Post of the tour

ContrelaMontre

Can I nominate this as Post of the Tour:

Rick Chasey wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

rayjay wrote:

There is nothing speculative about Froomys times. IMO they do bang on about AV and AC bans. They don't analyse Froomys times because their Bias towards Sky IMO. There's no argument, just an opinion.

The times aren't speculative, but their significance definitely is. They are fully aware that individual comparisons are largely meaningless. What seems to be upsetting you is people voicing their own opinions rather than yours.

Indeed.

If you don't like other people giving their opinions, maybe a forum isn't the best place to be. Here's mine.

We simply don't nearly enough evidence or any scientific study of the effects of doping to make any concrete or even educated guesses on whether someone is or isn't depending on their performance.

We have anecdotal evidence from a riders, but even their experiences are affected by so many other factors that we can't tell for sure.

We can look at the overall speed of the peloton over many different races and see that, broadly, it has reduced since the period where we see heavy EPO use in the peloton. But even that is a very very rough and ready way of looking at it that doesn't prove anything concretely.

But to compare one person's ride against a handful of other's is meaningless. Totally. That's even before you look at the other factors that contribute significantly to 'times' and average speeds and whatever.

You lot are arguing the toss about times up a climb in totally different conditions, in a mass start race situation, with probably a different wind, temperature, surface, bikes, gears, what had gone beforehand, racing situation blah blah, and comparing it to how many riders? 2? 3? 5? That's not scientific. That's just annecdotal bullsh!t. You need double blinds, you need to be able to single out a variable.

Other than the performance, which we can clearly see is no way do indicate any doping, there is no actual evidence I see of doping practices at sky. And as above, there is no rational, hard, scientifically acceptable and rigorous way to look at the performance, since we have nothing to judge it against, and don't know what is actually physically capable for what are already exceptional and unusual human beings - 'outliers'.

That doesn't mean they absolutely aren't, but it seems quite unlikely. With USP and all those teams we had regular hint, leaks, admissions etc. People talk about Leinders, but people only point to his past before sky, not what he did at sky. For some reason (predictably), they don't make the same connection to say, Vaughters.

What is going on at the moment, and it's happening on this forum and I don't like it, is a form of Mccarthyism.

'Fans' are overcompensating for being lied to. They feel duped and got stung, so now they've swung the other way. They got into cycling when Lance was big. They may have admired the guy, his ball(s). They've read Hamilton's book. Now they want blood (values). They say they see a doped performance and know what it looks like, but do they know a clean one? I got into cycling in '98 so I don't profess to know. How can you make a comparison? How can you know what the difference is between the two?

You lot have to stop it. When you get evidence that is actually provable and stacks up with actual evidence then you can say stuff. But this mud slinging has to stop.

This forum's got all so bloody serious about it too. Maybe it's because they're British. Maybe it's because there are a few people who think it's an unjust slur. Before we only got serious about Contador (and even then we had those bloody awful steak jokes), or Lance. At least with Lance he was a lightning rod that conducted it all into the same place. And he was American so we could laugh at him.

It's hysterical and it's bullsh!t.

And those who bloody say it don't know how to keep it in the right part of the forum either. Sort it out.

If you genuinely can't see this, I sincerely question why you even bother watching. Turn the TV off. Go watch something else. This sport isn't right for you. You obviously don't enjoy it, and I'm not enjoying your 'fandom' either.

somekindofwizard

I'm mostly a lurker here and this is from twitter but funniest thing I have read all tour:

@ukcyclingexpert

The cyclists who pedal really fast uphill are called gimpers because they're really skinny! #tdf

alan_a

From Double Alpe stage

dish_dash wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Alan A wrote:

If you haven't figured it out I am back from maternity assessment.

Thankfully no. 2 has decided against his/her early breakaway and has been reeled back in by the peloton, where hopefully he/she will remain for another 10 days before sprinting to the finish faster than Kittel or Cav, but definitely not Greipel - Mrs does not want to give birth to a gorilla sized baby.

if the nipper pinches the midwife's ars* while the umbilicial is being cut, let us know. We'll being keeping tabs on the future talent.

Can I nominate this for post of the tour?

above_the_cows

I'm being a bit cheeky...

frenchfighter wrote:

I reckon 25% of the posts on this thread are about cycling.

In case you were not aware this is the ProRace forum. There is a forum called CakeStop where you can post all you banal and inane musings there.

alan_a

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

Lichtblick wrote:

where do all these hundreds of thousands of fans go to the loo?

Is this like a joke you find on the side of a Penguin biscuit - is the answer the Alpe Loo-ez

alan_a

NapoleonD wrote:

hammerite wrote:

Lichtblick wrote:

where do all these hundreds of thousands of fans go to the loo?

I went to the toilet at the apartment we booked that was above the bar on bend 16. The rest just pee down the mountain on those below them! (There's grass in most places and not usually sheer drops at the side of the road)

Sean Kelly just announced Riblon is in turd position on the road.

ddraver

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

Contador caught. In the library of riders with panache Contadors attacks are a bit like the Mr Men - each one has a different character....but always the same old story

alan_a

Cleat is on fire today

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

Contador caught. In the library of riders with panache Contadors attacks are a bit like the Mr Men - each one has a different character....but always the same old story

alan_a

Chapeau. Probably the only decent post from the Sky doping thread

Above The Cows wrote:

jamie1012 wrote:

Well, whether or not they're doping, they certainly do enjoy a nice illegal feed.

Don't we all, the only way I can watch the cycling at work.

ratsbeyfus

ContrelaMontre wrote:

Can I nominate this as Post of the Tour:

Rick Chasey wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

rayjay wrote:

There is nothing speculative about Froomys times. IMO they do bang on about AV and AC bans. They don't analyse Froomys times because their Bias towards Sky IMO. There's no argument, just an opinion.

The times aren't speculative, but their significance definitely is. They are fully aware that individual comparisons are largely meaningless. What seems to be upsetting you is people voicing their own opinions rather than yours.

Indeed.

If you don't like other people giving their opinions, maybe a forum isn't the best place to be. Here's mine.

We simply don't nearly enough evidence or any scientific study of the effects of doping to make any concrete or even educated guesses on whether someone is or isn't depending on their performance.

We have anecdotal evidence from a riders, but even their experiences are affected by so many other factors that we can't tell for sure.

We can look at the overall speed of the peloton over many different races and see that, broadly, it has reduced since the period where we see heavy EPO use in the peloton. But even that is a very very rough and ready way of looking at it that doesn't prove anything concretely.

But to compare one person's ride against a handful of other's is meaningless. Totally. That's even before you look at the other factors that contribute significantly to 'times' and average speeds and whatever.

You lot are arguing the toss about times up a climb in totally different conditions, in a mass start race situation, with probably a different wind, temperature, surface, bikes, gears, what had gone beforehand, racing situation blah blah, and comparing it to how many riders? 2? 3? 5? That's not scientific. That's just annecdotal bullsh!t. You need double blinds, you need to be able to single out a variable.

Other than the performance, which we can clearly see is no way do indicate any doping, there is no actual evidence I see of doping practices at sky. And as above, there is no rational, hard, scientifically acceptable and rigorous way to look at the performance, since we have nothing to judge it against, and don't know what is actually physically capable for what are already exceptional and unusual human beings - 'outliers'.

That doesn't mean they absolutely aren't, but it seems quite unlikely. With USP and all those teams we had regular hint, leaks, admissions etc. People talk about Leinders, but people only point to his past before sky, not what he did at sky. For some reason (predictably), they don't make the same connection to say, Vaughters.

What is going on at the moment, and it's happening on this forum and I don't like it, is a form of Mccarthyism.

'Fans' are overcompensating for being lied to. They feel duped and got stung, so now they've swung the other way. They got into cycling when Lance was big. They may have admired the guy, his ball(s). They've read Hamilton's book. Now they want blood (values). They say they see a doped performance and know what it looks like, but do they know a clean one? I got into cycling in '98 so I don't profess to know. How can you make a comparison? How can you know what the difference is between the two?

You lot have to stop it. When you get evidence that is actually provable and stacks up with actual evidence then you can say stuff. But this mud slinging has to stop.

This forum's got all so bloody serious about it too. Maybe it's because they're British. Maybe it's because there are a few people who think it's an unjust slur. Before we only got serious about Contador (and even then we had those bloody awful steak jokes), or Lance. At least with Lance he was a lightning rod that conducted it all into the same place. And he was American so we could laugh at him.

It's hysterical and it's bullsh!t.

And those who bloody say it don't know how to keep it in the right part of the forum either. Sort it out.

If you genuinely can't see this, I sincerely question why you even bother watching. Turn the TV off. Go watch something else. This sport isn't right for you. You obviously don't enjoy it, and I'm not enjoying your 'fandom' either.

Cor! Rick wins with that one.

alan_a

The boy is on fire I tell you, on fire.

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

Daz555 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

20 sec penalty I hope!

He drinks lager...Contador just gets bitter

alan_a

Frenchie provides the image of the tour so far.

frenchfighter wrote:

yourpaceormine

I really liked the Francuspugnator post. Although I can't help but wonder if it should actually be Gauluspugnator. The Franks being Germans who were part of the Roman Army who were boffing the plucky little Gaulish warriors.

One of my little men whilst walking to the Champs to see Sastre win his yellow jumper commented upon the name of the road we were walking down, Rue Vercingetorix, believeing he was just a fictional character from Asterix

Monty Zoncolan

That Dutch/belkin photo is just wonderful.

above_the_cows

Yellow Peril wrote:

davidof wrote:

Quintana: the only thing that interests me is the Yellow Jersey

But unfortunately he looks like a man whose colour interest should be beige

alan_a

Yellow Peril wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

What a thread opener.

The TV Show set on location:



#TeamVictor

A drama about the living dead on the roads around Annecy? ...it must surely star BMC

PBo

anyone watching les revenants?

great programme. scary stuff

ddraver

Yellow Peril wrote:

Having seen the way Froome handles a cigar and a glass of booze I'm starting to doubt whether he's seen Michelle naked yet.

ddraver

Cleat providing right up to the end!

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

I wonder if they'll carry the light theme over into the start next year in Yorkshire and have a whippet with a miners lamp strapped to its head running through the streets of Halifax.

rick_chasey

Old hat here but I just saw this.

Lance Armstrong ‏@lancearmstrong 14 Jul
Hey @chrisfroome - no gifts on the Ventoux.


Bahahahahaaaa

LutherB

Not a post but a poster - special mention for RideOnTime is in order i think, he's been on a roll for the past 3 weeks

Macaloon

LutherB wrote:

Not a post but a poster - special mention for RideOnTime is in order i think, he's been on a roll for the past 3 weeks

Was just about to comment that RideO was the genius behind the whole Thread Starter movement, a magnificent addition to the 100th Tour. Chapeau RideO.

And this thread is a great tonic for any post-tour blues. Thanks, all. Some very funny stuff

nevman

You had to be there but PLs mispronunciation of `soldier` cracked us up when this came in

Menchov'sStabilisers wrote:

Nice little mention for EBH there with a mention of the "tomb of the unknown shoulder".

above_the_cows

Truly magnifique, heavyweight panache from nic_77 here.

nic_77 wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

FTFY

Macaloon

Above The Cows wrote:

Truly magnifique, heavyweight panache from nic_77 here.

Beat me to it. Induced a cred-shredding fit of the giggles. 5 spurs.

No_Ta_Doctor

Macaloon wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

Truly magnifique, heavyweight panache from nic_77 here.

Beat me to it. Induced a cred-shredding fit of the giggles. 5 spurs.

Cest magnifique indeed, but did it miss the time cut?

shazzz

This one was a corker, from the "Sky's bodystocking" thread:

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

Le Commentateur wrote:

SpecialGuestStar wrote:

What in God's name...... :shock:

If you think it's a bad look now wait until you see the hefty mamils of Surrey wearing them in sportives.