• 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 1329 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Koronin said:
Obviously it depends on the rider how noticeable the drop off is when a rider starts to decline. That start is usually somewhere in their mid 30's usually around 33 to 35. I also think that is why many riders retire around that age. It's not as big of an issue for the domestiques or the classics specialists, while it's most noticeable for the GT specialists. We've already seen that he's not as dominant as he was previously. He can definitely race for another 5 years, however the question is at what level.
Have we? He's won a GT double last season and made the best attempt at Giro-Tour for 20 years this season. In the last year he's been the fastest on the hardest climbs in cycling: Zoncolan, Finestre and Angliru amongst others.

I think he's at his peak right now. Finestre ride was every bit as spectacular as Ventoux or the 2015 tour, but now instead of then fading in the third week like he used to, he's getting stronger and staying strong into the following GT.

Not sure there is any sign yet that Froome is at the start of a downward curve. The only big issue I see for him is if Sky decide he carries too much clinic baggage to be their number one and lead them in the Tour, whereas Thomas is seen as much cleaner and more popular.


He hasn't been as dominate in a GT since 2015. Also if not for Contador's trap stage he'd have won the Tour/Vuelta double in 2016. He was more dominate in that year than he was in 2017 when he actually got the double.
 
hfer07 said:
I don't quite get the comparison between Froome and Evans at all-nor the relevance of folks like papi Horner, Vino, Sastre, etc, winning a GT after 34 y.o. because they were not (((multiple))) Tour winners, nor they did have the "super Team" with all ((marginal gains)) to "enhance" their careers as Froome does.

Comparing Froome to multiple Tour winners just makes my point even more emphatically. Froome has won three Tours past the age of 30. In that same 95 year period, Indurain is the only other multiple Tour winner who did it even twice. Not counting LA.

Riders win multiple Tours by starting young, and entering the event every year. Eventually, that takes its toll and they burn out. Granted, Froome started relatively late (same to some extent with LA, given that he was out with cancer for a while), which may explain why he's lasted as long as he has.

LA was almost 34 when he retired the first time, and I'll grant you that he probably could have won the Tour the following year, and possibly in 2007. By 2008, I think Contador would have beaten him, had they both been able to ride the Tour. But there were other relevant factors. If Ullrich and Basso, both younger riders, hadn't had their careers derailed in 2006, they might have surpassed LA by 2007.

samhocking said:
Is the dropoff that sudden at 34? Froome at 33 just had the best last 12 months of GT performances so far in his entire career didn't he? Evans at 33 hadn't, so no comparison.

Best results is not necessarily the same as best performance. Results depend on performance, obviously, but also other factors that change from year to year, like competition, parcours, crashes, etc.

He will begin to fade, but there should be time for 1 or 2 more Tour De France podiums I would think.

I don't disagree with that. But competing for the podium in the next year or two is not destroying Bernal's potential, which is what I was responding to.
 
pastronef said:
glassmoon said:
pastronef said:
a bug on Strava, showing power and heart rate. Froome has always very low heart rate

https://twitter.com/laflammerouge16/status/1071011319221022722
removed?

yes, Laflammerouge removed it because he could have problems with privacy rules. it dod show Froome´s training on Zoncolan and another day on Madone, Braus and other riviera climbs. heart rate didnt go above 160
f*ck your privacy...we want all the goodies!!! we have agendas to keep up
 
Re:

dacooley said:
oddly enough the thread slowly died down. seemingly even the most vitriol sceptic had nothing left but accept that froome is on top of GT pyramid with good reason. :)

Assuming this means you think a guy who got caught doping (but covered up by the UCI) is clean, I would hope you're kidding. Good one.

Other explanation is that people are dejected and realize the UCI won't do anything about this guy. Thinking he's clean would be delusional at this point. Sorry, scratch that. Delusional at any point since the 2011 Vuelta.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
dacooley said:
oddly enough the thread slowly died down. seemingly even the most vitriol sceptic had nothing left but accept that froome is on top of GT pyramid with good reason. :)

Assuming this means you think a guy who got caught doping (but covered up by the UCI) is clean, I would hope you're kidding. Good one.

Other explanation is that people are dejected and realize the UCI won't do anything about this guy. Thinking he's clean would be delusional at this point. Sorry, scratch that. Delusional at any point since the 2011 Vuelta.


really? when was that?
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
red_flanders said:
dacooley said:
oddly enough the thread slowly died down. seemingly even the most vitriol sceptic had nothing left but accept that froome is on top of GT pyramid with good reason. :)

Assuming this means you think a guy who got caught doping (but covered up by the UCI) is clean, I would hope you're kidding. Good one.

Other explanation is that people are dejected and realize the UCI won't do anything about this guy. Thinking he's clean would be delusional at this point. Sorry, scratch that. Delusional at any point since the 2011 Vuelta.


really? when was that?

Give me a break
 
It pains me to support Red Flanders ( ;) ) but it is hard not to agree with his view on the AAF when you look at available information about other Salbutamol cases.

There have been loads of convictions, but the only other rider I know of who was cleared was Oscar Pereiro. Cleared in 07 for a pozzy test in 06.

Why is this important? Because Pereiro won the 06 Tour on the back of Landis testing positive for testosterone.

Of course, how would it have looked if they had taken the TdF off Landis and given it to Pereiro only to then take it off him the following year when his doping case was heard?

Not going to happen.
 
Maybe because we don’t know how many pro cyclist have had a a AAF for salbutamol, we should never have known about Froome it should have remained private.


If you have issues with only finding out about Froome via a leak then you should be asking how many have have had an AAF without us even knowing about it.....but I doubt that really bothers you
 
We can only know what we know. We know of quite a few bans, but only two clearing (Froome and Pereiro).

We know from the Amstrong case that he was tipped off about positives by the UCI and told how to make it go away (€100,000). Its not a huge leap of faith to think that nothing has changed.

Interesting that you point out that Froome's AAF should have been kept private. Yes, it should...

...but I'll remind you that the only reason Contador was banned for Clenbutarol was because the pozzy was leaked. The UCI were burying it.

Again, not a huge leap of faith to think that nothing has changed and that they were hoping to bury Froome's AAF.

There is a lot of money tied up in Froome.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
dacooley said:
oddly enough the thread slowly died down. seemingly even the most vitriol sceptic had nothing left but accept that froome is on top of GT pyramid with good reason. :)

Assuming this means you think a guy who got caught doping (but covered up by the UCI) is clean, I would hope you're kidding. Good one.

Other explanation is that people are dejected and realize the UCI won't do anything about this guy. Thinking he's clean would be delusional at this point. Sorry, scratch that. Delusional at any point since the 2011 Vuelta.
Yeah that just about sums it up.
It's sufficiently depressing that even thehog/digger etc hardly ever bother turning up here any more.
Lance was more vulnerable and more fun.
 

TRENDING THREADS