Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Dear Wiggo]

Chris Froome has not reached his peak and can improve on his stunning performance at this year's Tour de France, claims Team Sky principal Sir Dave Brailsford.

...

"He is not at his best yet, for sure, he can still reach a better physical condition than he is now."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...s-Team-Sky-principal-Sir-Dave-Brailsford.html

Like I said, most probably PR, but better be prepared...

 

[SundayRider]

Struggling...

His wattage hasn't increased in real terms - yeah yeah ! So he had that power all along he was just not using it!

 

[GuyIncognito]

His wattage hasn't increased in real terms - yeah yeah ! So he had that power all along he was just not using it!

Yep, he had trouble navigating the other cyclists around him which made him waste most of his energy. It's quite logical when you think about it.

Explains perfectly why he couldn't TT for toffee before Leinders. All those riders around him.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

His wattage hasn't increased in real terms - yeah yeah ! So he had that power all along he was just not using it!

As Ferminal hints - the original story for his mediocrity was having the power, but attacking way too early, burning all his matches, and not having anything left to finish the stage.

Apparently Julich showed him how to fix it (cf Vaughters making a similar claim when "fixing" Danielson back in the day) by measuring his efforts and keeping the powder dry until the final climb.

Or something.

Or bilzharia, which imo is a red herring or worm.

 

[SundayRider]

As Ferminal hints - the original story for his mediocrity was having the power, but attacking way too early, burning all his matches, and not having anything left to finish the stage.

Apparently Julich showed him how to fix it (cf Vaughters making a similar claim when "fixing" Danielson back in the day) by measuring his efforts and keeping the powder dry until the final climb.

Or something.

Or bilzharia, which imo is a red herring or worm.

If that was the case then surely we'd have all remember him repeatedly attacking from 80K out during the Tour in the years before his break out...oh wait he didn't even make the Sky team in 2011.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

14 in the final TdF TT in 2008!: http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=8024

Never mind he was 2:22 down on GC, 22 minutes behind "non GC rider", David Millar.

 

[EnacheV]

14 in the final TdF TT in 2008!: http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=8024

Never mind he was 2:22 down on GC, 22 minutes behind "non GC rider", David Millar.

I see Nibali on 40+ pos at 5mins+

Clearly no talent here @ Froome

Explains perfectly why he couldn't TT for toffee before Leinders. All those riders around him.

Yes, i see the truth now.

No talent Froome is a bull**** theory, especially compared with the talented Nibali theory.

So that leaves bilhzaria as the deadhorse to beat, for a while.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I see Nibali on 40+ pos at 5mins+

Clearly no talent here @ Froome



Yes, i see the truth now.

Except Nibali was ~1:45 further up GC, if that means anything to you.

 

[SundayRider]

I see Nibali on 40+ pos at 5mins+

Clearly no talent here @ Froome



Yes, i see the truth now.

No talent Froome is a bull**** theory, especially compared with the talented Nibali theory.

So that leaves bilhzaria as the deadhorse to beat, for a while.

Last TT in a grand tour often throws up some strange results. Lower ranked GC riders sometimes get better conditions than those who start later in the day etc.

 

[EnacheV]

Except Nibali was ~1:45 further up GC, if that means anything to you.

Means nothing.

in 2008 Froome > Nibali as TT

also 2008 Froome > Nibali as climbing

http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=8021

Clearly no talent Froome If that's true, we can call Nibali the "minus talent" Nibali ?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I see Nibali on 40+ pos at 5mins+

Clearly no talent here @ Froome



Yes, i see the truth now.

No talent Froome is a bull**** theory, especially compared with the talented Nibali theory.

So that leaves bilhzaria as the deadhorse to beat, for a while.

And Nibali came 11th at the Giro 2 months earlier, while Froome spent the early part of the year racing in South Africa.

But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a good cry.

And in Stage 4 of 2008 TdF, Nibali put a minute into Chris over 30km.

 

[SundayRider]

I see Nibali on 40+ pos at 5mins+

Clearly no talent here @ Froome



Yes, i see the truth now.

No talent Froome is a bull**** theory, especially compared with the talented Nibali theory.

So that leaves bilhzaria as the deadhorse to beat, for a while.

The first TT of that Tour (28k) Nibali was a minute up on Froome who was also behind the likes of Andy Schleck and Damiano Cunego - hardly a super TTer in the making!

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I think Nibs coming 11th at the Giro the same year explains away any mysterious "Froome pwnt Nibali at the Tour" arguments. Giro del Capo. Good grief.

 

[the sceptic]

Means nothing.

in 2008 Froome > Nibali as TT

also 2008 Froome > Nibali as climbing

http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=8021

Clearly no talent Froome If that's true, we can call Nibali the "minus talent" Nibali ?

 

[EnacheV]

Ofc the comparisons are forced, but that's because there needs to be a highlight of the ****ty no talent theory. Bilzharia ? fine. But get out with the no talent theory.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Ofc the comparisons are forced, but that's because there needs to be a highlight of the ****ty no talent theory. Bilzharia ? fine. But get out with the no talent theory.

When your comparison discounts an 11th place at the Giro 2 months before for Nibali, compared to DNF and DNS for Froome at the same period, all your arguments are PWNT.

Comparing Froome 2011, 2012 or 2013 to Froome 2008, yes, I would say he was comparatively talentless in 2008.

 

[Bronstein]

Means nothing.

in 2008 Froome > Nibali as TT

also 2008 Froome > Nibali as climbing

http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=8021

Clearly no talent Froome If that's true, we can call Nibali the "minus talent" Nibali ?

Froome versus Nibali at the 2008 TdF:

Froome finishes ahead of Nibali:

Stage 17 (mountain stage)
Froome 31st at 11.41
Nibali 41st at 17.10

Stage 20 (ITT)
Froome 16th at 3.00
Nibali 50th at 5.28


Nibali finishes ahead of Froome:

Stage 4 (ITT)
Nibali 9th at 0.29
Froome 31st at 1.31

Stage 6 (medium mountain stage)
Nibali 55th at 2.19
Froome 79th at 4.48

Stage 7 (medium mountain stage)
Nibali 23rd at 0.06
Froome 148th at 21.53

Stage 9 (mountain stage)
Nibali 13th at 1.17
Froome 51st at 1.57

Stage 10 (high mountain stage)
Nibali 13th at 3.40
Froome 120th at 33.14

Stage 11 (medium mountain stage)
Nibali 82nd at 14.51
Froome 126th at 22.14

Stage 15 (mountain stage)
Nibali 20th at 5.46
Froome 127th at 25.33

Stage 16 (mountain stage)
Nibali 33rd at 5.13
Froome 138th at 31.56

Stage 18 (medium mountain stage)
Nibali 68th at 6.50
Froome 114th at 7.07


Final GC:

Nibali 20th at 28.33

Froome 84th at 2.22.33

The facts speak for themselves.

 

[The Hitch]

Enache is trying to hijack the thread, but earlier today some very important and good points were made.

I wonder if believers have any answer to these points. Seems to clearly show bs coming from sky, and massive contradictions in the all important - why froome became god story, which if they are lying about almost guarantees froome is doping.

I wonder if the next pro sky contribution will adress these or will it be the usual Armstrong taunt that froome has never failed a test and ad hominem attacks about how stupid everyone in the clinic is.

I thought Julich already mastered that hence his 2011 explosion.

Funny that the only riders who don't know when to deliver the Watts all end up at Sky.

Yep, he had trouble navigating the other cyclists around him which made him waste most of his energy. It's quite logical when you think about it.

Explains perfectly why he couldn't TT for toffee before Leinders. All those riders around him.

 

[the sceptic]

Ofc the comparisons are forced, but that's because there needs to be a highlight of the ****ty no talent theory. Bilzharia ? fine. But get out with the no talent theory.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Maybe Froome should go down the Cunego-route. He doesn't get much heat from the Clinic these days.

Problem with that is Sky's supposed ZTP and how important it is to them to be seen as clean. If Froome starts performing less dominantly but still well and starts dropping hints he wasn't playing ball, no way do Sky let him do his thing the way Lampre have let Cunego do his. They have to suspend him internally or investigate at least; Lampre do not have such a commitment to the veneer of clean cycling, so they were not beholden to do anything.

Also, of course, Froome's trying to show he's clean and has always been. Cunego was trying to show he was clean by comparing to where he wasn't.

The other question is, where is the talent level of each rider clean? Cunego was a hugely successful junior who was seen as a sure thing when he turned pro, albeit perhaps not as immediate a success as he was. Froome's unusual route into cycling makes it harder to judge where his actual talent level lay prior to rocking up at Barloworld. But because he only showed potential on the odd occasion at Barloworld and after his mildly impressive showcase at the 2008 Tour (where he didn't look as impressive as John-Lee Augustyn, who was younger and even less experienced, and his performances have been ret-conned into showing real star potential as if they were Fuglsang's 2009 Dauphiné or Gesink's 2008 Vuelta) his results then start slowing up.

It's no wonder that for those operating under the assumption he is doping he appears more like Bjarne Riis than Jan Ullrich, and if somebody has been very successful from a young age (or immediately from turning pro, as Bauke Mollema, who took up cycling late and won L'Avenir only a couple of years later, is a good counterexample) it is a lot easier for those operating under the assumption they are clean to explain.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Problem with that is Sky's supposed ZTP and how important it is to them to be seen as clean. If Froome starts performing less dominantly but still well and starts dropping hints he wasn't playing ball, no way do Sky let him do his thing the way Lampre have let Cunego do his. They have to suspend him internally or investigate at least; Lampre do not have such a commitment to the veneer of clean cycling, so they were not beholden to do anything.

Also, of course, Froome's trying to show he's clean and has always been. Cunego was trying to show he was clean by comparing to where he wasn't.

The other question is, where is the talent level of each rider clean? Cunego was a hugely successful junior who was seen as a sure thing when he turned pro, albeit perhaps not as immediate a success as he was. Froome's unusual route into cycling makes it harder to judge where his actual talent level lay prior to rocking up at Barloworld. But because he only showed potential on the odd occasion at Barloworld and after his mildly impressive showcase at the 2008 Tour (where he didn't look as impressive as John-Lee Augustyn, who was younger and even less experienced, and his performances have been ret-conned into showing real star potential as if they were Fuglsang's 2009 Dauphiné or Gesink's 2008 Vuelta) his results then start slowing up.

It's no wonder that for those operating under the assumption he is doping he appears more like Bjarne Riis than Jan Ullrich, and if somebody has been very successful from a young age (or immediately from turning pro, as Bauke Mollema, who took up cycling late and won L'Avenir only a couple of years later, is a good counterexample) it is a lot easier for those operating under the assumption they are clean to explain.

And getting a tattoo about it...maybe Froome should get a tattoo?

 

[The Hitch]

Of course if it wasn't a known troll who has no interest in debate, forcing the argument, one could point out that Nibali did the Giro that year, finished 11th and his TDF whoopass of Froome came after that Giro performance thereby proving Nibali 2008>>>>>>>>>> Froome 2008.

 

[roundabout]

Froome's unusual route into cycling makes it harder to judge where his actual talent level lay prior to rocking up at Barloworld.

With better riding skills and better teams he could have had a chance of winning 2 stage races in the UCI U23 Nations Cup in 2007.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

And Nibali came 11th at the Giro 2 months earlier, while Froome spent the early part of the year racing in South Africa.

But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a good cry.

And in Stage 4 of 2008 TdF, Nibali put a minute into Chris over 30km.

Of course if it wasn't a known troll who has no interest in debate, forcing the argument, one could point out that Nibali did the Giro that year, finished 11th and his TDF whoopass of Froome came after that Giro performance thereby proving Nibali 2008>>>>>>>>>> Froome 2008.

Good post, Hitch.

 

[the sceptic]

Of course if it wasn't a known troll who has no interest in debate, forcing the argument, one could point out that Nibali did the Giro that year, finished 11th and his TDF whoopass of Froome came after that Giro performance thereby proving Nibali 2008>>>>>>>>>> Froome 2008.

The somewhat sane skybots like jimmyfingers gave up on Froome a long time ago. The only way to defend him now is to troll or to become Walsh.