Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[mewmewmew13]

This is where my opinion fall after today' s weird finish...
I think it was PR..saved Froome's bacon from looking too infallible.
threw a smokescreen in the small morsel of the 'feed zone fine'...

now Froome looks real it kept Porte under radar as well


Quote:
Originally Posted by bewildered
"Yeah i don't think he was bonking, I'm not saying he was faking but today was a very good PR day for Sky in terms of putting a stop to doping questions"

 

[timbo25]

you know what scares me?
Froome isn't even the cyclist Armstrong was.
Armstrong focused on the tour, scouting every inch of it, riding less one day competition. Froome is careless, not paying attention, falling in corners, wrong gears on the TT bike, forgetting to eat but still winning "the whole freaking year"

If he had the focus of Armstrong, his performance would be "not of this earth"

 

[arvc40]

This is where my opinion fall after today' s weird finish...
I think it was PR..saved Froome's bacon from looking too infallible.
threw a smokescreen in the small morsel of the 'feed zone fine'...

now Froome looks real it kept Porte under radar as well


Quote:
Originally Posted by bewildered
"Yeah i don't think he was bonking, I'm not saying he was faking but today was a very good PR day for Sky in terms of putting a stop to doping questions"

I think today was a great bit of PR for the team with regards to dopeing questions.

 

[gooner]

I disagree.

There are 4 barriers to doping. Moral, Health, fear of getting caught and not introduced to it. If you believe in miracles you can add- no need for it (eg Froome, Usain Bolt, Federer, Messi- best anyway, why risk doping).

But if someone is seen to cheat in other ways, that confirms to us that barrier number 1 is not particularly strong.

They may still not dope for other reasons , but it probably wont be because they think cheating is bad (like say Bassons)

And here is why I disagree using my argument.

Eduardo blatantly cheating against Celtic, smiling and coming out with a BS excuse with Wenger vehemently defending it. Similarly with Pires against Portsmouth. Harry Redknapp, then the Portsmouth manage blasted Pires and was asked would he have no problem if Teddy Sheringham did it for them. He said he probably wouldn't have had. Phil Brown said the same thing when he was Hull manager. That doesn't mean we can say that these managers would also have no problems if there players are doping and especially in the case of Wenger from his past comments. Not one bit of suspicion would I add to anyone here from a doping perspective due to this.

This was similar to Froome today.

 

[arvc40]

I get the feeling he could have ridden up to quintana any time he wanted

 

[lemoogle]

I get the feeling he could have ridden up to quintana any time he wanted

Wait I thought you thought Froome/Sky were clean

 

[arvc40]

Wait I thought you thought Froome/Sky were clean

I did not suggest otherwise.

 

[lemoogle]

I did not suggest otherwise.

Just not sure how you can think sky is clean but yet still think they have a reason for PR moves on the road regarding doping questions.

 

[vrusimov]

Why would WADA do that though? That's never gonna happen, an empty promise, like Contador saying they can check his DNA in the Puerto case, knowing the Spanish will never ask him.

Personally I trust Vayer because he is not affraid to say when he thinks a performance is implausible. Something Grappe clearly has had a problem with in the Armstrong case.

The thing of it is ... it seems like you will never get others to go on the record of singling out suspicious performances. Vayer is the only one who does and much of his data can be confirmed by the number of positive failed controls, confessions, associations and doping scandals. There are only 21 riders in Not Normal but there have probably been many cheats who went undetected because they kept their heads low.

 

[gooner]

which is irrational

The only irrational thing is to use this to further the doping argument against Froome.

I gave the football alternative.

A question.

Should we say footballers who cheat to dive for pens are susceptible to doping because they do this and that managers that defend it would be inclined to accept their players are doping so?

If Yes, then you are referring to Wenger who has been one of the most outspoken on the subject in football.

The logic is the same. Swap Froome and the Sky management in the car today.

 

[arvc40]

Improving PR a good thing Dope or not.

 

[TheGame]

I'm pretty sure he knows how to spot a doper though. IIRC he has criticized Contador in the past, so these tweets are pretty telling.

Every ****er has called Contador a doper. Calling him a doper does not make you reliable.

 

[arvc40]

Improving PR a good thing Dope or not.

What with all the Grief there getting over it. Just saying

 

[TheGame]

So, let's get this straight between Lance and Froome:

1. Had a disease - check.
2. Showed no GT credentials before transformation - check
3. Sean Yates on staff - check
4. Hired doctor known for doping - check
5. Team domestiques ripping legs off top contenders - check
6. Snarky comments - check

When did Armstrong have Yates on staff?

 

[Benotti69]

When did Armstrong have Yates on staff?

Astana and wasn't Armstrong an owner of Discovery.

 

[taiwan]

When did Armstrong have Yates on staff?

http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/team.asp?year=2005&teamcode=DSC

 

[sprenten]

What regression? He has no reason to push. He won the ITT even though he admitted he took it easy. All he had to do today was not blow up. The Tour was over on Ventoux.

The first part of this is a myth that he has no reason to push, if he did not push today, that will show up in the data the next two days, because Quintana and Rodriguez still present a danger in the way they are climbing. Podium places and mountain jersey very much in the mix and Contador's 2nd or 10th it doesn't matter comment make this a very dangerous race.

I am sure the Sky plan was to peak sometime between Bonasce and the 1st ITT and hold fitness till Ventoux and then defend. That would be the proper way to win a Grand Tour achieve a peak between stages 7-11 hope that it holds a week, have the lead and then defend. I am pretty sure Belkin had the same strategy until fatigue strikes their guys and then they get sick or start crashing because of fatigue/conditions/taking risks. Tour d' Suisse probably too close to this years TdF to achieve a peak in a non doped state and hold it for a week without killing yourself.

 

[TheBean]

I disagree.

There are 4 barriers to doping. Moral, Health, fear of getting caught and not introduced to it. If you believe in miracles you can add- no need for it (eg Froome, Usain Bolt, Federer, Messi- best anyway, why risk doping).

But if someone is seen to cheat in other ways, that confirms to us that barrier number 1 is not particularly strong.

They may still not dope for other reasons , but it probably wont be because they think cheating is bad (like say Bassons)

Taking a gel close to the finish is against the rules, but it's a minor infraction with a known, and small, penalty. I would guess almost every team has received "sticky bottles", lengthy doctor's assistance while holding onto the car, a team mechanic tightening and retightening the seat-post bolt, or jst about any other ticky-tack infraction.

I hardly think one can infer a willingness to dope from a willingness to accept - or even order - an illegal feed.

 

[gingerwallaceafro]

Yates was Armstrong's mentor at Motorola an on staff at Astana.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

There are many who are invested in this guy. They wanted Armstrong, but he is such a scandal, they want it all to go away like magic. Doping fatigue my friend....

Since I'm old, I'll say I'm reminded of 1998 when the Festina dopers were tossed. We were tired then. That Tour was won my Marco Pantini, and the following year Bassons was pushed aside by Armstrong.

Then there was 2006, when all the Puerto riders were tossed, leaving us with hope...and Floyd winning.

 

[H2OUUP2]

Since I'm old, I'll say I'm reminded of 1998 when the Festina dopers were tossed. We were tired then. That Tour was won my Marco Pantini, and the following year Bassons was pushed aside by Armstrong.

Then there was 2006, when all the Puerto riders were tossed, leaving us with hope...and Floyd winning.

And the circle of cycling continues...

 

[autologous]

Taking a gel close to the finish is against the rules, but it's a minor infraction with a known, and small, penalty. I would guess almost every team has received "sticky bottles", lengthy doctor's assistance while holding onto the car, a team mechanic tightening and retightening the seat-post bolt, or jst about any other ticky-tack infraction.

I hardly think one can infer a willingness to dope from a willingness to accept - or even order - an illegal feed.

Yeah. Almost every team has done all of those things while having the yellow jersey, at the head of the race, at the head of a crucial Alpe stage, no less, with the race commissars in their radios telling them that it is against the rules.

A "ticky-tack" infraction that displays hubris, arrogance, and a sense of being above the rules. As well as total disrespect for the yellow jersey.

What other rules do they consider optional?

 

[Benotti69]

Since I'm old, I'll say I'm reminded of 1998 when the Festina dopers were tossed. We were tired then. That Tour was won my Marco Pantini, and the following year Bassons was pushed aside by Armstrong.

Then there was 2006, when all the Puerto riders were tossed, leaving us with hope...and Floyd winning.

And in 2012 USADA gave us the reasoned decision and banned Armstrong, Bruyneel, and others for life ........and Bradley Wiggins ex gruppetto fodder won the Tdf.

And in 2013 Armstrong admitted doping to Oprah.........and Chris 'ET' Froome won the TdF.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I see this argument being made a lot in this thread which I disagree with.

It's like you could say a certain footballer who cheats and dives for a penalty would/maybe also have the capability of stooping to dope as well because they are willing to do this to get an added edge. They come up with stupid reasons too for cheating to this level and similiarly their managers come out with all sorts of tosh to defend it publicly. I don't use that to say that footballer has further suspicions of doping from me and the same should be said here as well. This shouldn't be linked to add fuel to the Froome doping argument.

I disagree completely as from experience, people who cheat a little when there is little to be gained will cheat more when there are higher stakes. Not to mention that it was in direct defiance of the race marshal who told them not to take the feed.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

you do know, footballers still have the scheduled urinetest like cyclist had in 1996?

Yea, it isn't a huge secret that there were a significant number of soccer (footballer's) players on Fuentes' list of clients.