Richie Porte - what do we know about him?

[oncehadhair]

I know what I saw yesterday, a man deliberately losing time. Does anybody have a video of a genuine Porte crack (preferably from before 2011)? It would be interesting to see if he looked as calm, composed, and still as he did yesterday.

How many riders, sitting in second place in the biggest sporting event in the world, soft pedal into 60th place? You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Benotti69]

How many riders, sitting in second place in the biggest sporting event in the world, soft pedal into 60th place? You have no idea what you are talking about.

I have said this before, but this is professional cycling and absolutely anything is possible.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

How many riders, sitting in second place in the biggest sporting event in the world, soft pedal into 60th place? You have no idea what you are talking about.

I was more impressed with Peter Kennaugh. At first I thought Ryder connected with him and ended up pushing down the ravine. But if you look closer there is no contact. Kennaugh fakes it and tumbles down.

It reminded me of Revenge of the Sith when Palpatine issues Order 66. In this scenario it was Brailsford who issues a similar instruction over race radio and each Sky member started losing time. Someone needs to create a montage with this music.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

If yesterday's stage was a horse race Porte (and Kiryienka) would be routine dope tested - too bad to be true

They aren't reporting any sickness AFAIK, it was too early in the stage to be due to forgetting to eat, and while it is certainly natural to follow a big performance with a below par one this wasn't close to being simply "below par". He was climbing with Tosatto !

Meanwhile one of their most important domestiques was at least 10 minutes behind the sprinters. With the rest day to come Sky had to keep him in the race by whatever means necessary but didn't. He must have been a wreck

Hard to come up with a plausible explanation

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

I have said this before, but this is professional cycling and absolutely anything is possible.

So some of the GC contenders could be clean? Fair enough.

 

[oncehadhair]

I have said this before, but this is professional cycling and absolutely anything is possible.

Well LMFHO. So when does repeating something make it correct? Politicians do that in the absence of an argument.

You obviously spend more time posting on forums than following bike racing.

 

[martinvickers]

I have said this before, but this is professional cycling and absolutely anything is possible.

Possible, plausible and likely are three very different things. People in here might want to remember that.

 

[dlwssonic]

How many riders, sitting in second place in the biggest sporting event in the world, soft pedal into 60th place? You have no idea what you are talking about.

losing your second spot seems really worth it compared to getting caught for doping.

 

[martinvickers]

If yesterday's stage was a horse race Porte (and Kiryienka) would be routine dope tested - too bad to be true

They aren't reporting any sickness AFAIK, it was too early in the stage to be due to forgetting to eat, and while it is certainly natural to follow a big performance with a below par one this wasn't close to being simply "below par". He was climbing with Tosatto !

Meanwhile one of their most important domestiques was at least 10 minutes behind the sprinters. With the rest day to come Sky had to keep him in the race by whatever means necessary but didn't. He must have been a wreck

Hard to come up with a plausible explanation

If this really was about Porte and Sky 'soft pedalling' to take pressure off Froome, far easier, and less noteworthy to simply have Porte 'crack' slightly on the last climb, and Froome, safely enveloped to 'hang on' alone for one climb and a descent - let porte lose about 4-5 minutes. No big questions asked.

To blow up like a stick of dynamite on the very first climb, lose an engine from the entire race, and have Porte drop 15 minutes, wjile exposing Froome to basically two entire team for 100km is not 'soft pedalling' - it frankly raised far more questions than it answered, which is the opposite of what 'soft pedalling' would be used for.

That's the thing about conspiracy theories - they should at least be AS plausible as the 'cover' story.

 

[martinvickers]

losing your second spot seems really worth it compared to getting caught for doping.

Huh? Why would they get caught for doping, though. Froome kept up. Is he not tested as the yellow jersey?

Please explain specifically how would Porte's implosion protect him from being caught for doping.

 

[oncehadhair]

losing your second spot seems really worth it compared to getting caught for doping.

No argument with that. But 60th?.
Anyone round here heard of common sense?

 

[Cycle Chic]

If this really was about Porte and Sky 'soft pedalling' to take pressure off Froome, far easier, and less noteworthy to simply have Porte 'crack' slightly on the last climb, and Froome, safely enveloped to 'hang on' alone for one climb and a descent - let porte lose about 4-5 minutes. No big questions asked.

To blow up like a stick of dynamite on the very first climb, lose an engine from the entire race, and have Porte drop 15 minutes, wjile exposing Froome to basically two entire team for 100km is not 'soft pedalling' - it frankly raised far more questions than it answered, which is the opposite of what 'soft pedalling' would be used for.

That's the thing about conspiracy theories - they should at least be AS plausible as the 'cover' story.

Do we really need to point out to you how ridiculous Sky's rise to WORLD DOMINATION OF CYCLING really is. Yesterdays performance was a walk in the park...no matter how ridiculous.

 

[Cookster15]

Huh? Why would they get caught for doping, though. Froome kept up. Is he not tested as the yellow jersey?

Please explain specifically how would Porte's implosion protect him from being caught for doping.

I don't have a firm opinion either way on Sky, Froome or Porte but it has been written and pointed out to me in here that the UCI decide who wins and looses (ie; look the other way like Armstrong).

Contador was tripped up in 2010 as he was on the outer (for whatever reason). When the thumb got pointed to the ground they found a miniscule amount of Clen which was enough. Who is to say the powers that be have not yet decided it's Froome's (or Porte's) turn to be tripped up? If so the only question is not if but when. Notwithstanding the scale of carnage he caused in stage 8, Froome on his own is slightly plausible but having the two strongest riders in the TDF two years running is a bit much - even with a national lottery.

Hopefully this theory of King Making (or Killing) is wrong. If not maybe everyone here would be just as well served following WWE Wrestling - just as "believable".

 

[martinvickers]

Do we really need to point out to you how ridiculous Sky's rise to WORLD DOMINATION OF CYCLING really is. Yesterdays performance was a walk in the park...no matter how ridiculous.

I'm not even sure why I'm taking these eejits off ignore, but, here goes...

Actually, yes, CC. Explain why it's SO ridiculous. First, they dominate GC STAGE racing, not world cycling - they're sh!t at the classics, and they didn't know what to do with Cavendish.

But yes, they absolutely dominate GC stage racing. It's remarkable. It's suspicious. It's certainly worth investigating.

But 'ridiculous' - do you know what the word actually means? It's not just a synonym for "i don't believe them".

I'm sorry, but the 'soft pedalling' conspiracy is FAR more ridiculous -as in worthy of ridicule - than the idea that one rich team might become the best at it's speciality, especially if it has a set of tactics devised specifically for that task.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

If this really was about Porte and Sky 'soft pedalling' to take pressure off Froome, far easier, and less noteworthy to simply have Porte 'crack' slightly on the last climb, and Froome, safely enveloped to 'hang on' alone for one climb and a descent - let porte lose about 4-5 minutes. No big questions asked.

To blow up like a stick of dynamite on the very first climb, lose an engine from the entire race, and have Porte drop 15 minutes, wjile exposing Froome to basically two entire team for 100km is not 'soft pedalling' - it frankly raised far more questions than it answered, which is the opposite of what 'soft pedalling' would be used for.

That's the thing about conspiracy theories - they should at least be AS plausible as the 'cover' story.

I don't buy the "deliberate time loss" thing either. Nobody who has a good shot at a podium finish is going to give that up. It's his career, not to mention a whole bunch of money. It was reported that Porte was going to lead the team at the Giro next year but if this time loss is normal then that would be hard to justify. If Sky were worried what the world was thinking then saturday was the day to dial it down, not sunday. They aren't worried though. Brailsford and Kerrison told us what to expect in advance and they were right.

Most plausible maybe is food poisoning. Or dope poisoning. Or maybe just hungover

 

[martinvickers]

I don't have a firm opinion either way on Sky, Froome or Porte but it has been written and pointed out to me in here that the UCI decide who wins and looses (ie; look the other way like Armstrong).

Contador was tripped up in 2011 as he was on the outer (for whatever reason). When the thumb got pointed to the ground they found a miniscule amount of Clen which was enough. Who is to say the powers that be have not yet decided it's Froome's (or Porte's) turn to be tripped up? If so the only question is not if but when. Notwithstanding the scale of carnage he caused in stage 8, Froome on his own is slightly plausible but having the two strongest riders in the TDF two years running is a bit much - even with a national lottery.

Hopefully this theory of King Making (or Killing) is wrong. If not maybe everyone here would be just as well served following WWE Wrestling - just as "believable".

Contador would make more sense if the UCI had shown 'enthusiam' to get him - if anything they showed reluctance.

 

[BYOP88]

Contador would make more sense if the UCI had shown 'enthusiam' to get him - if anything they showed reluctance.

Is this the same UCI that first told Contador not to mention the positive, then appealed to CAS after the Spanish Federation cleared Contador?

 

[martinvickers]

I don't buy the "deliberate time loss" thing either. Nobody who has a good shot at a podium finish is going to give that up. It's his career, not to mention a whole bunch of money. It was reported that Porte was going to lead the team at the Giro next year but if this time loss is normal then that would be hard to justify. If Sky were worried what the world was thinking then saturday was the day to dial it down, not sunday. They aren't worried though. Brailsford and Kerrison told us what to expect in advance and they were right.

Most plausible maybe is food poisoning. Or dope poisoning. Or maybe just hungover

This is the thing - if the theory had been - 'Bad blood bag!! Bad blood bag!!" I wouldn't have said it was likely - but it would at least have been plausible - requires only one thing to go wrong, explains that days events, and no complicated conspiracy - I could have certainly bought the possiblity, if not the likelihood, because it crossed my mind.

But no, the tin foil hats needed something 'Bigger', more 'Monstrous'.

Much like UCI let positives slide to 'pick winners', to grow the sport in 'new markets' which they can then profit from. Not the far more likely, UCI just hate dope stories ******ing up their kingdom so hush up borderline positivse in big stars. It's not like the UCI have been basically and consistently playing down the amount of Dope in the pleton for twenty years, is it? No, it has to be 'bigger', more 'monstrous', tentacles everywhere.


Jeez, I reckon bilderburg and the illuminati will be involved by stage 17.

 

[martinvickers]

Is this the same UCI that first told Contador not to mention the positive, then appealed to CAS after the Spanish Federation cleared Contador?

Exactly my point. Do you not see that? Do you not see the obvious contradiction between the first bit and the second?

UCI tried to PROTECT Berti, not kill him. It was only when the news leaked out despite them that they had to be seen to take it seriously.

See that's the thing about UCI under Hein/McQuaid - it's not that they LIKE doping and dopers - well, Hein did, McQuaid's agnostic - it's just they want the BAD NEWS STORIES to go away.

If you have a choice of explanation between vast clever conspiracy and pig thick incompetence, the latter is usually your guy.

 

[BYOP88]

Exactly my point. Do you not see that? Do you not see the obvious contradiction between the first bit and the second?

UCI tried to PROTECT Berti, not kill him. It was only when the news leaked out despite them that they had to be seen to take it seriously.

See that's the thing about UCI under Hein/McQuaid - it's not that they LIKE doping and dopers - well, Hein did, McQuaid's agnostic - it's just they want the BAD NEWS STORIES to go away.

If you have a choice of explanation between vast clever conspiracy and pig thick incompetence, the latter is usually your guy.

I have now, but early morning posting probably isn't the best idea on my part.

Although I don't get why the UCI didn't appeal against the Frank Schleck outcome. Seems a little strange that they throw one under the bus and not another.

 

[Galic Ho]

Even dopers can have a bad day?

Edit: Just look at Contador and Evans yesterday, Wigans at the Giro for that matter.

The tell is in the riders form on the bike compared to when they were gunning it and flogging everyone.

Take Evans on Saturday. Was getting passed left right and centre. He blew up. Bad day. Contador's number one domestique, Kreuziger pulled him up most of the hill. Contador was having a bad day. Why? Contrast with their good days when they flog everyone or are the ones doing the pulling. You can see it in their eyes, how they are slouched over their bike, their cadence and rhythm is affected negatively.

Best example? Stage 16 2006 Tour de France. Floyd Landis blowing up. That was bad. Really bad. The sweat and perspiration were the tell. Having a team mate pull for him was also the tell. His best was ironically the next day. Contrast between both and Floyd did sweat a lot both days, but his cadence, form and stamina were worlds apart.

Contrast with Porte. Was he sweating like a pig? Nope. Was his cadence and rhythm affected? Nope. Did he look like his breathing was laboured, did he in any way, shape or form look like he was doing poorly physically and mentally other than on the stopwatch? Nope.

Porte was taking it easy. Intentionally going slow. It was an act. Worse, his physical state was the tell. He backed off something fierce under ORDERS. Gotta make it look real. Gotta sell it to the public and not embarrass the ASO and Tour again. Problem is when he wasn't even sweating and breathing heavily, well it was obvious his form wasn't the reason. It was deliberately going slow for a purpose. That purpose is to make Sky look legit. Well actually less questionable. Legit is a poor choice. They ain't legit.

After all, when you go full *** like they did, almost everyone bats an eye and takes notice. Time suggests he had a bad day, his riding form says the opposite. Hesjedal who finished with Porte...now he had a bad day.

 

[darwin553]

Bottom line is (yes again with the bottom line ) is that if Sky wanted the media to not pay attention to their team for possible doping, Porte wouldn't have put in the performamce yesterday as it still draws negative attention to the team and they would be better served telling Porte to ease up on the last climb and not the first.

 

[thehog]

On Satursday Sky smashed every other team. Dropped them.

On Sunday Movistar dragged 40 riders for 100km and dropped none.

Some how Porte and co. couldn't keep up even when getting inside of one minute in catching the main bunch.

Reminds me of the old stomach flu at the GT trick. PDM would be proud.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

If yesterday's stage was a horse race Porte (and Kiryienka) would be routine dope tested - too bad to be true

Yes, just like Contador at the Dauphine.

The fifteen minutes however are somehow distorted. When Porte realised he couldnt get to the front he let it go. He was at 1 minute 17 with 5K to go on Val Louron.

The real questionmark is how come Poels/Moreno/Gesink and many others were able to bridge on the Peyresourde and the Tasmanian Devil not? The peloton did it in 40 minutes, whopeedoo, only six minutes slower than Montfort in 2008.

Movistar dogged him but it is not like it was impossible to achieve.

Kierenka en Shiftzuf are also very interesting. Timelimit was about 39 minutes, how come all sprinters were finished inside 27 minutes? Muravjev even finished with a fever. The nineteen year old sprinter van Poppel finished in time, yet Kamikazekirienka not? Something is Cookstering at team Sky.

Take Evans on Saturday. Was getting passed left right and centre. He blew up. Bad day. Contador's number one domestique, Kreuziger pulled him up most of the hill. Contador was having a bad day

Contador was like in the Vuelta last year. So, did he really have a bad day or is this somehow his base level? Froome/Porte did a Verbier on saturday, just like Belle Filles last year, Conti without a BB cant do that any more.

 

[Galic Ho]

It's hot out there. Blood doesn't transport well. And you should never use T when it's over 35c. Jitters. Crazy jitters.

PS it reminded me of Sky (gb) at the Olympics. They thought they could ride start to finish on the front.

Richie is a bit thick. Not hard to bait him.

Nah hog, I think Richie won yesterday. They sat him down, promised him next years Giro and said lose time. Richie said 'cool, I am down with that.'

Look at him, he wasn't even trying. We've seen Porte tank before when he was supposed to be helping Contador. Richie ain't bright, but he most definitely is on the same treatment as Froome. Kerrison wasn't wrong about that.

So why lose so much time? Well look at the gaps! Look at how they went. One minute. Then two. Then slowly crept up. Once they knew Froome was safe in the front group and wouldn't fall, they told Richie to back off even more. Why lose 18 minutes? ASO. Prudhomme. They would have been told to really back down or they will take yellow away. Is it a risk? Is Froome gonna fall? Who knows. Is he gonna crack? Hell no. They know he has enough juice left to win it no sweat. All the other riders yesterday except Quintana had nothing to attack Froome with. They were just thankful to be in the front group.