The Chris Froome thread
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jacksonville, NC
Posts: 69
Bikes: N/A
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
How big of a "time penalty" if any will come from the illegal feed zone? I think if Froome had not won the stage, it would be maybe a financial fine. Winning the stage in the fashion he did, after illegally obtaining a team feed bag when no one else could makes me think that maybe he should get a 6 minute penalty. That would put him like a minute and a half behind Mollema and Contador. Make him earn the yellow back in the Alps. I was really bummed when Qunitana got dropped, if he doesn't have any major injuries accidents, he should be a real force to contend with in the next year or two.
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Middle Earth (aka IA)
Posts: 20,435
Bikes: A bunch of old bikes and a few new ones
Mentioned: 178 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5888 Post(s)
Liked 3,471 Times
in
2,079 Posts
Thread title edited for less "spoiler like" wording. Leaving this one open, but please read the sticky in the forum about Doping speculation. Last I heard from several sources that have been reviewing Froome's numbers is that he's still within the 'not likely doping' range. I hope that's the case, but as with everyone else, I have some reservations due to recent history.
#30
SilentRider
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 2,383
Bikes: Trek Madone SLR 7, Giant TCR Advanced Pro, Trek Domane SLR, Trek Emonda SLR Project One (x2), custom Bingham Built Titanium road bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I was pumping my fist(s) for Armstrong during his second of 7 wins. Dominant performances .. after that, I was full of suspicion but it was still fun to watch. I remember watching Floyd's miracle recovery day thinking: this is great stuff but I hope he's not on something. I did the same for Alberto. Fun to watch but he was on something. Cadel, I think, was clean.
Froome? I am twice bitten, forever shy. His rides up hill and against the clock in this tour have been uncharacteristic and superhuman .. much like all the other assisted rides. A part of me hopes they don't catch Sky. It would really be bad for the sport, but I suppose it will mean a return to pure racing.
That thing on stage 13? Wow.
Froome? I am twice bitten, forever shy. His rides up hill and against the clock in this tour have been uncharacteristic and superhuman .. much like all the other assisted rides. A part of me hopes they don't catch Sky. It would really be bad for the sport, but I suppose it will mean a return to pure racing.
That thing on stage 13? Wow.
#32
Professional Fuss-Budget
Accusing a rider solely because of an excellent performance, relative to other riders, is ridiculous. It's like saying your co-worker is embezzling because she shows up at work with a fancy sports car.
It's absurd to suggest that Froome and/or Sky are the only ones in the peloton who would have access to a Super Secret Doping Formula. That has never been the case. I.e. you can't use the idea that "rider x beat everyone else" as proof of doping.
Someone is going to win on Ventoux. Someone is always going to win. The only way to stay at the top is to put in a consistent performance, and to push it when it really counts.
Is Quintana doping? Nieve? Rolland? Kreuziger? Ten Dam? They all put in outstanding performances today. Why not accuse the whole peloton? Why watch at all, if you're going to declare that the winner is doping because he... won?
To me, what this really expresses is a skepticism of the sport (despite cyclists doing the same crap as everyone else), as well as a general dislike of Sky and/or Froome.
It's absurd to suggest that Froome and/or Sky are the only ones in the peloton who would have access to a Super Secret Doping Formula. That has never been the case. I.e. you can't use the idea that "rider x beat everyone else" as proof of doping.
Someone is going to win on Ventoux. Someone is always going to win. The only way to stay at the top is to put in a consistent performance, and to push it when it really counts.
Is Quintana doping? Nieve? Rolland? Kreuziger? Ten Dam? They all put in outstanding performances today. Why not accuse the whole peloton? Why watch at all, if you're going to declare that the winner is doping because he... won?
To me, what this really expresses is a skepticism of the sport (despite cyclists doing the same crap as everyone else), as well as a general dislike of Sky and/or Froome.
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Grand Junction, Colorado
Posts: 56
Bikes: Gunnar, Surly
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Catching Festina didn't change anything (just opened the door for Postal), catching Armstrong didn't change anything, catching Landis didn't change anything (based on Hamilton, Contador, etc.). If Froome is doping (yea, "if"), catching him won't change anything except confirm most people's low opinion of professional bike racing. Until there's real change at the top of the UCI, or the elimination of the UCI altogether, I won't be confident in this sport. I'm waiting to see what happens in September, if McQuaid is retained then I'm done with procycling.
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,159
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Accusing a rider solely because of an excellent performance, relative to other riders, is ridiculous. It's like saying your co-worker is embezzling because she shows up at work with a fancy sports car.
It's absurd to suggest that Froome and/or Sky are the only ones in the peloton who would have access to a Super Secret Doping Formula. That has never been the case. I.e. you can't use the idea that "rider x beat everyone else" as proof of doping.
Someone is going to win on Ventoux. Someone is always going to win. The only way to stay at the top is to put in a consistent performance, and to push it when it really counts.
Is Quintana doping? Nieve? Rolland? Kreuziger? Ten Dam? They all put in outstanding performances today. Why not accuse the whole peloton? Why watch at all, if you're going to declare that the winner is doping because he... won?
To me, what this really expresses is a skepticism of the sport (despite cyclists doing the same crap as everyone else), as well as a general dislike of Sky and/or Froome.
It's absurd to suggest that Froome and/or Sky are the only ones in the peloton who would have access to a Super Secret Doping Formula. That has never been the case. I.e. you can't use the idea that "rider x beat everyone else" as proof of doping.
Someone is going to win on Ventoux. Someone is always going to win. The only way to stay at the top is to put in a consistent performance, and to push it when it really counts.
Is Quintana doping? Nieve? Rolland? Kreuziger? Ten Dam? They all put in outstanding performances today. Why not accuse the whole peloton? Why watch at all, if you're going to declare that the winner is doping because he... won?
To me, what this really expresses is a skepticism of the sport (despite cyclists doing the same crap as everyone else), as well as a general dislike of Sky and/or Froome.
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 1,690
Bikes: Serotta Nove
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't dislike Froome. I like that he love to race even when he really doesn't have to. My suspicion is a lot of riders are still doping. Why the eyes towards Froome? How many riders in the history of the Tour could put almost two minutes on Contador on a climb? I am talking about a climb in the Tour not a prep race.
If we have been hearing for 10 years about an up and coming rider named Froome being the next great thing I would still be wary of such a beating, but it would be in the realm of possibilities. The fact is up until a 2nd place ride in 2011 Froome had done next to nothing as a pro, and now the best or used to best cannot even ride his wheel.
He is not winning a 10 seconds he is winning climbs by minutes.
If we have been hearing for 10 years about an up and coming rider named Froome being the next great thing I would still be wary of such a beating, but it would be in the realm of possibilities. The fact is up until a 2nd place ride in 2011 Froome had done next to nothing as a pro, and now the best or used to best cannot even ride his wheel.
He is not winning a 10 seconds he is winning climbs by minutes.
#36
I'm doing it wrong.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,875
Bikes: Rivendell Appaloosa, Rivendell Frank Jones Sr., Trek Fuel EX9, Kona Jake the Snake CR, Niner Sir9
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9742 Post(s)
Liked 2,812 Times
in
1,664 Posts
Accusing a rider solely because of an excellent performance, relative to other riders, is ridiculous. It's like saying your co-worker is embezzling because she shows up at work with a fancy sports car.
It's absurd to suggest that Froome and/or Sky are the only ones in the peloton who would have access to a Super Secret Doping Formula. That has never been the case. I.e. you can't use the idea that "rider x beat everyone else" as proof of doping.
Someone is going to win on Ventoux. Someone is always going to win. The only way to stay at the top is to put in a consistent performance, and to push it when it really counts.
Is Quintana doping? Nieve? Rolland? Kreuziger? Ten Dam? They all put in outstanding performances today. Why not accuse the whole peloton? Why watch at all, if you're going to declare that the winner is doping because he... won?
To me, what this really expresses is a skepticism of the sport (despite cyclists doing the same crap as everyone else), as well as a general dislike of Sky and/or Froome.
It's absurd to suggest that Froome and/or Sky are the only ones in the peloton who would have access to a Super Secret Doping Formula. That has never been the case. I.e. you can't use the idea that "rider x beat everyone else" as proof of doping.
Someone is going to win on Ventoux. Someone is always going to win. The only way to stay at the top is to put in a consistent performance, and to push it when it really counts.
Is Quintana doping? Nieve? Rolland? Kreuziger? Ten Dam? They all put in outstanding performances today. Why not accuse the whole peloton? Why watch at all, if you're going to declare that the winner is doping because he... won?
To me, what this really expresses is a skepticism of the sport (despite cyclists doing the same crap as everyone else), as well as a general dislike of Sky and/or Froome.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: On yer left
Posts: 1,646
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
^The saddest casualty of doping on sports is the distrust we all feel in the results. And you're right that it is no longer enjoyable to watch if we are constantly questioning whether the winner is cheating or not. If we just close our eyes and marvel at some unbelievable performance and attribute it to the rider's superior conditioning and preparation, we are also fooling ourselves. Some healthy skepticism is a good thing, but the discussions are approaching conspiracy theory levels.
#38
I'm doing it wrong.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,875
Bikes: Rivendell Appaloosa, Rivendell Frank Jones Sr., Trek Fuel EX9, Kona Jake the Snake CR, Niner Sir9
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9742 Post(s)
Liked 2,812 Times
in
1,664 Posts
I don't dislike Froome. I like that he love to race even when he really doesn't have to. My suspicion is a lot of riders are still doping. Why the eyes towards Froome? How many riders in the history of the Tour could put almost two minutes on Contador on a climb? I am talking about a climb in the Tour not a prep race.
If we have been hearing for 10 years about an up and coming rider named Froome being the next great thing I would still be wary of such a beating, but it would be in the realm of possibilities. The fact is up until a 2nd place ride in 2011 Froome had done next to nothing as a pro, and now the best or used to best cannot even ride his wheel.
He is not winning a 10 seconds he is winning climbs by minutes.
If we have been hearing for 10 years about an up and coming rider named Froome being the next great thing I would still be wary of such a beating, but it would be in the realm of possibilities. The fact is up until a 2nd place ride in 2011 Froome had done next to nothing as a pro, and now the best or used to best cannot even ride his wheel.
He is not winning a 10 seconds he is winning climbs by minutes.
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 1,690
Bikes: Serotta Nove
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I forgot to mention I would love to see how Contador's climb time compares with his 2009 climb time. I suspect it must be much slower than 2009 for him.
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
No one disputes that someone has to win?
Its the manner of the victories that is causing concern, and its not just a few on an internet forum, suspicion is clearly rife as in interviews questions are being asked and even former riders are speaking out on live TV/Radio.
As you say, some great rides today........completely blown out of the water by another rider who has turned into superman since joining Sky.
And not to mention the food station fiasco, what exactly do you think sky were saying with that? Blatant cheating, or are we going to hear a ''we didn't realise''? Of course they know the rules, but decided that the rules do not matter, personally i think it shows the ethics of the team and you can guarentee the peloton are of the same thinking.
Its the manner of the victories that is causing concern, and its not just a few on an internet forum, suspicion is clearly rife as in interviews questions are being asked and even former riders are speaking out on live TV/Radio.
As you say, some great rides today........completely blown out of the water by another rider who has turned into superman since joining Sky.
And not to mention the food station fiasco, what exactly do you think sky were saying with that? Blatant cheating, or are we going to hear a ''we didn't realise''? Of course they know the rules, but decided that the rules do not matter, personally i think it shows the ethics of the team and you can guarentee the peloton are of the same thinking.
#42
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'd say that the histories of Froome (and Porte) in no way suggest that they were about to become world beaters - until 2011 that is, and now Porte can ride at the head of the field for miles, and Froome can ride away from anyone who is anyone on Ventoux, and look fresh at the finish. I'd love Sky to be clean, but it's getting very difficult to believe it.
#45
SilentRider
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 2,383
Bikes: Trek Madone SLR 7, Giant TCR Advanced Pro, Trek Domane SLR, Trek Emonda SLR Project One (x2), custom Bingham Built Titanium road bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
At the end of the day, money talks. Take for example, Armstrong. He just downsized to a ~USD2,000,000 home in Texas. He is set for life financially.
Maybe the calculation is about the money and not about clean racing.
Maybe the calculation is about the money and not about clean racing.
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
6 Posts
I have never believed Team Sky to be clean. I have my suspicion about even Wiggin's win last year. Anybody remember that Brailsford hired Geert Leinders? To refresh your memories, Dr. Leinders was a Rabobank doping doctor during the time "the chicken" and Thomas Dekker were busted for doping.
Yes, definitely yes, Froome's ride today is just not from guts and glory.
Stay tuned!
Yes, definitely yes, Froome's ride today is just not from guts and glory.
Stay tuned!
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 71
Bikes: 2012 Specialized Roubaix Apex Compact
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm certainly no expert, but I hadn't seen anything that screamed "doping" to me from Froome thus far, but when I saw him just turn on the afterburners and leave everyone behind, I just thought "wtf" how is that even possible?
#49
.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: France
Posts: 12
Bikes: GT ZR3000, Cannondale Trail SL, Peugeot PX10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
oh dear, what will you weirdos whinge about when the tour is over and Froome is cleared of any doping allegations
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
6 Posts
I wanna believe Froome is clean, but my head just won't let me!