Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Benotti69]

What Froome did in his first Tour de France is for me more importat than won L Avenir, if you understand of this a little and if you have followed Froome history.

Lemond was talented, but Froome is not less, but they have different stories, Lemond could show his talend before his accident in a clearly way, Froome couldnt do it before his illnessm becouse he was starting and he had a lot of thing toi improve and learn.

I am not an expert of Lemond, I asked him for a sign when I was child in San Sebastian, he denied me in spanish with and strong american accent, we dont know a lot about him in Spain, he was the main rival of my idol Pedro Delgado, so he was like the enemie then, in the good sense of the word enemie, but Perico was in Spain then more than now Alonso or Nadal or even Messi.

Now I dont have than tought and I believe Lemond as a big name of cycling and on of the last stas before the EPO era. But, for me, he is as talented as evans, no more, but he had an era when he could win more than Evans.

But so far I know about him he became professional been 20 years old, and he started cycling world much before, that change things a lot...

You are an expert, it beings with TR and ends in OLLING!

 

[Benotti69]

Chicken said this about Froome:



I think that statement says enough

Exactamundo!

 

[Taxus4a]

Chicken said this about Froome:



I think that statement says enough

Who is Rassmusen, the messias?
It is just his opinion.
This T d France Quintana and Purito climbed better than him.
Of course Froome is one the big names in cycling, at least in Tour cycling, he is better than Contador, and some people wanted to put Contador among the big names in the past.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Who is Rassmusen, the messias?
It is just his opinion.
This T d France Quintana and Purito climbed better than him.
Of course Froome is one the big names in cycling, at least in Tour cycling, he is better than Contador, and some people wanted to put Contador among the big names in the past.

Yeah Froome is a bigger name than Contador. Yeah Purito outclimbed him *ROFL* don't forget that "bonk" on Alpe d'Huez. Gheezus I can't believe you're still keeping this up.

 

[Taxus4a]

Yeah Froome is a bigger name than Contador. Yeah Purito outclimbed him *ROFL* don't forget that "bonk" on Alpe d'Huez. Gheezus I can't believe you're still keeping this up.

Purito had a crash before the mountains, but at the end fo the Tour he was at his level in the last stages.

Quintana was just dropped for Froome the stages he attacked from far.
Of course Froome, and Porte as well, were amazing in Ax 3 Domaines, but it looks more becouse Purito crashed two days before and Quintana attacked the climb before.

That figures of Ax 3 domaines are good, but ir was the first mountain stage of the Tour, and it was the forst tome that happens in Td F history, so it is imposible to compare...you can compare wuth Lance figures at Hautacam, as well the first mountain stage that Tour...and if you compare thee numbers, consideing just 8 km in Ax 3 Domaines, Froome looks like a junior.

1. [ESP] OTXOA PALACIOS Javier KEL 6h09'32" 70
2. [USA] ARMSTRONG Lance USP 42" 50
3. [ESP] JIMENEZ SASTRE Jose Maria BAN 01'13" 35
4. [FRA] VIRENQUE Richard PLT 01'57" 20
5. [ESP] BELTRAN MARTINEZ Manuel MAP 01'57" 15
6. [ESP] ESCARTIN COTI Fernando KEL 02'02" 10
7. [ESP] HERAS HERNANDEZ Roberto KEL 02'02" 5
8. [FRA] MOREAU Christophe FES 03'05" 3
9. [ESP] BELOKI DORRONSORO Joseba FES 03'35" 2
10. [SUI] ZÜLLE Alex BAN 03'47" 1
11. [ESP] MANCEBO PEREZ Francisco BAN 03'47" 0
12. [BEL] VAN DE WOUWER Kurt LOT 03'55" 0
13. [GER] ULLRICH Jan TEL 04'01" 0

With the numbers of Ax 3 domaines, Froome maybe could have reached the place of Zulle or Beloki...Yes, I admit he could have won Ullrich that day

 

[DirtyWorks]

What Froome did in his first Tour de France is for me more importat than won L Avenir....

Bzzzt! Wrong.

This is not really a reply to you, but as a general point for the casual reader.

Without doping, there are riders doing very well at events like l'Avenir and going on to do very well a little later in life.

Without doping there is no regionally competitive athlete suddenly dominating grand tours. None.

 

[Taxus4a]

Bzzzt! Wrong.

This is not really a reply to you, but as a general point for the casual reader.

Without doping, there are riders doing very well at events like l'Avenir and going on to do very well a little later in life.

Without doping there is no regionally competitive athlete suddenly dominating grand tours. None.

You didnt read my article... there, it is my answer, if you are not agree tell me what...it is difficult to explain just in a post becouse is not "suddenly".

His first Tour was in 2008

 

[LaFlorecita]

You didnt read my article... there, it is my answer, if you are not agree tell me what...it is difficult to explain just in a post becouse is not "suddenly".

His first Tour was in 2008

Yes it is "suddenly". From no top 10 in any stage race of note to 2nd in a GT is "suddenly".

 

[Dazed and Confused]

You didnt read my article... there, it is my answer, if you are not agree tell me what...it is difficult to explain just in a post becouse is not "suddenly".

His first Tour was in 2008

Froome's transformation from donkey to racehorse coincides nicely with the hiring of Leinders, a doping doctor.

 

[Pentacycle]

Froome's transformation from donkey to racehorse coincides nicely with the hiring of Leinders, a doping doctor.

That was 2010, not 2011. And I don't think Leinders was responsible for Froome's jump in performance.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

That was 2010, not 2011. And I don't think Leinders was responsible for Froome's jump in performance.

and you think Leinders will come in on the Monday and start injecting random riders immediately? Personally I think the timeline fits perfectly. A donkey looking for a boost before contract negotiations and a doctor who now understands how the team works.

 

[Netserk]

That was 2010, not 2011. And I don't think Leinders was responsible for Froome's jump in performance.

The end of 2010. After the season IIRC. That's practically 2011.

 

[Parrulo]

The end of 2010. After the season IIRC. That's practically 2011.

^^this.

Like D&C said the timeline fits very well. Leinders took his time to adapt to the team and there was time to get to know the riders and find a suitable candidate for the big push.

A guy running out of contract and out of options, from the right country for the sponsors and willingly to take the risks.

 

[Taxus4a]

Froome's transformation from donkey to racehorse coincides nicely with the hiring of Leinders, a doping doctor.

And as well with the development of biopassport and others antidoping, and as well with the treatment of bilharzia.

At the moment Julich test Froome he couldnt believe his test. But all of that is in my article with a lot of link and explanations.

Froome did in his first Tour, with less experience in cycling best ITT that contador at the same age, and as well a better result in the mountain that Contador was able.

That is a fact.

 

[Pentacycle]

The end of 2010. After the season IIRC. That's practically 2011.

Yet the arrival of Leinders doesn't explain why Froome kept improving after 2011. That's what is bugging me. How can that happen when he was already maxed out in la Vuelta 11 to get that contract?

 

[Netserk]

Yet the arrival of Leinders doesn't explain why Froome kept improving after 2011. That's what is bugging me. How can that happen when he was already maxed out in la Vuelta 11 to get that contract?

Who has ever said such rubbish?

 

[Taxus4a]

and you think Leinders will come in on the Monday and start injecting random riders immediately? Personally I think the timeline fits perfectly. A donkey looking for a boost before contract negotiations and a doctor who now understands how the team works.

The timeline fits, but that is not an evidence of anything, it is just a coincidence.

Froome story is full of coincidences (live in general is full of coincidences anyway), so I understand people bad thoughts, but time will put things in its place.

As to give EPO to a man give the same effect that eliminate bilharzia, of course suite, but it s a question of believe, and there is a fact: Froome had bilharzia, and he was given treatment two times at least that year, one in May, so for me fit more one of the theories, how fit all his career thinking without doping

 

[Parrulo]

Yet the arrival of Leinders doesn't explain why Froome kept improving after 2011. That's what is bugging me. How can that happen when he was already maxed out in la Vuelta 11 to get that contract?

What? If anything the Vuelta was a trial, a beta version of the real program and they have been improving it ever since. Leinders still worked with Sky in 2012 and it wouldn't surprise me if he was still working behind the curtains. Just like Ferrari and Fuentes used to do.

 

[Pentacycle]

Who has ever said such rubbish?

People who saw him as a rider that had stagnated in his development, and only explain his breakthrough by PED use.

 

[Benotti69]

What? If anything the Vuelta was a trial, a beta version of the real program and they have been improving it ever since. Leinders still worked with Sky in 2012 and it wouldn't surprise me if he was still working behind the curtains. Just like Ferrari and Fuentes used to do.

Which is what i have been saying for a while, that Sky never stopped using Leinders or Leinders instructed Kerrison and now Kerrison is running the program.

 

[Taxus4a]

Yet the arrival of Leinders doesn't explain why Froome kept improving after 2011. That's what is bugging me. How can that happen when he was already maxed out in la Vuelta 11 to get that contract?

Keep thinking, you will find an explanation for sure if you think in the bad way.
You have it already if you think in the good way, but i am afraid that is not interesting...

Oh wait, dont think anymore, Parrulo did for you

 

[Netserk]

The timeline fits, but that is not an evidence of anything, it is just a coincidence.

Froome story is full of coincidences (live in general is full of coincidences anyway), so I understand people bad thoughts, but time will put things in its place.

As to give EPO to a man give the same effect that eliminate bilharzia, of course suite, but it s a question of believe, and there is a fact: Froome had bilharzia, and he was given treatment two times at least that year, one in May, so for me fit more one of the theories, how fit all his career thinking without doping

Is that a 'fact'?

 

[Netserk]

People who saw him as a rider that had stagnated in his development, and only explain his breakthrough by PED use.

That would be me. And I have *never* said that he was maxed out in the Vuelta.

 

[Taxus4a]

I see Parrulo is an administrator, it is allowed to be ironic with them as well with another forum members or that cost to me another ban?

I dont have problem to change my words, but my comment wanst important, for me all the members here are the same and deserve my same politenessm and the same is given to me.

 

[mattghg]

Is that a 'fact'?

You doubt it?