Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[del1962]

Yes it will. 8 vs. 7.

if contador wins the vuelata 6 vs 7

 

[the sceptic]

No it wont

Anyway you cant compare them one has had a doping suspension and the other hasnt

how much does 50 picograms of clenbuterol enhance performance?

 

[del1962]

how much does 50 picograms of clenbuterol enhance performance?

Did he have a suspension or not?

 

[Walkman]

how much does 50 picograms of clenbuterol enhance performance?

Did you just question me on the cleanness of Lövkvist and now I find you defending Contador?

 

[the sceptic]

Did he have a suspension or not?

Yes of course.

Your point is that Contador is different due to his 50 picograms of clen. But then I wonder how much difference it made.

 

[Netserk]

Did he have a suspension or not?

Yes just like Bassons, Contador had a suspension. So?

 

[Walkman]

Yes just like Bassons, Contador had a suspension. So?

To say that with a straight face…that's something you don't see everyday.

And for those of you who don't know who Bassons is, trust me when I say that this is probably the dumbest comparison ever on this forum.

 

[King Boonen]

how much does 50 picograms of clenbuterol enhance performance?

Can I include the bag of blood it was in in the calculation?

 

[the sceptic]

Did you just question me on the cleanness of Lövkvist and now I find you defending Contador?

Im only defending logic and common sense.

 

[Walkman]

Im only defending logic and common sense.

The blood bag theory was never ruled out, was it? So when you are argumenting about the 50 picograms why are your ignoring the theory of blood doping?

That's not common sense, that's being subjective.

 

[the sceptic]

The blood bag theory was never ruled out, was it? So when you are argumenting about the 50 picograms why are your ignoring the theory of blood doping?

That's not common sense, that's being subjective.

Del is trying to argue that you cant compare Contador and Froome because Contador was suspended and Froome has never tested positive.

But as far as I know Contador was only suspended for the 50 picograms of clen, thus I am wondering how much that affected his performance since it makes it impossible to compare him to Froome.

Still eagerly awaiting his reply.

 

[Walkman]

Del is trying to argue that you cant compare Contador and Froome because Contador was suspended and Froome has never tested positive.

But as far as I know Contador was only suspended for the 50 picograms of clen, thus I am wondering how much that affected his performance since it makes it impossible to compare him to Froome.

Still eagerly awaiting his reply.

Race Radio said that Levi got Bruyneel to set up a team wide doping program before the 2007 Tour. And do you know where Contador rode in 2007?

That's right, Discovery! Beating Lance and Bassos times with 1 minute if I recall correctly. Pretty darn good for a guy who was 24 years old at the time.

Furthermore, Contador's whole career has been full of indications of doping. When Discovery was folding, none wanted to hire Contador, the reigning Tour Champion, kind of weird isn't it?

Then you had the medical waste story at the 2009 Tour. And why would Discovery or Astana be any different than the US Postal? The riders and the management was roughly the same and why would Bruyneel abandon a working system? Do you really think the whole Armstrong doping program was scrapped and Discovery just happened to stumble of the best climber of this generation once Lance retired?

Contador has ridden for the same DS as Pantani, Basso and Armstrong, the three most notorious doper of the last 20 years, coincidence?

And add to this the Operación Puerto. So yeah, I think you can make an argument that it's hard to compare Froome to Contador.

 

[King Boonen]

Del is trying to argue that you cant compare Contador and Froome because Contador was suspended and Froome has never tested positive.

But as far as I know Contador was only suspended for the 50 picograms of clen, thus I am wondering how much that affected his performance since it makes it impossible to compare him to Froome.

Still eagerly awaiting his reply.

Sorry that's a fallacy. He was suspended for clenbuterol, the amount is irrelevant. I'm sure you are fully aware of this however.

 

[the sceptic]

Race Radio said that Levi got Bruyneel to set up a team wide doping program before the 2007 Tour. And do you know where Contador rode in 2007?

That's right, Discovery! Beating Lance and Bassos times with 1 minute if I recall correctly. Pretty darn good for a guy who was 24 years old at the time.

Furthermore, Contador's whole career has been full of indications of doping. When Discovery was folding, none wanted to hire Contador, the reigning Tour Champion, kind of weird isn't it?

Then you had the medical waste story at the 2009 Tour. And why would Discovery or Astana be any different than the US Postal? The riders and the management was roughly the same and why would Bruyneel abandon a working system? Do you really think the whole Armstrong doping program was scrapped and Discovery just happened to stumble of the best climber of this generation once Lance retired?

Contador has ridden for the same DS as Pantani, Basso and Armstrong, the three most notorious doper of the last 20 years, coincidence?

And add to this the Operación Puerto. So yeah, I think you can make an argument that it's hard to compare Froome to Contador.

Probably correct. But its hillarious to think that most of these arguments dont apply to Froome as well.

 

[Walkman]

Probably correct. But its hillarious to think that most of these arguments dont apply to Froome as well.

Arguments?

These are facts!

The medical waste story of the 2009 Tour was Astana not Barloworld.

Froome didn't replaced Armstrong as the new GT guy at Discovery, Contador did.

That none wanted to sign Contador in 2007 had nothing to do with Froome.

That Contador have ridden for a number of notorious doping DS has nothing to do with Froome.

Neither was Froome implicated in the Operación Puerto, Contador was.

You can't try and pin these facts to Froome. You can make a case against Froome, but not using these facts because they does not relate to him.

 

[SeriousSam]

When you and del claim it is hard to compare Contador to Froome, what exactly is it you are actually asserting?

That Contador is more likely to have doped, or more likely to have doped more, than Froome? Perhaps in a given year, or from some points onwards?

If so, that's an intriguing conjecture but it's one in need of support. Rattling off a list of facts about Contador and declaring victory doesn't quite cut it. Not when the astronomically implausible badzilla narrative has been presented so elaborately in this very thread, many times.

 

[the sceptic]

Arguments?

These are facts!

The medical waste story of the 2009 Tour was Astana not Barloworld.

Froome didn't replaced Armstrong as the new GT guy at Discovery, Contador did.

That none wanted to sign Contador in 2007 had nothing to do with Froome.

That Contador have ridden for a number of notorious doping DS has nothing to do with Froome.

Neither was Froome implicated in the Operación Puerto, Contador was.

You can't try and pin these facts to Froome. You can make a case against Froome, but not using these facts because they does not relate to him.

maybe next you can try to find some facts about Froome then. I think this thread should cover most of it.

 

[inri2000]

maybe next you can try to find some facts about Froome then. I think this thread should cover most of it.

Why would he do something that doesn't suit his obviously biased agenda?

 

[Walkman]

When you and del claim it is hard to compare Contador to Froome, what exactly is it you are actually asserting?

That Contador is more likely to have doped, or more likely to have doped more, than Froome? Perhaps in a given year, or from some points onwards?

If so, that's an intriguing conjecture but it's one in need of support. Rattling off a list of facts about Contador and declaring victory doesn't quite cut it. Not when the astronomically implausible badzilla narrative has been presented so elaborately in this very thread, many times.

I have never declared victory. Read the post history and you will see. I only responded to a post earlier and I said that I can see why someone thinks that you can't compare Froome and Contador.

Then I was challenged so I presented some facts as to why I think the way I do.

 

[Walkman]

Why would he do something that doesn't suit his obviously biased agenda?

What would my "agenda" be? And why am I biased?

Please elaborate and answer me.

 

[the sceptic]

I have never declared victory. Read the post history and you will see. I only responded to a post earlier and I said that I can see why someone thinks that you can't compare Froome and Contador.

Then I was challenged so I presented some facts as to why I think the way I do.

You still havent explained why Froome is different.

 

[laurel1969]

Why would he do something that doesn't suit his obviously biased agenda?

Is there such a thing as an unbiased agenda?

 

[del1962]

Sceptic, perhaps if you think you can compare them then you should take it up was the poster who made the original supposition that you can't compare them, I agreed and gave my reason, perhaps he didn't like my reason though

 

[TailWindHome]

You still havent explained why Froome is different.

He hasn't a doping conviction whereas Contador has.
Or am I missing a whole different sub argument?

 

[Netserk]

Sceptic, perhaps if you think you can compare them then you should take it up was the poster who made the original supposition that you can't compare them, I agreed and gave my reason, perhaps he didn't like my reason though

10 char

No it wont

Anyway you cant compare them one has had a doping suspension and the other hasnt