The Chris Squared Thread

[red_flanders]

And if most of the top riders (at around that age) are picked up by European teams wouldn't the national scene in America be watered down to some extent. So the logical question would be to wonder just how competitive those races were? So by winning them are you really showing yourself to be that talented relative to (American) riders in Europe?

Oh, definitely a good question, and glad you steered it back to the point. Back when Horner was dominating the American pro scene, there was a lot of discussion amongst fans about how good he was, and if he could make it in Europe. Lots of "big fish in small pond" discussions. I recall thinking he'd do OK but lots of folks thought he'd be just as or almost as dominant over in Europe.

I think John Lieswyn (sp?) said something after a big US race one time (San Francisco GP?) that really resonated with me. He was saying a lot of people would tell him how good he was and you should race in Europe, but he was commenting how people really didn't get the difference between a guy like him and a guy like Boonen who had just won a big race over there. Just massive difference.

Anyway Lieswyn was not the same kind of rider as Horner, who was just really winning everything big for a while. Horner had a long career in the US, and was a big winner. Hincapie did a few US races when he wasn't in Europe–very different.

I'm sure Chris is happy to be making Europe money, I think he's said as much. The guy is 41, and didn't maximize his earning years back in the day, so he keeps racing. He also seems to be having fun all the time, really enjoying racing. It's why he's a good interview I think.

Anyway, the guy knows how to race a bike, he's won a lot no matter the size of the pond. That means something, and he's done well in Europe his second go 'round. Certainly his palmares before this Vuelta are profoundly better than Froome's before the 2011 edition, no matter how you slice it. That's what's funny about the Froome thing. He was nobody.

 

[BroDeal]

BroCrastination - The practice of avoiding the salient points of a thread so you can focus on irrelevant ones.

The only salient point is that Horner out-Froomed Froome and made the Skydiots and their new era, it's different this time, weight loss, altitude training, and late bloomer idiocy look even more ridiculous. If that type of hucksterism can work for a no-talent no skills nobody like Froome then it can surely work for a rider of Horner's class. Looks like Pudro needs to switch his avatar.

Forza Horner! He is tearing down the big lie one mountain top finish at a time.

 

[spalco]

The difference between me and you is that I am not dumb enough to think that anyone competitive in the general classification of a grand tour is clean.

I like both Froome and Horner, does that make me an idiot² or an √idiot?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

The only salient point is that Horner out-Froomed Froome and made the Skydiots and their new era, it's different this time, weight loss, altitude training, and late bloomer idiocy look even more ridiculous. If that type of hucksterism can work for a no-talent no skills nobody like Froome then it can surely work for a rider of Horner's class. Looks like Pudro needs to switch his avatar.

Forza Horner! He is tearing down the big lie one mountain top finish at a time.

BroTract - Tedious continuance or delay of an point that is relevant.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

...there was a lot of discussion amongst fans about how good he was, and if he could make it in Europe. Lots of "big fish in small pond" discussions.
...
Horner had a long career in the US, and was a big winner. Hincapie did a few US races when he wasn't in Europe–very different.

The thing is when Horner finally came to Europe was he on a programme? If so, how advanced? The problem is that it is impossible to know how naturally talented he is. Again, just how good is Hincapie? I don't remember many people giving him the 'he was always talented' argument. Is that because he raced with Armstrong?

I'm sure Chris is happy to be making Europe money, I think he's said as much. The guy is 41, and didn't maximize his earning years back in the day, so he keeps racing. He also seems to be having fun all the time, really enjoying racing. It's why he's a good interview I think.

Anyway, the guy knows how to race a bike, he's won a lot no matter the size of the pond. That means something, and he's done well in Europe his second go 'round. Certainly his palmares before this Vuelta are profoundly better than Froome's before the 2011 edition, no matter how you slice it. That's what's funny about the Froome thing. He was nobody.

Doping is (obviously) cheating but it some ways it is hard not to have some sympathy with riders that have put their life into making it in cycling (and possibly could have made at least a decent living) were other people not doping. Then of course if you do dope you become part of the problem and it cycles round.

Me being curious... did you race in the American national circuit or just a fan?

 

[neineinei]

Who is having a hissy fit? Just because people reply to you you think they are having a hissy fit. Clearly the idea of a forum is beyond you.

As usual you bypass any of the arguments (even the ones you raise). With the exception of Foxy I don't know anyone who has been remotely upset because Horner is winning. The funny thing is watching you and others justify Horner with the same arguments that you berate Armstrong and others with.

What about Horner's comments on Armstrong. Always get's raised with Wiggins. Isn't there a thread devoted to just that. Why don't you start one on Horner? Funny how you don't comment on that.

Please continue on BroStrong... your hypocrisy is getting to epic proportions. or should I say BroPortions.

There is already a thread on Horner and his comments on Armstrong. Here are a couple of Horner quotes from the first post of the thread:

Horner 2007: “It is impossible to ride the front with your whole team and get to the final climb with most of your team still on the front — and be ready to come back and do it day-in and day-out.”

Horner 2012: “I didn’t see anything that was unbelievable. When you’re reading it now about he past, it’s hard to take and bad news,” Horner said of his time under Bruyneel, with two seasons alongside Armstrong. He said he never saw Armstrong dope in that time, and also that, while Armstrong posted strong results, Horner never saw any “unbelievable” riding from the Texan.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

There is already a thread on Horner and his comments on Armstrong. Here are a couple of Horner quotes from the first post of the thread:

Horner 2007: “It is impossible to ride the front with your whole team and get to the final climb with most of your team still on the front — and be ready to come back and do it day-in and day-out.”

Horner 2012: “I didn’t see anything that was unbelievable. When you’re reading it now about he past, it’s hard to take and bad news,” Horner said of his time under Bruyneel, with two seasons alongside Armstrong. He said he never saw Armstrong dope in that time, and also that, while Armstrong posted strong results, Horner never saw any “unbelievable” riding from the Texan.

I meant a specific thread on that (like the Wiggin's one) rather than a general smack down Horner thread.

 

[murali]

Comparing Froome with the veteran is like insulting Horner, imho.

Horner was born in the wrong generation. He was part of the team that had the most successful american rider at the time; and the most impressive DS at the time. Both are not genuine faults of his own.

The real question is: would this thread had made sense if he was part of the "clean generation"?

I don't see a rider who will do anything to win a GT in Horner. Whereas Froome had already put in constraint on team leadership one year in advance.

Dogs are harmless, as long as they haven't tasted blood. Once you give them the taste of blood, they will never eat dog biscuits, even if you wrap them in a gold leaf.

 

[sittingbison]

come on gentle(wo)men,
lets not resort to personal insults and attacks. Remember message not messenger comprende?

cheers
bison

 

[del1962]

Comparing Froome with the veteran is like insulting Horner, imho.

Horner was born in the wrong generation. He was part of the team that had the most successful american rider at the time; and the most impressive DS at the time. Both are not genuine faults of his own.

The real question is: would this thread had made sense if he was part of the "clean generation"?

I don't see a rider who will do anything to win a GT in Horner. Whereas Froome had already put in constraint on team leadership one year in advance.

Dogs are harmless, as long as they haven't tasted blood. Once you give them the taste of blood, they will never eat dog biscuits, even if you wrap them in a gold leaf.

Ah, so (if he is doping which I am not accusing him of), you are saying its Ok for him to dope because he worked with Brunyeel, shame for Froome he never got the chance to work with Brunyeel, then maybe he would get less bashing on the forum

 

[The Hitch]

Then where's the Nibali thread in the Clinic, where's Valverde, where's Rodriguez? None on the first page anyway.

Btw. I like both Froome and Horner, does that make me an idiot² or an √idiot?

Your first sentence does make you an idiot.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Comparing Froome with the veteran is like insulting Horner, imho.

Horner was born in the wrong generation. He was part of the team that had the most successful american rider at the time; and the most impressive DS at the time. Both are not genuine faults of his own.

The real question is: would this thread had made sense if he was part of the "clean generation"?

I don't see a rider who will do anything to win a GT in Horner. Whereas Froome had already put in constraint on team leadership one year in advance.

Dogs are harmless, as long as they haven't tasted blood. Once you give them the taste of blood, they will never eat dog biscuits, even if you wrap them in a gold leaf.

To be honest I don't think dogs would want a biscuit wrapped in a gold leaf even if they haven't tasted blood. And dogs don't turn into man eaters all of a sudden because they had a taste of blood. I'm guessing you have very little to do with dogs. Poor analogy.

Usually riding on the same team as Armstrong is enough to condemn you as a doper, it seems Horner is getting more benefit of the doubt from people usually not willing to give any.

And I call bull**** on the 'he has more natural talent than Froome' because if he has been doping consistently throughout his career you can have no way of knowing what his natural talent is.

For the sake of clarity I'm making no accusations, happy to give the chap the benefit of the doubt, just questioning people's motives and reasoning.

 

[Beech Mtn]

Sure, but I don't know decent pro rider in any country who wasn't.

Christopher Froome

 

[red_flanders]

The thing is when Horner finally came to Europe was he on a programme? If so, how advanced? The problem is that it is impossible to know how naturally talented he is. Again, just how good is Hincapie? I don't remember many people giving him the 'he was always talented' argument. Is that because he raced with Armstrong?

I think it's clear that Horner is and was naturally an extremely talented climber. Surely folks don't imagine he was on any kind of top program getting paid what he was in the US. I still don't get the Hincapie connection, such a different rider and career.

Personally, it seems clear to me that when Horner joined up with team Armstrong he changed his tune RE: doping which others have pointed out well.

Doping is (obviously) cheating but it some ways it is hard not to have some sympathy with riders that have put their life into making it in cycling (and possibly could have made at least a decent living) were other people not doping. Then of course if you do dope you become part of the problem and it cycles round.

Me being curious... did you race in the American national circuit or just a fan?

Not at all, just a fan and really didn't follow the domestic scene closely. It's IMO definitely a minor league vs. Europe and the races back then weren't as good as they are now with California and the US Pro Challenge or whatever they call that one in Colorado. I likes my scenery...

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

i just don't agree with your metaphor that calling a given pro-athlete a doper, and then later seeing you've called it right, is like accidentally hitting the jackpot. Chances of calling it right are like 90%-95% for procycling.

and wrt froome vs. horner, on a horizontal scale from highly unexpected to highly expected, Froome's results from 2011 onwards are probably situated a bit more to the left than Horner's current vuelta. That doesn't mean Horner's vuelta (and some other recent results of his) isn't also situated on the left.

No, no, no... i said those who say (almost) all riders are dopers hit the jackpot by chance. In other words, yeah they will hit it 95%.

I OTOH, called a few obvious dopers upfront (those i mentioned). But on the majority of riders i am unsure (for example Froome). So my 90%+ are pretty good, because i don´t call everybody a doper.

Hope you get it now...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

As long as there are outrageous performances, and in particular by teams who make grandiose claims of cleanliness, there will be threads bashing those riders and teams on every cycling forum.

It's not about "Sky" or "Froome" in particular, they're just the flavor of the year. Now Horner is taking a bunch of heat. It isn't personal or national folks.

True- and perfectly fair.
But this thread has turned in to bashing the fans or supporters of those riders or teams.

Also - while there are a lot of comparisons between Froome & Horner (why?) I believe there has only been one poster who appears to believe Horner is clean.

 

[Beech Mtn]

True- and perfectly fair.
But this thread has turned in to bashing the fans or supporters of those riders or teams.

Also - while there are a lot of comparisons between Froome & Horner (why?) I believe there has only been one poster who appears to believe Horner is clean.

IIRC, it came out of a joke on another thread about two guys named Chris, both out of contract, and performing at the Vuelta. Or somesuch.

Foxxy,
I asked this earlier, but you may not have seen it. Do you think Jens is clean, or is there any comparison to be made between Jens and Horner?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

True- and perfectly fair.
But this thread has turned in to bashing the fans or supporters of those riders or teams.

Also - while there are a lot of comparisons between Froome & Horner (why?) I believe there has only been one poster who appears to believe Horner is clean.

I don't think ANYONE believes Horner is clean.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I OTOH, called a few obvious dopers upfront (those i mentioned). But on the majority of riders i am unsure (for example Froome).

What exactly makes you unsure about Froome yet 100% certain about Horner?

I'm virtually certain both are doping.

 

[sniper]

I don't think ANYONE believes Horner is clean.

the uci thought he was clean in 2009. (hence a zero on the 2010 suspicion index)

 

[Dr_Lexus]

I don't think ANYONE believes Horner is clean.

I do. If you point one finger then point all your fingers. At all of them.

Ok cycling may not be 100% clean but theres no point in Horner doping.

He wouldn't throw away his entire career just for one win. Doesn't make a lot of sense. He's won enough already.

Maybe the other guys have been brought back to the pack & that's why Horner is up there in the mix?

 

[Netserk]

I do. If you point one finger then point all your fingers. At all of them.

Ok cycling may not be 100% clean but theres no point in Horner doping.

He wouldn't throw away his entire career just for one win. Doesn't make a lot of sense. He's won enough already.

Maybe the other guys have been brought back to the pack & that's why Horner is up there in the mix?

Are you aware that in Levi's testimony he said that Horner (Rider-15) told him back in 2008 that he doped in 2005?

 

[happychappy]

Dogs are harmless, as long as they haven't tasted blood. Once you give them the taste of blood, they will never eat dog biscuits, even if you wrap them in a gold leaf.

My Greyhound has eaten plenty of cats unfortunate enough to be too slow to make it up the nearest tree. He still loves dog biscuits.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I do. If you point one finger then point all your fingers. At all of them.
Isn't that what most here are doing, with the notable exception of Foxxy who thinks on the one hand that Horner is the worst doper since Ricco while confessing to a lack of suspicion re. Froome?
Ok cycling may not be 100% clean but theres no point in Horner doping.
Reasons for Horner to dope
1. $
2.money
3.Needs new contract, see 1 & 2

He wouldn't throw away his entire career just for one win. Doesn't make a lot of sense. He's won enough already.
???????????? Oh yeah he won that GT Tour of California. Horner, as talented as he is has spent years bashing his head against the wall of pro cycling in Europe, had trouble getting along with some team management, had a number of ill timed injuries, spent most of his European time in service to others, and never really had a big payday.
Maybe the other guys have been brought back to the pack & that's why Horner is up there in the mix?

This might win as biggest logical fail of any post at least in the past few days. Not without competition either, we've got Foxxy to raise the bar.

 

[the sceptic]

At least Froomezilla believers have the excuse that they only started watching cycling in 2012, but for Horner there really is no excuse to be a believer.