Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[veganrob]

Re: Re:

That is classic Brailsford/SKY bobby.

Muddy the waters, give conflicting/unclear statements whenever its about bad publicity; always cover all bases. They live of the confusion because the casual viewer cant find head or tails.

Aren't Wada/UCI obliged to release the details if both parties agree...Brailsford has gone in print now as saying he really hopes they do?

It would be a spectacular and indefensible u turn if he did try to block it now

We have heard that from Brailsford before. crickets

 

[Nighttrain99]

Re: Re:

Haha, still can't believe he got away easily.
'But the sport is clean now, the dark era is over' etc. etc.

IMO this proves the sport never even tried to clean up and is just as dirty as ever.

Yea, claims of “cleaning up the sport/dark ages over”, Sky’s promises of transparency,....these have only been window dressings or just plain lies. The players may have changed but the game remains the same.

Still, I watch LeTour as I always have for 3 decades. It will be fascinating to see how Froome will perform after winning a grueling Giro d’Italia. I just wish he didn’t have that janky riding style devoid of any elegance whatsoever. After all, Froome may end as the most accomplished Grand Tour Stage racer ever. Also, it’d be cool if Sky would own their Evil Empire role in cycling and act accordingly in public. They’ve earned it in so many ways.

 

[Alpe73]

Re: Re:

It should be repeated, Mr Rabin, WADA:
...
Asked why anyone else in Froome’s position will not use the same arguments, Dr Rabin said people were underestimating how many of these cases occur every year without anyone knowing about them, as was meant to happen in this case, too.
“It’s not a unique case but because it was Froome, a sporting celebrity, and it was put in the limelight, it appears to be unique,” he said.
“We deal with all cases on an individual basis and I have personally dealt with several in the past. Yes, there are elements of this case that are fairly unusual but I can assure you it is not unique.”

But this does not actually explain anything. It is him saying we do this often enough that we know what we are doing, but he does not provide any basis for why the decision was made.

I appreciate your curiosity of wanting to know ... but respect more Froome’s, UCI’s and WADA’s right to confidentiality ... if they so choose. Rather simple, really.

Understandable, of course, but it places a rather unfortunate burden on WADA, as in addition to having to promulgate rules and procedures, they are also now subject to not being able to explicate the actual implementation, and in this instance, decision not to implement their own rules and procedures. As such, their ability to function as an objective, clinical body is rendered questionable at best, and leaves them vulnerable to accusations of obfuscation on behalf of parties involved in proceedings that are under the supervision of WADA. As long as WADA is subject to not being able to provide information to support their findings and decisions, the ultimate arbiter of their effectiveness is the trust they inspire in the public. They are proving to be unable to warrant that trust.

Manipulation of syntax allows us to whip up grand, spooky imagery ... as you have done. Deconstruction allows us to render a more sober reading.

WADA will have to revise their research, theory and practice in this area. So ... that is a good thing that has been borne out of this case. Rules, statutes, directives, laws and even constitutions are revised or thrown out all over the world ... not infrequently.

So what’s the fuss?

Some friendly advice (seriously) ... “keep it real.”

You seem like a decent guy. You ask good questions. You seek clarification. You don’t pitch the “know it all/real fan/wasn’t born yesterday” swagger.

Don’t get swallowed by the chainring biters round here.

Cheers.

 

[Alpe73]

Re:

Basically their the types pointing fingers laughing at the boy falling in the school yard all bruised up and all. Each to his pleasure.

 

[Koronin]

Re: Re:

Haha, still can't believe he got away easily.
'But the sport is clean now, the dark era is over' etc. etc.

IMO this proves the sport never even tried to clean up and is just as dirty as ever.

Yea, claims of “cleaning up the sport/dark ages over”, Sky’s promises of transparency,....these have only been window dressings or just plain lies. The players may have changed but the game remains the same.

Still, I watch LeTour as I always have for 3 decades. It will be fascinating to see how Froome will perform after winning a grueling Giro d’Italia. I just wish he didn’t have that janky riding style devoid of any elegance whatsoever. After all, Froome may end as the most accomplished Grand Tour Stage racer ever. Also, it’d be cool if Sky would own their Evil Empire role in cycling and act accordingly in public. They’ve earned it in so many ways.

I think we now watch with the knowledge that nothing has changed other than the names. The window dressing or the blanket has been removed. Somehow I don't think this was the conclusion the UCI/WADA/Sky/Froome was expecting to come from the decision.
Sky seems to have a hard time accepting a lot of fans don't like them and never will and find them to be as bad if not worse then US Postal and they for some reason don't comprehend it. It appears they can't believe that a lot of people won't accept their newest excuses and this "decision".
That is one thing you have to give respect to Lance and US Postal for. They never hid their arrogance and accepted their role. Still not a fan of Lance, but he never hid what he was in that sense.

 

[Pantani_lives]

It's incredible that WADA completely ignores the obvious explanation that Froome took salbutamol orally or intravenously. Of course he doesn't have asthma or a malfunctioning kidney. Are we really supposed to believe that an asthma and kidney patient has won the Tour four times? These explanations are plain lies. WADA knows it, UCI knows it, but no one can stop them. The UCI never minded that Froome uses doping, they only minded that there was a leak.

Now another Tour de France will be ruined by a protected doping user and Team Skybutamol.

 

[The Hegelian]

Yeah, I find it hard - impossible - to countenance how a rider with a worsening asthmatic condition requiring that many ventolin puffs, could also, simultaneously, be the same rider who climbed better, not only than his competitors, but also than he previously had in that race.

 

[Robert5091]

Re:

Yeah, I find it hard - impossible - to countenance how a rider with a worsening asthmatic condition requiring that many ventolin puffs, could also, simultaneously, be the same rider who climbed better, not only than his competitors, but also than he previously had in that race.

Well, if we go back to the Critérium du Dauphiné 2014 Stage 2: with 19 km to go including the Col du Béal climb -

Froome's having a good old puff, "I don’t use [the inhaler] every time I race. Normally, only when I have a big effort coming up." and indeed only Bertie managed to stay with Froome to the finish. Performance enhancement or medication?

(Although stage 18 of the Vuelta Froome did n't "do a Landis" taken into account his previous days performance and that he'd already rode the Tour, it was, shall we say, a "remarkable" turnaround)

 

[Ripper]

Re: Re:

How do you know how sick they are and how much asthma treatment they are taking??

Guessing their dosage doesn’t make you a doctor you know

But you play one on TV!

 

[The Hegelian]

Re: Re:

Yeah, I find it hard - impossible - to countenance how a rider with a worsening asthmatic condition requiring that many ventolin puffs, could also, simultaneously, be the same rider who climbed better, not only than his competitors, but also than he previously had in that race.

Well, if we go back to the Critérium du Dauphiné 2014 Stage 2: with 19 km to go including the Col du Béal climb -

Froome's having a good old puff, "I don’t use [the inhaler] every time I race. Normally, only when I have a big effort coming up." and indeed only Bertie managed to stay with Froome to the finish. Performance enhancement or medication?

(Although stage 18 of the Vuelta Froome did n't "do a Landis" taken into account his previous days performance and that he'd already rode the Tour, it was, shall we say, a "remarkable" turnaround)

Yes, wasn't it the case that Nibali took time off him on the previous mtf, it looked like the Vuelta was basically slipping away for Froome - then he rebounds very unexpectedly and takes time off Nibali?

Whilst: being sick enough to up his doses of ventolin. Did he say 'chest infection' somewhere in the report??

And then: getting poppedat this exact moment for being well over the limit (even when all is adjusted, tweaked and lawyered: 19%).

Just seems completely implausible. If you're getting sick and asthmatic deep into your second GT in a row, you don't usually start putting your rivals to the sword.

 

[brownbobby]

Re: Re:

That is classic Brailsford/SKY bobby.

Muddy the waters, give conflicting/unclear statements whenever its about bad publicity; always cover all bases. They live of the confusion because the casual viewer cant find head or tails.

Aren't Wada/UCI obliged to release the details if both parties agree...Brailsford has gone in print now as saying he really hopes they do?

It would be a spectacular and indefensible u turn if he did try to block it now

We have heard that from Brailsford before. crickets

Indeed we have. Will be interesting to see if the very foundation of most clinic theories; the notion that nothing changes, that history is bound to repeat itself ad infinitum, is proven correct here.

 

[MatParker117]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

 

[brownbobby]

Re:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

Well that's off script!

I give it less than 2 hours before every single thing they've said/produced has been 'proven' to be

a) lies
b) proof of doping
c) manipulated to cover up doping
d) proof of motors
e) OBFUSCATION
f) lacking transparency
g) all of the above

 

[Winterfold]

Re:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

The 'email exchange' between Froome and Kerrison prior to stage 19 is an amazing prediction of what actually happened that day, almost as if it were written with hindsight :surprised: :lol:

What mail package is that? Photoshop? :twisted:

 

[rick james]

Re:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

spin to win

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Haha, still can't believe he got away easily.
'But the sport is clean now, the dark era is over' etc. etc.

Didn’t realise that asthma treatment = dark era


Give me riders getting popped for asthma treatment over EPO any day do the week

Riders who are so sick they should be hospitalised the amount of asthma medication they are taking.

Never mind all the other ailments they claimed to have had and cured!

But no i jest, cant beat a drop of pineapple juice in the bidon to beat a dirty doper!!!

How do you know how sick they are and how much asthma treatment they are taking??

Guessing their dosage doesn’t make you a doctor you know

Sick people dont win 3 week Grand Tours. Dont need to be a doctor to know that.

Doping now that does. Also dont need to be a doctor to know that either.

:lol:

 

[adamfo]

I'm feeling unfit. My resting heart rate is 3 x higher than Froomes, his being measured at 32 bpm before the start of stage 19 at the Giro.

 

[silvergrenade]

Re:

I'm feeling unfit. My resting heart rate is 3 x higher than Froomes, his being measured at 32 bpm before the start of stage 19 at the Giro.

Isn't his in the late twenties?

 

[silvergrenade]

Re: Re:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

Well that's off script!

I give it less than 2 hours before every single thing they've said/produced has been 'proven' to be

a) lies
b) proof of doping
c) manipulated to cover up doping
d) proof of motors
e) OBFUSCATION
f) lacking transparency
g) all of the above

On the descent it was 49 seconds not 50 seconds..
Lies, Lies and more lies.
It proves he got that one second using a motor.

The sport is still dirty and it hasnt tried to clean itself.
Transparency? Giving data after a month? Such manipulation? Why?

 

[gillan1969]

Re:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

first class

there you brownbobby...a better analogy for you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PgbcQGOAPw

 

[brownbobby]

Re: Re:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

first class

there you brownbobby...a better analogy for you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PgbcQGOAPw

:lol: Touché :lol:

 

[thehog]

Re:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

Finestre a), b) and c) the dudes heartrate didn’t break 155. I also note they kept in their infamous 6% variance and upped his weight like on PSM.

 

[thehog]

And Froome is now glad all the “truth” has finally been revealed

 

[silvergrenade]

And Froome is now glad all the “truth” has finally been revealed

So?
Shouldnt he be?

 

[brownbobby]

Re: Re:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44694122

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/england/pdf/froome_stage19.pdf

Finestre a), b) and c) the dudes heartrate didn’t break 155. I also note they kept in their infamous 6% variance and upped his weight like on PSM.

Where does the suggestion they upped his weight come from?

And reference the power readings, i understood it to be pretty much universally acknowledged that osymetric chainrings give artificially high readings in this range?

and HR...considering his max on the day was 159, 'only' getting to 155 during a 16 second attack is completely consistent with that. 16 seconds is unlikely long enough to reach max HR.