Kimmage on Wiggins, Sky

[gooner]

There are already a million inconsistencies.

Yeah, more with regards to "future potential inconsistencies".

 

[Rollthedice]

Michelle is Froome's Michele. Ferrari that is.

 

[hrotha]

Clumsy English? Haven't you seen his interview in English after la Vuelta 2012, that was one awesome interview

But you make a very good point, he can't do an interview with Kkmmage without a translator

He'd need an interpreter, not a translator.

Paging Descender.

 

[bigcog]

Contador told Kimmage once: "you are free to believe whatever you want"

That is much smarter than forcing a lot of bull**** down everyone's throats.

And yes a lot of his fans accept he's dirty

Fair enough

 

[The Hitch]

So that's what the froome defense has come down too. Yeah he may be lying with every breathe but he actually did the interview and maybe lance wouldn't have ergo froome est cleans.

 

[jens_attacks]

valverde for me is the best ever dealing with some of these questions. i've read once an interview and he was asked " did you ever race clean?" and he said "i have a clear conscience". why the fucc can't chris do that?

it won't be so ridiculous when he will fall and you have all these interviews looking back.

 

[thehog]

I do like Kimmage dropping Walsh's pathetic attempt for a book into the leading paragraph.

Brilliant!

And I do love Froome getting a serious case of the "I don't recall". Sure this wasn't the SCA deposition?

Question is? Why would they do this? Was it a get back at Walsh? It can't be to demonstrate cleanness? Total madness. The less said the better. This interview is effectively a positive test!

“I watched the 2002 Tour de France with my mouth agape. It was the first Tour I ever saw. Ivan Basso and Lance Armstrong’s duel in the mountains was like an epic dogfight between to World War One pilot barons. A residual of hero worship for Basso lingered with me until I came to learn the shady pharmaceutical secret of his success. You never get over that feeling of betrayal. Basso was my first and last hero of he peloton.’ - ‘The Climb.’

Paul Kimmage: You saw the Tour for the first time in 2002.

Chris Froome: That’s a guestimate.

PK: Where were you?

CF: I was in the boarding house of St John’s College in Johannesburg. Our house master was into cycling and he had put cycling on the common room television and I can vividly remember Armstrong and Basso in the mountains together and watching them dueling.
PK: Why did you root for Basso and not Armstrong?
CF: It was some point soon after that Basso went down with his involvement in . . . I don’t know what doping case.
PK: Yes, I know what happened afterwards, but most kids (in 2002), I imagine, would have been rooting for Armstrong. What was it about Basso?
CF: I think because he was the weaker of the two, the underdog. And I also thought he had more style. He looked good on a bike and I liked the way he came across in his interviews . . .
Michelle Cound: His demeanor.
CF: Yeah, demeanor is a good word. He was very calm as opposed to Lance, who seemed a lot more in your face and not necessarily my type of guy.
PK: Someone who shouted a lot?
CF: (smiles) Possibly, yeah.
PK: It was ’05 when they went head-to-head, not ’02.
CF: Was it?
PK: Basso was 11th in ’02, 7th in ’03, 3rd in ’04 and 2nd in ’05. And a year later he was busted in Operation Puerto.
MC: Then you were much older . . . you were about 20, then.
CF: Okay, that’s strange. I really thought I had seen them going head-to-head in the boarding house.
MC: Unless it was a specific stage?
CF: Which was the one were Lance basically gave Basso the stage?
PK: I’m not sure what year it was.

(It was 2004.)

http://www.independent.ie/sport/oth...orm-part-2-30394950.html#sthash.gZURYFGe.dpuf

 

[deValtos]

valverde for me is the best ever dealing with some of these questions. i've read once an interview and he was asked " did you ever race clean?" and he said "i have a clear conscience". why the fucc can't chris do that?

Because that answer is the closest possible thing to admitting you're on the juice (without saying it explicitly). Anyone who uses that "clear conscience" or similar nonsense is going to lose all credibility. (Not that the clinic here give Froome much cred, but some people still do)

 

[Merckx index]

He was not at 2-3% when he was at the UCI

When he was at the UCI he was @71kg, perhaps 72..... he is now 66kg. That is a lot. Granted it does not mean a shift from 80 to 95 but it still will result in a shift, it is not zero

I am sure one of our math folks here can work it out

That’s the point. I don’t believe you can lose 5-6 kg, if that’s what it was (Froome says four in the interview), without affecting V02max (not per weight). That is the kind of weight loss you achieve with power when you resume training during the offseason, not by someone who is in the middle of the season and has been racing for several years. Again, if he really achieved that, his prior training must have been pretty poor. (Notice in that Froome quote, even he expresses doubt that by losing weight he would raise his V02max/kg)

And remember, this explanation, if that’s what it is, has to account for the transformation occurring in 2011. You would have to say that he was still substantially overweight until then. I think 80-85 is probably pretty compatible with his results prior to then. He says he was 69 kilo his first year at Sky, and subsequently dropped 3 kilo, but he doesn't say exactly when.

Here's the bottom line, RR. If he was 80-85 when he weighed 70-72 kilo, at 66 kilo, with no loss in power, he would be 85-93.

 

[jens_attacks]

Because that answer is the closest possible thing to admitting you're on the juice (without saying it explicitly). Anyone who uses that "clear conscience" or similar nonsense is going to lose all credibility. (Not that the clinic here give Froome much cred, but some people still do)

it's not the end of the world if you say that. valverde still is a great rider with huge amounts of fans over the world(more than chris)
froome jumped on the ship though and now he has to go and go until it sinks.
to give you an example, froome in my country for example has exact 0 credibility. so he only makes it worse with all these stories.


with all my jokes about him and michelle, i still think he's a champion(yes an ugly one) but why go this way with all these santa claus stories?keep a low profile for christ sake and win races.

cycling will have 0 credibility for the next 20 years anyway.

 

[The Hitch]

I do like Kimmage dropping Walsh's pathetic attempt for a book into the leading paragraph.

Brilliant!

And I do love Froome getting a serious case of the "I don't recall". Sure this wasn't the SCA deposition?

Question is? Why would they do this? Was it a get back at Walsh? It can't be to demonstrate cleanness? Total madness. The less said the better. This interview is effectively a positive test!



http://www.independent.ie/sport/oth...orm-part-2-30394950.html#sthash.gZURYFGe.dpuf

Beautiful.

Shame kimmage didn't push it though like Jeremy Paxman would. Froome is on the ropes there. He really really remembers exactly where he was and what he saw. Hell he even remembers that the headmaster likes cycling.

Oh but wait a minute. None of that actually happened.

So where did Chris get it from?

 

[The Hitch]

Because that answer is the closest possible thing to admitting you're on the juice (without saying it explicitly). Anyone who uses that "clear conscience" or similar nonsense is going to lose all credibility. (Not that the clinic here give Froome much cred, but some people still do)

The people that give froome credibility are the same type of people that still give Valverde credibility (and yes they do exist)

 

[LaFlorecita]

He'd need an interpreter, not a translator.

Paging Descender.

You are correct of course

Sorry

 

[LaFlorecita]

Beautiful.

Shame kimmage didn't push it though like Jeremy Paxman would. Froome is on the ropes there. He really really remembers exactly where he was and what he saw. Hell he even remembers that the headmaster likes cycling.

Oh but wait a minute. None of that actually happened.

So where did Chris get it from?

That is pretty awesome.

 

[the sceptic]

The people that give froome credibility are the same type of people that still give Valverde credibility (and yes they do exist)

Its pretty ironic that the only people that think Contador is cleans on this forum are sky fans.

anyway, Kimmage looks like he did good research. He asked all the questions the clinic could have asked for

 

[froooome]

He was not at 2-3% when he was at the UCI

When he was at the UCI he was @71kg, perhaps 72..... he is now 66kg. That is a lot. Granted it does not mean a shift from 80 to 95 but it still will result in a shift, it is not zero

I am sure one of our math folks here can work it out

Well, if we assume VO2max to be 85ml/kg/min at 72kg, it means that he consumes oxygen 6120ml/min. Divide this by 66kg to get 92.7ml/kg/min...

Nibali today in CN:

"I can remember Froome in 2008, he was much fatter then ... and was beatable. I think he needed a team that really knew how to exploit his potential. That was good for him because he hasn’t been burned out too young. Whoever was lucky enough to find him, found a rider with a good engine and they’ve worked really well with him."

On the other hand, I believe CF and MC somewhat trolled festinaboy Vayer. However, not sure which one annoys festinaboy more, the numbers or that his name was written wrong

 

[Race Radio]

That’s the point. I don’t believe you can lose 5-6 kg, if that’s what it was (Froome says four in the interview), without affecting V02max (not per weight). That is the kind of weight loss you achieve with power when you resume training during the offseason, not by someone who is in the middle of the season and has been racing for several years. Again, if he really achieved that, his prior training must have been pretty poor. (Notice in that Froome quote, even he expresses doubt that by losing weight he would raise his V02max/kg)

And remember, this explanation, if that’s what it is, has to account for the transformation occurring in 2011. You would have to say that he was still substantially overweight until then. I think 80-85 is probably pretty compatible with his results prior to then. He says he was 69 kilo his first year at Sky, and subsequently dropped 3 kilo, but he doesn't say exactly when.

Here's the bottom line, RR. If he was 80-85 when he weighed 70-72 kilo, at 66 kilo, with no loss in power, he would be 85-93.

The test he is referring to was done 7 years ago, he had not been a Pro for several years. He told Eurosport he was 66kg at the Tour last year.

Again, I am not saying anything about doping but losing that amount of weight would effect that 80-85 number he gave.

Regardless, Vo2 max is old time stuff. It is a nice distraction but there are lots of other things more interesting, like those SRM files from 2009 and 2010.

 

[Dalakhani]

This 2nd part is extraordinary.

The doctor came around to everyone’s room and said, ‘Okay guys, you’ve had three hard days, here are some amino acids to help you recover.’ At first I thought, ‘This is a bit weird’ but he explained there were no problems with it and that it was completely allowed.

This is a doping team (Barloworld) giving him injections. He doesn't know what's being injected into him. But he's sure he's never doped?

Whenever I've seen Froome on TV, he's seemed normal enough, but his comments in this interview suggest he's got a really low IQ.

He just doesn't seem able to put two and two together.

Example:

PK: What about recuperation? Did you have any injections during that Tour?

CF: No. On Barloworld they did do injectable . . . was it Fluimacil? It was an amino acid or something and the doctor would administer that at certain points. And I did have some Fluimacil. I don’t know if I had it on the Tour but there were . . . it’s possible once or twice.

 

[Dalakhani]

The other thing that was weird is that he remembers rooting for a rider in the Tour - the first one he watched - but has no idea what year it was, whether or not he was watching it at boarding school, was he a schoolboy, was he 20 years old...?

It's so odd.

 

[thehog]

Beautiful.

Shame kimmage didn't push it though like Jeremy Paxman would. Froome is on the ropes there. He really really remembers exactly where he was and what he saw. Hell he even remembers that the headmaster likes cycling.

Oh but wait a minute. None of that actually happened.

So where did Chris get it from?

This is why I stick with the notion that Froome was always a nobody. And this his only way out of that. Walsh also is just as nerdy and geeky as Froome sees similarities in him with himself.

How Froome manages to lead a team and inspire leadership is beyond me.

Today the Dawg well and truly jumped the shark. And Walsh might as well retire from journalism. He's a disgrace.

 

[kingjr]

Its pretty ironic that the only people that think Contador is cleans on this forum are sky fans.

Well, I'm not.

 

[Chaddy]

The other thing that was weird is that he remembers rooting for a rider in the Tour - the first one he watched - but has no idea what year it was, whether or not he was watching it at boarding school, was he a schoolboy, was he 20 years old...?

It's so odd.

It's not that strange

I started watching the Tour because of Chris Boardman but I couldn't tell you what year it was

 

[deValtos]

It's not that strange

I started watching the Tour because of Chris Boardman but I couldn't tell you what year it was

For me I've nailed it down to either 1999 or 2000.

Reasons I can't remember:

-I would've been 7 or 8 and cycling back then was just watching half of the TDF a year rather than nowdays of checking the result of every race ridden, reading forums etc.
-Which one was the tour where Armstrong rode away from everyone on the climbs ? .... oh wait, damnit.
-Watched like 90% of the cycling videos on youtube, I can't differentiate between if I've seen a race live or if it's from a recorded video I watched 10+ years after the race, my memory blurs it all into one.

So yeah, I don't think it's that unsual.

 

[thehog]

It's not that strange

I started watching the Tour because of Chris Boardman but I couldn't tell you what year it was

Yes but when you use the word "vividly" and remember watching it in the boarding house at school. And it didn't happen, then what?

It didn't actually happen? You weren't actually at school or in a boarding house.

I doubt doubt that he did watch it in 2004. But why make up the BS story to fit? and why did Walsh serve it up?

 

[keeponrollin]

Beautiful.

Shame kimmage didn't push it though like Jeremy Paxman would. Froome is on the ropes there. He really really remembers exactly where he was and what he saw. Hell he even remembers that the headmaster likes cycling.

Oh but wait a minute. None of that actually happened.

So where did Chris get it from?

The essence of being a good liar, is to keep the lie simple. The simpler the lie, the easier it is to remember, & the closer the lie is to reality, the easier it is to cross the gap to reality. Froome is a truly *** liar !

I don't think this is an important lie to get caught in. An honest answer might be; "I've no idea what race made me want to turn Pro, but Walsh wanted a good story, so I/we made this one up."

Of course, this interview highlights what a really crap liar he is, so now PK has the scent of blood, so now he can start pulling the threads of some of the other, more significant lies.

I think we can all see now why Sky & Froome's handlers didn't want him to give an un-vetted interview, to a bloodhound like PK.


Well done Paul !!!!!