The Chris Squared Thread

[BroDeal]

Why you might ask? Because the mods in their infinite wisdom are intent on making it impossible to discuss the parallels between Froome and Horner, point out the hilarity of those who complain about Horner but defend Froome (or vice versa), and what the performance of the two implies about the cleanliness (or lack thereof) of the sport.

Oh, yeah. Discussion of wind conditions during climbs should also be okay in this thread since mods have turned apoplectic over people asking what the wind was like in the Vuelta in the Horner thread.

There. Now everyone can discuss what everyone wants to discuss without being off-topic.

 

[D-Queued]

in before the close...

I'm already lost, but isn't this the usual quandary?

Some will always defend the indefensible.

Anyhow, find yourself stuck between supporting or critiquing F(roome) and H(orner)?

Good grief.

Dave.

 

[thehog]

Why you might ask? Because the mods in their infinite wisdom are intent on making it impossible to discuss the parallels between Froome and Horner, point out the hilarity of those who complain about Horner but defend Froome (or vice versa), and what the performance of the two implies about the cleanliness (or lack thereof) of the sport.

Oh, yeah. Discussion of wind conditions during climbs should also be okay in this thread since mods have turned apoplectic over people asking what the wind was like in the Vuelta in the Horner thread.

There. Now everyone can discuss what everyone wants to discuss without being off-topic.

Horner is an enigma wrapped in a Froome covered by a Bruyneel.

With a tailwind.

 

[BYOP88]

Didn't they both have long hair? Now one is bald and the other one is losing his hair as quickly as he climbs mountains. So from that we can conclude that anyone(called Chris) who is bald is a doper

 

[BroDeal]

I'm already lost, but isn't this the usual quandary?

Usually we can discuss it.

Anyhow, find yourself stuck between supporting or critiquing F(roome) and H(orner)?

I don't have a quandry. It is funny watching Downtown Foxy Brown, believer in Froome, complain that Horner is the most ridiculous sports performance ever. It is also comical how the usual suspects who defend Froome have not come to the defense of Horner. In fact they don't dare to even post for fear of exposing their hypocrisy. Then there are the UK cycling forums, like the muppet show over at Bike Radar...

 

[JimmyFingers]

I found those ardent attackers of Froome like Moose defending Horner the most hilarious, even using the 'poor US boy forced to dope by the dirty Euros' excuse pedaled by Lance.

If Horner is there in the third week I'll raise my eyebrows. Until then I'm expecting him to fade. I don't know enough about the man to judge, beyond his age.

 

[Clausfarre]

Had to make this in response to over-moderation...

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Can we talk about Chris Farley? Because that Chris was doping too, but he was hilarious anyway...even funnier than the Union Jack flag wavers or the Stars and Stripes flag wavers poking the guy with the other flag about doping from one of their countrymen.

But I miss Chris Farley...funny dude.

EDIT: I'm super happy "Union Jack" doesn't involve a bunch of Teamsters pile-driving the dolphin.

 

[the sceptic]

I found those ardent attackers of Froome like Moose defending Horner the most hilarious, even using the 'poor US boy forced to dope by the dirty Euros' excuse pedaled by Lance.

If Horner is there in the third week I'll raise my eyebrows. Until then I'm expecting him to fade. I don't know enough about the man to judge, beyond his age.

so Froome is clean and Horner is clean too. What does it take before you suspect someone is doping?

 

[peterst6906]

so Froome is clean and Horner is clean too. What does it take before you suspect someone is doping?

He already wrote it.

If Horner is there in the 3rd week.

That's a pretty straight forward indication.

 

[Ferminal]

It's 2011 all over again

 

[thehog]

He already wrote it.

If Horner is there in the 3rd week.

That's a pretty straight forward indication.

Forget the 3rd week.

He's in his 42nd year for crying out loud!

He's beating up on Valv.Piti. You know you're choking the chain when Valverde starts calling you out!

 

[proffate]

He already wrote it.

If Horner is there in the 3rd week.

That's a pretty straight forward indication.

clearly Santambrogio was clean because he blew up before the end of the Giro.

 

[peterst6906]

clearly Santambrogio was clean because he blew up before the end of the Giro.

That wasn't the question and is irrelevant, but if you think Santambrogio was clean, good for you, but you'd be wrong.

 

[sittingbison]

Why you might ask? Because the mods in their infinite wisdom are intent on making it impossible to discuss the parallels between Froome and Horner...BLA BLA BLA

The mods in their infinite wisdom are intent of preventing every thread descending a Dawg fight between haters, fanbois, and skybots. So yes if you want to compare the ludicrousness of Chris Squared, open an appropriate thread. Which you have (almost) done

 

[doperhopper]

there are two differences between chris squareds aka horny dawgs: saddle and rpm

 

[karlboss]

there are two differences between chris squareds aka horny dawgs: saddle and rpm

Like Armstrong and Pantani.

 

[maltiv]

I found those ardent attackers of Froome like Moose defending Horner the most hilarious, even using the 'poor US boy forced to dope by the dirty Euros' excuse pedaled by Lance.

If Horner is there in the third week I'll raise my eyebrows. Until then I'm expecting him to fade. I don't know enough about the man to judge, beyond his age.

Being ridiculously good in the first week, and then fading later in the race, could also be an indication of a rider who has taken a good old EPO doze before the race, but who doesn't dare to refill during the race. That was the case with Santambrogio for example, who by the end of the Giro was back to his normal self.

 

[del1962]

When Froome comes out with some of the ridiculous statements that Horner made about Armstrong, then I will compare them, until then .............zzzzzzzzz

 

[Ferminal]

Being ridiculously good in the first week, and then fading later in the race, could also be an indication of a rider who has taken a good old EPO doze before the race, but who doesn't dare to refill during the race. That was the case with Santambrogio for example, who by the end of the Giro was back to his normal self.

Yeh, especially if they aren't hitting a big peak in their career. Santambrogio definitely was but Horner you could argue he has been this good before in Pais Vasco and California.

 

[sniper]

When Froome comes out with some of the ridiculous statements that Horner made about Armstrong, then I will compare them, until then .............zzzzzzzzz

you won't compare their performances because Froome, who hardly knew Armstrong let alone rode for him, hasn't talked about Armstrong? (perhaps I missed the irony in your post)


Vayer on twitter, by the way, is levelling some straightforward accusations at both Chris(t)s.
Vayer is quite an act. A bit of the Victor Conte of cycling.

 

[del1962]

you won't compare their performances because Froome, who hardly knew Armstrong let alone rode for him, hasn't talked about Armstrong? (perhaps I missed the irony in your post)


Vayer on twitter, by the way, is levelling some straightforward accusations at both Chris(t)s.
Vayer is quite an act. A bit of the Victor Conte of cycling.

No irony, as I said if Froome comes out with the same bull on Armstrong that Horner has then I will compare them, until then ..........

Vayer seems to use the clinic modus operandi, throw enough mud, and hope some of it sticks, without any evidence other than performance.

Obviouly Vayer knows a lot about Festina's doping in the 90s as he was part of it, but that is no qualification to be quoted as an expert on Sky.

 

[sniper]

...
Vayer seems to use the clinic modus operandi, throw enough mud, and hope some of it sticks, without any evidence other than performance..

history of cycling is no evidence?
in most scientific disciplines historical data is seen as valid evidence and can be used as such to make logical inferences wrt the present.

anyway, i still prefer "throwing mud and hoping some of it sticks" mentality over the "move on nothing to see here" mentality of the vast majority of sports officials and journos.
if the latter mentality prevails we might as well legalize doping. would be fairer.

 

[Ferminal]

Problem is evaluations of history are not always accurate.

 

[del1962]

Well sniper we will have to agree to disagree then, life is to short for a vortex