Kimmage on Wiggins, Sky

[Energy Starr]

That sounds Kinky

Is it wrong to suddenly like her a little?

 

[lllludo]

Chris Froome's personal doc in Monaco

The dawg's personal doc in Monaco is not any type of doctor
Stephane Bermon is a sport doctor specialist of triathlon and cycling who propose effort tests and VO2 max tests to his clients
http://www.im2s.mc/evaluation-de-la-forme-physique-les-tests-deffort/

 

[Pack Fodder]

Yeah, one does wonder if a war situation relates to pro cycling....

It's an analogy. Competition and combat are closely linked. You have strategy, tactics, opponents, goals, both sides looking for the edge, often through innovation. I would have thought the comparison was quite clear.

But if the coach don't need to be there than why are so many coaches standing on the side of fields why their teams are in play, why not sit at home and phone it in to someone there to do their bidding!

Why does the DS sit in the team car behind the race? Why not in the hotel or better still Paris........

Sorry? I think you've misunderstood me entirely here.

My point is that Kerrison is NOT really a coach; not in any sense we'd recognise anyway. You can see Sutton, for example, being a coach the way in a day to day training sense a 'first team coach' might be. you can see a DS being a coach in the 'match-day manager' sense, changing tactics during the match, monitoring the play.

Other sports have this split, notably football. And many of the large clubs, Chelsea for example, have 'match analysts' on the staff, who see very little of the players day to day - they crunch the pro-zone numbers, or whatever software they use, go through the videos, etc. they might do a presentation to the team, might even focus on a specific area, but they certainly aren't doing day to day training work with the individual players.

The analysts still come down to the club ground - they have to talk in depth with Mourinho and the coaches. But that's still not direct coaching of the players.

Kerrsion's background, and everything you have shown here, points to him basically being an analyst, not a coach as such. I don't believe he's as important as the PR suggests - but this argument seems a strange one. I understand the urge to catch out Froome in falsehoods, but there seems to me rather better examples than this.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Directly, though?

Only when there are cameras around...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Here Kerrison chats to Oli Cookson and Servais Knaven.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Kerrsion's background, and everything you have shown here, points to him basically being an analyst, not a coach as such. I don't believe he's as important as the PR suggests - but this argument seems a strange one. I understand the urge to catch out Froome in falsehoods, but there seems to me rather better examples than this.

Go back and check the things Brad and Brailsford said about Kerrison in 2012 - the PR now is half what it was back then.

Also: it's not significantly damning on its own, but as part of an overarching narrative, it adds to the stink.

 

[red_flanders]

Pwned.

What now?

 

[Race Radio]

Competition and combat are closely linked.

No, they are not. The sooner this false analogy dies the better

 

[proffate]

After reading all this, I have the feeling that Froome is being kept oblivious to the fact that he is doping. In his mind, he has had all these ailments that have kept him from achieving his 'true potential'. With the proper medical treatment, he has been able to cure these ailments and ride at the level he has always imagined he should be riding at. The fact that almost all of the cures for his ailments are doping products is completely missed by him. He just thinks, I have a cold, my asthma is flaring up, I feel sluggish, must be the Bilharzia. Just take some cortisone and I'll be back to normal. And the people around him who know the truth about all these medications, they are happy to keep him blissfully ignorant. I mean, it's not like he is taking EPO and roadside blood bags! Only dopers use those methods, clean riders just take proper medications to clear up any illness that keeps them from dominating the sport of cycling.

Until a team doctor tells Froome he feels sluggish due to hemolysis and needs epo to go back to "normal".

 

[thehog]

Now he certainly wasn't at boarding school when he watched Hautcam "online" with Richie. But is he just making up stuff again?

Pantani wasn't sprinting. He was going backwards after one foolish attack. And although Armstrong was impressive he wasn't exactly "sprinting", he was leaping frogging group to group. I would say its one or Armstrong least "comical" performances. No way it was a Sierestre from 99.

Now Piepoli & Cobo were way more comical. Why didn't they watch that stage? Maybe Dawg didn't want Richie to know how far he was off the back?

118 FROOME Christopher Barloworld 33:14s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdfsOmW7w0o&sns=em

CF: Obsessive, I want to understand the efforts I’m doing. When Tim (suggests) something to me I’ll say, ‘Sure but we can do a bit more here.’ I’m always trying to hit those efforts 100 per cent. I also think the style of racing has changed. It was quite funny, Richie (his team-mate Richie Porte) and I were looking at Hautacam (the Pyrenean climb). We were going to go recon it and wanted to see it online before going to ride it. We brought up a video of Armstrong and Pantani racing up Hautacam and it was comical watching it – it was as if they were sprinting all the way up. We looked at it and felt, ‘That just doesn’t happen anymore.’ So for people to say now that I’m going faster up the climbs than Lance, I can’t explain that. What I can say is that I believe the racing has evolved in the sense that, back then, they would probably have climbed the climbs before the final climb, at the same speed. That’s not the case today. If we go that fast up the first climb, there’s no way we’ll go that fast up the last climb. And I think that’s probably a big tell as to the EPO that was used then.

1996

Riis 34:35
Virenque 35:20
Defaux 35:20
Piepoli 35:52
Ullrich 36:08

2000

Armstrong 36:22
Moreau 39:27
Zulle 40:06
Ullrich 40:23

2008

Piepoli & Cobo 37:30
Schleck 37:58
Evans Group 39:47

 

[Granville57]

Only when there are cameras around...

Here Kerrison chats to Oli Cookson and Servais Knaven.

God, I love the internet.

Nicely done.

 

[42x16ss]

Now he certainly wasn't at boarding school when he watched Hautcam "online" with Richie. But is he just making up stuff again?

Pantani wasn't sprinting. He was going backwards after one foolish attack. And although Armstrong was impressive he wasn't exactly "sprinting", he was leaping frogging group to group. I would say its one or Armstrong least "comical" performances. No way it was a Sierestre from 99.

Now Piepoli & Cobo were way more comical. Why didn't they watch that stage? Maybe Dawg didn't want Richie to know how far he was off the back?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdfsOmW7w0o&sns=em

Maybe he messed up and meant Ventoux? Now that was totally ludicrous.

 

[thehog]

Maybe he messed up and meant Ventoux? Now that was totally ludicrous.

No because they watched Hautcam as they were about to recon it for this years Tour. There is no Ventoux this year.

 

[Granville57]

There is no Ventoux this year.

There will be if Michelle says so.

 

[hfer07]

CF: Obsessive, I want to understand the efforts I’m doing. When Tim (suggests) something to me I’ll say, ‘Sure but we can do a bit more here.’ I’m always trying to hit those efforts 100 per cent. I also think the style of racing has changed. It was quite funny, Richie (his team-mate Richie Porte) and I were looking at Hautacam (the Pyrenean climb). We were going to go recon it and wanted to see it online before going to ride it. We brought up a video of Armstrong and Pantani racing up Hautacam and it was comical watching it – it was as if they were sprinting all the way up. We looked at it and felt, ‘That just doesn’t happen anymore.’ So for people to say now that I’m going faster up the climbs than Lance, I can’t explain that. What I can say is that I believe the racing has evolved in the sense that, back then, they would probably have climbed the climbs before the final climb, at the same speed. That’s not the case today. If we go that fast up the first climb, there’s no way we’ll go that fast up the last climb. And I think that’s probably a big tell as to the EPO that was used then.

he should have watched this for self assurance on that statement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52xv2Hg2fkI

 

[elduggo]

Nah, I would expect the medical experts to do the checking, not me.

Froome repeatedly states with 100% certainty that he will never be stripped of his titles. He would be unlikely to make such a confident assertion unless he knew every intricate detail of his passport/blood profile.

Or alternatively, he really is that stupid and naive.

 

[jens_attacks]

Now he certainly wasn't at boarding school when he watched Hautcam "online" with Richie. But is he just making up stuff again?

Pantani wasn't sprinting. He was going backwards after one foolish attack. And although Armstrong was impressive he wasn't exactly "sprinting", he was leaping frogging group to group. I would say its one or Armstrong least "comical" performances. No way it was a Sierestre from 99.

it was the strongest performance by lance on a climb in tdf. sestriere was very slow compared to this. they got it right hoggie

 

[LaFlorecita]

No because they watched Hautcam as they were about to recon it for this years Tour. There is no Ventoux this year.

Love your new avatar hog

 

[Eriana]

Froome repeatedly states with 100% certainty that he will never be stripped of his titles. He would be unlikely to make such a confident assertion unless he knew every intricate detail of his passport/blood profile.

Or he actually knows he never doped, but I would not expect that unpopular opinion to make any headway here.

 

[Digger]

Or he actually knows he never doped, but I would not expect that unpopular opinion to make any headway here.

Well in that case he's without question the greatest rider we've ever seen.

Simple as that.

 

[elduggo]

Well in that case he's without question the greatest rider we've ever seen.

Simple as that.

yeah, and he became the greatest rider in the history of the sport after showing, at best, only average promise beforehand.

 

[argyllflyer]

Well in that case he's without question the greatest rider we've ever seen.

Simple as that.

As the sport has been littered with dopers since its inception, we can never - truly and with confidence - know what a clean rider looks like. Whether its Froome or someone yet to come, that person can never win in the eyes of those who seek dopers like McCarthy hunted Commies.

 

[bewildered]

Michelle is interesting re how advanced the Bilharzia wasn't, she says Froome wasn't ' in the advanced stages [of Bilharzia]' twice in between him saying that he was 'pretty full on' and Dr Chunge saying that he was 'riddled with Bilharzia. The levels are very high'

Why does she place so much emphasis on this I wonder, contradicting both Froome and the Doctor twice in quick succession? She says that Froome definitely wasn't in the advanced stages but it definitely affected his performance.

Also interesting that Kimmage thanks Froome only for answering the questions and not Michelle. I wonder what he thought of their body language and Michelle being there at the time. He thanked them both on twitter afterwards tho. I wonder if he thought she was repeatedly prompting Froome and pushing his answers in a certain direction, it certainly comes across that way in print.

 

[argyllflyer]

Michelle is interesting re how advanced the Bilharzia wasn't, she says Froome wasn't ' in the advanced stages [of Bilharzia]' twice in between him saying that he was 'pretty full on' and Dr Chunge saying that he was 'riddled with Bilharzia. The levels are very high'

Why does she place so much emphasis on this I wonder, contradicting both Froome and the Doctor twice in quick succession? She says that Froome definitely wasn't in the advanced stages but it definitely affected his performance.

The lack of death might explain why it wasn't 'the advanced stages'.

 

[sniper]

Michelle is interesting re how advanced the Bilharzia wasn't, she says Froome wasn't ' in the advanced stages [of Bilharzia]' twice in between him saying that he was 'pretty full on' and Dr Chunge saying that he was 'riddled with Bilharzia. The levels are very high'

Why does she place so much emphasis on this I wonder, contradicting both Froome and the Doctor twice in quick succession? She says that Froome definitely wasn't in the advanced stages but it definitely affected his performance.

it's the only way to keep the story half-straight.
they want us to believe two contradicting premises:
1. the bilharzia affected his performance as it ate his bloodcells
2. froome's BP pre- and post-2011 didn't show any irregularities.