Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Poursuivant]

Re: Re:

I wonder why Dawg searches his own name and blocks everyone that says negative thinsg about him on twitter?

seems rather.. crazy.

Maybe because he is fed up with people like you?

people like me? don't get personal please or I will have to report you.

don't get personal???? you accuse Froome and I assume others with no real knowledge of anything. based on the methods that would get you laughed at by a competent scientist (or grade schooler) and your worried about how you are treated?

The sceptic has a problem, I feel sorry for him, you only have to see his posts during stage threads to see his vitriol come to the fore, I have it on good authority Froome robbed his rabbit as a kid for his snake, and the sceptic swore revenge from that day forth.

Sceptic: let the personal hate go, you will feel so, so much better.

 

[the sceptic]

Re: Re:

I wonder why Dawg searches his own name and blocks everyone that says negative thinsg about him on twitter?

seems rather.. crazy.

Maybe because he is fed up with people like you?

people like me? don't get personal please or I will have to report you.

don't get personal???? you accuse Froome and I assume others with no real knowledge of anything. based on the methods that would get you laughed at by a competent scientist (or grade schooler) and your worried about how you are treated?

No real knowledge? Please do tell what I am missing then.

I don't see anything wrong with my methods. If you did some research you would see that there are competent scientists out there that agree with me.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I wonder why Dawg searches his own name and blocks everyone that says negative thinsg about him on twitter?

seems rather.. crazy.

Maybe because he is fed up with people like you?

people like me? don't get personal please or I will have to report you.

don't get personal???? you accuse Froome and I assume others with no real knowledge of anything. based on the methods that would get you laughed at by a competent scientist (or grade schooler) and your worried about how you are treated?

no great knowledge? WTF! The sport has a history of doping though and through. Hell there was huge outrage from LeMond, Walsh and others (rightfully so) when it was heard Armstrong was working with Ferrari, barely a whimper when discovered Sky hired Leinders.....one of many knowlegable examples that gets cited in here when opinions are expressed about riders like Froome, who came from hanging onto motorbikes on mountains to a La Vuelta podium and he would've won that if not for hanging around for a bone idle w@nk*r.

Froome is a doper. It is as obvious as Armstrong, if not more so. Armstrong was WC at 21. Froome was crashing into race officials........

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

I don't see anything wrong with my methods. If you did some research you would see that there are competent scientists out there that agree with me.

You certainly have views / opinions conclusions that are the same as some scientists out there, but lets not big it up by saying they agree with you as if they have ratified your research ...

 

[cantpedal]

Re: Re:

I wonder why Dawg searches his own name and blocks everyone that says negative thinsg about him on twitter?

seems rather.. crazy.

Maybe because he is fed up with people like you?

people like me? don't get personal please or I will have to report you.

don't get personal???? you accuse Froome and I assume others with no real knowledge of anything. based on the methods that would get you laughed at by a competent scientist (or grade schooler) and your worried about how you are treated?

no great knowledge? WTF! The sport has a history of doping though and through. Hell there was huge outrage from LeMond, Walsh and others (rightfully so) when it was heard Armstrong was working with Ferrari, barely a whimper when discovered Sky hired Leinders.....one of many knowlegable examples that gets cited in here when opinions are expressed about riders like Froome, who came from hanging onto motorbikes on mountains to a La Vuelta podium and he would've won that if not for hanging around for a bone idle w@nk*r.

Froome is a doper. It is as obvious as Armstrong, if not more so. Armstrong was WC at 21. Froome was crashing into race officials........

Wow what are you on? Never said everyone was clean. I have no idea. My issue is with the use of so called facts against Froome and I'm sure others, and then to have the gall to be offended by the way someone talked about him. using those "facts" would be like me diagnosing you as a full blown Paranoid psycho from the preceding rant. to be clear I'm not but the evidence is just as flimsy as you trying to pull conclusions from the crap you call facts. "I know his power #s because I know how fast someone got up a hill?" Do you realize how ludicrous that is?
I've read in this forum that Armstrong was most likely already doping at 21. If that's true it kind of kills that part of your argument.
I don't hear LeMond going nuts now. He's happily involved in promoting the sport. Walsh seem to like and believe Froome. What you only believe Walsh when It's convenient and supports what you believe? Is he Credible or not?
I could go on but i'm sure its pointless.
I'm sure you'll follow with another spew of venom don't wait on a response I've happily moved on.

 

[Saint Unix]

Re: Re:

Walsh seem to like and believe Froome. What you only believe Walsh when It's convenient and supports what you believe? Is he Credible or not?

Walsh's own words:
"He was sensational, and everybody who was at that race in terms of the journalists, when [he] made that big attack in the mountains(...), I was in the press room that day, I saw the reaction; people were laughing. Incredulous. They didn't believe this. Because here we had a guy (...) supposedly riding the race clean, riding more effortlessly, with greater power, at a greater speed than all the Tours that had gone before, so it just didn't make sense."

It's about Lance Armstrong, but apply that to Froome's times up Ax-3-Domaines or Ventoux and you'll realize that Walsh likes who he wants to like, sees what he wants to see and is a huge hypocrite these days. So no, Walsh is not credible.

 

[cantpedal]

Re: Re:

Walsh seem to like and believe Froome. What you only believe Walsh when It's convenient and supports what you believe? Is he Credible or not?

Walsh's own words:
"He was sensational, and everybody who was at that race in terms of the journalists, when [he] made that big attack in the mountains(...), I was in the press room that day, I saw the reaction; people were laughing. Incredulous. They didn't believe this. Because here we had a guy (...) supposedly riding the race clean, riding more effortlessly, with greater power, at a greater speed than all the Tours that had gone before, so it just didn't make sense."

It's about Lance Armstrong, but apply that to Froome's times up Ax-3-Domaines or Ventoux and you'll realize that Walsh likes who he wants to like, sees what he wants to see and is a huge hypocrite these days. So no, Walsh is not credible.

You caught me still on here trying to clean up my post. hopeless with my phone and these thumbs.
so in reply to your post i'll say "Exactly my point" now I'm gone bad spelling grammar and all..damn phone

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

I wonder why Dawg searches his own name and blocks everyone that says negative thinsg about him on twitter?

seems rather.. crazy.

Maybe because he is fed up with people like you?

people like me? don't get personal please or I will have to report you.

don't get personal???? you accuse Froome and I assume others with no real knowledge of anything. based on the methods that would get you laughed at by a competent scientist (or grade schooler) and your worried about how you are treated?

Don't assume then.

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

I wonder why Dawg searches his own name and blocks everyone that says negative thinsg about him on twitter?

seems rather.. crazy.

Maybe because he is fed up with people like you?

people like me? don't get personal please or I will have to report you.

don't get personal???? you accuse Froome and I assume others with no real knowledge of anything. based on the methods that would get you laughed at by a competent scientist (or grade schooler) and your worried about how you are treated?

no great knowledge? WTF! The sport has a history of doping though and through. Hell there was huge outrage from LeMond, Walsh and others (rightfully so) when it was heard Armstrong was working with Ferrari, barely a whimper when discovered Sky hired Leinders.....one of many knowlegable examples that gets cited in here when opinions are expressed about riders like Froome, who came from hanging onto motorbikes on mountains to a La Vuelta podium and he would've won that if not for hanging around for a bone idle w@nk*r.

Froome is a doper. It is as obvious as Armstrong, if not more so. Armstrong was WC at 21. Froome was crashing into race officials........

And holding on to motorbikes. You can't forget the motorbikes

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Still not blocked by Froome, good, so I can read those very interesting tweets about:

I hope my boy loves lions as much as I do! ❤️☺️ #YellowJersey #TDF2015

too bad Walsh blocked me though, he is pure comedy gold

##blocked

what an hypocritical moron, it really is astonishing this guy is being paid for his job

 

[meat puppet]

now now, fearless, is that really necessary? it'll only upset posters who want to hear how froome is da best, cleans, marginal gains, about to win the tour. only fabricated data against him. I like his credibility.

 

[the sceptic]

Re:

Still not blocked by Froome, good, so I can read those very interesting tweets about:

I hope my boy loves lions as much as I do! ❤️☺️ #YellowJersey #TDF2015

too bad Walsh blocked me though, he is pure comedy gold

##blocked

what an hypocritical moron, it really is astonishing this guy is being paid for his job

what really is amazing is that some people still haven't worked out that Walsh is paid by sky to write lies that benefit them.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Re:

now now, fearless, is that really necessary? it'll only upset posters who want to hear how froome is da best, cleans, marginal gains, about to win the tour. only fabricated data against him. I like his credibility.

Sorry, wont do it again mp

 

[veganrob]

Re: Re:

now now, fearless, is that really necessary? it'll only upset posters who want to hear how froome is da best, cleans, marginal gains, about to win the tour. only fabricated data against him. I like his credibility.

Sorry, wont do it again mp

Sometimes I wonder how guys like Walsh can spout this bullsh1t. Do they really believe it or purposely deflecting? And then we have all the fans that just discovered cycking in 2011 and are now the experts. Blows my mind.

"shakes my head in disbelief"

 

[Ramon Koran]

Some people need to get a life, I mean seriously spending your time asking people questions just to provoke them is pathetic. No wonder walsh banned some of you, you are just trolling and not contributing to the debate.

 

[veganrob]

Re:

Some people need to get a life, I mean seriously spending your time asking people questions just to provoke them is pathetic. No wonder walsh banned some of you, you are just trolling and not contributing to the debate.

So we all should just fawn over Walsh then? Will that help you sleep better?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Re:

Some people need to get a life, I mean

You should have stopped there my friend, and, to be frank, some interpunction could have strenghtened your 'case' but now you just look like a ...

You have to understand Walsh was held pretty high by a lot of folks, we are just dissappointed he is/turned out to be such a gigantic sellout, perhaps one of the biggest in history.

Provocative? Perhaps, perhaps not. After reading his books, including Mein Climb, copyright @the Sceptic, he should be pointed on his hypocrisy because his fellow 'journalists' aren't doing it.

That's all there is to it, if that means 'we have to get a life' according to your high standards: so be it.

 

[SeriousSam]

If you post dumb *** in the forum or on twitter, people are free to call you out for the dumb *** you post. Walsh is going to have to live with that.

 

[Supimilian]

Re:

If you post dumb **** in the forum or on twitter, people are free to call you out for the dumb **** you post. Walsh is going to have to live with that.

Exactly.
The same reason some should tighten it up a bit when it comes to separation of baseless accusations and personal opinions from factors that are potentially real indicators of foul play. For the good of the cause.

 

[Ramon Koran]

The fact is although i agree that walsh has said some dumb stuff, it is not by trolling him on Twitter that you are going to achieve anything. On the contrary you make yourselfs apear bitter, ridiculous. Maybe if you could come up with some strong evidence to show that walsh is lying, or talking rubbish you would be taken more seriously.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

If you post dumb **** in the forum or on twitter, people are free to call you out for the dumb **** you post. Walsh is going to have to live with that.

Exactly.
The same reason some should tighten it up a bit when it comes to separation of baseless accusations and personal opinions from factors that are potentially real indicators of foul play. For the good of the cause.

If you engage people in the clinic in intelligent discussion you will find they are very happy to back up any claims and discuss why they say things, even Benotti!

If you come in and rant about how they are all jealous, petty losers then you get the response you would get in any discussion platform.

This isn't a post to you personally, I don't know what your interactions in the clinic have been like, it's just a general post to people who haven't worked out how the clinic works

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Still not blocked by Froome, good, so I can read those very interesting tweets about:

I hope my boy loves lions as much as I do! ❤️☺️ #YellowJersey #TDF2015

too bad Walsh blocked me though, he is pure comedy gold

##blocked

what an hypocritical moron, it really is astonishing this guy is being paid for his job

The fact is although i agree that walsh has said some dumb stuff, it is not by trolling him on Twitter that you are going to achieve anything. On the contrary you make yourselfs apear bitter, ridiculous. Maybe if you could come up with some strong evidence to show that walsh is lying, or talking rubbish you would be taken more seriously.

That's exactly what Fearless Greg LeMond has done, he's not trolling Walsh at all, he pointed out his hypocrisy and asked him to clarify his position. Result? Blocked by Walsh.

 

[Supimilian]

Re: Re:

Still not blocked by Froome, good, so I can read those very interesting tweets about:

I hope my boy loves lions as much as I do! ❤️☺️ #YellowJersey #TDF2015

too bad Walsh blocked me though, he is pure comedy gold

##blocked

what an hypocritical moron, it really is astonishing this guy is being paid for his job

The fact is although i agree that walsh has said some dumb stuff, it is not by trolling him on Twitter that you are going to achieve anything. On the contrary you make yourselfs apear bitter, ridiculous. Maybe if you could come up with some strong evidence to show that walsh is lying, or talking rubbish you would be taken more seriously.

That's exactly what Fearless Greg LeMond has done, he's not trolling Walsh at all, he pointed out his hypocrisy and asked him to clarify his position. Result? Blocked by Walsh.

The fact that he blocks him with no rebuttal says it all. This is why laws against 'trolling' are idiotic: harassing and threatening people is already illegal, so it becomes a tool to maintain narrative for some agenda in a broad sense. Walsh is getting 'trolled' here.
Total joke.

 

[the sceptic]

Re:

Some people need to get a life, I mean seriously spending your time asking people questions just to provoke them is pathetic. No wonder walsh banned some of you, you are just trolling and not contributing to the debate.

Isn't that exactly what you are doing in this thread?

 

[Saint Unix]

You can't really do more with Twitter's 140 character limit than FGLM has done. He asked a valid question to a man who without doubt has two separate criteria for what a doped performance looks like, depending on who the rider is, what team he rides for or what country he's from.

The real issue here is that a journalist who is paid for his opinions and expertise on cycling can't handle when people point out his double standards and hypocrisy. It's damning that Walsh doesn't face the questions head-on with valid arguments and evidence. If he can be as certain about Sky being clean as he is you'd expect him to have better answers for the people asking him valid questions than putting his hands over his eyes and ears and ignoring them.

Also, if I could be bothered with Twitter, I would ask Walsh to check out Froome's performances in flat TTs before 2011 and after. Revealing.