Most Suspicious Performance Of The Last 5 Years

[T_S_A_R]

I'm always shocked at how little attention Froome's TT in 2013 gets.

After dominating in the mountains skeletal Froome ends up only 11 seconds behind Tony Martin in a flat 33km. Considering that Martin was a minimum 10kgs heavier Froome's W/kg must have been off the charts.

 

[Stingray34]

Surprsingly still not mentioned: Giro 2015. Mutant Contador beating basically single-handedly an extraterrestrial climbing train. Contador's time trial, Aru's stage 20, Zakarin's win...

I wouldn't call it mutant. When a rider like Froome attacks while seated, legs turning at 200 rpm's, that's mutant. When AC attacks over the course of three weeks, it's more accurate to call it beautiful.

It ain't mutant - it's Vivax!

Call me Don Draper.

 

[thehog]

Re:

I'm always shocked at how little attention Froome's TT in 2013 gets.

After dominating in the mountains skeletal Froome ends up only 11 seconds behind Tony Martin in a flat 33km. Considering that Martin was a minimum 10kgs heavier Froome's W/kg must have been off the charts.

That is very true.

Although his 2006 Commonwealth games TT in sandshoes, 5 minutes back was a strong indicator of his talent

Yes, they are cycling shoes and yes he has a power meter on his TT bike riding for Kenya. The talent was always there, he just lost the fat, apparently

 

[Rollthedice]

Re: Re:

I'm always shocked at how little attention Froome's TT in 2013 gets.

After dominating in the mountains skeletal Froome ends up only 11 seconds behind Tony Martin in a flat 33km. Considering that Martin was a minimum 10kgs heavier Froome's W/kg must have been off the charts.

That is very true.

Although his 2006 Commonwealth games TT in sandshoes, 5 minutes back was a strong indicator of his talent

Yes, they are cycling shoes and yes he has a power meter on his TT bike riding for Kenya. The talent was always there, he just lost the fat, apparently

Reading the legend for the picture with fat Froome, I wonder how come Brailsfraud and Sutton didn't notice the other 16 riders who finished in front of the dawg.

 

[harryh]

Re: Re:

I'm always shocked at how little attention Froome's TT in 2013 gets.

After dominating in the mountains skeletal Froome ends up only 11 seconds behind Tony Martin in a flat 33km. Considering that Martin was a minimum 10kgs heavier Froome's W/kg must have been off the charts.

That is very true.

Although his 2006 Commonwealth games TT in sandshoes, 5 minutes back was a strong indicator of his talent

Yes, they are cycling shoes and yes he has a power meter on his TT bike riding for Kenya. The talent was always there, he just lost the fat, apparently

Reading the legend for the picture with fat Froome, I wonder how come Brailsfraud and Sutton didn't notice the other 16 riders who finished in front of the dawg.

Actually you should ask, how they noticed that Froome will be a super responder to their secret method. But hey, I have already answered to that question. viewtopic.php?p=1868588#p1868588

 

[doperhopper]

Re: Re:

I'm always shocked at how little attention Froome's TT in 2013 gets.

After dominating in the mountains skeletal Froome ends up only 11 seconds behind Tony Martin in a flat 33km. Considering that Martin was a minimum 10kgs heavier Froome's W/kg must have been off the charts.

That is very true.

Although his 2006 Commonwealth games TT in sandshoes, 5 minutes back was a strong indicator of his talent

Yes, they are cycling shoes and yes he has a power meter on his TT bike riding for Kenya. The talent was always there, he just lost the fat, apparently

Reading the legend for the picture with fat Froome, I wonder how come Brailsfraud and Sutton didn't notice the other 16 riders who finished in front of the dawg.

Actually you should ask, how they noticed that Froome will be a super responder to their secret method. But hey, I have already answered to that question. viewtopic.php?p=1868588#p1868588

Well, you know, as the trusted expert says, "engine was always there" - so it was enough to add fuel.

 

[harryh]

Re: Re:

I'm always shocked at how little attention Froome's TT in 2013 gets.

After dominating in the mountains skeletal Froome ends up only 11 seconds behind Tony Martin in a flat 33km. Considering that Martin was a minimum 10kgs heavier Froome's W/kg must have been off the charts.

That is very true.

Although his 2006 Commonwealth games TT in sandshoes, 5 minutes back was a strong indicator of his talent

Yes, they are cycling shoes and yes he has a power meter on his TT bike riding for Kenya. The talent was always there, he just lost the fat, apparently

Reading the legend for the picture with fat Froome, I wonder how come Brailsfraud and Sutton didn't notice the other 16 riders who finished in front of the dawg.

Actually you should ask, how they noticed that Froome will be a super responder to their secret method. But hey, I have already answered to that question. viewtopic.php?p=1868588#p1868588

Well, you know, as the trusted expert says, "engine was always there" - so it was enough to add fuel...

...which will work great for Froome but probably not for those 16 other riders. Exactly. And here the tarot readers come into play

 

[Farcanal]

Re: Re:

I'm always shocked at how little attention Froome's TT in 2013 gets.

After dominating in the mountains skeletal Froome ends up only 11 seconds behind Tony Martin in a flat 33km. Considering that Martin was a minimum 10kgs heavier Froome's W/kg must have been off the charts.

That is very true.

Although his 2006 Commonwealth games TT in sandshoes, 5 minutes back was a strong indicator of his talent

Yes, they are cycling shoes and yes he has a power meter on his TT bike riding for Kenya. The talent was always there, he just lost the fat, apparently

Reading the legend for the picture with fat Froome, I wonder how come Brailsfraud and Sutton didn't notice the other 16 riders who finished in front of the dawg.

Actually you should ask, how they noticed that Froome will be a super responder to their secret method. But hey, I have already answered to that question. viewtopic.php?p=1868588#p1868588

I don't believe you did answer that question. Your response was to my question which did not ask that. My question was; why would Sky, with its limitless resources, choose such a 'donkey' (as Froome is often described here) to put on a doping programme when the results would look so suspicious instead of choosing a 'more believable' purchase (in the eyes of the clinic) whose improvement would not draw the same suspicion. They weren't limited by finances, they could've picked anybody. They were limited by their requirement not to hire ex dopers but that still left plenty of scope. So why Froome when it wasn't certain he could be that good and, to those of you in the know , would look so suspicious?

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

I'm always shocked at how little attention Froome's TT in 2013 gets.

After dominating in the mountains skeletal Froome ends up only 11 seconds behind Tony Martin in a flat 33km. Considering that Martin was a minimum 10kgs heavier Froome's W/kg must have been off the charts.

That is very true.

Although his 2006 Commonwealth games TT in sandshoes, 5 minutes back was a strong indicator of his talent

Yes, they are cycling shoes and yes he has a power meter on his TT bike riding for Kenya. The talent was always there, he just lost the fat, apparently

Reading the legend for the picture with fat Froome, I wonder how come Brailsfraud and Sutton didn't notice the other 16 riders who finished in front of the dawg.

Actually you should ask, how they noticed that Froome will be a super responder to their secret method. But hey, I have already answered to that question. viewtopic.php?p=1868588#p1868588

I don't believe you did answer that question. Your response was to my question which did not ask that. My question was; why would Sky, with its limitless resources, choose such a 'donkey' (as Froome is often described here) to put on a doping programme when the results would look so suspicious instead of choosing a 'more believable' purchase (in the eyes of the clinic) whose improvement would not draw the same suspicion. They weren't limited by finances, they could've picked anybody. They were limited by their requirement not to hire ex dopers but that still left plenty of scope. So why Froome when it wasn't certain he could be that good and, to those of you in the know , would look so suspicious?

Please. Rigoberto Uran, Thomas Lofkvist, Sergio Henao or even Michael freaking Rogers would have been 1000% more believable than Froome.

 

[wrinklyvet]

@42x16ss - I don't think there is a logical reply in your post to Farcanal's question as to "why would Sky, with its limitless resources, choose such a 'donkey' (as Froome is often described here) to put on a doping programme when the results would look so suspicious instead of choosing a 'more believable' purchase (in the eyes of the clinic) whose improvement would not draw the same suspicion."

He's not asking who would have been more believable and by what impossible percentages.

 

[The Carrot]

I'm surprised he didn't compete in the Individual Pursuit (IP) at the Commonwealth Games, after all, it's the best way of spotting GT potential apparently. Now he's won the Tdf twice perhaps he can convert this to pursuit form and win at the Commonwealths as a swan song. Shame BC pushed to get rid of the IP as an Olympic event or the Dawg could have won that.

 

[Farcanal]

Re: Re:

I don't believe you did answer that question. Your response was to my question which did not ask that. My question was; why would Sky, with its limitless resources, choose such a 'donkey' (as Froome is often described here) to put on a doping programme when the results would look so suspicious instead of choosing a 'more believable' purchase (in the eyes of the clinic) whose improvement would not draw the same suspicion. They weren't limited by finances, they could've picked anybody. They were limited by their requirement not to hire ex dopers but that still left plenty of scope. So why Froome when it wasn't certain he could be that good and, to those of you in the know , would look so suspicious?[/quote]
Please. Rigoberto Uran, Thomas Lofkvist, Sergio Henao or even Michael freaking Rogers would have been 1000% more believable than Froome.[/quote]

Exactly, well done, so answer the question; why did they pick Froome to juice up for such a dramatic improvement when it would've been far less suspicious to choose any of those you listed or maybe any of another 50 riders in the peleton? Doesn't make any sense when with their money they could've chosen anyone.

 

[Farcanal]

Re:

@42x16ss - I don't think there is a logical reply in your post to Farcanal's question as to "why would Sky, with its limitless resources, choose such a 'donkey' (as Froome is often described here) to put on a doping programme when the results would look so suspicious instead of choosing a 'more believable' purchase (in the eyes of the clinic) whose improvement would not draw the same suspicion."

He's not asking who would have been more believable and by what impossible percentages.

Forget it, wrinkly, appreciate your help in trying to get a simple point across, but these guys keep avoiding a simple question that exposes their illogical dislike of Froome, Sky or anything British.

 

[Rollthedice]

Re: Re:

I don't believe you did answer that question. Your response was to my question which did not ask that. My question was; why would Sky, with its limitless resources, choose such a 'donkey' (as Froome is often described here) to put on a doping programme when the results would look so suspicious instead of choosing a 'more believable' purchase (in the eyes of the clinic) whose improvement would not draw the same suspicion. They weren't limited by finances, they could've picked anybody. They were limited by their requirement not to hire ex dopers but that still left plenty of scope. So why Froome when it wasn't certain he could be that good and, to those of you in the know , would look so suspicious?

Please. Rigoberto Uran, Thomas Lofkvist, Sergio Henao or even Michael freaking Rogers would have been 1000% more believable than Froome.[/quote]

Exactly, well done, so answer the question; why did they pick Froome to juice up for such a dramatic improvement when it would've been far less suspicious to choose any of those you listed or maybe any of another 50 riders in the peleton? Doesn't make any sense when with their money they could've chosen anyone.[/quote]

They didn't juiced up Froome, they were too busy juicing up their talents like Wiggo and not a useless dom. He was a lost cause for Sky who tried to get rid of him in 2011. Then magic happened. What exactly Froome did remains a mistery. The scientific study says he lost the fat.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

I don't believe you did answer that question. Your response was to my question which did not ask that. My question was; why would Sky, with its limitless resources, choose such a 'donkey' (as Froome is often described here) to put on a doping programme when the results would look so suspicious instead of choosing a 'more believable' purchase (in the eyes of the clinic) whose improvement would not draw the same suspicion. They weren't limited by finances, they could've picked anybody. They were limited by their requirement not to hire ex dopers but that still left plenty of scope. So why Froome when it wasn't certain he could be that good and, to those of you in the know , would look so suspicious?

Please. Rigoberto Uran, Thomas Lofkvist, Sergio Henao or even Michael freaking Rogers would have been 1000% more believable than Froome.

Exactly, well done, so answer the question; why did they pick Froome to juice up for such a dramatic improvement when it would've been far less suspicious to choose any of those you listed or maybe any of another 50 riders in the peleton? Doesn't make any sense when with their money they could've chosen anyone.

Its 'peloton', the UK hasn't left the EU as yet, you must maintain European spellings until such time

 

[86TDFWinner]

Nibali

 

[Bronstein]

Re: Re:

Exactly, well done, so answer the question; why did they pick Froome to juice up for such a dramatic improvement when it would've been far less suspicious to choose any of those you listed or maybe any of another 50 riders in the peleton? Doesn't make any sense when with their money they could've chosen anyone.

Sky didn't pick Froome. He wasn't even part of the initial selection for 2011 Vuelta. According to Froome, he only rode the Vuelta because Nordhaug fell ill. Froome and whoever was helping him independently organised a program for the Vuelta.

 

[Farcanal]

Re: Re:

Exactly, well done, so answer the question; why did they pick Froome to juice up for such a dramatic improvement when it would've been far less suspicious to choose any of those you listed or maybe any of another 50 riders in the peleton? Doesn't make any sense when with their money they could've chosen anyone.

Sky didn't pick Froome. He wasn't even part of the initial selection for 2011 Vuelta. According to Froome, he only rode the Vuelta because Nordhaug fell ill. Froome and whoever was helping him independently organised a program for the Vuelta.

Both Rollthedice and you have given ostensibly the same answer so, while accepting that two opinions is too small a sample to represent the whole clinic, is the perceived logic that Froome was a loner who, despite being such a loser, had enough resources to find a system for rapid improvement himself that even worked starting from a base level that his employer's multi-million pound system had alresdy disregarded as a lost cause?

If so, has Sky since adopted this marvellous technique with the rest of the riders who are apparently only performing so well because of Sky's ped regime?

 

[ebandit]

here for spartacus at 2016 flanders / roubaix ...Mark L

 

[Zam_Olyas]

poster above 10,000 post and sock puppets after a ban.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

Does Matt Hayman finishing Paris-Roubaix as if he'd skipped the first 250km having had two days racing in the previous 10 weeks count ?

 

[Maxiton]

Re:

Does Matt Hayman finishing Paris-Roubaix as if he'd skipped the first 250km having had two days racing in the previous 10 weeks count ?

I'm afraid it has to.

 

[IzzyStradlin]

Re:

Does Matt Hayman finishing Paris-Roubaix as if he'd skipped the first 250km having had two days racing in the previous 10 weeks count ?

Rode the front of the break all day. Digs off the front at 85k and 65k. Covers the big moves in the finale. THEN outsprints Boonen.

It was a special ride.

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

Does Matt Hayman finishing Paris-Roubaix as if he'd skipped the first 250km having had two days racing in the previous 10 weeks count ?

Rode the front of the break all day. Digs off the front at 85k and 65k. Covers the big moves in the finale. THEN outsprints Boonen.

It was a special ride.

Then he had a shower and went out for a Sunday ride.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Does Matt Hayman finishing Paris-Roubaix as if he'd skipped the first 250km having had two days racing in the previous 10 weeks count ?

Former Doc Leinders would have been proud. Thankfully Hayman is Aussie and we know he wouldn't do want euro riders have resorted to.

Ian Stannard was clearly charged as well.