Open letter to Froome

[samhocking]

I think you're missing the point, many, myself included primarily come here for the entertainment value for how absurd the conversations are. As I said it's just internet noise, it's not important on any constructive basis.

 

[Pennino]

Usually me neither likes this open letter stuff, but this is actually a very good one. Good job MI. And Froome/Sky ofcourse don't need to do anything. But they just take the piss on every real lover of cycling. So rightfully the crowd isn't exactly going to line up to cheer for this wonderful legend.

 

[dacooley]

Re:

Usually me neither likes this open letter stuff, but this is actually a very good one. Good job MI. And Froome/Sky ofcourse don't need to do anything. But they just take the piss on every real lover of cycling. So rightfully the crowd isn't exactly going to line up to cheer for this wonderful legend.

so, supporting sky and froome personally is not being a "real lover of cycling". good effort.

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

I'm not insulting, i'm actually asking why MI thinks just one rider out of thousands should have to prove their innocence .

Its amazing how the beliebers become communists when it comes to questioning their riders.

The most succesul cyclist since Indurain is "just one rider out of thousands". Domestiques at the Tour of Japan should be getting as much scrutiny as tour de France winners?


Froome has won half the TDF's this decade, and been on the podium of every one he has ridden. He's made more money gotten more publicity, glory than all the other cyclists.

Maybe just maybe that's why people focus more on him than John Smith from team Newcastle cycles or whatever. (just a thought)

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

I think you're missing the point, many, myself included primarily come here for the entertainment value for how absurd the conversations are. As I said it's just internet noise, it's not important on any constructive basis.

Clearly that's a lie, or you wouldn't constantly feel the need to justify your presence by repeatedly posting this.

 

[Pennino]

Re: Re:

Usually me neither likes this open letter stuff, but this is actually a very good one. Good job MI. And Froome/Sky ofcourse don't need to do anything. But they just take the piss on every real lover of cycling. So rightfully the crowd isn't exactly going to line up to cheer for this wonderful legend.

so, supporting sky and froome personally is not being a "real lover of cycling". good effort.

Indeed. It's comparable to the F1 hype in my country these days. Tons of people who never really cared about the sport or the culture itself suddenly are making the most noise about it. If you are a genuine lover of the sport cycling and it's culture, you just have to die in front of the telly watching the Skybots distroy every GC they're aiming for. Bar a miniscule amount of weird exceptions, perhaps.

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

aye I'm, the one writing open letters to cyclist...sad state of affairs

You're the one who's either wasting your own time reading and replying to posts by, in your own words, "crazy, self-important bullsh*tters", wasting everyone else's time by filling the forum with snide remarks of no substance or both.

In any case, you have to ask yourself... What's the point? What do you get out of spending your days on this board? You don't seem to understand the discussion, you don't seem to even want to understand the discussion and you definitely don't contribute to the discussion. Sad state of affairs indeed.

It's a sad state of affairs when you refuse to accept different opinions - Now of course you could ask moderators to stop different opinions, so that we have an echo chamber.

 

[samhocking]

I don't think I've ever said this before today? I'm not here in any capacity other than to be entertained and debate with like-minded fools. I leave anti-doping up to the experts thanks,

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

aye I'm, the one writing open letters to cyclist...sad state of affairs

You're the one who's either wasting your own time reading and replying to posts by, in your own words, "crazy, self-important bullsh*tters", wasting everyone else's time by filling the forum with snide remarks of no substance or both.

In any case, you have to ask yourself... What's the point? What do you get out of spending your days on this board? You don't seem to understand the discussion, you don't seem to even want to understand the discussion and you definitely don't contribute to the discussion. Sad state of affairs indeed.

It's a sad state of affairs when you refuse to accept different opinions - Now of course you could ask moderators to stop different opinions, so that we have an echo chamber.

I haven't seen any different opinions. All ive seen is one group of posters say "we think Froome dopes because... a, b c and d and also e, f y and g are dodgy"

Then there is a second group of posters that says nothing more than variations of "you are all losers".

 

[gillan1969]

Re:

I think you're missing the point, many, myself included primarily come here for the entertainment value for how absurd the conversations are. As I said it's just internet noise, it's not important on any constructive basis.

some of us read Dr Freeman's book for the entertainment value and how absurd it is...other enjoy it...each to their own eh

...if you are remotely interested in the science of doping, process and political power then the froome case highlights all of these...the questions being asked in the forum are legitimate questions is another matter...

some people have enquiring minds...others may blithely believe jesus loves because the bible tells them so and that SKY riders do 2KG stools

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

I don't think I've ever said this before today? I'm not here in any capacity other than to be entertained and debate with like-minded fools. I leave anti-doping up to the experts thanks,

Who by the way all tend to say cycling is still doped.

But feel free to keep coming in here and pat yourself on the back about how superior you are

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

Usually me neither likes this open letter stuff, but this is actually a very good one. Good job MI. And Froome/Sky ofcourse don't need to do anything. But they just take the piss on every real lover of cycling. So rightfully the crowd isn't exactly going to line up to cheer for this wonderful legend.

so, supporting sky and froome personally is not being a "real lover of cycling". good effort.

Indeed. It's comparable to the F1 hype in my country these days. Tons of people who never really cared about the sport or the culture itself suddenly are making the most noise about it. If you are a genuine lover of the sport cycling and it's culture, you just have to die in front of the telly watching the Skybots distroy every GC they're aiming for. Bar a miniscule amount of weird exceptions, perhaps.

What are you on about? Did you die watching Sagan destroy any and all competition for the Green Jersey? This is how cycling is, some team or rider will always dominate, just look at Peugeot or Alcyon who did it for decades year after year - did that destroy cycling for 'real fans' too?

 

[Saint Unix]

Re: Re:

It's a sad state of affairs when you refuse to accept different opinions - Now of course you could ask moderators to stop different opinions, so that we have an echo chamber.

rick james doesn't post opinions. He posts personal attacks and nonsense pretty much exclusively. I'm more than willing to have a reasonable discussion with someone who makes thought out posts and sticks to factual evidence. You can try going through rick's posts and see if you find any of that whatsoever.

As Hitch said, this forum has become a bunch of people arguing their case using actual evidence, a second group of people saying the first group is wrong without offering up any facts to counter the arguments, and then there's rick all on his own just being an a**.

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

I don't think I've ever said this before today? I'm not here in any capacity other than to be entertained and debate with like-minded fools. I leave anti-doping up to the experts thanks,

Who by the way all tend to say cycling is still doped.

But feel free to keep coming in here and pat yourself on the back about how superior you are

Primarily arguments are based on the pretext you believe someone is doping and someone else believes they are not, or you like a team/rider or don''t like a team/rider, otherwise this is simply an echo chamber of fools patting each other on the back, yes.

 

[dacooley]

Re: Re:

Usually me neither likes this open letter stuff, but this is actually a very good one. Good job MI. And Froome/Sky ofcourse don't need to do anything. But they just take the piss on every real lover of cycling. So rightfully the crowd isn't exactly going to line up to cheer for this wonderful legend.

so, supporting sky and froome personally is not being a "real lover of cycling". good effort.

Indeed. It's comparable to the F1 hype in my country these days. Tons of people who never really cared about the sport or the culture itself suddenly are making the most noise about it. If you are a genuine lover of the sport cycling and it's culture, you just have to die in front of the telly watching the Skybots distroy every GC they're aiming for. Bar a miniscule amount of weird exceptions, perhaps.

the problem is that for most of people muddling sky went beyond doping intolerance long ago. a great number of cycling fans just want to see them getting beaten, no matter how it is going to be accomplished. god forbid, had thomas crashed out in the pyreenes on some descent, people would've drooled over that descent. had thomas / froome completely cracked in final mountain stages, everybody would've thanked dimoulin for delivering a piece of real cycling. and nobody or almost nobody would have questioned what other contenders might have done doping-wise!!! because fans in their majority just lost control and sky not winning the tour is what they were eager to see.

 

[Pennino]

Re: Re:

Usually me neither likes this open letter stuff, but this is actually a very good one. Good job MI. And Froome/Sky ofcourse don't need to do anything. But they just take the piss on every real lover of cycling. So rightfully the crowd isn't exactly going to line up to cheer for this wonderful legend.

so, supporting sky and froome personally is not being a "real lover of cycling". good effort.

Indeed. It's comparable to the F1 hype in my country these days. Tons of people who never really cared about the sport or the culture itself suddenly are making the most noise about it. If you are a genuine lover of the sport cycling and it's culture, you just have to die in front of the telly watching the Skybots distroy every GC they're aiming for. Bar a miniscule amount of weird exceptions, perhaps.

What are you on about? Did you die watching Sagan destroy any and all competition for the Green Jersey? This is how cycling is, some team or rider will always dominate, just look at Peugeot or Alcyon who did it for decades year after year - did that destroy cycling for 'real fans' too?

Sagan is a single rider (who's extreme level of competetiveness wherever and whenever he shows up is seriously questionable though). The problem with Sky is: they do it almost suddenly after their first appearance, they do it with former donkeys compared to the brilliant talents that they bought from abroad, who never come further than play second fiddle behind the native Brits and they are ABSOLUTE DOMINANT. That is irritating as hell, no matter how you spin it. The most irritating part: they continously show signs of very strange weaknesses, mostly tactical, but then the next day they have fixed that. And then you have their presentation.

 

[topcat]

MI's post highlights the extraordinarily suspicious journey of CF. The format is an open letter that poses a series of questions. If these questions could be answered within the rules, then they would have been answered. PR is very important. Some of the ' responses' here are hysterical. 'We're going to shout louder than you and be more aggressive. We're right and you're wrong. And we don't need to back it up with facts or reasoning.'
It only serves to strengthen the case against CF.

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

Usually me neither likes this open letter stuff, but this is actually a very good one. Good job MI. And Froome/Sky ofcourse don't need to do anything. But they just take the piss on every real lover of cycling. So rightfully the crowd isn't exactly going to line up to cheer for this wonderful legend.

so, supporting sky and froome personally is not being a "real lover of cycling". good effort.

Indeed. It's comparable to the F1 hype in my country these days. Tons of people who never really cared about the sport or the culture itself suddenly are making the most noise about it. If you are a genuine lover of the sport cycling and it's culture, you just have to die in front of the telly watching the Skybots distroy every GC they're aiming for. Bar a miniscule amount of weird exceptions, perhaps.

What are you on about? Did you die watching Sagan destroy any and all competition for the Green Jersey? This is how cycling is, some team or rider will always dominate, just look at Peugeot or Alcyon who did it for decades year after year - did that destroy cycling for 'real fans' too?

Sagan is a single rider (who's extreme level of competetiveness wherever and whenever he shows up is seriously questionable though). The problem with Sky is: they do it almost suddenly after their first appearance, they do it with former donkeys compared to the brilliant talents that they bought from abroad, who never come further than play second fiddle behind the native Brits and they are ABSOLUTE DOMINANT. That is irritating as hell, no matter how you spin it. The most irritating part: they continously show signs of very strange weaknesses, mostly tactical, but then the next day they have fixed that. And then you have their presentation.

I honestly can't believe Sky look at your claimed talented pool of foreign GC contenders with better numbers and higher chances of winning Grand Tours with better and longer palamares and tell them you will have to be a domestique and those riders just say yes ok, i'll put my GC career on hold for 2 years to earn some more money instead? That in itself suggests those talented riders do not have the actual determination to be GC contenders and perhaps missing the desire to win Tour de France. What valid GC contender can just throw away 2 years in their prime? Many GC contenders only win one GT in their entire careers, there simply isn't the career length to waste two years unless you have already given up on ever winning a GT.

 

[Savant12]

Re:

MI's post highlights the extraordinarily suspicious journey of CF. The format is an open letter that poses a series of questions. If these questions could be answered within the rules, then they would have been answered. PR is very important. Some of the ' responses' here are hysterical. 'We're going to shout louder than you and be more aggressive. We're right and you're wrong. And we don't need to back it up with facts or reasoning.'
It only serves to strengthen the case against CF.

Why not a similarly worded open letter to the UCI and WADA for they are enabling Froome to continue riding above suspicion?

 

[topcat]

Yes. Wada and Uci are complicit in this mess.

 

[Saint Unix]

Re: Re:

I honestly can't believe Sky look at your claimed talented pool of foreign GC contenders with better numbers and higher chances of winning Grand Tours with better and longer palamares and tell them you will have to be a domestique and those riders just say yes ok, i'll put my GC career on hold for 2 years to earn some more money instead? That in itself suggests those talented riders do not have the actual determination to be GC contenders and perhaps missing the desire to win Tour de France. What valid GC contender can just throw away 2 years in their prime? Many GC contenders only win one GT in their entire careers, there simply isn't the career length to waste two years unless you have already given up on ever winning a GT.

A lot of those guys are able to financially secure their entire families for the rest of their lives off of the contracts at Sky. Money talks.

Either non-British Sky riders are putting their careers on hold for a big pay day or British passport holders are just naturally more gifted and determined than anyone else. Or rather, they suddenly become that as soon as they hit 25-30 years of age. What seems more likely?

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

I don't think I've ever said this before today? I'm not here in any capacity other than to be entertained and debate with like-minded fools. I leave anti-doping up to the experts thanks,

Who by the way all tend to say cycling is still doped.

But feel free to keep coming in here and pat yourself on the back about how superior you are

Primarily arguments are based on the pretext you believe someone is doping and someone else believes they are not, or you like a team/rider or don''t like a team/rider, otherwise this is simply an echo chamber of fools patting each other on the back, yes.

So most people in here are fools you think? Pretty much sums up what weve been saying all along that you guys have no arguments, simply attack anyone guilty of thought crime.

The sjws of cycling

 

[samhocking]

So non-British riders don't want to win Tour de France with Sky then? They don't want to be made GT winners at 25-30, they want to earn money for their family as domestiques for British riders with less talent instead? If that's the case, then what is the problem, you've just explained non-British riders in Sky don't want to win Tour de France, they just want Sky's money. That is not anything Sky is doing, it's decided by the non-British riders clearly!

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

I don't think I've ever said this before today? I'm not here in any capacity other than to be entertained and debate with like-minded fools. I leave anti-doping up to the experts thanks,

Who by the way all tend to say cycling is still doped.

But feel free to keep coming in here and pat yourself on the back about how superior you are

Primarily arguments are based on the pretext you believe someone is doping and someone else believes they are not, or you like a team/rider or don''t like a team/rider, otherwise this is simply an echo chamber of fools patting each other on the back, yes.

So most people in here are fools you think? Pretty much sums up what weve been saying all along that you guys have no arguments, simply attack anyone guilty of thought crime.

The sjws of cycling

Fools compared to WADA experts, yes. Nobody has the facts, so to pretend to know what is actually happening is foolish, that's all I mean by internet noise.

 

[Saint Unix]

Re:

So non-British riders don't want to win Tour de France with Sky then? They don't want to be made GT winners at 25-30, they want to earn money for their family as domestiques for British riders with less talent instead? If that's the case, then what is the problem, you've just explained non-British riders in Sky don't want to win Tour de France, they just want Sky's money. That is not anything Sky is doing, it's decided by the non-British riders clearly!

They're getting paid more to do dom work for Sky than they would get by being captains for their own team. For all we know Sky could be promising them a shot at a future GT if they work hard for the team, but these random British superstars keep popping up and overtaking them in the pecking order. Or maybe they see how guys like Porte and Uran get smoked by Sky when moving to other teams and realize that Sky have the sport in a stranglehold for the time being and they might as well just sit on the gravy train and enjoy the ride.

All more probable than Wiggins, Froome and Thomas triumphantly overcoming a lack of initial GC talent due to their inherent Britishness.