• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 778 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
its just the usual post-armstrong myth making...of course Armstrong's anecdote was better...Argentin in his case I think

...and of course it would all have a whiff of believablability if this wasn't all revisionist nonsense...at least with Armstrong you heard stories about him in 89/90/91 as being a great talent (albeit potentially assisted)...all we knew about Froome pre-transformation was that Brailsford rated him the lowest of all the SKY riders....if you were sitting on the worlds greatest rider (potentially) and he wasn't performing you would be mightily peed off...but no...doesn't even rate a mention ;)

purrrllleaassee
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
3
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
SeriousSam said:
Cool sounding anecdotes are all made up ***. All of them.
What "cool" anecdotes?

Poulidor used to appeal to middle aged French housewives. Thomas is like the British, gay version of that. Designed to appeal to middle aged male lycra warriors.
Dad humour, but not much cool about it.

cool wrt to the target audience. i just have to laugh whenever i hear one of those anecdotes because they're so obviously fabricated out of thin air
 
Re:

LaFlorecita said:
I was talking out of my arse, he did not win stage 3 of the Giro del Capo (Tour of the Cape) (who thought it was a good idea to give a South-African race an Italian name :confused: ) he came 2nd overall in 2008 though and won this 1.2 race with the same name in 2009
http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=10559
What the hell , over 3 minutes advantage :D , why have Sky fans not yet pointed towards this as evidence of his talent, instead of his 382th place at the U23 Commonwealth ITT :D

Leaving Badzilla to one side, It does confuse me that people use that he was some poor backwater cyclist who knew nothing about bike racing which is one of the reasons it took him until that Vuelta to "get it". In his first Pro year he rode and finished the Tour, the Giro the year after before he came back the following year to get DQ'd, he also raced in plenty of other races on the calendar so for people to claim he lacked experience in the peloton to compete is utter rubbish.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
Re: Re:

StryderHells said:
Leaving Badzilla to one side, It does confuse me that people use that he was some poor backwater cyclist who knew nothing about bike racing which is one of the reasons it took him until that Vuelta to "get it". In his first Pro year he rode and finished the Tour, the Giro the year after before he came back the following year to get DQ'd, he also raced in plenty of other races on the calendar so for people to claim he lacked experience in the peloton to compete is utter rubbish.

Just a friendly reminder that from 16 - 21, Froome was competing in amateur races with the biggest field on offer in South Africa:

CMx106CWwAAdZ1w.png:large


and was crap at it.
 
Re:

StryderHells said:
Nice one @Dear Wiggo, just goes to show that he didn't lack race experience before turning pro but looking at those awful results it's easy to understand how someone trying to keep the Froome myth alive might have missed he had race experience

No offence to African racing and amateur cycling in Africa but I think at that time in history it was quite a big step below racing in Europe. Sure, Froome got racing experience but I think he would have developed at a faster rate had he learned his trade at an earlier age in Europe which has a much stronger racing culture.
 
Don't forget that the roads are all of atrocious quality there. Because its Africa, a backward place with lions and hippos and even ostriches (or Turkeys, one of the two) constantly on the rampage, full of corruption (unlike Britain) and too poor to send its athletes abroad for international competition (lets ignore all the medals they always win).

Like Walsh, I won't pretend to have visited the areas where these races took place, but Brailsford and Froome say it is like this, and so it must be true.
 
Here's the thing...

Let's say for a moment that that silliness is actually true and Froome really didn't have any idea how to ride in a pack. That he really did waste all his energy just navigating it.

How does that explain his time trials going from pathetic to world beater? He's not racing any pack in them
 
Re:

GuyIncognito said:
Here's the thing...

Let's say for a moment that that silliness is actually true and Froome really didn't have any idea how to ride in a pack. That he really did waste all his energy just navigating it.

How does that explain his time trials going from pathetic to world beater? He's not racing any pack in them

The thing is has his TTing always been pathetic? If we go all the way back to the 2007 UCI Road World Championships Men's under-23 time trial where he finished 41st you might say that his TT result was crap at the time but then you look at the riders around him and you see Tejay Van Garderen in 38th, who you could say turned into a very good Time Trialist and similarly with Ian Standard, Gatis Smukulis and Martin Velits who finished above him.
 
Is that result from 2007?

Did they race as individuals or teams?

Because I see at least 3 Konica Minolta teammates ahead of Froome (if it was 2007)

And Van Garderen is 3 years younger than Froome and it was the first year out of juniors for him.

But I would say that describing his TT ability from that time as pathetic would a be a typical exaggeration.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
It's easy to dismiss me as an anti-Sky poster or what have you, but there is no rational explanation for how the rider in those results - any of them - could go on to do the things he has done since 2011's Vuelta.

I've known good riders nowhere near Tour winning potential and as 16 year olds they were monsters.
 
Re: Re:

Savant12 said:
GuyIncognito said:
Here's the thing...

Let's say for a moment that that silliness is actually true and Froome really didn't have any idea how to ride in a pack. That he really did waste all his energy just navigating it.

How does that explain his time trials going from pathetic to world beater? He's not racing any pack in them

The thing is has his TTing always been pathetic? If we go all the way back to the 2007 UCI Road World Championships Men's under-23 time trial where he finished 41st you might say that his TT result was crap at the time but then you look at the riders around him and you see Tejay Van Garderen in 38th, who you could say turned into a very good Time Trialist and similarly with Ian Standard, Gatis Smukulis and Martin Velits who finished above him.

Also, all this analysis of Froome is based on results only and is pretty pointless. He could have had an awful time trial position as a youngster, after all I doubt they did much wind tunnel testing in SA teams. Nowadays his time trial position looks extremely aero.

Likewise, who knows what happened in those races where Froome finished low down. Would you expect Froome to be challenging in a race that was won by Impey? What was his role? Perhaps he was working as a domestique. Perhaps he had a rubbish coach and was overtraining or unable to peak properly.

It's just impossible to come to the conclusion that he lacked talent by solely looking at his results.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
He could have had an awful time trial position as a youngster, after all I doubt they did much wind tunnel testing in SA teams. Nowadays his time trial position looks extremely aero.

They did not put Froome through the tunnel till after 2011 Vuelta, where he smashed Wiggo and pretty much everyone else in the race.

So that theory is kinda punctured yeah?
 
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
DFA123 said:
It's just impossible to come to the conclusion that he lacked talent by solely looking at his results.

Sure thing buddy.

Me? I prefer to read a rider's tea leaves to work out whether they have talent. Much more reliable.

Dilmah FTMFW.

The problem is that you are ignoring some significant results and ignoring all other factors. If Froome began a full scale program in 2011, that would mean that he finished 32nd in the Giro (relatively) clean at 23 years old. You don't come close to doing that without a huge amount of natural talent. Likewise, he wouldn't have been signed up by Barloworld or Sky, and wouldn't have ridden the TdF at such a young age if he didnt have natural ability. He wouldn't have made it to the world tour from his background if he wasn't precociously talented.

Looking at results are one bit of evidence, but they are far from the full story imo. His transformation post-2011 is obviously not credible, but trying to claim he never had any talent is wrong as well.

I think Froome suffers from the fact that his transformation all happened in the public eye, whereas riders like Valverde or Contador burst onto the scene already as top riders - so are widely thought of as being more talented. But both of those were on doping teams as neo-pros, so the reality is that we simply don't know their true talent.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
I think Froome suffers from the fact that his transformation all happened in the public eye, whereas riders like Valverde or Contador burst onto the scene already as top riders - so are widely thought of as being more talented. But both of those were on doping teams as neo-pros, so the reality is that we simply don't know their true talent.

I think the thing you suffer from is not knowing what you're talking about.

Valverde and Contador were junior beasts.

Froome had nothing. Until his contract was up in 2011.

Yes, when looking to start a UK registered team they hired the only UK riders in the peloton. Quelle surprise.

They had no issues ditching a no hoper either.
 
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
DFA123 said:
I think Froome suffers from the fact that his transformation all happened in the public eye, whereas riders like Valverde or Contador burst onto the scene already as top riders - so are widely thought of as being more talented. But both of those were on doping teams as neo-pros, so the reality is that we simply don't know their true talent.

I think the thing you suffer from is not knowing what you're talking about.

Valverde and Contador were junior beasts.

Froome had nothing. Until his contract was up in 2011.

Yes, when looking to start a UK registered team they hired the only UK riders in the peloton. Quelle surprise.

They had no issues ditching a no hoper either.

Yes, they were junior beasts, but we don't know at what age they started doping, so we just can't say how good they are. They could have been doping since teenagers for all we know.

Froome, pre-2011 was a solid mid-pack pro. If he did that clean - which his post-2011 transformation suggests he did (at least without blood doping) - then he was clearly naturally talented.

The fact is that we don't know how naturally talented the top riders are in the peloton and how much they are super-responders. Trying to pretend and claim otherwise is ridiculous. At least with Froome, it looks like we probably have some kind of benchmark as to what he can do relatively clean - 32nd in a Grand Tour.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Dear Wiggo said:
DFA123 said:
I think Froome suffers from the fact that his transformation all happened in the public eye, whereas riders like Valverde or Contador burst onto the scene already as top riders - so are widely thought of as being more talented. But both of those were on doping teams as neo-pros, so the reality is that we simply don't know their true talent.

I think the thing you suffer from is not knowing what you're talking about.

Valverde and Contador were junior beasts.

Froome had nothing. Until his contract was up in 2011.

Yes, when looking to start a UK registered team they hired the only UK riders in the peloton. Quelle surprise.

They had no issues ditching a no hoper either.

Yes, they were junior beasts, but we don't know at what age they started doping, so we just can't say how good they are. They could have been doping since teenagers for all we know.

Froome, pre-2011 was a solid mid-pack pro. If he did that clean - which his post-2011 transformation suggests he did (at least without blood doping) - then he was clearly naturally talented.

The fact is that we don't know how naturally talented the top riders are in the peloton and how much they are super-responders. Trying to pretend and claim otherwise is ridiculous. At least with Froome, it looks like we probably have some kind of benchmark as to what he can do relatively clean - 32nd in a Grand Tour.

So Contador and Valverde could have been doping since teenagers, but Froome came 32nd clean.

Right.

We know which side of the fence you're standing on then, don't we.

:rolleyes:
 
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
DFA123 said:
He could have had an awful time trial position as a youngster, after all I doubt they did much wind tunnel testing in SA teams. Nowadays his time trial position looks extremely aero.

They did not put Froome through the tunnel till after 2011 Vuelta, where he smashed Wiggo and pretty much everyone else in the race.

So that theory is kinda punctured yeah?
Even worse, he only got in a wind tunnel in 2013:

Despite being the Olympic bronze medallist in the discipline and runner-up to Wiggins in both long time-trials in this year’s Tour, Froome has never tested his position and bike in a wind tunnel. In time-trial terms, he has been operating in the Stone Age, with elbows out as if riding a scooter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/9751875/Chris-Froome-defiant-over-Bradley-Wiggins-challenge-to-Tour-de-France-ambitions.html
 
Re: Re:

Dear Wiggo said:
DFA123 said:
Dear Wiggo said:
DFA123 said:
I think Froome suffers from the fact that his transformation all happened in the public eye, whereas riders like Valverde or Contador burst onto the scene already as top riders - so are widely thought of as being more talented. But both of those were on doping teams as neo-pros, so the reality is that we simply don't know their true talent.

I think the thing you suffer from is not knowing what you're talking about.

Valverde and Contador were junior beasts.

Froome had nothing. Until his contract was up in 2011.

Yes, when looking to start a UK registered team they hired the only UK riders in the peloton. Quelle surprise.

They had no issues ditching a no hoper either.

Yes, they were junior beasts, but we don't know at what age they started doping, so we just can't say how good they are. They could have been doping since teenagers for all we know.

Froome, pre-2011 was a solid mid-pack pro. If he did that clean - which his post-2011 transformation suggests he did (at least without blood doping) - then he was clearly naturally talented.

The fact is that we don't know how naturally talented the top riders are in the peloton and how much they are super-responders. Trying to pretend and claim otherwise is ridiculous. At least with Froome, it looks like we probably have some kind of benchmark as to what he can do relatively clean - 32nd in a Grand Tour.

So Contador and Valverde could have been doping since teenagers, but Froome came 32nd clean.

Right.

We know which side of the fence you're standing on then, don't we.

:rolleyes:
I never said that; I said they are both possibilities. So it's pointless trying to conclude which riders are more naturally talented.

I'm not on any side of the fence; I'm simply stating that you don't know how naturally talented these riders are. But any rider that has made it to the World Tour from South African racing probably has a fair amount of talent.

Your posts are highly disingenuous. You make a big deal about Froome finishing 18th in some local sportive as evidence that he lacks talent, but fail to mention that he finished 83rd in the Tour de France or was winning UCI African Tour races at the same age. This kind of cherry picking adds nothing to the debate - why not give the full picture?

Imo the focus should be on how Froome has transformed post-2011. This agenda to try to make him out to be a less deserving winner than others because he is supposedly less natural talented is both pointless and baseless.
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Dear Wiggo said:
DFA123 said:
I think Froome suffers from the fact that his transformation all happened in the public eye, whereas riders like Valverde or Contador burst onto the scene already as top riders - so are widely thought of as being more talented. But both of those were on doping teams as neo-pros, so the reality is that we simply don't know their true talent.

I think the thing you suffer from is not knowing what you're talking about.

Valverde and Contador were junior beasts.

Froome had nothing. Until his contract was up in 2011.

Yes, when looking to start a UK registered team they hired the only UK riders in the peloton. Quelle surprise.

They had no issues ditching a no hoper either.

Yes, they were junior beasts, but we don't know at what age they started doping, so we just can't say how good they are. They could have been doping since teenagers for all we know.

Froome, pre-2011 was a solid mid-pack pro. If he did that clean - which his post-2011 transformation suggests he did (at least without blood doping) - then he was clearly naturally talented.

The fact is that we don't know how naturally talented the top riders are in the peloton and how much they are super-responders. Trying to pretend and claim otherwise is ridiculous. At least with Froome, it looks like we probably have some kind of benchmark as to what he can do relatively clean - 32nd in a Grand Tour.

thanks DFA123

no doubt about the choice to use super fuel from the Vuelta 2011.
but nice reasoning about his previous results at Barloworld
the italic part too
 

TRENDING THREADS