Chris Froome's numbers released

[X-Man]

Not as boring as when contador got dropped on almost all the climbs 

 

Was not even in the TV coverage half the time, boring.

 

Just like when Contador dropped Froome in Vuelta '12 and '14 and Tirreno Adriatico 

[Patchelicious]

Just like when Contador dropped Froome in Vuelta '12 and '14 and Tirreno Adriatico

Just like when Contador served a 2 year ban for doping!

[X-Man]

Just like when Contador served a 2 year ban for doping!

 

Patch you win! 

[Guest Lancesball]

Not as boring as when contador got dropped on almost all the climbs 

 

Was not even in the TV coverage half the time, boring.

 

He raced and won the Giro a few weeks before against an incredibly strong Astana.

 

If he was at the Tour with his Giro form he would of won. No question and Not sure you watched a race called Vuelta in '12 and '14 where he went in fresh on a peak against Froome? 

[Guest Lancesball]

Just like when Contador served a 2 year ban for doping!

 

When was it 2yrs?

[Mntboy]

Just like when Contador served a 2 year ban for doping!

More like 8 months. I still wonder a little about that Giro win when he was with Astana. He may have had loads of special steaks on hand to help I suspect. Doping or not AC does tend to be more on point with his tactics than some of his rivals with Froome being the exception. Makes for interesting racing.

 

Edit: corrected team. Had Discovery and not Astana.

[Patchelicious]

When was it 2yrs?

My bad

[Pure Savage]

He raced and won the Giro a few weeks before against an incredibly strong Astana.

 

If he was at the Tour with his Giro form he would of won. No question and Not sure you watched a race called Vuelta in '12 and '14 where he went in fresh on a peak against Froome?

I thought we just discuss Le tour

['Dale]

Patch you win!

Hang on:

'Berto is a legend

Froome prob started too late to reach that status

 

????

[Martin PJ]

I was a fan running up to his 1st TDF win. He just became a constant moaner. Bitching about this and that. I feel that he throws his toys whenever things don't go his way. He is much more of a diva than Wiggins can ever dream to be

Just don't like the guy anymore. Maybe prick is a strong word. Maybe he is more of an ass

 

I met him once when he was trying to sell helmets for Kask at 94.7 for his sponsor. He is certainly not a diva. Myself and a mate did not recognise him at first, he seemed very modest and pretty normal. I don't think you can fake that.

 

I don't think that we can appreciate the kind of pressure these guys are under.

[kosmonooit]

There are many questions which a lab test can't answer. Like how do you maintain power whilst being so thin, how do you stop yourself from having a bad day (think Richie Porte), how do you stop those red blood cells from dropping in a three week race.

 

This being said, I am a Froome supporter.

 

Does being thin change your lung capacity?  Shouldn't think so.

 

In terms of Richie, I think the difference is Chris is much stronger in terms of headspace, that's what also makes a champ.

[Martin PJ]

Does being thin change your lung capacity?  Shouldn't think so.

 

In terms of Richie, I think the difference is Chris is much stronger in terms of headspace, that's what also makes a champ.

 

With weight loss there must be a point where being skinny does make you lose power. Sure, the cardio does not change, but you still need muscles to push a bike and a bit of weight to survive the hard training that they do.

 

With Richie Porte always having a bad day, I think this is very normal in sports. So you would expect the top guys to have a bad day now and then, when they do have bad days then this is evidence that racing is cleaner.

 

This year at the Tour, Froome was suffering the last few days so that does prove something in his favour.

[raptor-22]

Yeah i'm getting tired of his "sitting on the fence" and blowing hot air

He should either wind his neck in or put his money where his mouth and make a concrete commitment.

 

Its easy for us armchair athletes to look back and pick holes in an athletes past history, and its even easier for a highly qualified professional to do the same. All they can do is look at data which does not tell the whole story, you actual need to be there the whole time, walk in those shoes as there are lots of other daily factors that influence an athletes career / performance...

 

Winning the TDF, its like the swiss cheese model used in human factors for accidents ... you have to get all the holes to line up to win it 

 

 

No Athlete will provide all the data unless all of their peers are compelled to do the same. Its a bit like everyone whinging about Mercedes dominating F1 and the FIA asking Merc to provide all the data on their engines performance parameters.

 

Thats basically giving everyone else an instruction manual on how beat them. Same with Froome. Why would he give his rivals an advantage on how they can beat him?

 

Sure theres not enough data to prove anything this way or that but thats up to the scientists to go and do. Instead they prefer to posture in articles than go and do the real work.

 

Until Tucker comes  out with something ground breaking I'll always view him as Noakes Lab janitor.

Noakes his always had the balls to take his foot of his mouth to make space for the other but 90% of the time he's been right.

SO come on Dr Tucker, prove to us whether riders are doping or not. Innuendo helps no one

[raptor-22]

 

removed annoying double post

[Patchelicious]

The method people use to critise CF is very flawed.

 

They retrospectively look for possible holes in his history etc. Now this is great as this makes us all experts, cause its easy to do this. And so many false positives can be painted as suspicious.

 

The question I keep asking and that gets avoided is: "Cool lets do that and then do the same with other athletes". Other athletes dont come under the same level of cynical scrutiny.

 

Here are two examples of what I mean: 1 is a specific event. 2 is a broader one.

 

1: During the Tour de France in 2015 he won a mountain stage by a minute or so. Immediately is was lablled a "out of this world" performance. Later on another climber (NQ) beats the same field by a greater margin and not a single eyebrow is raised? Why the double standards? Either they should both be subject to the same level of scrutiny or neither should.

 

2: Over a greater period of time. How does somebody like Valverde peak for 8 months. He basically features in every race! Yet nobody asks how that can be done? I bet if Froome peaked that long, people would lose their minds? Even better..... How does a team like Astana that are CAUGHT (not suspected, CAUGHT doping) get to ride in the Giro, where they go on to make miraculous comebacks the day after they went for "blood tests" and nobody makes a fuss?

 

Put any of the current big 4-5 riders through the same retrospective scrutiny and periods in their past could be seen as "suspicious" like how many people keep saying that Froome came out of nowhere.

 

So this is where I pull my hair out. On one hand you have a dude who is yet to get caught, who is not much better over all than the rest. Yet he is subjected to such critisms that he goes and publishes his numbers, numbers that are a teams competitive advantage.

 

But on the other hand, you have KNOWN dopers doing extra ordinary things and people are just like "meh so?". This makes me ask; Is it really about being anti doping or just anti the person you dont like.

 

How is this ok?

[Pure Savage]

No Athlete will provide all the data unless all of their peers are compelled to do the same. Its a bit like everyone whinging about Mercedes dominating F1 and the FIA asking Merc to provide all the data on their engines performance parameters.

 

Thats basically giving everyone else an instruction manual on how beat them. Same with Froome. Why would he give his rivals an advantage on how they can beat him?

 

Sure theres not enough data to prove anything this way or that but thats up to the scientists to go and do. Instead they prefer to posture in articles than go and do the real work.

 

Until Tucker comes out with something ground breaking I'll always view him as Noakes Lab janitor.

Noakes his always had the balls to take his foot of his mouth to make space for the other but 90% of the time he's been right.

SO come on Dr Tucker, prove to us whether riders are doping or not. Innuendo helps no one

My worst is when they say, he did not shine in SA so how is he now a tour winning athlete.

 

Ja, with that logic Nolan Hofman should be cleaning up at Le tour.