Froome Vuelta salbutamol problem

Jez mon

indyP wrote:

'Omerta is alive and well in the peloton' - this written by a 'mod' in the comments section on CN about CF first stage today. I can't believe my eyes at times

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-f ... sol-stage/

Some of those comments make the DM below the line look erudite and well informed!

tim000

Vino'sGhost wrote:

It’s gone very quiet from the Froome supporters club

maybe because this thread is just going round in circles. has there been any new news since page 1 ?

ocdupalais

Sky doing a resounding job at saying "have some of that!" and infuriating their already fit-to-burst critics in both Andalusia and Algarve, today.

RichN95.

OCDuPalais wrote:

Sky doing a resounding job at saying "have some of that!" and infuriating their already fit-to-burst critics in both Andalusia and Algarve, today.

I was hoping Froome would win today just for the reaction around various parts. And to see the media day trippers from yesterday being told to turn around and go back.

blazing_saddles

RichN95 wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

Sky doing a resounding job at saying "have some of that!" and infuriating their already fit-to-burst critics in both Andalusia and Algarve, today.

I was hoping Froome would win today just for the reaction around various parts. And to see the media day trippers from yesterday being told to turn around and go back.

Not to worry.
I am sure the tin foil hat brigade will make much theory from Froome pulling up alongside the stage winner (*spoiler*), just before he took off like a scalded cat.

Vino'sGhost

[*]

Blazing Saddles wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

Sky doing a resounding job at saying "have some of that!" and infuriating their already fit-to-burst critics in both Andalusia and Algarve, today.

I was hoping Froome would win today just for the reaction around various parts. And to see the media day trippers from yesterday being told to turn around and go back.

Not to worry.
I am sure the tin foil hat brigade will make much theory from Froome pulling up alongside the stage winner (*spoiler*), just before he took off like a scalded cat.

I thought froome looked really good today not at all stressed by that brutal climb.

ocdupalais

tim000 wrote:

Vino'sGhost wrote:

It’s gone very quiet from the Froome supporters club

maybe because this thread is just going round in circles. has there been any new news since page 1 ?

No new news (other than Sky in ominously good form with no inhalers spotted)... but it’s gone even more quiet from the anti-Froome brigade. Is there something else on the internet to go on and on about that I’ve missed?

m.r.m.

Outside of the politics, Sky did a masterful job in Algarve today of controlling the race and setting up their captains. Wonder if that is a harbinger of things to come in the monuments (mainly) with my man Kwiatkowski.

redvision

OCDuPalais wrote:

it’s gone even more quiet from the anti-Froome brigade

That's because the likes of Tony Martin are leading the fight and publically saying what has been argued on here.

Sky might have looked impressive so far, very ominous for the season ahead (unless their inhalers run out ), but it is so wrong seeing froome race whilst this is hanging over him.

blazing_saddles

redvision wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

it’s gone even more quiet from the anti-Froome brigade

That's because the likes of Tony Martin are leading the fight and publically saying what has been argued on here.

Sky might have looked impressive so far, very ominous for the season ahead (unless their inhalers run out ), but it is so wrong seeing froome race whilst this is hanging over him.

Quite embarrassing on Wednesday when they quoted him, but left out the fact that Martin wasn't actually racing Andalusia. The most outspoken of the lot must be Tim Wellens, thought. He's good for promoting headlines like this one:-

http://www.velonews.com/2018/02/news/ro ... rie_457279

Even if the content doesn't quite do it justice.

“I would have preferred that it was resolved before he came back, especially in the instance that he gets a suspension and the results could be disqualified,” Fulgsang said Tuesday. “It would be good for cycling if the case had been cleared before Froome comes back to racing.”

After speaking with VeloNews on Tuesday, Fuglsang was spotted chatting to Froome as the came into the finish line together. He later told a Danish journalist that he softened his opinion about Froome, adding, “He told me some things I did not know about his case.”

That's pretty weak sauce coming from a notorious hard liner.

bobmcstuff

Blazing Saddles wrote:

redvision wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

it’s gone even more quiet from the anti-Froome brigade

That's because the likes of Tony Martin are leading the fight and publically saying what has been argued on here.

Sky might have looked impressive so far, very ominous for the season ahead (unless their inhalers run out ), but it is so wrong seeing froome race whilst this is hanging over him.

Quite embarrassing on Wednesday when they quoted him, but left out the fact that Martin wasn't actually racing Andalusia. The most outspoken of the lot must be Tim Wellens, thought. He's good for promoting headlines like this one:-

http://www.velonews.com/2018/02/news/ro ... rie_457279

Even if the content doesn't quite do it justice.

“I would have preferred that it was resolved before he came back, especially in the instance that he gets a suspension and the results could be disqualified,” Fulgsang said Tuesday. “It would be good for cycling if the case had been cleared before Froome comes back to racing.”

After speaking with VeloNews on Tuesday, Fuglsang was spotted chatting to Froome as the came into the finish line together. He later told a Danish journalist that he softened his opinion about Froome, adding, “He told me some things I did not know about his case.”

That's pretty weak sauce coming from a notorious hard liner.

That's a bit different to not quite doing it justice - doesn't it pretty much contradict the headline...

smithy21

Blazing Saddles wrote:

redvision wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

it’s gone even more quiet from the anti-Froome brigade

That's because the likes of Tony Martin are leading the fight and publically saying what has been argued on here.

Sky might have looked impressive so far, very ominous for the season ahead (unless their inhalers run out ), but it is so wrong seeing froome race whilst this is hanging over him.

Quite embarrassing on Wednesday when they quoted him, but left out the fact that Martin wasn't actually racing Andalusia. The most outspoken of the lot must be Tim Wellens, thought. He's good for promoting headlines like this one:-

http://www.velonews.com/2018/02/news/ro ... rie_457279

Even if the content doesn't quite do it justice.

“I would have preferred that it was resolved before he came back, especially in the instance that he gets a suspension and the results could be disqualified,” Fulgsang said Tuesday. “It would be good for cycling if the case had been cleared before Froome comes back to racing.”

After speaking with VeloNews on Tuesday, Fuglsang was spotted chatting to Froome as the came into the finish line together. He later told a Danish journalist that he softened his opinion about Froome, adding, “He told me some things I did not know about his case.”

That's pretty weak sauce coming from a notorious hard liner.

Come on Jakob, tell us what he told you.

yorkshireraw

smithy21 wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

redvision wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

it’s gone even more quiet from the anti-Froome brigade

That's because the likes of Tony Martin are leading the fight and publically saying what has been argued on here.

Sky might have looked impressive so far, very ominous for the season ahead (unless their inhalers run out ), but it is so wrong seeing froome race whilst this is hanging over him.

Quite embarrassing on Wednesday when they quoted him, but left out the fact that Martin wasn't actually racing Andalusia. The most outspoken of the lot must be Tim Wellens, thought. He's good for promoting headlines like this one:-

http://www.velonews.com/2018/02/news/ro ... rie_457279

Even if the content doesn't quite do it justice.

“I would have preferred that it was resolved before he came back, especially in the instance that he gets a suspension and the results could be disqualified,” Fulgsang said Tuesday. “It would be good for cycling if the case had been cleared before Froome comes back to racing.”

After speaking with VeloNews on Tuesday, Fuglsang was spotted chatting to Froome as the came into the finish line together. He later told a Danish journalist that he softened his opinion about Froome, adding, “He told me some things I did not know about his case.”

That's pretty weak sauce coming from a notorious hard liner.

Come on Jakob, tell us what he told you.

Probably something like 'mate, FFS, you race for a team that's had multiple banned riders before and during their time there, plus your boss is one of the most unrepentant dopers of all time. You're looking a bit precarious up there on your high horse.'

blazing_saddles

smithy21 wrote:

Come on Jakob, tell us what he told you.

I find that to be the most interesting part of the article, as it exposes the media mindset.
Imagine if what he said had had a negative impact on Fuglsang.
Would the press be satisfied to leave it with a simple: "that he had hardened his opinion"?

mamil314

Matthewfalle wrote:

indyP wrote:

'Omerta is alive and well in the peloton' - this written by a 'mod' in the comments section on CN about CF first stage today. I can't believe my eyes at times

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-f ... sol-stage/

nowt wrong with anything on there - cross section of opinion, same as on here.

No. You don't see media representatives here cynically stoking the fire to keep clicks going.
There is no cross section of opinion here. It's neutral people trying to point out to 'strongly opinionated' fellas that there is not much to go on to make a conclusion and everyone should wait for officials to do their job. It's obvious by now that their words are drowned out by rustling of tinfoil sheets. Earlier comment about 'Pro-Froome camp going quiet' shows me that some here care about arguing more than about the actual issue.

larkim

You'd imagine it would be very difficult to keep a secret in the peloton once a conversation has happened. I'm expecting some of that conversation to leak out, though the cynic in me suggests the bits that will leak out will be filtered according to the broad position adopted by the media outlet reporting on it. Whatever amount of pre-judging you do (and we all do it to a greater or lesser degree), its no great surprise when media outlets make a point of persisting with a direction of a story once they've established it.

blazing_saddles

mamil314 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

indyP wrote:

'Omerta is alive and well in the peloton' - this written by a 'mod' in the comments section on CN about CF first stage today. I can't believe my eyes at times

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-f ... sol-stage/

nowt wrong with anything on there - cross section of opinion, same as on here.

No. You don't see media representatives here cynically stoking the fire to keep clicks going.
There is no cross section of opinion here. It's neutral people trying to point out to 'strongly opinionated' fellas that there is not much to go on to make a conclusion and everyone should wait for officials to do their job. It's obvious by now that their words are drowned out by rustling of tinfoil sheets. Earlier comment about 'Pro-Froome camp going quiet' shows me that some here care about arguing more than about the actual issue.

On cue, to reinforce this point.
Another day, another fine CN re-hash of the same old quotes.
Since things are being repeated, it is also worth remembering that Wellens, who is the lead quote in these stories, holds the rather outspoken viewpoint that asthmatics should not be allowed to use a puffer, should the need arise, during a race.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/naesen- ... a-del-sol/

Note which rider mentioned in the Velonew's piece conveniently fails to make the cut in CN's one sided story telling...

Vino'sGhost

mamil314 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

indyP wrote:

'Omerta is alive and well in the peloton' - this written by a 'mod' in the comments section on CN about CF first stage today. I can't believe my eyes at times

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-f ... sol-stage/

nowt wrong with anything on there - cross section of opinion, same as on here.

No. You don't see media representatives here cynically stoking the fire to keep clicks going.
There is no cross section of opinion here. It's neutral people trying to point out to 'strongly opinionated' fellas that there is not much to go on to make a conclusion and everyone should wait for officials to do their job. It's obvious by now that their words are drowned out by rustling of tinfoil sheets. Earlier comment about 'Pro-Froome camp going quiet' shows me that some here care about arguing more than about the actual issue.

It’s not about the argument it’s about the almost religious belief that he’s innocent of any wrong doing, that he’s been hard done to, that it wouldn’t happen if it were anyone else, it’s almost religious just like it was with Armstrong . The willing suspension of disbelief and reinforcement with statements like “he wouldn’t have done it because he knows he’s getting tested.

As far as I’m aware Armstrong didn’t get done for failing a test ( he may have arranged for no false tests and bought test equipment but that’s a different story)

Matthewfalle

mamil314 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

indyP wrote:

'Omerta is alive and well in the peloton' - this written by a 'mod' in the comments section on CN about CF first stage today. I can't believe my eyes at times

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-f ... sol-stage/

nowt wrong with anything on there - cross section of opinion, same as on here.

No. You don't see media representatives here cynically stoking the fire to keep clicks going.
There is no cross section of opinion here. It's neutral people trying to point out to 'strongly opinionated' fellas that there is not much to go on to make a conclusion and everyone should wait for officials to do their job. It's obvious by now that their words are drowned out by rustling of tinfoil sheets. Earlier comment about 'Pro-Froome camp going quiet' shows me that some here care about arguing more than about the actual issue.

It seems tha5 anytime someone writes anything about your Saint Froome you get angry. Someone with more knowledge of the whole thing writes icee you don’t like - perhaps he’s telling the truth?

No cynical stoking of any fires there as far as I can see.

Methinks the man/lady protesters too much.

iainf72

I find the reporting odd. Things like 9/10 riders not thinking Froome should be there. So if we take that to it's logical extension, 9/10 riders don't agree with anti-doping rules.

I suspect for most riders they can imagine it's more a misfortune than anything else, and are very much in a "there but for the grace of god I go" mindset You'll have some like Wellens virtue signalling

surrey_commuter

iainf72 wrote:

I find the reporting odd. Things like 9/10 riders not thinking Froome should be there. So if we take that to it's logical extension, 9/10 riders don't agree with anti-doping rules.

I suspect for most riders they can imagine it's more a misfortune than anything else, and are very much in a "there but for the grace of god I go" mindset You'll have some like Wellens virtue signalling

That is a very good sign. Their previous welcome to cheaters always showed their acceptance of cheating. We will know the sport is truly clean when teams refuse to employ convicted cheats because of pressure from sponsors and riders.

smithy21

Surrey Commuter wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

I find the reporting odd. Things like 9/10 riders not thinking Froome should be there. So if we take that to it's logical extension, 9/10 riders don't agree with anti-doping rules.

I suspect for most riders they can imagine it's more a misfortune than anything else, and are very much in a "there but for the grace of god I go" mindset You'll have some like Wellens virtue signalling

That is a very good sign. Their previous welcome to cheaters always showed their acceptance of cheating. We will know the sport is truly clean when teams refuse to employ convicted cheats because of pressure from sponsors and riders.

Christ.

When it is “truly clean”they will be riding unicorns, not bikes.

iainf72

Surrey Commuter wrote:

That is a very good sign. Their previous welcome to cheaters always showed their acceptance of cheating. We will know the sport is truly clean when teams refuse to employ convicted cheats because of pressure from sponsors and riders.

Which part is a good sign? The 9/10 riders? Because that's blatant nonsense.

Matthewfalle

Surrey Commuter wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

I find the reporting odd. Things like 9/10 riders not thinking Froome should be there. So if we take that to it's logical extension, 9/10 riders don't agree with anti-doping rules.

I suspect for most riders they can imagine it's more a misfortune than anything else, and are very much in a "there but for the grace of god I go" mindset You'll have some like Wellens virtue signalling

That is a very good sign. Their previous welcome to cheaters always showed their acceptance of cheating. We will know the sport is truly clean when teams refuse to employ convicted cheats because of pressure from sponsors and riders.

I thought that was SKY’s raison d’atre?

Bo Duke

Bikeradar needs to send a message to thanks to Froome for creating a 100 page thread to see us through the off season.

andyp

YorkshireRaw wrote:

Probably something like 'mate, FFS, you race for a team that's had multiple banned riders before and during their time there, plus your boss is one of the most unrepentant dopers of all time. You're looking a bit precarious up there on your high horse.'

Looking at Fuglsang's career history, and you'd be surprised he has any claim to the moral high ground - riding for Riis, Bruyneel and Vinokourov. It's the doping equivalent of a royal flush.

ademort

Just a thought. I am also an asthma patient and use Ventolin Disc 200microgram . I understand that Froome uses the 100 microgram ventolin meaning he can take 16 puffs per day. Is it possible that his inhaler was putting out 200 micrograms each time and therefore doubling his Salbutomol level. I know drugs are strictly controlled etc but could it happen. At the end of the day when you use an inhaler you don,t see the medicine you just breathe in and thats it. If you take tablets or medicine in liquid form you can see what you are taking can,t you. Just a thought that he might have had a 200 microgram inhaler and not a 100 microgram inhaler. Any thoughts.

redvision

ademort wrote:

Just a thought. I am also an asthma patient and use Ventolin Disc 200microgram . I understand that Froome uses the 100 microgram ventolin meaning he can take 16 puffs per day. Is it possible that his inhaler was putting out 200 micrograms each time and therefore doubling his Salbutomol level. I know drugs are strictly controlled etc but could it happen. At the end of the day when you use an inhaler you don,t see the medicine you just breathe in and thats it. If you take tablets or medicine in liquid form you can see what you are taking can,t you. Just a thought that he might have had a 200 microgram inhaler and not a 100 microgram inhaler. Any thoughts.

Yes, by him pressing the inhaler twice

Inhalers deliver a measured dose so no, it would not have delivered a double dosage.

Vino'sGhost

Q How many puffs does it take to win bike race?

No_Ta_Doctor

Vino'sGhost wrote:

Q How many puffs does it take to win bike race?

You seem to have inadvertently stumbled upon a key fact here. No amount of puffs is going to win you a bike race.

And in keeping with the debate style employed frequently by you, because it obviously emphasises that no other conclusion can be drawn that isn't utterly laughable and therefore held by a complete idiot: