Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

Page 17 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 15, 2013
550
0
0
Race Radio said:
This is where things fall apart. Froome held on to a Moto once because he had an knee issue and was trying to get through the stage. This is suddenly transformed into being his true ability, not an occasional incident. It is impossible to find one rider who has not had a bad day and got a few "Power bottles"

Froome had a good engine. He could climb and TT a bit. That is why he was able to turn Pro and remain a Pro. Did he show any indication that he could win the Tour?.......no, not much

yes fair enough about the motorbike, I know he just wanted to finish as he was injured and about to quit anyway. You could say the same about the zig-zagging, in isolation it shows nothing, anybody can have an off day where their legs are gone.

But the fact that he was about to be dropped by Sky tells you all you need to know about his then achievements to date and what Sky thought of them, Leinders comes on board, 6 months later Froome is told he'd be dropped as Sky were obviously not convinced at all by his performances (or perhaps a reluctance to dope), 2 months later he shows GT winning prowess in the Vuelta and has more or less been a GT beast since, dominating TTs and climbs.

That was what I was trying to say, that transformation from dropped rider to GT contender occurred in the space of a month or two, it is the suddenness of the transformation that makes it more suspicious than LA.

I know we don't have bags of syringes etc with Sky, I think they have learned not to be that stupid and I wouldn't expect that. But the overnight leap in performance and link to Leinders are more than enough for me.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Cycle Chic said:
Race Radio - how about addressing the post by Libertine Seguros ?

Which part? It appears we agree on most things but disagree on where Froome lands on the "Most improved" List.
 
bewildered said:
yes fair enough about the motorbike, I know he just wanted to finish as he was injured and about to quit anyway. You could say the same about the zig-zagging, in isolation it shows nothing, anybody can have an off day where their legs are gone.

But the fact that he was about to be dropped by Sky tells you all you need to know about his then achievements to date and what Sky thought of them, Leinders comes on board, 6 months later Froome is told he'd be dropped as Sky were obviously not convinced at all by his performances (or perhaps a reluctance to dope), 2 months later he shows GT winning prowess in the Vuelta and has more or less been a GT beast since, dominating TTs and climbs.

That was what I was trying to say, that transformation from dropped rider to GT contender occurred in the space of a month or two, it is the suddenness of the transformation that makes it more suspicious than LA.

I know we don't have bags of syringes etc with Sky, I think they have learned not to be that stupid and I wouldn't expect that. But the overnight leap in performance and link to Leinders are more than enough for me.

Big engine at work... :rolleyes:

giro-2010-st10-HENDERSON-FROOME.jpg
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Race Radio said:
Which part? It appears we agree on most things but disagree on where Froome lands on the "Most improved" List.

it's a pretty damning picture though, you must agree.
if froome is doping, and you seem to agree that he likely is, then how likely is it that wiggins 2012 was clean? Indeed, unlikely. And then, how likely is it that Wiggins 2009 was clean? How likely is it that Porte, Talansky and Martin are clean?
If Sky aren't clean, it would mean that the fans are currently being lied to and fooled in dimensions previously unknown to cycling (cf. Wiggins' open letter in i think the Guardian where he draws his entire family into the equation).

Is there any clean segment left in cycling, any team for which you'd put your hand in the fire?
I realize you're not eager to dwell down to these degrees of speculation, but i thought I'd ask nonetheless:)
 
Race Radio said:
Which part? It appears we agree on most things but disagree on where Froome lands on the "Most improved" List.

Lib Seg addressed all your points and there was no acknowledgement from you or counter argument. Excellent post as always from Lib Seg.
 
Race Radio said:
I wound't say grossly untrue.

Riis was riding for Toshiba during a race in 88. Fignon asked for his help to win a race, even though they were on separate teams. Riis rode for him and in return was given a job where he rode for 3 years, largely anonymously. There was zero indication he could ride 6.7 w/kg on the Hautacam with a 64% hct.

Yeah but he wasn't out of contract when he made the transformation thanks to EPO which is what you were suggesting. You are slightly bending facts here to fit your version of events. Froome was almost out of contract when he had his transformation. I would say Riis improved over time whilst Froome improved overnight almost.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
pmcg76 said:
Yeah but he wasn't out of contract when he made the transformation thanks to EPO which is what you were suggesting. You are slightly bending facts here to fit your version of events. Froome was almost out of contract when he had his transformation. I would say Riis improved over time whilst Froome improved overnight almost.

My point stands. Riis was an anonymous rider, barely hanging on to his contract, with few accomplishments in 7 years of fetching bottles.

http://www.cyclingbase.com/palcoureurs.php?id=1572&idtitle=1

The transformation was absurd. Guy goes from 5.5 w/kilo to 6.7 w/Kilo
 
Race Radio said:
My point stands. Riis was an anonymous rider, barely hanging on to his contract, with few accomplishments in 7 years of fetching bottles.

http://www.cyclingbase.com/palcoureurs.php?id=1572&idtitle=1

The transformation was absurd. Guy goes from 5.5 w/kilo to 6.7 w/Kilo

Well, I think you are well off base on this and I am not disagreeing that Riis was a nobody but then so was Froome. I agree Riis barely got a contract after Toshiba but he rode as a domestique for Fignon which clearly limits opportunities but he clearly did enough to catch the attention of Ferretti who didn't really sign domestiques. Riis said in his autobiography that he could have went with Fignon to Gatorade but chose to back himself in going to Ariostea. What Froome done that marks him out as being so much better than Riis, I am not sure. I would love to know(and indeed the world) what Froome was putting out at Barloworld and SKY before the transformation. My bet is we will never know.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
2
0
Yeah we are lucky Froome is clean. If he starts doping he will win every ITT and mountain stage by 3 minutes.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
pmcg76 said:
Well, I think you are well off base on this and I am not disagreeing that Riis was a nobody but then so was Froome. I agree Riis barely got a contract after Toshiba but he rode as a domestique for Fignon which clearly limits opportunities but he clearly did enough to catch the attention of Ferretti who didn't really sign domestiques. Riis said in his autobiography that he could have went with Fignon to Gatorade but chose to back himself in going to Ariostea. What Froome done that marks him out as being so much better than Riis, I am not sure. I would love to know(and indeed the world) what Froome was putting out at Barloworld and SKY before the transformation. My bet is we will never know.

I am not saying Froome was a somebody, he wasn't. I am saying the size of the improvement from Riis was greater then that of Froome. Riis went from a big guy who could not climb with the leaders to a guy ripping 6.7 w/kg. Of course this vast improvement is likely due to the doping products available at the time. Nobody can hit 64% now.

When Riis suddenly got 5th, then 3rd, then 1st late in his career everyone sat up and took notice. Everyone jumped on the EPO train because they saw Riis making $$$$. I do not hear the same response from Pro riders re. Froome.....but perhaps that is because nobody knows what he is doing
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
I dont know exactly how much Froome has improved. It seems he went from 5.8 w/kg at the Vuelta in 2011 to 6.3 w/kg this year at the Tour (or last year's Tour as well). It seems to be a mini version of a miracle transformation.

So.... A while ago Van Garderen stated that if he or Talanski generates the same performance as Froome years from now if we'll question them. To me this seemed like a indirect statement that they were "doing the same" as Froome/team SKY and that it was "level playing field" similar to how Tyler felt about his 2002-2003 CSC seasons when he did so well. So what did TVG mean by his statement? Should we start a thread on all the top American riders. There's plenty of indirect evidence that Americans are doping. All the Garmin riders (apart from a small handful) have been busted for doping in the past, Tom Zirbel (who was a BMC rider at some point I believe?) was busted and still denies he doped rather than admit, and of course I'm sure there's other doping connected riders succeding in US cycling.

So my question and hopeful answer is: Should we start an American cycling doping thread about current US pros?
 
Race Radio said:
I am not saying Froome was a somebody, he wasn't. I am saying the size of the improvement from Riis was greater then that of Froome. Riis went from a big guy who could not climb with the leaders to a guy ripping 6.7 w/kg. Of course this vast improvement is likely due to the doping products available at the time. Nobody can hit 64% now.

When Riis suddenly got 5th, then 3rd, then 1st late in his career everyone sat up and took notice. Everyone jumped on the EPO train because they saw Riis making $$$$. I do not hear the same response from Pro riders re. Froome.....but perhaps that is because nobody knows what he is doing

This...my opinion..
 
BigBoat said:
I dont know exactly how much Froome has improved. It seems he went from 5.8 w/kg at the Vuelta in 2011 to 6.3 w/kg this year at the Tour (or last year's Tour as well). It seems to be a mini version of a miracle transformation.

So.... A while ago Van Garderen stated that if he or Talanski generates the same performance as Froome years from now if we'll question them. To me this seemed like a indirect statement that they were "doing the same" as Froome/team SKY and that it was "level playing field" similar to how Tyler felt about his 2002-2003 CSC seasons when he did so well. So what did TVG mean by his statement? Should we start a thread on all the top American riders. There's plenty of indirect evidence that Americans are doping. All the Garmin riders (apart from a small handful) have been busted for doping in the past, Tom Zirbel (who was a BMC rider at some point I believe?) was busted and still denies he doped rather than admit, and of course I'm sure there's other doping connected riders succeding in US cycling.

So my question and hopeful answer is: Should we start an American cycling doping thread about current US pros?

You are wrong lumping Tom in with this laundry list. Check Zirbel's history and progress before including him with the Garmins that admitted to doing the real doping.

The statement that he was BMC is absurdly off the mark
...he was going to be signed by JV when the DHEA showed up ...he has never signed with a Pro Tour team.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
mewmewmew13 said:
You are wrong lumping Tom in with this laundry list. Check Zirbel's history and progress before including him with the Garmins that admitted to doing the real doping.

The statement that he was BMC is absurdly off the mark
...he was going to be signed by JV when the DHEA showed up ...he has never signed with a Pro Tour team.

Oh, I was thinking of that for some reason, he must have been with Priority health as it says on his page.

Anyways, maybe my impression on Zirbel is a little bit different than yours, of course I mean no disrespect to you if your a fan of his or anything. Tom does seem to have an anti-doping message but this blows by the point that most of the Garmin team are staunchly anti doping as well (to the public atleast) and have also admitted to numerous levels of doping throughout their careers, conveniently ending at certain times all in the 2000-2007 range. I felt Zirbel as being "connected" to them because his performances have been so powerful (4th at World TT) 1st numerous times against the Garmins/BMC at the US Pro TT. That combined of course with his ++ for a banned substance and his subsequent assistance to USADA to go on and bust a couple other riders. This might lead some to believe that Zirbel was "connected" to an American cycling doping network.

I was just wondering if there was ANY interest on the clinic of starting a "current American rider" doping thread seeing as how 1.) Teejay and Garmin staunchly support SKY much the same way that Lance's former competitors largely support him, 2.) Teejay was wondering if there would be any speculation about him/Talanski, 3.) Many of the current Americans visually look and ride almost identical to their pre 2007 selves, of course one could also argue that power outputs across the board have dropped but I just cant help but wonder what the current doping culture involves in the top tier or "inner circle" of American cycling. If there are still little "Siberia's" out there with Danielson's and Talanski's red cells being saved up. Of course that's how I view it anyways.

Sorry to ramble, just wondering if posters here are getting sick of team SKY/David Walsh, Chris Froome, etc.
 
BigBoat said:
Oh, I was thinking of that for some reason, he must have been with Priority health as it says on his page.

Anyways, maybe my impression on Zirbel is a little bit different than yours, of course I mean no disrespect to you if your a fan of his or anything. Tom does seem to have an anti-doping message but this blows by the point that most of the Garmin team are staunchly anti doping as well (to the public atleast) and have also admitted to numerous levels of doping throughout their careers, conveniently ending at certain times all in the 2000-2007 range. I felt Zirbel as being "connected" to them because his performances have been so powerful (4th at World TT) 1st numerous times against the Garmins/BMC at the US Pro TT. That combined of course with his ++ for a banned substance and his subsequent assistance to USADA to go on and bust a couple other riders. This might lead some to believe that Zirbel was "connected" to an American cycling doping network.

I was just wondering if there was ANY interest on the clinic of starting a "current American rider" doping thread seeing as how 1.) Teejay and Garmin staunchly support SKY much the same way that Lance's former competitors largely support him, 2.) Teejay was wondering if there would be any speculation about him/Talanski, 3.) Many of the current Americans visually look and ride almost identical to their pre 2007 selves, of course one could also argue that power outputs across the board have dropped but I just cant help but wonder what the current doping culture involves in the top tier or "inner circle" of American cycling. If there are still little "Siberia's" out there with Danielson's and Talanski's red cells being saved up. Of course that's how I view it anyways.

Sorry to ramble, just wondering if posters here are getting sick of team SKY/David Walsh, Chris Froome, etc.

I know you weren't disrespecting me..thanx..I'm not taking it personally but just am a stickler for actual facts if they are available.

W/r to Tom 'assisting' USADA...what many don't know is that earlier in his career as a lowly conti rider he was uncomfortable with rumours that someone on his team was breaking the rules (cheating aka doping) . When asked to provide a phone number to someone else who was investigating he did....that led to uncovering a person who was actually doping...so not really running to the authorities and spilling a list of names.

This happened before the later USADA and Lance-related shenanigans. Thus he was given a reduced sentence for assistance providing a contact...not really the same as running to the authorities and squealing out a group of riders.

Thanks for letting me put something out there that I actually had some knowledge of.

Carry on.
 
Whatever....

every thread in this clinic descends into finger pointing and name calling of posters.
It feels like a bunch of school kids whining about each other.

Pointless to get into a p***ing match and rendering most threads here pointless as well.




Anyway. w/r to Walsh...his style changed substantially after embedding with Sky imho.
He went from full frontal attack of suspected dopers and unrealistic performances to blowing air kisses all 'round the Sky camp.
 
May 26, 2009
4,114
0
0
mewmewmew13 said:
Whatever....

every thread in this clinic descends into finger pointing and name calling of posters.
It feels like a bunch of school kids whining about each other.

Pointless to get into a p***ing match and rendering most threads here pointless as well.




Anyway. w/r to Walsh...his style changed substantially after embedding with Sky imho.
He went from full frontal attack of suspected dopers and unrealistic performances to blowing air kisses all 'round the Sky camp.

Hit nail on head.

CN people, please can we get a 'Like' button, pretty please with a cherry on top.
 
Carols said:
Lance had to get out of the saddle. Not so Dawg he can do it seated :eek::eek:

you know who loved to get out of the saddle...:rolleyes:
it let him swagger and look tough on his bike with his neck chain swinging back and forth....



it is AMAZING that Froome never had to stand...just look down at his stem and keep a steady cadence :)