Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[buckle]

Very tidy with Pinot winning the last stage on ADH but this Tour was over by the first week. The key is not to lose control of the narrative which has happened this year and in 2013. Sky have endeavoured to regain it today and it appears to have worked for the tifosi. This really is WWE and nothing more.

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":3d31dozp][quote="
However, keep up the good work if you think records are only be broken because of better doping methods. You are in the right section here.

So, in a sport in which most, perhaps even all, of the main protagonists have doped & lied for decades, you want me to believe their records can be beaten by clean riders now? Not a chance, you need a reality check my friend, i.e. the incremental performance improvements you base your theory upon is data which shouldn't be taken seriously anyway, you know why? It's skewed by doping.

Saying "people go faster as time goes by" is based upon times achieved via the widespread use of PED's for decades. Mother nature doesn't factor into any improvements in 20 years, it's an absurd notion.[/quote]Well lets start with the fact that nothing has been broken. A little detail you must have missed.

Secondly, you wont hear me say that cycling will ever be 100% clean but todays cycling is different than the gong show we have watched from 1993 until 2010. Yes trainings methods have improved quite a lot as well.

Yes in cycling a lot of things will change over a period of 20 years. If you think otherwise than you are dead wrong. I actually cant believe you think otherwise. This sport cannot be compared with for instance a sport like athletics where its more logical a record will last for 20 years.

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff""p9wy6qs][quote="
However, keep up the good work if you think records are only be broken because of better doping methods. You are in the right section here.

So, in a sport in which most, perhaps even all, of the main protagonists have doped & lied for decades, you want me to believe their records can be beaten by clean riders now? Not a chance, you need a reality check my friend, i.e. the incremental performance improvements you base your theory upon is data which shouldn't be taken seriously anyway, you know why? It's skewed by doping.

Saying "people go faster as time goes by" is based upon times achieved via the widespread use of PED's for decades. Mother nature doesn't factor into any improvements in 20 years, it's an absurd notion.[/quote]Well lets start with the fact that nothing has been broken. A little detail you must have missed.

Secondly, you wont hear me say that cycling will ever be 100% clean but todays cycling is different than the gong show we have watched from 1993 until 2010. Yes trainings methods have improved quite a lot as well.

Yes in cycling a lot of things will change over a period of 20 years. If you think otherwise than you are dead wrong. I actually cant believe you think otherwise. This sport cannot be compared with for instance a sport like athletics where its more logical a record will last for 20 years.[/quote]

Cycling has learnt from other sports to not wash its dirty linen in public. This is a competitive market place where sports themselves are competing with each other for TV time and lucrative contracts. Yes, there will be a few show trials from time to time but nothing more than that. The best thing that could happen to cycling is to reinstate Lance Armstrong. Disqualifying him retrospectively has become part of the narrative. I say let him do the chat shows and the celebrity circuit once more. He might prove more useful "alive" than "dead" in terms of a reminder to us all of what sports have now become.

 

[AICA ribonucleotide]

So Froome had Bronchitis and still won the tour!

 

[Lyon]

Re:

So Froome had Bronchitis and still won the tour!

Did it eat his red blood cells?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

This is also a different period. People are going faster as times goes by, always will be, always has been.

People are only going ''faster' because the doping methods got better, i.e. if you think a combination of equipment & training improvements will give clean riders now the same performance levels as super charged EPO extraterrestrials from merely 20 years ago, I'm afraid you're way off the mark.

There are so many things wrong in the post. Stuff I didnt say and stuff you ignore that I did say, that its not even worth to go into full detail.

However, keep up the good work if you think records are only be broken because of better doping methods. You are in the right section here.[/quote]

Maybe you can enlighten us how so called clean riders with their methods aka 'marginal gains', which Sky lied about inventing, are beating EPO times.

All these clean guys riding for dirty teams, dirty doctors, dirty soignuers, dirty DSs etc can beat EPO fueled times! Sure, that is why Tinkoff have a unicorn on their logo.

 

[BrentonOfTheNorth]

Re:

Let'not use hyperbole. Today was slower than most of us expected. If this was the only stage in this TdF I would actually be pretty hopeful. But it wasn't so great in the pyrenees,

On a side note: wtf did Lance use in 2001 to be so close to the 60% era... Also, pretty amazing times in 2006.

Saline solution to get down to 49% after the stage before the dope test, like Pantani and others presumably used to do?

 

[blackcat]

vroom was spat on again today.

if you wish to believe, its optional

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

vroom was spat on again today.

if you wish to believe, its optional

Not much to believe or not, there's a video of it. Still no urine video though.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

vroom was spat on again today.

if you wish to believe, its optional

Froome is very punk, they show their love..........

 

[AICA ribonucleotide]

No one is picking on this Froome bronchitis story? Carsten Jeppesen Sky's danish Head of Technical Operations let slip to Danish media that Froome had been suffering from bronchitis for the past few days.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

No one is picking on this Froome bronchitis story? Carsten Jeppesen Sky's danish Head of Technical Operations let slip to Danish media that Froome had been suffering from bronchitis for the past few days.

Walsh will....oh wait!!

Wonder how many TUEs he got for today?

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

This is also a different period. People are going faster as times goes by, always will be, always has been.

People are only going ''faster' because the doping methods got better, i.e. if you think a combination of equipment & training improvements will give clean riders now the same performance levels as super charged EPO extraterrestrials from merely 20 years ago, I'm afraid you're way off the mark.

There are so many things wrong in the post. Stuff I didnt say and stuff you ignore that I did say, that its not even worth to go into full detail.

However, keep up the good work if you think records are only be broken because of better doping methods. You are in the right section here.

Maybe you can enlighten us how so called clean riders with their methods aka 'marginal gains', which Sky lied about inventing, are beating EPO times.

All these clean guys riding for dirty teams, dirty doctors, dirty soignuers, dirty DSs etc can beat EPO fueled times! Sure, that is why Tinkoff have a unicorn on their logo.[/quote]I will enlighten you.

AGAIN: We probably have to go back to 1991 to notice any non-dopers on the list of fastest times ever. That's 24 years ago. I repeat 24 years ago. Are you expecting that one of the better climbers anno 2015 will climb slower than that ?

In 1991 41:02 Jean-Francois Bernard 20.18 km/h. Now more than 2 decades later Quintana is what? 2.5 minute faster. Nothing strange with that.

 

[doperhopper]

Re:

No one is picking on this Froome bronchitis story? Carsten Jeppesen Sky's danish Head of Technical Operations let slip to Danish media that Froome had been suffering from bronchitis for the past few days.

Meh, so next book will be: The Climb With The Badzilla.

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2wrms1dz]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.[/quote]

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":3rxgxk64]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?[/quote]Now this is perfect example. Thanks for your input.

When people try to try rationalize a performance, they are an Armstrong tifosi. According to this person, we are only allowed to talk crap here.

People like this poster are worrysome.

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":1r7m94so]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?[/quote]Now this is perfect example. Thanks for your input.

When people try to try rationalize a performance, they are an Armstrong tifosi. According to this person, we are only allowed to talk crap here.

People like this poster are exactly what I mean. The irony.[/quote]

The clinicians predict that contemporary sportsmen are all doped and they get proved 100% correct. Where's the irony? We had ten years of rationality during the Armstrong era and this proved to be a sporting fraud. We are into the fourth year of Sky's version and this too will be proved a fraud. Again, where's the irony?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

This is also a different period. People are going faster as times goes by, always will be, always has been.

People are only going ''faster' because the doping methods got better, i.e. if you think a combination of equipment & training improvements will give clean riders now the same performance levels as super charged EPO extraterrestrials from merely 20 years ago, I'm afraid you're way off the mark.

There are so many things wrong in the post. Stuff I didnt say and stuff you ignore that I did say, that its not even worth to go into full detail.

However, keep up the good work if you think records are only be broken because of better doping methods. You are in the right section here.

Maybe you can enlighten us how so called clean riders with their methods aka 'marginal gains', which Sky lied about inventing, are beating EPO times.

All these clean guys riding for dirty teams, dirty doctors, dirty soignuers, dirty DSs etc can beat EPO fueled times! Sure, that is why Tinkoff have a unicorn on their logo.[/quote]I will enlighten you.

AGAIN: We probably have to go back to 1991 to notice any non-dopers on the list of fastest times ever. That's 24 years ago. I repeat 24 years ago. Are you expecting that one of the better climbers anno 2015 will climb slower than that ?

In 1991 41:02 Jean-Francois Bernard 20.18 km/h. Now more than 2 decades later Quintana is what? 2.5 minute faster. Nothing strange with that.

Some people here a completey brainwashed and cant see things from 2 sides anymore.[/quote]

Sorry there was nothing enlightening in that! 24 years explains what exactly?

What makes Quintana able to climb faster? What natural evolution made riders go faster uphill? Rounder wheels?

 

[pmcg76]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":3zvtu2wc]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?[/quote]

Where exactly does that notion come from? I could make the claim that everyone cheats on their partner and everytime someone is caught claim that I am right, cos that is exactly what you are saying.

As the saying goes 'even a broken clock is correct twice day'.

There are guys from the 80s who have gone up Alpe d'Huez faster than Contador so where is this massive boost from EPO/blood doping then?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":3ruxs21a]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?[/quote]Now this is perfect example. Thanks for your input.

When people try to try rationalize a performance, they are an Armstrong tifosi. According to this person, we are only allowed to talk crap here.

People like this poster are worrysome.[/quote]

What 2 sides are there?

UCI are not anti doping? Look how many times they tested bikes for motors? 19 times last look, over 3 weeks. They tested 36 bikes at Milan SanRemo!!

Then we have that none of the TdF samples are being sent to the best lab in Europe, Cologne that has the best equipment!

Then we have the teams run by the same people who ran the teams for the last 20 years or were riders the last 20 years. These people believed in the culture of doping back then, what changed their minds now?

And then we have the team that talks about being clean, hiding how they do things and giving strange answers and then outright lies to avoid the obvious. Doping.

That you consider people in here brainwashed is sad, the clinic did not create doping the sport, neither does the clinic enable it, but it is here to discuss it. Insulting people because you cant convince people of unicorns doesn't mean you are right! I am sorry you believe in miracles.

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":3swoe88b]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?

Now this is perfect example. Thanks for your input.

When people try to try rationalize a performance, they are an Armstrong tifosi. According to this person, we are only allowed to talk crap here.

People like this poster are exactly what I mean. The irony.[/quote]

The clinicians predict that contemporary sportsmen are all doped and they get proved 100% correct. Where's the irony? We had ten years of rationality during the Armstrong era and this proved to be a sporting fraud. We are into the fourth year of Sky's version and this too will be proved a fraud. Again, where's the irony?[/quote] Yeah that was really difficult to predict that Armstrong & Co were doped...

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2kgf6zut]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?

Where exactly does that notion come from? I could make the claim that everyone cheats on their partner and everytime someone is caught claim that I am right, cos that is exactly what you are saying.

As the saying goes 'even a broken clock is correct twice day'.

There are guys from the 80s who have gone up Alpe d'Huez faster than Contador so where is this massive boost from EPO/blood doping then?[/quote]

The USA cycling team blood doped for the 1984 olympics that Alexi Grewal won.

EPO doesn't give a massive boost? Hmm I think there are a lot riders who beg to differ.

 

[pmcg76]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":qtbrm8tu]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?

Where exactly does that notion come from? I could make the claim that everyone cheats on their partner and everytime someone is caught claim that I am right, cos that is exactly what you are saying.

As the saying goes 'even a broken clock is correct twice day'.

There are guys from the 80s who have gone up Alpe d'Huez faster than Contador so where is this massive boost from EPO/blood doping then?

The USA cycling team blood doped for the 1984 olympics that Alexi Grewal won.

EPO doesn't give a massive boost? Hmm I think there are a lot riders who beg to differ.[/quote]

Not saying EPO doesnt give a big advantage but then riddle me this

Lucho Herrera 41.50 1987
Charly Mottet 41.42 1991
Greg LeMond 41.42 1991
Andrew Hampsten 41:45 1991
Laurent Fignon 41.56 1987

v

Lance Armstrong 41.35 1999
Alberto Contador 41.33 2011
Alejandro Valverde 41:45 2008
Frank Schleck 41:45 2008
Denis Menchov 41:47 2008
Bernhard Kohl 41:47 2008

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2pqkvz05]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?

Now this is perfect example. Thanks for your input.

When people try to try rationalize a performance, they are an Armstrong tifosi. According to this person, we are only allowed to talk crap here.

People like this poster are worrysome.[/quote]

What 2 sides are there?

[/quote]The side you are on: Quintana's 20th fastest time ever between a bunch of dopers.

The other side: Quintana's 20th fastest time ever. Only 2,5 minutes faster than an arguably non doper in 1991 (a good 24 year earlier).

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2ooqduxk]

Some people here are completely brainwashed and can't see things from 2 sides anymore.

You can mix as many metaphors as you like but nobody believes these guys are not doping. Why come to the clinic? There are plenty of other fora which celebrate clean sport. This forum reserves the right to take an alternative view and the predictions of the regulars enjoys a 100% success rate. Were you an Armstrong tifoso?

Where exactly does that notion come from? I could make the claim that everyone cheats on their partner and everytime someone is caught claim that I am right, cos that is exactly what you are saying.

As the saying goes 'even a broken clock is correct twice day'.

There are guys from the 80s who have gone up Alpe d'Huez faster than Contador so where is this massive boost from EPO/blood doping then?

The USA cycling team blood doped for the 1984 olympics that Alexi Grewal won.

EPO doesn't give a massive boost? Hmm I think there are a lot riders who beg to differ.

Not saying EPO doesnt give a big advantage but then riddle me this

Lucho Herrera 41.50 1987
Charly Mottet 41.42 1991
Greg LeMond 41.42 1991
Andrew Hampsten 41:45 1991
Laurent Fignon 41.50 1987

v

Lance Armstrong 41.35 1999
Alberto Contador 41.33 2011
Alejandro Valverde 41:45 2008
Frank Schleck 41:45 2008
Denis Menchov 41:47 2008
Bernhard Kohl 41:47 2008[/quote]

Riddle me this

Nairo Quintana COL | 39:23 | 2015

Quintana had the fastest time ever up Croix De Fer today as well. EPO, apparently it gives you wings.

Please dont put Fignon on that list, whatever about the others, Fignon doped, yes he claims not with EPO but with everything else of the time.