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

[Anonymous]

Whaat? That article must've passed me by. He had RBC therapy before this race?!

It's that it was his reason stated for having red blood cell therapy between the Tour de Suisse and the Vuelta.

where did you find the info that he had blood cell therapy?

The normal treatment for Schistosomiasis is generally oral drugs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schistosomiasis#Treatment

 

[Scirea]

I expected Chris to top ten in the time trial, and be comfortably inside the top ten on the overall after today (which i said yesterday). My feeling was we would see Martin, Cancellara as the top two, then Wiggins, with Chris pushing Brad close but not beating him.

Chris's time trialling ability is underrated.

But, Chris's big problem has been maintaining that consistency and form over long periods, ie. more than a week. Hes been brads domestique for week 1, I think he will drop back now and Lofkvist will step up to be the support guy for Brad for Week 2. think its very likely that Froome has put in everything he could into week 1, with the plan of Lofkvist and Zandio being the domestiques for the latter stages of the race.

What's up with that now...

 

[Anonymous]

What's up with that now...

I underestimated Chris. I also grossly overestimate Lofkvist

 

[luckyboy]

Bit off-topic but I just stumbled upon the Anti Team Sky blog and it says that Sky are sponsoring up until 2013 and then a new sponsor will need to be found? First I remember hearing about that.

 

[maltiv]

I underestimated Chris. I also grossly overestimate Lofkvist

To be fair Löfkvist was much better than this just last year. 17th in the TDF is not to be laughed upon and should illustrate that he should be able to do better. No idea what's up with him, he's more or less gotten gradually worse at everything since he was like 23 which doesn't make any sense.

 

[Je ne sais quoi]

where did you find the info that he had blood cell therapy?

The normal treatment for Schistosomiasis is generally oral drugs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schistosomiasis#Treatment

I know no more than what I quoted of the CN article, in which he talks about having treatment for a condition that threatens his red blood cells.
I would like to know more, because this kind of story can be both an innocent explanation, and it can be seen as a poetic "masking agent" in the narrative of a cyclist.

 

[Chris L]

All very easy to jump to conclusions...Froome has surprised me as a GC contender, but I've know for a while he can climb and TT albeit inconsistently. I think this is one of the few races we've seen him going full gas, except maybe Castilla y Leon in early season. It's all too easy to look at his result sheet on CQ Ranking without recalling what happened on each stage.

One the biggest disappointments for me this year was my misguided belief that Froome would be sticking it to Bottle on Mt. Baldy this year. Instead I had to watch the Radioshack show. Grim.
I really thought he was going to smash the Tour of Cali but he massive underperformed - he did get in a couple of breaks but that was about it.

I believed the hype about Froome prior to California. Also I recall watching him on Stage 2 of the Tour of Romandie riding exceptionally well - weather being pretty bad too. As I recall, Froome only ended up rode Romandie as a last minute replacement for Mick Rogers who was out with illness.
See - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOUVhcfDgAk

 

[hrotha]

I underestimated Chris. I also grossly overestimate Lofkvist

We should really have a thread about Highroad.

 

[Ferminal]

We should really have a thread about Highroad.

I thought it was assumed to be common knowledge?

 

[blackcat]

Dimspace is great for benchmarking opinion.


Anything he says, u can virtually run away and choose the opposite.

IE. if he thinks Brailsford runs a clean squad, thus, Sky is dirty as a bucks party.


Froome better assert himself as leader.

 

[Escarabajo]

I underestimated Chris. I also grossly overestimate Lofkvist

Well, we are already past week 1 by now.

 

[LukeSchmid]

I read Froome's comment about his treatment for the parasite and I never thought it meant he was pumping himself full of blood as a treatment. I thought it meant he took a drug that killed the parasite. I think too much is being read into the quote.
Not meant as a general comment on whether Froome is clean or not.

 

[daveinzambia]

I read Froome's comment about his treatment for the parasite and I never thought it meant he was pumping himself full of blood as a treatment. I thought it meant he took a drug that killed the parasite. I think too much is being read into the quote.
Not meant as a general comment on whether Froome is clean or not.

in fact instead of being read as an excuse for blood treatment should be read as an explanation for why some of his form earlier in the year was not as strong or consistent.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Or a useful way of 'explaining' abnormal values and the treatment as being the reason why he has gone from being **** to being an uber-climber and TTer.

 

[hrotha]

I thought it was assumed to be common knowledge?

Possibly, but it'd be nice to put all the data in a single thread, because I'm sure many people (even here) haven't even stopped to think about it.

 

[Winterfold]

Even as a Wiggo/Sky fan I would be all over Froome like a rash if I were UCI/testing.

I think his performance is not totally stretching credibility to the point of insulting me (unlike Cobo), but there are all sorts of things that don't quite add up.

There might be a perfectly acceptable explanation, like post-disease red blood cell reformation, but on the other hand, this is pro-cycling.

 

[luckyboy]

The reason my contributions in this thread are skewed towards Cobo, is because he is the subject of this thread. You&#8217]

About Froome (in this thread), you have said that..

-the competition here isn't strong

Same goes for Cobo.

-Froome has learnt how to ride with his head and hold something back

That doesn't magically transform you into a GT rider, so that point makes little sense.

-been dropped on an uphill stage

-Same group as Cobo, 20 seconds down on Valdepeñas de Jaen.
-2 seconds behind Cobo, 25 down on San Lorenzo.
-4 seconds behind Cobo, 5th place on La Covatilla, on the front for the final 4km.
-27 seconds behind Cobo, Wiggins etc on Manzaneda after working on the front for 5km to bring back Moreno, Nieve, Lagutin, Sorensen, Rabo riders.
-20 seconds behind Cobo's attack on Lagos do Somiendo, on the front for tha last 3.5km
-48 seconds behind Cobo on Angliru, 4th place, working on the front for Wiggins from 6km out.

So he has been dropped once by half a minute after pushing a hard pace for 5km bringing back attacks for his team leader.

-only done team attacks at very specific limited points in a stage

Pushing the pace on the front from about 5km out at every mountaintop finish so far. Don't know what this proves, apart from his new-found super-climbing talent.

-not done aggressive attacking performances on consecutive stages

Irrelevant. The fact he has even been up there is enough.

-plus he is also only 26 and has had a less than smooth career progression

Well, he got the parasite in November last year. Was back racing in February, and had a few weeks off for more treatment after Tour de Suisse. His race days have been pretty constant throughout his career, and this season hasn't been disrupted.

 

[Anonymous]

Dimspace is great for benchmarking opinion.


Anything he says, u can virtually run away and choose the opposite.

IE. if he thinks Brailsford runs a clean squad, thus, Sky is dirty as a bucks party.


Froome better assert himself as leader.

where have i said Sky were clean, Where have I said Sky were dirty.

I deliberately dont commit to either point of view, merely correct untruths such as blood treatment for a blood disorder which was in fact oral medication for a parasitic infection.

I choose my words very carefully where Sky are concerned.

Besides, I dont pay any attention to a bloke who is just bitter because Sky turned down his job application.

 

[Benotti69]

where have i said Sky were clean, Where have I said Sky were dirty.

I deliberately dont commit to either point of view, merely correct untruths such as blood treatment for a blood disorder which was in fact oral medication for a parasitic infection.

I choose my words very carefully where Sky are concerned.

Besides, I dont pay any attention to a bloke who is just bitter because Sky turned down his job application.

why dont you commit a point of view?

 

[Winterfold]

** edited by mod ***

 

[The Cobra]

Ok I havent read through the whole thread so dont know if this has been mentioned yet but,

http://teamsky.cyclingnews.com/tech...oes-the-ride-of-his-life-to-take-vuelta-lead/

5.8W/kg is surely in the realms of a clean athletes abilities. I think Froomes performance here is a combination of realising his potential and hitting perfect form at the right time and a weak field filled with riders returning from injury or out of form. If you look at the pre race favourites:

Anton - Totally out of form
Scarponi - See above
JRod - Never going to win a GT, cant TT to save his life and too inconsistant on long climbs
Nibali - Not in his best form

There's a whole host of second rate gc riders and domestiques having amazing Vueltas and Froome is only one of them I dont think anyone could have predicted the current top ten before the race.

 

[hrotha]

5.8W/kg is within believable limits by itself, but if you ever see me producing that kind of wattage you'd do well to ask me a few questions.

The top 10 of this Vuelta is weak, granted, but 5.8W/kg would put you with the best at the Tour. Of course the route there is different and harder so we don't know if he'd be able to put out that kind of wattage in the final climbs of the Tour yadda yadda.

 

[roundabout]

I'm curious how he did up Angliru.

 

[hrotha]

I'm curious how he did up Angliru.

Oh, I thought that article was about the Angliru. I imagine it must be pretty close, though. I've seen calculations ranging from 5.7 to 6W/kg.

 

[Anonymous]

why dont you commit a point of view?

pretty simple really. If i say riders are doping or suspicious then I get riders, and riders families on my case, If I say riders are definately clean, then I get everyone else on my case, and look stupid down the line if it turns out they arent.

when i came back to the forum, one of the reasons for using the website name was that I am forced to keep out of arguments like this, except to correct known mistakes like the blood thing.

Ive already been involved in a couple of war of words, one when i suggested Barry shouldnt be in the giro squad at the time of the Landis Allegations and another when I suggested that a rider wasnt giving his all.

If you cant find a good thing to say, its sometimes better to say nothing.

That said, if a Sky rider fails a dope test, the editorial on the fansite will be very interesting to read. I wont hold back.