Sky/Froome Talk Only (No Way Sky Are Cleans?)

[roundabout]

So Froome is a better rider than Hounard.

So are about 300 other people.

 

[Froome19]

An aging Steven Hounard dabbles in micro doses of EPO to keep his contract and you compare that to a guy who drops 10kg's and TTs like Cancellera?

I honestly shake my head.

Full scale program with logistics will smash the mid ranking dabbler.

Do you think Steven Hounard has $90k lying around to spend on a doping program incorporating AICAR and blood transfusions!?

Does Hounard have Yates, Sutton, Rogers and Tenerife?

The majority suggestions I have had on Froome are claiming that he went to the Vuelta with his very own DIY kit and that was what made him perform as he did. Seems very similar to Hounard that..

Also if not so then why does Froome get magically promoted to the elite group of dopers whilst he has done nothing to justify it and he has not got the talent at the moment to deserve such trust?

And also I would assume you would claim that Wiggins was doping as well in the Vuelta, so then why did Froome perform better? He may have had a better reaction to it than Wiggins, but considering that Wiggins is a far superior rider that excuse only stretches so far?

And also the point was not solely to draw parallels with Hounard that is merely a point, the fact is that doping could only have taken Froome so far concerning his perfomances in the Vuelta 2011.

Ps: Dont be selective

 

[Froome19]

So Froome is a better rider than Hounard.

So are about 300 other people.

Sure, but there is more than merely a fine line between being better and being far superior.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

What I still do not get is how people can explain the fact that drugs have apparently transformed Froome into an amazingly talented climber from a domestique about to be dropped, whilst they did nothing of the sort when it came to Steven Hounard.

Answer that and I may be convinced that possibly Froome's transformation was down to illegal ways and not the fact that he was limited by Bilharzia, lack of technique and all that.

I will see your strawman and raise you a rhetorical.
How is it that Hounard was doping to be pretty anonymous yet Froome could be transformed to a potential GT winner without using PEDs?

 

[Froome19]

How is it that Hounard was doping to be pretty anonymous yet Froome could be transformed to a potential GT winner without using PEDs?

Precisely

Only explanation is that Froome is immensely talented and therefore was never truly transformed.. rather was released.

PEDs as far as I know do not unlock ability, they increase ability.

 

[the sceptic]

After that 36th overall in the giro i knew it was only a matter of time, and a serious blood disease, before Froome would unleash his grand tour winning potential

 

[Netserk]

Precisely

Only explanation is that Froome is immensely talented and therefore was never truly transformed.. rather was released.

PEDs as far as I know do not unlock ability, they increase ability.

Yep. Riis was the strongest in 96 even if no riders at all took any drugs...

 

[thehog]

Precisely

Only explanation is that Froome is immensely talented and therefore was never truly transformed.. rather was released.

PEDs as far as I know do not unlock ability, they increase ability.

You do realise you're arguing the level playing field is reality in terms of doping?

 

[Froome19]

After that 36th overall in the giro i knew it was only a matter of time, and a serious blood disease, before Froome would unleash his grand tour winning potential

There are reasonable explanations for why he did not display potential which would be expected of a rider of such immense talent. If you choose not to consider them that is up to you.

It should also be noted that there were plenty of indications of Froome's talent in his earlier years in the sport of cycling, but once again people tend to argue the points with a deliberate ignorance more so than anything else.

 

[Froome19]

You do realise you're arguing the level playing field is reality in terms of doping?

If you could explain to me how I am doing so then by all means.
What I am arguing is that I do not see how Froome's burst onto the scene can be explained away by the use of PEDs.

Ps. See my ps

 

[thehog]

If you could explain to me how I am doing so then by all means.
What I am arguing is that I do not see how Froome's burst onto the scene can be explained away by the use of PEDs.

Ps. See my ps

Froome19 says Froome is clean!

Think I'm going cross-eyed!

Maybe, and a hint might be in your screen name, that you don't want see anything else but clean.

 

[Froome19]

Froome19 says Froome is clean!

Think I'm going cross-eyed!

Maybe, and a hint might be in your screen name, that you don't want see anything else but clean.

My screen name was based on effectively picking any rider from Sky and adding a suitable number to it, just as long as the acoustic effect was right I was happy

But if that is a suitable reason to say that Froome is doping.. then so be it..

 

[the sceptic]

Froome an immense talent? please point me in the direction of anyone saying that pre team sky.

 

[noddy69]

If you could explain to me how I am doing so then by all means.
What I am arguing is that I do not see how Froome's burst onto the scene can be explained away by the use of PEDs.

Ps. See my ps

Can you see why people would suspect him and think it may be from drug use ?

 

[Froome19]

Can you see why people would suspect him and think it may be from drug use ?

Of course, his superiority in the Tour is certainly suspicious, but in terms of his bursting on to the scene and the fact that that is used as an argument to condemn him as doping. To me it falls a bit short of the mark.

At first glance such a performance certainly would be suspicious; a nobody riding like a Tour winner, WTF? But to be honest when thinking about it on a deeper level it does not cut it for me.

 

[thehog]

Of course, his superiority in the Tour is certainly suspicious, but in terms of his bursting on to the scene and the fact that that is used as an argument to condemn him as doping. To me it falls a bit short of the mark.

At first glance such a performance certainly would be suspicious; a nobody riding like a Tour winner, WTF? But to be honest when thinking about it on a deeper level it does not cut it for me.

Here is Froome's immense talent on display Yes that's him going at right angles as super climber Simon Gerrans rides away from him!

 

[noddy69]

Of course, his superiority in the Tour is certainly suspicious, but in terms of his bursting on to the scene and the fact that that is used as an argument to condemn him as doping. To me it falls a bit short of the mark.

At first glance such a performance certainly would be suspicious; a nobody riding like a Tour winner, WTF? But to be honest when thinking about it on a deeper level it does not cut it for me.

I like to think of it in a simple manner. Firstly to be certain there must be evidence which stands up and at the moment there is plenty of video and results to point to the fact he may be but no certain proof.

However been a simple creature I look at the vuelta. After a hard tour and a long season Froome went up against the three amigos....who , lets face it, were not training or cycling on bread and water. In fact it was bloody obvious and plain as day what was going on. He was 4th and near them until exaustion took hold and two of them were fresh and ready and to be honest Valverde was waiting all year for it and didnt exert himself at the tour......it is pretty suspect.

 

[ebandit]

Here is Froome's immense talent on display Yes that's him going at right angles as super climber Simon Gerrans rides away from him!

hog how many times are you going to wheel this out............it shows
nothing

have you never been over cooked / dehydrated / bonked?

 

[Froome19]

Here is Froome's immense talent on display Yes that's him going at right angles as super climber Simon Gerrans rides away from him!

Once again you do not answer the questions I have raised.
You point out the fact that he was seemingly rubbish. I have already acknowledged that, lets move on.

I like to think of it in a simple manner. Firstly to be certain there must be evidence which stands up and at the moment there is plenty of video and results to point to the fact he may be but no certain proof.

However been a simple creature I look at the vuelta. After a hard tour and a long season Froome went up against the three amigos....who , lets face it, were not training or cycling on bread and water. In fact it was bloody obvious and plain as day what was going on. He was 4th and near them until exaustion took hold and two of them were fresh and ready and to be honest Valverde was waiting all year for it and didnt exert himself at the tour......it is pretty suspect.

This years Vuelta? If Froome were to be clean it is obvious that he is certainly one of the best GC riders in the world. Most likely the best or second. Therefore I would say that he is better than Purito, better than Valverde and better than Contador at that time who was very obviously below par in that Vuelta. So him thus competing and narrowly losing out to those three, who may have been aided by other aids, is certainly not all that suspicious. I believe that at the start of the Vuelta he was in pretty much tip top shape, not his Tour/Olympic shape, but certainly very close to that it was only as fatigue started to kick in that this Vuelta started to derail. Getting himself into shape was not exactly a problem. Also remember he only was in top shape and performing for the first time at the Dauphine, riders like Wiggins and even Purito (who did Giro admittedly not Tour) were performing throughout the year, so he was more capable of extending his season. Unfortunately he found that extension a bit too long and it came back to haunt him.

 

[thehog]

Once again you do not answer the questions I have raised.
You point out the fact that he was seemingly rubbish. I have already acknowledged that, lets move on.

.

He was beyond rubbish. He was non-exsitent.

 

[Froome19]

He was beyond rubbish. He was non-exsitent.

True, but that does not answer my questions does it?
Also lets get this correct when he was non-existent exactly?

 

[thehog]

hog how many times are you going to wheel this out............it shows
nothing

have you never been over cooked / dehydrated / bonked?

Sure it was a one off. Grupetto-Froome's one time at the front in a breakaway and he gets eaten alive by Simon Gerrans! LOL! If he stayed back where his talent was in the grupetto he wouldn't have burnt himself up.

Just to think in 18 months time from when this video was shot he became a better ciimber than 99% of the peloton and a faster, stronger TT'er than Cancellera.

But of course that was obviously always going to happen

Immense talent

 

[thehog]

I love how Froome just makes the fanboys go 'nannas. He cannot be explained.

It really is funny to watch.

 

[Froome19]

Sure it was a one off. Grupetto-Froome's one time at the front in a breakaway and he gets eaten alive by Simon Gerrans! LOL! If he stayed back where his talent was in the grupetto he wouldn't have burnt himself up.

Just to think in 18 months time from when this video was shot he became a better ciimber than 99% of the peloton and a faster, stronger TT'er than Cancellera.

But of course that was obviously always going to happen

Immense talent

To be brief.

He showed signs of considerable potential early on in his career.
He then was blighted by a mixture of lack of technique and Bilharzia which meant that he was incapable of competing at a reasonable standard of racing.
Bilharzia is then discovered and subsequently treated, he is properly educated by Sky and this leads to him not being restricted and therefore he is capable of delivering the performance such as the one he demonstrated at the Vuelta 2011.

You do not need to believe it, but it is a bit too obvious to not at the very least acknowledge.
And you still have not answered my questions.

 

[ebandit]

prime position

He was beyond rubbish. He was non-exsitent.

but he's in that shot.............up front with the leaders

a young guy on a learning curve

nothing to do with if he did or did not dope in later grand tours with team sky