- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Re: Re:
Kinjah coaching?? Oh my god.. they wen just over there with MTB... that is not racing.
Froome was a year racing some races in Europe, as well in Japan, Egyp, etc...he was in Aigle, but that is not his first year in Europe, we could say he had a previous contact with european cycling, but his first year in Europe was 2008, so 2011 was his fourth year at the best level of cycling, and the first 3 years obviously he was working for other people, especially Soler, one of the most talented climber of the last years, and in SKy as well for other riders.
The way to work in SKy benefited his body a lot, as well his optimization of energy. Sometimes you do the work, and that work came up in result when you less imagine, but if you work, the work have his fruits, soon or later...with the year he do in 2008 acording to circunstances, the surprises is he didnt a little bit better 2009 and 2010, but what happend in la Vuelta anst a big surprised. I was almost lost the hope with him, I though he should have been a doper in 2008, but when I saw that in the Vuelta I was happy to see that no, that he was a real talented rider.
42x16ss said:
Kinjah coaching?? Oh my god.. they wen just over there with MTB... that is not racing.
Froome was a year racing some races in Europe, as well in Japan, Egyp, etc...he was in Aigle, but that is not his first year in Europe, we could say he had a previous contact with european cycling, but his first year in Europe was 2008, so 2011 was his fourth year at the best level of cycling, and the first 3 years obviously he was working for other people, especially Soler, one of the most talented climber of the last years, and in SKy as well for other riders.
The way to work in SKy benefited his body a lot, as well his optimization of energy. Sometimes you do the work, and that work came up in result when you less imagine, but if you work, the work have his fruits, soon or later...with the year he do in 2008 acording to circunstances, the surprises is he didnt a little bit better 2009 and 2010, but what happend in la Vuelta anst a big surprised. I was almost lost the hope with him, I though he should have been a doper in 2008, but when I saw that in the Vuelta I was happy to see that no, that he was a real talented rider.
- May 23, 2009
- 10,256
- 1,455
- 25,680
Re: Re:
During heavy training and racing, any and every pro that knows what they're doing knows their weight, to within .1 of a kg. Why? Sweat rate testing and correct hydration. If you want to seriously contend a GT you need to do this stuff.Brullnux said:
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
- May 17, 2013
- 7,559
- 2,414
- 20,680
Re:
. Almost a copy/paste of Armstrong's defense, including the jealousy of the French who haven't won a Tour since '85. Phil Liggett must have written this piece...of garbage. The article doesn't mention why people doubt: the lies or storis that keep changing, why an athlete at this level doesn't know his weight or VO2Max, a guy who dominated ITTs yet hadn't trained in a wind tunnel. Et caetera...
There were hundreds like you on this forum pre-2012 making the same points, defending Armstrong. For them and for you, I have a nice structure or sale in Paris, about 320m high. $5M cash.
Objective link...ahahahahaTaxus4a said:
. Almost a copy/paste of Armstrong's defense, including the jealousy of the French who haven't won a Tour since '85. Phil Liggett must have written this piece...of garbage. The article doesn't mention why people doubt: the lies or storis that keep changing, why an athlete at this level doesn't know his weight or VO2Max, a guy who dominated ITTs yet hadn't trained in a wind tunnel. Et caetera...There were hundreds like you on this forum pre-2012 making the same points, defending Armstrong. For them and for you, I have a nice structure or sale in Paris, about 320m high. $5M cash.
- Oct 28, 2012
- 31
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
He is not estimating that his weight is 66 kilos. He is estimating that is weight was 70 kilos in 2007.
42x16ss said:
He is not estimating that his weight is 66 kilos. He is estimating that is weight was 70 kilos in 2007.
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Re: Re:
The article mention all of that, read again.
I have never defend Armstrong, infact I never say anything without proof,s but I said in his day lance must be doping. We talk of differents eras.
I said Froome was a promising rider for a race as le Tour in 2008 and he 3 year later was second in la Vuelta.
As the article said, againg Armstrong there was something, it was clear, the evidence was big, you cant beat to big dopers in that way... the case of Froome is the contrary, all the evidence is that is a clean rider, although for most of the people it is very suspicious his rise, but there is no more, there is very different number than Lance, there is no a signeur, there is not a and of course today inside cycling everybody knows cycling is different, just some people who live in the past like you think different.
One of the diofference woth lance is that Ulle is going to race la Vuelta, he race at a good level all the year.
One of the difference is that he ask for more controls, and accurate controls. one of the difference is he is a thing rider, lance climbed much better than Froome with a corpulent body.
Sky has bring a lot of new things to road cycling, does Lance teams did something similar?
If Lance was accusated he needed to defend in anyway...what can he said? But you see Froome acting the same about acusations? they are very different persons. Froome is a very noce guy, Lance was an arrogant and bad people.
Of course Froome take advantahe to be in SKY, but not in the way of doping.
Read Hamilton book, maybe the best book to know Lance, and you will see how today things are different.
All that there is againts Froome is nothing, it is just becouse he win after too years of not progresion with not very good result, no more, and that is not a proof even an evidence of doping, it is maybe a reason to distrut, becouse it is more normal to get to the top in other way. i said in my article the motives people doubt, read it, and I explain why you can aseverate anything.
Tonton said:Objective link...ahahahahaTaxus4a said:
There were hundreds like you on this forum pre-2012 making the same points, defending Armstrong. For them and for you, I have a nice structure or sale in Paris, about 320m high. $5M cash.
The article mention all of that, read again.
I have never defend Armstrong, infact I never say anything without proof,s but I said in his day lance must be doping. We talk of differents eras.
I said Froome was a promising rider for a race as le Tour in 2008 and he 3 year later was second in la Vuelta.
As the article said, againg Armstrong there was something, it was clear, the evidence was big, you cant beat to big dopers in that way... the case of Froome is the contrary, all the evidence is that is a clean rider, although for most of the people it is very suspicious his rise, but there is no more, there is very different number than Lance, there is no a signeur, there is not a and of course today inside cycling everybody knows cycling is different, just some people who live in the past like you think different.
One of the diofference woth lance is that Ulle is going to race la Vuelta, he race at a good level all the year.
One of the difference is that he ask for more controls, and accurate controls. one of the difference is he is a thing rider, lance climbed much better than Froome with a corpulent body.
Sky has bring a lot of new things to road cycling, does Lance teams did something similar?
If Lance was accusated he needed to defend in anyway...what can he said? But you see Froome acting the same about acusations? they are very different persons. Froome is a very noce guy, Lance was an arrogant and bad people.
Of course Froome take advantahe to be in SKY, but not in the way of doping.
Read Hamilton book, maybe the best book to know Lance, and you will see how today things are different.
All that there is againts Froome is nothing, it is just becouse he win after too years of not progresion with not very good result, no more, and that is not a proof even an evidence of doping, it is maybe a reason to distrut, becouse it is more normal to get to the top in other way. i said in my article the motives people doubt, read it, and I explain why you can aseverate anything.
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Re: Re:
I took this picture of Froome in 2009 and he was of course fater:
By the way, he did a very good Vuelta a Burgos that year, he did the same ITT that his mate Geraint Thomas, a man of the track, and he was in Neila, a climb that is not good for him, very well taking into account he was helping Soler and that there was a lot of dopers over there still in this race. With the cleanliness of today and as leader, he could have been top 5 in the race, and with 3 kilos less, he coudl have been on the podium.
I was a little disapointed becouse I followed him those years, but looking with perspective he did a great race.
freddybobs said:
I took this picture of Froome in 2009 and he was of course fater:
By the way, he did a very good Vuelta a Burgos that year, he did the same ITT that his mate Geraint Thomas, a man of the track, and he was in Neila, a climb that is not good for him, very well taking into account he was helping Soler and that there was a lot of dopers over there still in this race. With the cleanliness of today and as leader, he could have been top 5 in the race, and with 3 kilos less, he coudl have been on the podium.
I was a little disapointed becouse I followed him those years, but looking with perspective he did a great race.
- Jul 15, 2013
- 896
- 0
- 4,580
Re: Re:
Another example of a younger rider who was at least as good as Froome until the 2011 Vuelta, now look at the difference between them
Yes he finished with Bakelants on the Neila, just outside the top 20Taxus4a said:I took this picture of Froome in 2009 and he was of course fater:
By the way, he did a very good Vuelta a Burgos that year, he did the same ITT that his mate Geraint Thomas, a man of the track, and he was in Neila, a climb that is not good for him, very well taking into account he was helping Soler and that there was a lot of dopers over there still in this race. With the cleanliness of today and as leader, he could have been top 5 in the race, and with 3 kilos less, he coudl have been on the podium.
I was a little disapointed becouse I followed him those years, but looking with perspective he did a great race.
Another example of a younger rider who was at least as good as Froome until the 2011 Vuelta, now look at the difference between them
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Re: Re:
In term of results there was a lot of promising riders from 85-86, more than Froome, yes, but in cycling is not how you start , but how you finish.
You can compare Bakelant to him, and you dont consider the posisbility of Froome always clean and most of the rest, including Bakelants, year by year cleaner.
If you dont consider the posibility of Froome was clean in a world where most of them were dopers, although after 2008 things started to change, then obviously Froome is a doper as the rest, but things are not like that.
That doenst mean everybody is totallyclean today, but you can won totally clean today any race.
Froome did a lot of mistakes in 2009, he was like a junior on terms of cycling, he is still learning and improving year by year. You cant compare him to bakelants, even you cant compare him with Lee, Impey orJay Robert Thomson, the only ones with a similar story, but not the same.
Gung Ho Gun said:Yes he finished with Bakelants on the Neila, just outside the top 20Taxus4a said:I took this picture of Froome in 2009 and he was of course fater:
By the way, he did a very good Vuelta a Burgos that year, he did the same ITT that his mate Geraint Thomas, a man of the track, and he was in Neila, a climb that is not good for him, very well taking into account he was helping Soler and that there was a lot of dopers over there still in this race. With the cleanliness of today and as leader, he could have been top 5 in the race, and with 3 kilos less, he coudl have been on the podium.
I was a little disapointed becouse I followed him those years, but looking with perspective he did a great race.
Another example of a younger rider who was at least as good as Froome until the 2011 Vuelta, now look at the difference between them
In term of results there was a lot of promising riders from 85-86, more than Froome, yes, but in cycling is not how you start , but how you finish.
You can compare Bakelant to him, and you dont consider the posisbility of Froome always clean and most of the rest, including Bakelants, year by year cleaner.
If you dont consider the posibility of Froome was clean in a world where most of them were dopers, although after 2008 things started to change, then obviously Froome is a doper as the rest, but things are not like that.
That doenst mean everybody is totallyclean today, but you can won totally clean today any race.
Froome did a lot of mistakes in 2009, he was like a junior on terms of cycling, he is still learning and improving year by year. You cant compare him to bakelants, even you cant compare him with Lee, Impey orJay Robert Thomson, the only ones with a similar story, but not the same.
- Apr 16, 2009
- 17,599
- 6,854
- 28,180
Taxus, you just cannot become a GT contender just by being skinnier. It just does not work that way.
Why are you in denial? What is wrong with accepting it? It is not a big deal.
Why are you in denial? What is wrong with accepting it? It is not a big deal.
How about this? From 2008 to Romandie 2011 Froome never placed top ten in a time trial and averaged 37th place, which on average was about a third the way down the rankings. Since Tour de Suisse 2011 he's only missed a top ten three times and his average placing is 6th (and that includes his "outliers"). Pack fodder to hero in a couple of weeks. Not sure where anyone saw a potential GT winner in those 2008 to 2011 results.
John Swanson
John Swanson
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Re:
I would be easy to explain with Bilharzia, and maybe is that the main problem, but you dont need Bilharzia, nor doping to something like that happens.
If you ar e domestique you are not going to get the same result as if you are a leader, after his exceptional Vuelta 2011, he didnt become a leader, becouse thay team had another preferences, but he starting to have another role.
But anyway what you said is not exactly true:
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=17758
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=19539
And this is a good advise for september. I took a picture as well to Froome the previous day:
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=20190 he was 10th, Contador was 3rd I think, but he is not there
His level now is not much beter than that.
ScienceIsCool said:
I would be easy to explain with Bilharzia, and maybe is that the main problem, but you dont need Bilharzia, nor doping to something like that happens.
If you ar e domestique you are not going to get the same result as if you are a leader, after his exceptional Vuelta 2011, he didnt become a leader, becouse thay team had another preferences, but he starting to have another role.
But anyway what you said is not exactly true:
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=17758
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=19539
And this is a good advise for september. I took a picture as well to Froome the previous day:
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=20190 he was 10th, Contador was 3rd I think, but he is not there
His level now is not much beter than that.
Re: Re:
Pretty much exactly what you said in the post with the picture of 'fat' Froome.
Taxus4a said:
Pretty much exactly what you said in the post with the picture of 'fat' Froome.
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Of course Froome explode in a big way, but that doenst mean there are doping...
And respect to the people that talk about he did 85 previously in Poland, He was working, so doenst matter, it was a training race for la Vuelta. Oliveira did 79 in Poland and he was 12 in Salamanca ITT.
His story is obviously amazing and not usual, but becouse the past you just think in one direction to explain everything, and there are a lot of thing that count, not just that.
this is one of the reasons:
"I've moved up a lot. I think I've learnt a lot riding alongside Bradley, like learning how to conserve my energy instead of going off on crazy attacks and just being more consistent and being there on the big climbs."
And respect to the people that talk about he did 85 previously in Poland, He was working, so doenst matter, it was a training race for la Vuelta. Oliveira did 79 in Poland and he was 12 in Salamanca ITT.
His story is obviously amazing and not usual, but becouse the past you just think in one direction to explain everything, and there are a lot of thing that count, not just that.
this is one of the reasons:
"I've moved up a lot. I think I've learnt a lot riding alongside Bradley, like learning how to conserve my energy instead of going off on crazy attacks and just being more consistent and being there on the big climbs."
Re: Re:
No, it can't be explained by Bilharzia. Visit the Cambridge Schistosomiasis Research Group (http://old-www.path.cam.ac.uk/~schisto/) for a good primer on the pathology.
Acute symptoms include fever, nausea, headache and possibly a cough. These last from a few weeks to a few months. This does not describe Froome from 2008 to 2011, so no. Acute Bilharzia did not limit his performance for 4 seasons.
Chronic (intestinal) symptoms are due to fibrosis around eggs trapped in the intestinal wall. This will lead to lesions, primarily in the large intestine and will appear years after the initial infection. Was Froome complaining of intestinal bleeding for 4 years? Nope. So that wasn't limiting his performance.
Chronic (Hepatic) symptoms are also due to fibrosis, but around eggs trapped in the liver and/or spleen. As above it can take a few years to appear and will cause blood in the urine and or poop. Froome did also not have this.
Note that the adult form of the schistome appears in the blood, but only for a limited time and will lay eggs (which cause the majority of symptoms) before they die. So the adult blood munchers were also not responsible for Froome's limited performances.
And lastly, since when does a domsetique work for the leader IN A TIME TRIAL!?
John Swanson
Taxus4a said:
No, it can't be explained by Bilharzia. Visit the Cambridge Schistosomiasis Research Group (http://old-www.path.cam.ac.uk/~schisto/) for a good primer on the pathology.
Acute symptoms include fever, nausea, headache and possibly a cough. These last from a few weeks to a few months. This does not describe Froome from 2008 to 2011, so no. Acute Bilharzia did not limit his performance for 4 seasons.
Chronic (intestinal) symptoms are due to fibrosis around eggs trapped in the intestinal wall. This will lead to lesions, primarily in the large intestine and will appear years after the initial infection. Was Froome complaining of intestinal bleeding for 4 years? Nope. So that wasn't limiting his performance.
Chronic (Hepatic) symptoms are also due to fibrosis, but around eggs trapped in the liver and/or spleen. As above it can take a few years to appear and will cause blood in the urine and or poop. Froome did also not have this.
Note that the adult form of the schistome appears in the blood, but only for a limited time and will lay eggs (which cause the majority of symptoms) before they die. So the adult blood munchers were also not responsible for Froome's limited performances.
And lastly, since when does a domsetique work for the leader IN A TIME TRIAL!?
John Swanson
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Re: Re:
Are you kidding?
I have never said that if you lose weight you are going top become a GT winner, you must have the talent for that, But if you have the talent and one of the problems is weight, if you lose that kilos you are going to improve a lot.
In the case of Froome that was important.
If you see the article un unpolished diamond, you can see the pictures I took in 2009 in Burgos and in 2011 in Valladolid in Castilla y León and you can see the difference. He was in 2009 already 24 but he needed to leran a lot of more about cycling than the most of the riders.
Onbviously you can think what you want about his story, but he is the opossite to Lance, tollaly the oposite,and there is any evidence than you cant believe that jump is possible without doping, but yes, it is, a lot of circuentances asometimes join...
In the dping era, you need always an explanation, and you can answer the same, but does that means something?
Time will talk and clear ups things, as did with Lance.
In that Vuelta some people said he was a one hit wonder.. I said that: you didnt know well Froome is you think that, he is really good and he will improve year by year...well, those people now didnt admit they were wrong, but thay have now new teories. I have been always correct about Froome future and result, and the time gave me the reason, but I have never had the anster at: wich time you need to believe in Froome, in 10 years, in 20? are you going never to believe? it is possible to prove someone is clean?... I hope yes.
In the forum I talk I was famous to be a fan of 85-86 era, and thay think that i defend Froome becouse he is a 85 rider, but it not that way. I know very well any rider of that era, that is the difference with other cycling fans, and for that I followed froome more than other people in Europe, but no more.
In the normal promising riders, those who get very well result from young and everybody expect as future champions, it is easy to predict, but i have followed cycling for a long time, and for me that has no merit, I try to work a little bit more, and see that talent that is more hidden. That is what I find interesting. sometimes that talendt came with doping, as the case of L hotellerie, and you can folow a wrong rider, but it is a big mistake if you rule out a rider that get some top 20 in very hard races, the same that is a mistake to say that becouse Ullisi was 2 time world champion he will be a great champion. That is for people that know more than the average of cycling, but that have not much idea of this sport. and intead of that try to give lessons.
The big champion of the future is ,aybe now unknow and he has already 20.
I think Verona will be a great rider for GC, but if you see people of his age, as Jungels, he is getting better resulst. I think Verona will start with a top 5 in a one week race, but for circunstance, he could explode in a GT and to be top 5 of la Vuelta or something like that, and I dont see Jungels doing that, despite he is very good.
I am of course no sure that Verona can achieve big goals, but of course I dont rule out. and his strengh is, as froome, in his mind, although both of them have an impresive engine.
Ironhead Slim said:
Are you kidding?
I have never said that if you lose weight you are going top become a GT winner, you must have the talent for that, But if you have the talent and one of the problems is weight, if you lose that kilos you are going to improve a lot.
In the case of Froome that was important.
If you see the article un unpolished diamond, you can see the pictures I took in 2009 in Burgos and in 2011 in Valladolid in Castilla y León and you can see the difference. He was in 2009 already 24 but he needed to leran a lot of more about cycling than the most of the riders.
Onbviously you can think what you want about his story, but he is the opossite to Lance, tollaly the oposite,and there is any evidence than you cant believe that jump is possible without doping, but yes, it is, a lot of circuentances asometimes join...
In the dping era, you need always an explanation, and you can answer the same, but does that means something?
Time will talk and clear ups things, as did with Lance.
In that Vuelta some people said he was a one hit wonder.. I said that: you didnt know well Froome is you think that, he is really good and he will improve year by year...well, those people now didnt admit they were wrong, but thay have now new teories. I have been always correct about Froome future and result, and the time gave me the reason, but I have never had the anster at: wich time you need to believe in Froome, in 10 years, in 20? are you going never to believe? it is possible to prove someone is clean?... I hope yes.
In the forum I talk I was famous to be a fan of 85-86 era, and thay think that i defend Froome becouse he is a 85 rider, but it not that way. I know very well any rider of that era, that is the difference with other cycling fans, and for that I followed froome more than other people in Europe, but no more.
In the normal promising riders, those who get very well result from young and everybody expect as future champions, it is easy to predict, but i have followed cycling for a long time, and for me that has no merit, I try to work a little bit more, and see that talent that is more hidden. That is what I find interesting. sometimes that talendt came with doping, as the case of L hotellerie, and you can folow a wrong rider, but it is a big mistake if you rule out a rider that get some top 20 in very hard races, the same that is a mistake to say that becouse Ullisi was 2 time world champion he will be a great champion. That is for people that know more than the average of cycling, but that have not much idea of this sport. and intead of that try to give lessons.
The big champion of the future is ,aybe now unknow and he has already 20.
I think Verona will be a great rider for GC, but if you see people of his age, as Jungels, he is getting better resulst. I think Verona will start with a top 5 in a one week race, but for circunstance, he could explode in a GT and to be top 5 of la Vuelta or something like that, and I dont see Jungels doing that, despite he is very good.
I am of course no sure that Verona can achieve big goals, but of course I dont rule out. and his strengh is, as froome, in his mind, although both of them have an impresive engine.
Re: Re:
You said, "and with 3 kilos less, he coudl have been on the podium." Of course Froome has 'talent' but something happened to boost his talent to unprecedented levels overnight. And it wasn't from friggin' riding next to Wiggans, as you asserted.
Taxus4a said:
You said, "and with 3 kilos less, he coudl have been on the podium." Of course Froome has 'talent' but something happened to boost his talent to unprecedented levels overnight. And it wasn't from friggin' riding next to Wiggans, as you asserted.
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Re: Re:
I talk always of possibilities, you assert.
Of couse Froome in Burgos with the body he has today (he was doing pilates and more things later) would have been better, of course, to climb weith is the most important with difference.
I dont know exactly what was the most important factor to Froome good operformance in Burgos, but I know that to do that you dont need doping, I know that for sure, and he would improve as he did. sometimes a lot of factors happens together.
Was was impossible if the jump that santambroglio did, becouse it was a different case to Froome. of course if you change the team and you become a leader, you are going to improve a lot in term of results, but he improved a lot in term of performance.. that is not the same.
You have that opinion, well, I respect, but You can never assert, if you can assert and you have the proof go to a tribunal, but saying what; i cant believe that jump of level in 2011.., that is nothing. Froome doping is just a thing in the mind of some cycling "fans", that is self-feed for the join of people with the same opinion, no more...there is nothing...when lance was something that maybe you cant prove, but it was obvious.
I have never said in my opinion that sky of Froome dont doped, i think no, I hope no, I cant be sure, for the things I know and what I see, i would say no, but i cant be sure, but a lot of thing are said that are not true.
Ironhead Slim said:
I talk always of possibilities, you assert.
Of couse Froome in Burgos with the body he has today (he was doing pilates and more things later) would have been better, of course, to climb weith is the most important with difference.
I dont know exactly what was the most important factor to Froome good operformance in Burgos, but I know that to do that you dont need doping, I know that for sure, and he would improve as he did. sometimes a lot of factors happens together.
Was was impossible if the jump that santambroglio did, becouse it was a different case to Froome. of course if you change the team and you become a leader, you are going to improve a lot in term of results, but he improved a lot in term of performance.. that is not the same.
You have that opinion, well, I respect, but You can never assert, if you can assert and you have the proof go to a tribunal, but saying what; i cant believe that jump of level in 2011.., that is nothing. Froome doping is just a thing in the mind of some cycling "fans", that is self-feed for the join of people with the same opinion, no more...there is nothing...when lance was something that maybe you cant prove, but it was obvious.
I have never said in my opinion that sky of Froome dont doped, i think no, I hope no, I cant be sure, for the things I know and what I see, i would say no, but i cant be sure, but a lot of thing are said that are not true.
- Apr 16, 2009
- 17,599
- 6,854
- 28,180
So if I understand correctly you are saying that it wasn't because of bilharzia but because he did not care or were focused enough, is that right?
Please be more clear because it sounds like you are confusing yourself.
Please be more clear because it sounds like you are confusing yourself.
- Aug 12, 2012
- 6,996
- 1,011
- 20,680
Dans le Tour des Régions italiennes, sa première grande course, il était tombé trois fois. Il faut dire qu'il n'était pas très bien posé sur sa machine et que c'était la première fois qu'il roulait dans un peloton aussi important», indique Thèze.
© Le Télégramme - Plus d’information sur http://www.letelegramme.fr/sports/cyclisme/tour-et-detours-froome-forme-par-un-breton-11-07-2012-1770919.php?redirect=true
If you think that is not to show potential a man that can get thinner and that crashed 3 times, and still he is good in GC....Maybe for you the only important thing is to win. Well, for those who think like that, they must learn a lot about cycling. That is my opinion.
© Le Télégramme - Plus d’information sur http://www.letelegramme.fr/sports/cyclisme/tour-et-detours-froome-forme-par-un-breton-11-07-2012-1770919.php?redirect=true
If you think that is not to show potential a man that can get thinner and that crashed 3 times, and still he is good in GC....Maybe for you the only important thing is to win. Well, for those who think like that, they must learn a lot about cycling. That is my opinion.
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
Latest posts
-
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Latest: Armchair Cyclist
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram