How good is Chris Froome?

RichN95.

When they say 'I need more data' they really mean 'I need different data'.

andyp

iainf72 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Typical Ross Tucker thread on the Cycling Tips power analysis article linked up-thread.

As you know, when I saw this it wound me up.

Nothing would ever satisfy him, yet he's too cowardly to just say in black and white how he thinks they do it. And even if he thought it was fine, he's not want to disappoint the faithful. So it's not really science anymore it's just appeasing a cult.

Did you see his tweet last night about concussion and armchair experts? I nearly choked on my chai latte...

iainf72

Quite.

My particular fave Ross quote was when he said people who tended to believe Froome were new to cycling or a particular nationality. I've argued with him before on Twitter but just could not be bothered this time.

Vino'sGhost

RichN95 wrote:

When they say 'I need more data' they really mean 'I need different data'.

Exactly a total joke!


Froomes team should stop looking for spurious new evidence to support him and just get on with it

tailwindhome

I like how Tucker et al seem surprised and appalled that Froome's team have lodged 1500 pages of defence evidence.

Were they expecting 140 characters and a meme?

RichN95.

TailWindHome wrote:

I like how Tucker et al seem surprised and appalled that Froome's team have lodged 1500 pages of defence evidence.

Were they expecting 140 characters and a meme?

TV and film lawyer dramas have lead be to believe that 1500 pages is a small amount. There should be boxes full.

Edit: I Wikied the McLibel case - a law case infamous for its length and the amount paperwork filed. I couldn't find how much was filed, but the judge's decision alone was 1000 pages long.

No_Ta_Doctor

andyp wrote:

SloppySchleckonds wrote:

andyp wrote:

It's cod science in the sense that they are trying to validate a performance based on snippets of data, so they've basically guessed the other parameters they need.

Who are 'they'?

Sebastian Weber and Shane Stokes.

Well Sebastian Weber, really. I doubt Stokes did anything more that put some padding round the analysis and tried to hide his disappointment. Might have commissioned it.

No_Ta_Doctor

iainf72 wrote:

Quite.

My particular fave Ross quote was when he said people who tended to believe Froome were new to cycling or a particular nationality. I've argued with him before on Twitter but just could not be bothered this time.

I had quite a row with him once, and then somehow Vaughters managed to come in to slap me down.
Neither of them got what I was saying at all.

RichN95.

No tA Doctor wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Quite.

My particular fave Ross quote was when he said people who tended to believe Froome were new to cycling or a particular nationality. I've argued with him before on Twitter but just could not be bothered this time.

I had quite a row with him once, and then somehow Vaughters managed to come in to slap me down.
Neither of them got what I was saying at all.

Vaughters has always identified the big anti-doping voices and blown smoke up their arses. Of course his cycling ethics include signing riders to contracts that he knows he doesn't have the money to pay. I doubt there's a more two faced man in cycling.

No_Ta_Doctor

RichN95 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Quite.

My particular fave Ross quote was when he said people who tended to believe Froome were new to cycling or a particular nationality. I've argued with him before on Twitter but just could not be bothered this time.

I had quite a row with him once, and then somehow Vaughters managed to come in to slap me down.
Neither of them got what I was saying at all.

Vaughters has always identified the big anti-doping voices and blown smoke up their arses. Of course his cycling ethics include signing riders to contracts that he knows he doesn't have the money to pay. I doubt there's a more two faced man in cycling.

It was something to do with marginal gains, which Ross always reduces to "not eating Nutella" and "everyone has always done that".
Vaughters chipped in with "it's the money" (he's not exactly wrong), but it was less than helpful seeing as they'd entirely missed the point and a multitude of Ross's anti-doping warriors were piling in.

No_Ta_Doctor

iainf72 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Typical Ross Tucker thread on the Cycling Tips power analysis article linked up-thread.

As you know, when I saw this it wound me up.

Nothing would ever satisfy him, yet he's too cowardly to just say in black and white how he thinks they do it. And even if he thought it was fine, he's not want to disappoint the faithful. So it's not really science anymore it's just appeasing a cult.

Well I should have known, and would have expected it, but my Twitter timeline is pretty f@cked up at the mo. Need to stop following so many people. I should probably start with Ross....

shirley_basso

But could Chris do better? I reckon he had about 10s more in that giro stage.

Any interviews with TdF hopefuls yet? I wish they had a Gogglebox type recording of Porte, Nibali, any french DS as he set off. Fosters, limoncello and Cotes du Rhone everywhere.

No_Ta_Doctor

Shirley Basso wrote:

But could Chris do better? I reckon he had about 10s more in that giro stage.

Any interviews with TdF hopefuls yet? I wish they had a Gogglebox type recording of Porte, Nibali, any french DS as he set off. Fosters, limoncello and Cotes du Rhone everywhere.

I'd but any subscription service that had Marc Madiot on the radio to Pinot as Froome kicks.

RichN95.

No tA Doctor wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

But could Chris do better? I reckon he had about 10s more in that giro stage.

Any interviews with TdF hopefuls yet? I wish they had a Gogglebox type recording of Porte, Nibali, any french DS as he set off. Fosters, limoncello and Cotes du Rhone everywhere.

I'd but any subscription service that had Marc Madiot on the radio to Pinot as Froome kicks.

Funny you should say that as my contacts have secured a recording: https://youtu.be/k9J6rFWTfVA?t=5

above_the_cows

TailWindHome wrote:

I like how Tucker et al seem surprised and appalled that Froome's team have lodged 1500 pages of defence evidence.

Were they expecting 140 characters and a meme?

I was hoping for this.

above_the_cows

RichN95 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Quite.

My particular fave Ross quote was when he said people who tended to believe Froome were new to cycling or a particular nationality. I've argued with him before on Twitter but just could not be bothered this time.

I had quite a row with him once, and then somehow Vaughters managed to come in to slap me down.
Neither of them got what I was saying at all.

Vaughters has always identified the big anti-doping voices and blown smoke up their arses. Of course his cycling ethics include signing riders to contracts that he knows he doesn't have the money to pay. I doubt there's a more two faced man in cycling.

Plus he looks like a dodgy arms dealers smooth talking henchman and an East End vicar. Two faced indeed!