Kimmage film trailer

[zlev11]

At what point during the Tour did Armstrong ride up i.e. how much racing was in his legs? Was the parcours of the stage the same, or different? How about the wind? Did the timing start from the same point? And end?

I'm not saying Froome is clean, just that I hope he is. But I've consistently said performance is not proof, so I'm hardly going to start to condemn him on the back of that one. Early in the Tour, Sky got smashed up the next day and Froome was outclimbed in the thrid week, so it's all relative.

Isn't this thread about Kimmage being a bit of a tw@t though?

Armstrong did that time on a FULL program. transfusions, cortisone, testosterone for recovery, training the whole season with EPO. a clean rider should not even be close to a time set by Armstrong in a Tour that he won, at any point in the race.

it's amazing that this is even argued by anyone. it's right in front of everyone's face.

 

[The Hitch]

I expect Sastre's 'marginal gains' will one day be known.

Is an argument for all dopers get caught ?

 

[Benotti69]

Is an argument for all dopers get caught ?

Dont be confused.

 

[Digger]

I expect Sastre's 'marginal gains' will one day be known.

Hard to say - it's not looking good...unless Fuentes writes his book revealing that Sastre was a 'patient'.

 

[Benotti69]

Hard to say - it's not looking good...unless Fuentes writes his book revealing that Sastre was a 'patient'.

Riis could yet spill the beans.

 

[gooner]

Boohoo.
Kimmage has been the exact same since he wrote Rough Ride, the only people 'turning away' are Sky fans.

I call BS on this.

I'm no fan whatsoever of Sky but you tried that line as well in the Kimmage/Kreuziger/Roche thread saying you had a problem with some Nico Roche fans who were disagreeing with you. I suppose I'm a fanboy of the stickybottle website now since I disagreed with Kimmage's insult a few months back to the guy who runs that website. I seen a couple of people on my timeline(who aren't Sky fans)who questioned their contribution to the fund after these recent insulting comments. I'm not going to lie, I did myself. No way do I endorse this behaviour. I'm with him on the big issues eg: McQuaid and the UCI, going after the people who are found to have crossed the lined on doping or that show serious suspicion, but that doesn't mean it gives him the right to through any sort of comment he likes and direct his anger in all directions when someone disagrees with him. It's obvious at the moment he doesn't take too kind to an alternative comment or correction when his points have been proving to be wrong. An example is saying Walsh never mentioned Leinders in his reporting which is 100% false and when Owen Slot told him The Times reported on Froome/Porte and Motoman.

 

[pmcg76]

At what point during the Tour did Armstrong ride up i.e. how much racing was in his legs? Was the parcours of the stage the same, or different? How about the wind? Did the timing start from the same point? And end?

I'm not saying Froome is clean, just that I hope he is. But I've consistently said performance is not proof, so I'm hardly going to start to condemn him on the back of that one. Early in the Tour, Sky got smashed up the next day and Froome was outclimbed in the thrid week, so it's all relative.

Isn't this thread about Kimmage being a bit of a tw@t though?

I know this is the Kimmage thread but once again, we have someone spouting the same stuff. The conditions etc on that stage were the exact same for all the other riders but they are way down on the all-time times list. Porte was next fastest of the 2013 lot as 22nd fastest overall or something. What needs to be explained is how one guy is riding times with the biggest dopers whilst the other guys are still riding times slower than dopers. Overall, climbing times on that climb are down which of course reflects cycling getting cleaner but then we have Mr Froome. Care to explain???

 

[del1962]

I know this is the Kimmage thread but once again, we have someone spouting the same stuff. The conditions etc on that stage were the exact same for all the other riders but they are way down on the all-time times list. Porte was next fastest of the 2013 lot as 22nd fastest overall or something. What needs to be explained is how one guy is riding times with the biggest dopers whilst the other guys are still riding times slower than dopers. Overall, climbing times on that climb are down which of course reflects cycling getting cleaner but then we have Mr Froome. Care to explain???

According to Tucker Quintana's performance on Semnoz surpassed Froome's on AX-3, so perhaps Froome is not so out on his own as you imply.

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2013/07/on-performance-analysis-common-sense.html

 

[pmcg76]

According to Tucker Quintana's performance on Semnoz surpassed Froome's on AX-3, so perhaps Froome is not so out on his own as you imply.

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2013/07/on-performance-analysis-common-sense.html

Well I am clearly referring to Ax-3-Domaine which is what was mentioned and am I arguing Quintana is clean?? No way.

 

[del1962]

I see Sean never got round to reading Rough Ride

http://www.thescore.ie/sean-kelly-book-kimmage-roche-mcquaid-1046393-Aug2013/?utm_source=The+Score&utm_medium=twitter

 

[Benotti69]

I see Sean never got round to reading Rough Ride

Kelly = Omerta