Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[The Hitch]

He started working with Bobby J at the start of 2011 and his words about this period (2012 Procycling print version, no link that I've seen) were telling "Chris didn't know how to race. I needed to teach him to get the watts out at the right time. To do that we tried to hold him back in the first few stages in the Vuelta last year, get him to race steadily. It worked there and this year we've basically used the same tactic at Romandie, the Dauphine and the Tour"

Ah bobby jullich that great exponent of clean cycling. talking in hindsight about why froome became the bomb. What does it mean - we tried to hold him back in the first few stages. Froome was crap before because he wasted his energy in the early stages? But now he saved his energy and that's all it took to be the new Hinault.

both these explanations - that anr the didn't know when to put out watts nonsense grossly underplay the difference between 1st and 10th place let alone between 1st and where froome was finishing.

f his nationality or personality but because there are plenty of indications in print that to at least some of those within the pro peloton and on staff at Aigle his potential was recognised as early in his career as 2007

no they didnt. There may have been a few people who thought he was a good cyclist, but no one saw that he was going to be a tdf contender yet alone the greatest gt talent of his ge

 

[SundayRider]

Ah bobby jullich that great exponent of clean cycling. talking in hindsight about why froome became the bomb. What does it mean - we tried to hold him back in the first few stages. Froome was crap before because he wasted his energy in the early stages? But now he saved his energy and that's all it took to be the new Hinault.

both these explanations - that anr the didn't know when to put out watts nonsense grossly underplay the difference between 1st and 10th place let alone between 1st and where froome was finishing.


no they didnt. There may have been a few people who thought he was a good cyclist, but no one saw that he was going to be a tdf contender yet alone the greatest gt talent of his ge

If he was THAT much of a talent he could afford to waste a bit of energy and still have some good progressive results

 

[will10]

He lead Sky in Romandie and Tour de Suisse that year, and rode reasonably well too. So I think most people would have noticed him...I expected him to be a strong mountain domestique, at least. Obviously not to the extent he was...

I remember after a few days in the vuelta, before the first MTF, the Norwegian commentator named Mads Kaggestad (former pro) said that Froome could be top 10 in the GC. I remember thinking he was being utterly ridiculous, but he ended up being more than right. He didn't seem surprised at all when Froome was ripping up the mountains. Perhaps he had inside information though, I don't know.

That wasn't the case - seriously, check out those Vuelta threads. It's universal - people knew him but not as a time triallist and certainly not as a climber. Even in the 3rd week everyone expected him to capitulate and drop out of the top 10.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yea, after La Covatilla, there were people who were thinking he would be best served soft-pedalling the ITT to be fresh to use his surprising climbing strength to help Wiggins on La Manzaneda and La Farrapona before his reserves were spent, allowing Löfkvist to take over as the lead domestique in the Anglirú and Peña Cabarga stages.

I was one of those people.

 

[will10]

I quite like this one I stumbled across in the La Covatilla thread.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=659202#post659202

If only you'd known what was coming, Parrulo....

 

[richtea]

That wasn't the case - seriously, check out those Vuelta threads. It's universal - people knew him but not as a time triallist and certainly not as a climber. Even in the 3rd week everyone expected him to capitulate and drop out of the top 10.

That Vuelta was basically over at the end of second week if I remember correctly, with virtually no obstacles in the final stages (other than that stage in the Basque Country with the key climb some 40km from the finish). Someone suggested Sky could attack and try a TTT to the line but obviously that interesting scenario did not arise. I don't remember anyone thinking anything would happen GC wise in that last week, but i could be wrong.

 

[will10]

That Vuelta was basically over at the end of second week if I remember correctly, with virtually no obstacles in the final stages (other than that stage in the Basque Country with the key climb some 40km from the finish). Someone suggested Sky could attack and try a TTT to the line but obviously that interesting scenario did not arise. I don't remember anyone thinking anything would happen GC wise in that last week, but i could be wrong.

You are correct - I'd got it in my head the ITT was end of the 2nd week, not the start of it. The next few stages were all mountainous IIRC leading up to Angliru and there was a lot of doubt whether Froome would have the legs to still be a superdomestique to Wiggins. Little did we know he'd be in a position to win the race on Pena Carbarga.

 

[will10]

Oh man, the disbelief in the ITT thread was unreal.

For your reading pleasure: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15086&page=12

This poll is quite enlightening: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15138

(although to be fair, this is posted on the day Sky screwed Froome by having him kill himself on Manzaneda when it wasn't anywhere near necessary)

 

[richtea]

My key memory of Froome prior to that Vuelta was in the Tour de Suisse or Romandie in the same year (i think the latter). He had got through the Queen stage okay in an 'elite' group of 15 or 20 riders, and in the following stages went on an idiotic attack way too early and completely blew up. Regardless of what he or hasn't done doping wise, at least part of his improvement has to be attributed to being a bit less stupid.

 

[thehog]

Oh man, the disbelief in the ITT thread was unreal.

For your reading pleasure: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15086&page=12

This poll is quite enlightening: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15138

(although to be fair, this is posted on the day Sky screwed Froome by having him kill himself on Manzaneda when it wasn't anywhere near necessary)

Thats funny.

Froome has already exceeded my wildest expectations for this Vuelta. If he can keep this up for two more weeks he may well end up going to the Tour de France next year.

 

[richtea]

Oh man, the disbelief in the ITT thread was unreal.

For your reading pleasure: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15086&page=12

This poll is quite enlightening: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15138

(although to be fair, this is posted on the day Sky screwed Froome by having him kill himself on Manzaneda when it wasn't anywhere near necessary)

Its interesting however, that even in that thread some were claiming he was always destined to be a GT rider. Even if he is doping, there must be some underlying quality that wasn't being realised for whatever reason - I'm not sure I believe he is the donkey turned racehorse he is often portrayed as, even if the story is a bit hard to swallow.

 

[JimmyFingers]

training to race

lolz

 

[hrotha]

Its interesting however, that even in that thread some were claiming he was always destined to be a GT rider. Even if he is doping, there must be some underlying quality that wasn't being realised for whatever reason - I'm not sure I believe he is the donkey turned racehorse he is often portrayed as, even if the story is a bit hard to swallow.

It's very simple really. Those were the people who already back then were trying their best to rationalize Froome's performance.

 

[Parrulo]

I quite like this one I stumbled across in the La Covatilla thread.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=659202#post659202

If only you'd known what was coming, Parrulo....

the innocence was strong with me at the time i was yet to know about the wonders of marginal gains and swimming coaches that could reproduce the effects of AICAR

to be fair tho, up to that point skinny wiggins had never shown to be the absolute top tier time trialist he became all of the sudden.

he was well below expectations on the 09 tour when the schlecks went berserk on the grand bronnard stage to put time into him because they thought he was going to smash them the next day when he fact he only made up one third of the time on andy he had lost the previous day and a bit over 2 thirds of the time he had lost to frank.

then in 2010 he had no performance of note on a long time trial, even on the tour time trial while saving himself and having better wind conditions he was only 30 secs better then menchov who rode through a small tornado after going all out on all the mountain stages. oh and he lost time to nibali on the last time trial of the giro as well.

then in 2011 he was riding well on the time trias, already better then the 2 previous years but was still a level below martin who clearly beat him on every important time trial they rode that year.

 

[Parrulo]

It's very simple really. Those were the people who already back then were trying their best to rationalize Froome's performance.

surprisingly the same people that were already defending froome back then, had no problem calling purito a cheat and scum for semi drifting for 30 seconds behind mollema during the vuelta itt

 

[will10]

surprisingly the same people that were already defending froome back then, had no problem calling purito a cheat and scum for semi drifting for 30 seconds behind mollema during the vuelta itt

Two wrongs don't make a right dude.

 

[Netserk]

He lead Sky in Romandie and Tour de Suisse that year, and rode reasonably well too. So I think most people would have noticed him...I expected him to be a strong mountain domestique, at least. Obviously not to the extent he was...

I remember after a few days in the vuelta, before the first MTF, the Norwegian commentator named Mads Kaggestad (former pro) said that Froome could be top 10 in the GC. I remember thinking he was being utterly ridiculous, but he ended up being more than right. He didn't seem surprised at all when Froome was ripping up the mountains. Perhaps he had inside information though, I don't know.

In the Vuelta '11 ITT thread:

Wow whats up with Froome? Holy ****.

Earlier Froome has been unable to recover properly in 1 week races, sucking on a few stages. Now he's dominating the vuelta after 10 stages

 

[Parrulo]

Two wrongs don't make a right dude.

just pointing at the double standards.

if instead of chris froome of team sky, cristoban frontera of andalucia caja-sur popped out of nowhere at the vuelta you can be pretty sure his performance on the AdH stage of the 08 tour wouldn't be enough shown of talent to prove his innocence to the posters defending froome at the time.

particularly with one of the posters defending froome on that old thread (jamsqe) who liked to have a go at spanish riders at every chance he got

 

[Netserk]

just pointing at the double standards.

if instead of chris froome of team sky, cristoban frontera of andalucia caja-sur popped out of nowhere at the vuelta you can be pretty sure his performance on the AdH stage of the 08 tour wouldn't be enough shown of talent to prove his innocence to the posters defending froome at the time.

particularly with one of the posters defending froome on that old thread (jamsqe) who liked to have a go at spanish riders at every chance he got

And Wind Tunnel Testing

 

[will10]

just pointing at the double standards.

if instead of chris froome of team sky, cristoban frontera of andalucia caja-sur popped out of nowhere at the vuelta you can be pretty sure his performance on the AdH stage of the 08 tour wouldn't be enough shown of talent to prove his innocence to the posters defending froome at the time.

particularly with one of the posters defending froome on that old thread (jamsqe) who liked to have a go at spanish riders at every chance he got

You're preaching to the converted man. But I hate drafting in TTs.

 

[JRanton]

Heh, I'm reading the 2011 Vuelta thread, a few have changed their minds I guess.

Special mention to JRanton!

I wanted to give Froome the benefit of the doubt. It was a great story to be fair but then 2012 and particularly those string of results and performances from Algarve, Paris-Nice, Romandie, Bayern, Dauphine through to the Tour from the Tenerife gang was just too good to be true.

Then there was Geert Leinders of course and the explanations provided by Sky for their level of performance and rider transformations just aren't credible.

I have about 0.1% of nagging doubt still left and that's mainly based on the fact that I just find it quite incredible that a team that doped its riders in 2012 would then continue full steam ahead in 2013 after the Armstrong USADA nuclear bomb went off. A part of me thinks that Sky genuinely don't believe that they're doping even though in reality they are! It sounds ridiculous but the more I read about the history of doping in cycling the more it makes sense. You convince yourselves that all the other teams are doing exactly the same and that means you're not doping or at least not doing anything wrong.

 

[maltiv]

In the Vuelta '11 ITT thread:

What's your point? I never said I wasn't surprised by his performance. I was just saying that the argument that people didn't even know who he was was highly exaggerated. As you even see by my post, I had noticed his performances in one-week races, where he typically did well on a couple of stages and sucked in others (such as Tour de Suisse, where he was decent on Crans Montana). So thanks for proving my point

I'm not pro-Froome at all, if that's what you think. I just don't think we should exaggerate too much on how bad he was.

 

[DirtyWorks]

A part of me thinks that Sky genuinely don't believe that they're doping even though in reality they are!

If the UCI has given them the free doping pass, then it is perfectly true. They aren't doing the doping for which the federation does not approve. If ASO gets to run the Tour of Britain, then I think Sky will have an another historic year.

Their 2012 win record is unprecedented.

 

[richtea]

It's very simple really. Those were the people who already back then were trying their best to rationalize Froome's performance.

My point is merely that the magnitude of the performance jump is difficult to explain by doping alone. If you accept that doping has been scaled back by ABP and so on (you may not), and that Sky don't have access to any doping products that others don't (contestable, but certainly nothing to show this the case) then where is he getting such a big advantage from?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

My point is merely that the magnitude of the performance jump is difficult to explain by doping alone. If you accept that doping has been scaled back by ABP and so on (you may not), and that Sky don't have access to any doping products that others don't (contestable, but certainly nothing to show this the case) then where is he getting such a big advantage from?

Can you list, with links, all the teams that met with ASO pre-tour, or even pre-team creation?