Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[deeno1975]

Re: Re:

Will be interesting how "Froomey" does on "G"'s bike?

Looks like he's fine so far

If he finishes well on Thomas's bike then it may mean moto doping for all in Sky or of course no moto doping

 

[hfer07]

Introducing to the World the latest marginal gain skill: Froome does not even need his own bicycle to stay with the best !



amazing!

 

[Pantani Attacks]

Another piece of evidence to show Froome and the rain don't go together. He looked uglier than usual today... I guess Gs bike didn't help but still

 

[doperhopper]

Re:

Another piece of evidence to show Froome and the rain don't go together. He looked uglier than usual today... I guess Gs bike didn't help but still

several massive descents tomorrow, most probably rainy... we can eventually have the first french Tour winner after approx. 1452 years

 

[IzzyStradlin]

Looks like we're just a positive away from a French Tour winner!!!

 

[ontheroad]

Perfect scenario for Froome today and one that I thought might happen before a pedal was pushed in anger in the tour. Froome keeping it real. He even has the story of crashing and climbing onto Thomas' bike for the final climb! I don't think it was planned to happen in the manner it did at all though. It happened because he genuinely did show some weakness on that last climb.

I did genuinely think that he struggled with the pace at times on that last climb though. Normally he will drift into the middle of the peloton in a bluff move to pretend he is suffering before unleashing the insane cadence. There was no sign of that insane cadence today that we normally associate with Froome and it was noticeable that for the short while he went to the front of the peloton with a few km to go, the pace slowed down considerably allowing Yates to get back on temporarily.

 

[BigMac]

Re:

Another piece of evidence to show Froome and the rain don't go together. He looked uglier than usual today... I guess Gs bike didn't help but still

The moment he started ''looking ugly'' he had already tumbled on the tarmac and gotten himself a few nasty abrasions. That Froome and the rain don't go together is a myth based on confirmation bias and cherry picked evidence.

 

[Ryongsyong]

Re:

Looks like we're just a positive away from a French Tour winner!!!

We'll have to wait for ten years though probably, until someone runs out of money and decides to write a book.

 

[Fergoose]

I disagree. Froome has a lot of previous for looking vulnerable after he has safety secured top step on the podium. He clearly had the most energy in yesterday's ITT but today is somehow weaker than most on the last climb? I'm not buying it at all. Of course the crash may have interfered with his form but Froome is becoming increasingly aware that if he rides in a way that doesn't shove his bizarre level of dominance down everyone's throat then he'll get an easier time from the media and the fans. Giving up half a minute in the third week is becoming his signature move.

 

[Pantani Attacks]

Re: Re:

Another piece of evidence to show Froome and the rain don't go together. He looked uglier than usual today... I guess Gs bike didn't help but still

The moment he started ''looking ugly'' he had already tumbled on the tarmac and gotten himself a few nasty abrasions. That Froome and the rain don't go together is a myth based on confirmation bias and cherry picked evidence.

Show me some performances of his in the rain that come anywhere close to the full *** performances in the searing heat.

 

[zlev11]

Re: Re:

Another piece of evidence to show Froome and the rain don't go together. He looked uglier than usual today... I guess Gs bike didn't help but still

The moment he started ''looking ugly'' he had already tumbled on the tarmac and gotten himself a few nasty abrasions. That Froome and the rain don't go together is a myth based on confirmation bias and cherry picked evidence.

Show me some performances of his in the rain that come anywhere close to the full *** performances in the searing heat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwzfWal4kE4

a personal favorite of mine

 

[kwikki]

Few Tour winners are impulsive in front of the camera. They are measured, and take great pains to appear as if nothing is phasing them because they don't want to show weakness, they want to demoralise their opposition by making everything look like a walk in the park.

It seems some here don't quite get that.

Right now, Froome will be stiffening up. He will have bruising and we know he has deep abrasions on the back of his shoulders. He will be worrying about what chance he will have of sleeping tonight and recovering for tomorrow's stage because if he rolls on his back he will wake up.

Is he going to say that publicly? No. Of course not because he wants to downplay the damage. He won't want anyone thinking that it could be worth a concerted series of attacks tomorrow, even though he has a sizeable buffer.

 

[Pantani Attacks]

Re: Re:

Another piece of evidence to show Froome and the rain don't go together. He looked uglier than usual today... I guess Gs bike didn't help but still

The moment he started ''looking ugly'' he had already tumbled on the tarmac and gotten himself a few nasty abrasions. That Froome and the rain don't go together is a myth based on confirmation bias and cherry picked evidence.

Show me some performances of his in the rain that come anywhere close to the full *** performances in the searing heat.

Beating the likes of Mollema and Peraud by 40-50 seconds is full ***?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwzfWal4kE4

a personal favorite of mine

 

[tretiak]

Froome is incredible. Bicycles with symmetrical chainring as it were the most natural for him. Looked funny when he rode up to Poels and talked little. He sailed past the other . He plays such an ugly game.

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

This should be repeated over and over: Uniballer went down not because of being a exceptional doper but exceptional a$$hole... with better PR and relations in general, he would still have his jerseys and could even add one more yellow.

And Sky knows it.

Yep, that is true. But what's different there is that there were other whistleblowers (or people who talked) before he was an a-hole to them (and others) - eg Emma and Betsy. And there was the steroid 'positive' in 99 (although from memory the amount was below threshold). There hasn't been anything like that with Sky - and (in my view) there are plenty of people who could have chirped. Also - think about the personalities at Sky : Brailsford & Sutton, I'm sure they could be harsh enough on people to send them over the edge ...

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

This should be repeated over and over: Uniballer went down not because of being a exceptional doper but exceptional a$$hole... with better PR and relations in general, he would still have his jerseys and could even add one more yellow.

And Sky knows it.

Yep, that is true. But what's different there is that there were other whistleblowers (or people who talked) before he was an a-hole to them (and others) - eg Emma and Betsy. And there was the steroid 'positive' in 99 (although from memory the amount was below threshold). There hasn't been anything like that with Sky - and (in my view) there are plenty of people who could have chirped. Also - think about the personalities at Sky : Brailsford & Sutton, I'm sure they could be harsh enough on people to send them over the edge ...

Many people have learnt from all the USPS mistakes. It was well documented and so were all the things they did right.

Sky comes across as USPS without the mistakes.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

This should be repeated over and over: Uniballer went down not because of being a exceptional doper but exceptional a$$hole... with better PR and relations in general, he would still have his jerseys and could even add one more yellow.

And Sky knows it.

Yep, that is true. But what's different there is that there were other whistleblowers (or people who talked) before he was an a-hole to them (and others) - eg Emma and Betsy. And there was the steroid 'positive' in 99 (although from memory the amount was below threshold). There hasn't been anything like that with Sky - and (in my view) there are plenty of people who could have chirped. Also - think about the personalities at Sky : Brailsford & Sutton, I'm sure they could be harsh enough on people to send them over the edge ...

In real life (context) there was nothing on Armstrong. No one was listening to Betsy, Frankie or anyone. They weren't really saying anything either.

Likewise Emma, she didn't reveal the whole truth, just that she was bullied.

Armstrong suffered because at the time that so many people were banned for drug use. His position became more and more implausible over time. Once retired the 6 EPO positives and then Landis is what killed it off.

Today, no one actually tests positive anymore and when they do they are let off or get a 4 month ban. No one is killing this thing because there is absolutely no need to, none.

 

[Lajeretta4Ever]

LOL, I'm surprised not to see a bunch of Clinic Practitioners on their way to Mount Blac to scrap up samples of Frome's blood from the tarmac.
Anybody see Race Radio?

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

I'm sure you are mate, but it sounds like BS when you try to deflect away from genuine questions that people seem reticent to cover. I'm sure you'd love to dismiss anyone asking inconvenient questions as 'trolling', but everyone here has a right to attack or defend positions, and I believe that the clinic sceptics avoid talking about the SKY setup because they know that the deeper they go, the harder it is to rationalise that they set this up as a massive doping operation without SKY and Brailsford's sporting reputations being destroyed by a whistleblower or advance in science, be it in 5, 10 or 20 years.

They don't have 'loads of known dopers' in their ranks. They have people you believe are dopers, and there, yet again, you expose the sceptic mindset even further. Once the spiral begins, even suspicions are treated as absolute truths, like the Landa thing where Walsh said he was sceptical about Astana ergo Landa was doping ergo SKY signed a known doper. Just again, a willingness to make leaps where no firm evidence exists, and once they're made, they're part of the 'Team Sky is doping' canon, to be used and recycled every time Froome wins a stage.

Boasting and bragging is subjective. I find it difficult to warm to Froome or SKY as a team, but again, I just don't know what else they could realistically do. Imagine if they came out and said 'no comment' every time someone mentioned doping. You know for a fact that people in here would leap on that as admission of guilt, so why pretend otherwise?

I hate that the clinic drives me to defend a repulsive company in SKY/Murdoch/News Corp but I can't just sit back and not challenge people on the paranoid ramblings on here.

Totally agree.

If the clinic is right, Sky are one of the more disliked teams. There should be several whistleblowers by now if Sky is as dirty as everyone makes out. It's not like they haven't got rid of any staff/riders and potentially fallen out with them. Sky have dominated the TDF in recent years, I'm sure teams would love to weaken or remove the Sky train. Don't try to use the Murdoch owns the media excuse either, he owns a large proportion yes, but he too is disliked and has rival media companies, who I'm sure would love to bring the team down

Why should there be several whistleblowers? Landis only blew the whistle that led to the downfall of Armstrong because they would not give him a ride?

Can you point to any other rider who has similar cause?

It is also very well documented what happens to whistleblowers?

Sky are rich enough to buy the silence of any potential whistleblowers.

You think Murdoch's partners dont agree with Murdoch and would love to see their Brand exposed as dopers and cheats?

Sorry. But everything Sky has done mirrors doping teams.

Agree on what happens to whistleblowers. But I also believe this isn't early 00's anymore, phones (recordings) and social media are everywhere. Sky are meant to be disliked due to the way they portray themselves and Murdoch is definitely disliked. Why not combination of investigative journalist and whistleblower or 2

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I'm sure you are mate, but it sounds like BS when you try to deflect away from genuine questions that people seem reticent to cover. I'm sure you'd love to dismiss anyone asking inconvenient questions as 'trolling', but everyone here has a right to attack or defend positions, and I believe that the clinic sceptics avoid talking about the SKY setup because they know that the deeper they go, the harder it is to rationalise that they set this up as a massive doping operation without SKY and Brailsford's sporting reputations being destroyed by a whistleblower or advance in science, be it in 5, 10 or 20 years.

They don't have 'loads of known dopers' in their ranks. They have people you believe are dopers, and there, yet again, you expose the sceptic mindset even further. Once the spiral begins, even suspicions are treated as absolute truths, like the Landa thing where Walsh said he was sceptical about Astana ergo Landa was doping ergo SKY signed a known doper. Just again, a willingness to make leaps where no firm evidence exists, and once they're made, they're part of the 'Team Sky is doping' canon, to be used and recycled every time Froome wins a stage.

Boasting and bragging is subjective. I find it difficult to warm to Froome or SKY as a team, but again, I just don't know what else they could realistically do. Imagine if they came out and said 'no comment' every time someone mentioned doping. You know for a fact that people in here would leap on that as admission of guilt, so why pretend otherwise?

I hate that the clinic drives me to defend a repulsive company in SKY/Murdoch/News Corp but I can't just sit back and not challenge people on the paranoid ramblings on here.

Totally agree.

If the clinic is right, Sky are one of the more disliked teams. There should be several whistleblowers by now if Sky is as dirty as everyone makes out. It's not like they haven't got rid of any staff/riders and potentially fallen out with them. Sky have dominated the TDF in recent years, I'm sure teams would love to weaken or remove the Sky train. Don't try to use the Murdoch owns the media excuse either, he owns a large proportion yes, but he too is disliked and has rival media companies, who I'm sure would love to bring the team down

Why should there be several whistleblowers? Landis only blew the whistle that led to the downfall of Armstrong because they would not give him a ride?

Can you point to any other rider who has similar cause?

It is also very well documented what happens to whistleblowers?

Sky are rich enough to buy the silence of any potential whistleblowers.

You think Murdoch's partners dont agree with Murdoch and would love to see their Brand exposed as dopers and cheats?

Sorry. But everything Sky has done mirrors doping teams.

Agree on what happens to whistleblowers. But I also believe this isn't early 00's anymore, phones (recordings) and social media are everywhere. Sky are meant to be disliked due to the way they portray themselves and Murdoch is definitely disliked. Why not combination of investigative journalist and whistleblower or 2

Who is going to fund it?

Cycling is a minority sport. No one is going to put money into investigating a sport that the general public thinks is full of doping? They will hardly be dropping jaws at breakfast tables with headlines about cyclists doping?

 

[IzzyStradlin]

Re: Re:

Agree on what happens to whistleblowers. But I also believe this isn't early 00's anymore, phones (recordings) and social media are everywhere. Sky are meant to be disliked due to the way they portray themselves and Murdoch is definitely disliked. Why not combination of investigative journalist and whistleblower or 2

Eddy Boasson-Hagen

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

This should be repeated over and over: Uniballer went down not because of being a exceptional doper but exceptional a$$hole... with better PR and relations in general, he would still have his jerseys and could even add one more yellow.

And Sky knows it.

Yep, that is true. But what's different there is that there were other whistleblowers (or people who talked) before he was an a-hole to them (and others) - eg Emma and Betsy. And there was the steroid 'positive' in 99 (although from memory the amount was below threshold). There hasn't been anything like that with Sky - and (in my view) there are plenty of people who could have chirped. Also - think about the personalities at Sky : Brailsford & Sutton, I'm sure they could be harsh enough on people to send them over the edge ...

Many people have learnt from all the USPS mistakes. It was well documented and so were all the things they did right.

Sky comes across as USPS without the mistakes.

True, they are very PR focused, but I think my point still stands on some of the characters. This time its management not the head rider who could be rubbing people up the wrong way.

 

[bigcog]

Re:

LOL, I'm surprised not to see a bunch of Clinic Practitioners on their way to Mount Blac to scrap up samples of Frome's blood from the tarmac.
Anybody see Race Radio?

They're probably scared it's radioactive lol

Anyway I reckon he will give France their first TDF victory for years and become instantly more liked in France. All part of Sky's devious plan.

 

[AcademyCC]

Anyone saying Froome showed weakness today is pretty wide of the mark. He had a decent fall - clear damage to shoulder, back and knee. Then he rode up a savage climb on someone else's bike lol Against the best in the world going full tilt and kept pace.

Having tried it myself a few times on decent climbs healthy just for fun - riding someone else's bike in those conditions is like riding on the moon.

His performance was his most freakish yet. He was waiting for the support car then just said '*** it' - rode to front and kept pace lol.

Ill be honest I'm a SKY fan but this is getting pretty out of hand.

 

[SvenONE]

First time poster on these forums despite reading cylingnews for the last ten years or so. But after this years tour I felt compelled simply because I just want to scream at the television.

Without going too deep, I’m an American who has watched cycling since 2008 (this also includes pirated Belgian streams of other major races during the year). I admit I was naive to the LA era, and embarrassingly will say that I was a LA supporter up until the ban “no positive test! how do we explain that??” After all, watching 4 hulking Baseball players smashing home runs in the late 90s early 2000s, they never tested for anything, why would this be any different.

But after watching Sky’s dominance of the tour all these years, it’s becoming hard to watch. I’m obviously not alone in this; I am after all posting in the Clinic. But every July my friends who know me ask how the Tour is going (I’m their goto source for updates) and this year simply shook my head and say “I just don’t know what to think anymore”. There’s a certain creeping feeling of finality or despair when it comes to watching the tour now.

Now I don’t think I’m particularly special, but I work in broadcast media (business news) which I switched to after working for about 5 years in advertising. I just didn’t have the stomach for it. The conclusion I arrived at after those 5 years was that advertising boils down to dressing a brand or concept up in such a way to persuade your audience to believe that this brand or concept will fulfill their needs better than a competitor. So I feel when the topic turns towards the PR machine of Sky I feel I have a little bit of a contribution towards that part of the discussion.

Sky controls the message and the narrative, and they control it far better than Armstrong and Bruyneel ever did. Their protected rider is an unassuming, quiet, and awkward Kenyan/Brit who with each passing day seems to looks less and less beatable. Their resources appear to be vast, and they are in an opportune period to do this ("you'd have to be crazy to dope this close to the Armstrong era fallout!"). Do I think that Brailsford is operating at Goebbels level propaganda? No, but they are controlling the message by appealing to the stone and proof by assertion arguments that don’t actually answer any questions, but when you don’t rock any boats you don’t have people coming out of the woodwork to take you down.

Armstrong’s downfall also had the backing of the U.S. Government, which the resources of a country whose GDP is nearly 10x that of Britain and more than any other country like Russia, Italy, France, Spain etc. The cost of that investigation was not cheap, both by the agencies involved and the legal fees that followed.

It’s remarkable that no one is really asking questions in public about Sky and Froome, but at the same time it seems rather obvious why. Everybody has a lot to lose if the Froome story isn't real. In the years to come? Someone might slip up or rub someone the wrong way, but until then I think we as cycling fans are perfectly within our rights to be skeptical about all of the questions that Brailsford deflects or spins about Froome, after all Froome never really seems to defend himself -- it always seems like that's Brailsford job.