Are sky clean or not?
Comments
-
The other place is 'The Clinic' section of the cycling news forum. Be warned, it's mental, like bat shoot crazy mental.What is "the other place"? I feel like I need something to tip my sanity over the edge but do not know which place you mean.
PS my workplace is pushing me close to the edge but I need time off and the asylum is very attractive right now for a bit of time off!0 -
Cyclingnews forum. Weird.0
-
^ Long lost 'Loon.
There is some objective stuff. God knows why they bother. For example:
Update of the Alpe d'Huez climbing times and speed chart previously posted here and here. Read those previous posts for discussion of context.
Edit (28 July 2015): since posting this two days ago, I was alerted to some updates made to the 1991 ascent times. Two sources did work with archive video to better verify these times, the net result being an addition of 41 seconds to each of the 1991 ascent times.
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/alpe-dhuez-tdf-fastest-ascent-times.html
Froome doesn't make the top 50. 'Faster than Lance' my arse....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
Well here goes, into the asylum!0
-
Well here goes, into the asylum!
Don't do it. You'll never be the same again.It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.0 -
Well here goes, into the asylum!
Leave a trail of cotton thread so you can find your way back easily0 -
Given there is absolutely nothing at all, in 56 pages, with any substance at all about Sky doping...Given there is absolutely nothing at all, in 6 years, with any substance at all about Sky doping...we need some extraordinary evidence.
Please post extraordinary evidence below. Please keep conjecture in your head.
You're quite right. Nothing more than conjecture and opinion. Looking forward to someone with something however spurious, but based on a link, a bust, a motoman, an email to Stefano, Dave's missus dropping him off to meet Ricco in a McDonalds car park, anything really. That'll be a start.
EDIT: The only thing I can see at the moment is Servais Knaven that has anything.
According to t'papers, Dave B's off on holiday to California next week with his partner and daughter, and visiting the 49ers and the Oracle sailing team. The Asylum loons are bound to weave something fantastical out of that.0 -
Well I am back and seriously do not know what I have just read. I went in at page 1 and it seemed an old thread mentioning froome and Barloworld. Then I fast forwarded to the last page and it was also Barloworld and photos of Froome in a Barloworld strip. All that in a thread about Sky and doping. All the comments make no sense to me (and I am used to complete insanity at work). I have to admit to feeling scared in case I actually know any of these people in real life.
So if I am understanding the attitude of the other place it is guilty because we have some random numbers relating to performance dating from Barloworld days and something about weight loss. Also Roche was told not to lose weight but Froome could. Then there was something about LRP. Also they mentioned Ullrich, LA, Landis and a few other big name dopers or coaches involved in doping as linked to Froome. I admit to not really understanding them but that could be due to the fact that I kind of dipped out of following cycling and TdF for almost all of the LA years (pretty much after Indurain retired).
They do seem to be a bit like a forum full of Manc33 style conspiracy enthusiasts. Is that a fair comment?0 -
Well I am back and seriously do not know what I have just read. I went in at page 1 and it seemed an old thread mentioning froome and Barloworld. Then I fast forwarded to the last page and it was also Barloworld and photos of Froome in a Barloworld strip. All that in a thread about Sky and doping. All the comments make no sense to me (and I am used to complete insanity at work). I have to admit to feeling scared in case I actually know any of these people in real life.
So if I am understanding the attitude of the other place it is guilty because we have some random numbers relating to performance dating from Barloworld days and something about weight loss. Also Roche was told not to lose weight but Froome could. Then there was something about LRP. Also they mentioned Ullrich, LA, Landis and a few other big name dopers or coaches involved in doping as linked to Froome. I admit to not really understanding them but that could be due to the fact that I kind of dipped out of following cycling and TdF for almost all of the LA years (pretty much after Indurain retired).
They do seem to be a bit like a forum full of Manc33 style conspiracy enthusiasts. Is that a fair comment?
If Manc33 are loons who know sod all about the sport in question - that's actually a hindrance to posting in the Asylum - and who also believe in lizards, and fellas on grassy knolls....yeah0 -
Flat Earthers by any chance?0
-
More paranoid individuals, and nominative determinists called macaloon, might be getting fromaged-off with the casual association of the word loon, with a person of limited grip.
Japanese macaloons:
...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
i've taken a look there once. its just wrong.
something for you all, when froome helped wiggins win the 2012 tour he was supposedly 63kg, and this tour 68kg...
so --- why?0 -
i've taken a look there once. its just wrong.
something for you all, when froome helped wiggins win the 2012 tour he was supposedly 63kg, and this tour 68kg...
so --- why?
Lol. He was never 63kg. 69kg maybe. Wiggins was 71kg for the Tour - unless you weighed him immediately after a tough stage and before he'd refuelled, when maybe he'd be 69-70kg for a micro-second. Froome was 1-2kg lighter.0 -
Bloody sailors. Off their tits on drugs most of the time.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19666695#p19666695]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:
Given there is absolutely nothing at all, in 56 pages, with any substance at all about Sky doping...Given there is absolutely nothing at all, in 6 years, with any substance at all about Sky doping...we need some extraordinary evidence.
Please post extraordinary evidence below. Please keep conjecture in your head.
You're quite right. Nothing more than conjecture and opinion. Looking forward to someone with something however spurious, but based on a link, a bust, a motoman, an email to Stefano, Dave's missus dropping him off to meet Ricco in a McDonalds car park, anything really. That'll be a start.
EDIT: The only thing I can see at the moment is Servais Knaven that has anything.
According to t'papers, Dave B's off on holiday to California next week with his partner and daughter, and visiting the 49ers and the Oracle sailing team. The Asylum loons are bound to weave something fantastical out of that.
Didn't Ben Ainslie have to go through a massive transformation when he won one of his golds, because he changed category?
That's it! The smoking gun! SKY ARE DOPERS!
Wait for me Tangled Metal!0 -
5kg of extra blood and drugs if some are to be believed!!
Seriously though does anyone think this year Sky and Froome were not performing as well as 2012 and 2013? Froome looked like he'd have managed a larger winning margin in 2012 if Wiggo was not there, I think I am not the only one to think he was stronger than the nominated leader Wiggo that year. Also I think 2013 he was stronger than this year. Perhaps I am wrong.
This year to me seemed a bit sour. I don't care what your opinions on a cyclist being a doper or not. Being at the tour and performing at the higher level needed to be on for the GC top spot is worthy of respect. Even if he was doping it would still take a high degree of commitment to the sport. IMHO a guy there putting his body on the line for the sport deserves at least enough respect to not get urine thrown over him or one of his team mates getting punched. All these actions are just wrong, even if the evidence comes out that he was a doper. I would not have wanted to see LA having that treatment or any other proven doper getting that while riding the tour or other big race. Wrong.0 -
5kg of extra blood and drugs if some are to be believed!!
Seriously though does anyone think this year Sky and Froome were not performing as well as 2012 and 2013? Froome looked like he'd have managed a larger winning margin in 2012 if Wiggo was not there, I think I am not the only one to think he was stronger than the nominated leader Wiggo that year. Also I think 2013 he was stronger than this year. Perhaps I am wrong.
This year to me seemed a bit sour. I don't care what your opinions on a cyclist being a doper or not. Being at the tour and performing at the higher level needed to be on for the GC top spot is worthy of respect. Even if he was doping it would still take a high degree of commitment to the sport. IMHO a guy there putting his body on the line for the sport deserves at least enough respect to not get urine thrown over him or one of his team mates getting punched. All these actions are just wrong, even if the evidence comes out that he was a doper. I would not have wanted to see LA having that treatment or any other proven doper getting that while riding the tour or other big race. Wrong.
One of the biggest problems with Froome in arguing his credibility, is his back story. There's no doubt its a gift to the Doperati, but there's also no doubt its a bit of a hurdle. He wasnt a star performer as a junior or an U23 rider, and definitely not on the European scene. He was doing MTB shizz in SA, and only landed in Europe relatively late. He scored some decent results in a few races in Italy and so on - more than decent considering that the step up for him from riding trails in SA, and learning to ride in a large peloton in Europe, was MASSIVE. In fact I have a feeling he beat the likes of Rui Costa on a mountain finish in one race in Italy.
But you cant argue this with the Doperati. They are happy to wallow in woeful ignorance. Much easier to portray him as a total donkey (which of course he never was)
Then you have his transformation at the 2011 Vuelta - and it WAS a transformation compared to all of his previous 19 months with Sky. To buy it you have to buy the bilharzia explanation - and some simply can't do that. Even without the Lance exposure, history is riddled with riders who've faced being out of contract and have got desperate.
So really Froome's back story isnt the easiest sell, and as I say its a gift to the Doperati. If he'd been a boy-genius in Europe, scoring great U23 results etc, they'd have less to attach their theories to (tho God knows, they just make up shoot anyway)0 -
As they've shown though they don't want Transformation (Froome) and they don't want Steady Improvement (Thomas), they want incredible results as a junior (where of course there's no doping), and then immediate success in the World Tour (where everyone is doped but they should win anyway). And they should win at 1985 speeds.
It's almost, almost as if they're talking in circles.0 -
As they've shown though they don't want Transformation (Froome) and they don't want Steady Improvement (Thomas), they want incredible results as a junior (where of course there's no doping), and then immediate success in the World Tour (where everyone is doped but they should win anyway). And they should win at 1985 speeds.
It's almost, almost as if they're talking in circles.
Never! :?0 -
i've taken a look there once. its just wrong.
I just took a look. Now I feel dirty. Like reading the comments on Grauniad opinion pieces.Kinesis Racelite 4s disc
Kona Paddy Wagon
Canyon Roadlite Al 7.0 - reborn as single speed!
Felt Z85 - mangled by taxi.0 -
i've taken a look there once. its just wrong.
I just took a look. Now I feel dirty. Like reading Grauniad opinion pieces.
Fixed that for you. Although either way is good."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19666768#p19666768]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:One of the biggest problems with Froome in arguing his credibility, is his back story. There's no doubt its a gift to the Doperati, but there's also no doubt its a bit of a hurdle.
I have some sympathy for the more rationale Clinic Cynics re Froome. The story from Sky is that they always knew Froome was a supreme talent but it took him a while to deal with his relative lack of experience and sort out the Bilharzia.
I have a few problems with this:
1 - If you do a Google search on Froome, then there is nothing about him being particularly talented in "real time". He is simply AN Other Barloworld/Sky rider. His most notable contribution to GT history prior to 2011 was to be DQ'd for taking a tow! (Albeit when in search of the team car to abandon). All the stuff about him being a supreme talent that just needed nurturing is retrospectively
2 - He arrived in Europe in 2007 training/racing at the UCI Academy. Now, in any endurance sport, after a year or two of solid training and racing as an adult, you start achieving performances that are quite close to your maximum levels in % terms. (The returns for more/better training diminish rapidly, and are mainly aimed at eeking out the final percent or two, not transforming yourself in your mid 20s.) So, where were the GT-contending level results in 2009/2010 and early 2011? Even riders who flatter to ultimately deceive do at least flatter in their early days.
3 - If he was the supreme talent pre Vuelta 2011, what are the odds on him performing to close to GT winning levels in the lab repeatedly but never on the road?
As Father In Law says about investments: If it sounds too good to be true then it probably is.0 -
If you look at that photo of him on Wiggin's wheel at the 2009 nationals, he's clearly about 5kg heavier. That will make a big difference."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
I'll give it to Sky. If they are systematically doping as a team under all the scrutiny they are under and all the pronouncements then they have MASSIVE cohones. Might account for Froomes awkward riding style.Kinesis Racelite 4s disc
Kona Paddy Wagon
Canyon Roadlite Al 7.0 - reborn as single speed!
Felt Z85 - mangled by taxi.0 -
"After the Vuelta it was revealed Froome had suffered throughout the year from the parasitic disease bilharzia ( schistosomiasis ), having been diagnosed in 2010. It has since been speculated that Froome may have had the
parasitic infection for much of his adult life and during his early cycling career. The discovery and subsequent treatment of the illness has been used to explain Froome's rapid rise to form during 2011."0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19666843#p19666843]Wallace and Gromit[/url] wrote:[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19666768#p19666768]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:One of the biggest problems with Froome in arguing his credibility, is his back story. There's no doubt its a gift to the Doperati, but there's also no doubt its a bit of a hurdle.
I have some sympathy for the more rationale Clinic Cynics re Froome. The story from Sky is that they always knew Froome was a supreme talent but it took him a while to deal with his relative lack of experience and sort out the Bilharzia.
I have a few problems with this:
1 - If you do a Google search on Froome, then there is nothing about him being particularly talented in "real time". He is simply AN Other Barloworld/Sky rider. His most notable contribution to GT history prior to 2011 was to be DQ'd for taking a tow! (Albeit when in search of the team car to abandon). All the stuff about him being a supreme talent that just needed nurturing is retrospectively
2 - He arrived in Europe in 2007 training/racing at the UCI Academy. Now, in any endurance sport, after a year or two of solid training and racing as an adult, you start achieving performances that are quite close to your maximum levels in % terms. (The returns for more/better training diminish rapidly, and are mainly aimed at eeking out the final percent or two, not transforming yourself in your mid 20s.) So, where were the GT-contending level results in 2009/2010 and early 2011? Even riders who flatter to ultimately deceive do at least flatter in their early days.
3 - If he was the supreme talent pre Vuelta 2011, what are the odds on him performing to close to GT winning levels in the lab repeatedly but never on the road?
As Father In Law says about investments: If it sounds too good to be true then it probably is.
All fair questions.
I'm not here to shout doper or non-doper where Froome's concerned - fact is that none of us can know for certain.
But a decent debate's always a good thing.
So, a couple of thoughts on the above:
From 2007-09 he was riding for Barloworld. That was a disorganised shower of a team managed by Corti, if ever there was one, You were on your own, and it was sink or swim. There was fook going on in that team in the way of bringing on a young rider. Froome had Robbie Hunter keeping an eye out for him - handy if you wanted advice on how to punch, I'd imagine, but that would have been about it. Just for comparison's sake, Geraint Thomas, on the other hand, was going back and forth between the road and track, and was being coached by Ellingworth, just as Cav was.
As for what was or wasnt written about him prior to 2010 about him being a big talent, I cant say I remember reading much along those lines, if truth be told.0 -
There were some impressive results - u23 and otherwise - for Froome before he even got to Barloworld.
He won a stage of Giro delle Regioni up to Montepulciano, beating riders like Mollema, Rui Costa, and a very young TJVG; he also finished 2nd on a hilly finish in the same race where he got away with Grega Bole, dropped him, then Froome followed the lead car when it turned right in the finish straight while Bole went straight on to win. He was 2nd on a loooong Arosa climb in the G.P Tell finishing just behind Matthias Frank and ahead of Jakob Fuglsang; on the previous stage he was 3rd just behind Fuglsang. Stage win + 6th up Mt Fuji in Tour of Japan. Honestly, after reading his story I think it's remarkable he got those results.
I still think that as a neo-pro riding the Tour de France to get 30th up Alpe d'Huez (on stage 17), then 14th in a 53km TT (stage 20), then a week later get 3rd in the very hilly Giro dell'Appenino (behind 2 dopers) is pretty darn impressive going.
His Vuelta 2011 performance was a huge surprise, I can't imagine anyone saying otherwise, but we're halfway through 2015 now and it's still the best (only?) stick to beat him with. And people have been digging. A lot.0 -
There were some impressive results - u23 and otherwise - for Froome before he even got to Barloworld.
He won a stage of Giro delle Regioni up to Montepulciano, beating riders like Mollema, Rui Costa, and a very young TJVG. He was 2nd on the loooong Arosa climb finishing just behind Matthias Frank and ahead of Jakob Fuglsang; on the previous stage he was 3rd just behind Fuglsang. Stage win + 6th up Mt Fuji in Tour of Japan. Honestly, after reading his story I think it's remarkable he got those results.
I still think that as a neo-pro riding the Tour de France to get 30th up Alpe d'Huez (on stage 17), then 14th in a 53km TT (stage 20), then a week later get 3rd in the very hilly Giro dell'Appenino (behind 2 dopers) is pretty darn impressive going.
His Vuelta 2011 performance was a huge surprise, I can't imagine anyone saying otherwise, but we're halfway through 2015 now and it's still the best (only?) stick to beat him with. And people have been digging. A lot.
Cheers Turfle, I was trying to remember who he beat as well as Costa. Was it the Arosa stage or the previous one, where he would have won if he hadn't followed the moto/car when it peeled off before the finish? Twas one of them, I think0 -
I'll give it to Sky. If they are systematically doping as a team under all the scrutiny they are under and all the pronouncements then they have MASSIVE cohones. Might account for Froomes awkward riding style.
0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19666913#p19666913]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:There were some impressive results - u23 and otherwise - for Froome before he even got to Barloworld.
He won a stage of Giro delle Regioni up to Montepulciano, beating riders like Mollema, Rui Costa, and a very young TJVG. He was 2nd on the loooong Arosa climb finishing just behind Matthias Frank and ahead of Jakob Fuglsang; on the previous stage he was 3rd just behind Fuglsang. Stage win + 6th up Mt Fuji in Tour of Japan. Honestly, after reading his story I think it's remarkable he got those results.
I still think that as a neo-pro riding the Tour de France to get 30th up Alpe d'Huez (on stage 17), then 14th in a 53km TT (stage 20), then a week later get 3rd in the very hilly Giro dell'Appenino (behind 2 dopers) is pretty darn impressive going.
His Vuelta 2011 performance was a huge surprise, I can't imagine anyone saying otherwise, but we're halfway through 2015 now and it's still the best (only?) stick to beat him with. And people have been digging. A lot.
Cheers Turfle, I was trying to remember who he beat as well as Costa. Was it the Arosa stage or the previous one, where he would have won if he hadn't followed the moto/car when it peeled off before the finish? Twas one of them, I think
That was this one, where he got away with Grega Bole:
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=5295
(I appear to have combined two different races in my post!)0 -
As I have pointed out before, Froome didn't have that huge a jump in performance at a GT, actually pretty similar to others:
Contador went from 31st to 1st, Froome went from 34th to 2nd, Nibali went from 20th to 6th, Quintana went from 36th to 2nd.
All pretty similar jumps in performance, I know its not scientific but it's interesting.0
