing only to limit losses till Paris not winning a stage for a change, not so much.