Chris Froome salbutamol/Tour merged threads

1…34689…44

Comments

  • larkim
    larkim Posts: 2,485
    This article on Ulissi suggests he admitted the offence (of ingesting too much) - in which case, that would be very different from what we understand Froome's position to be (i.e. that he DIDN'T ingest too much).

    http://www.velonews.com/2018/01/news/ul ... ght_454257

    So again, may not be a good comparator with the Froome case.
    2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
    2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #4s)
    2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
    2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
    2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
    2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)
  • larkim
    larkim Posts: 2,485
    Similarly in this article Ulissi says (unchallenged):-

    The team issued a statement from Ulissi. He retierated his innocence.

    "I feel it is important to underline that its been recognised that I have not acted with the intent to improve my athletic performance, but it has been established that I committed negligently, which of course I regret..."

    All of that seems to imply that there were probably "too many puffs", but that he was made to "prove" his point that he wasn't trying to enhance performance.

    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ulissi- ... -positive/
    2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
    2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #4s)
    2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
    2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
    2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
    2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,788
    Seems to be rumors of a decision before the Tour starts. I can imagine the people who wanted a quick resolution would be unhappy with this outcome
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    inseine wrote:
    Seems to be rumors of a decision before the Tour starts. I can imagine the people who wanted a quick resolution would be unhappy with this outcome

    As far as I'm aware, that rumour is entirely based on the precedent that almost all proper doping scandals blow their lid the week before the Tour (the exceptions being Festina and Rasmussen).
    _
  • Beatmaker
    Beatmaker Posts: 1,092
    Philippa York wading in on Froome/Hinault/Sky. Again. http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-and-his-struggle-for-greatness/
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,788
    Beatmaker wrote:
    Philippa York wading in on Froome/Hinault/Sky. Again. http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-and-his-struggle-for-greatness/

    So everyone should just accept what Hinault says, even if patently incorrect, just because he is a 'great' whilst Froome isn't?
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • Dorset_Boy
    Dorset_Boy Posts: 7,557
    I think the sunshine has gone to Philippa York's head. She clearly hates Froome and tries to belittle his achievements.
    Just because the Badger was LE PATRON, doesn't mean his views are correct, or informed, and where he is patently wrong he should be called out on it.
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Beatmaker wrote:
    Philippa York wading in on Froome/Hinault/Sky. Again. http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-and-his-struggle-for-greatness/
    well - that was a load of non-descript waffle ... glad I can speed read!
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:

    Different cases (banned not controlled substances) and both exceptions rather than the rule.
    Exceptions to what rule?
    The Bardini riders from last year's Giro took eight months to process. There's a Russian track rider whose ban has been in the appeal stage so long that she actually finished her two year ban and returned to racing. Alexandre Pliushcin's salbutamol case took eight months.

    3 of your 4 examples took 8 months. Froome's case is into month 10. So his case is already longer.

    It is not normal for a doping case to drag on for 10 months+
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    Dorset Boy wrote:
    I think the sunshine has gone to Philippa York's head. She clearly hates Froome and tries to belittle his achievements.
    Just because the Badger was LE PATRON, doesn't mean his views are correct, or informed, and where he is patently wrong he should be called out on it.

    She avoided addressing what he said.


    But she does have a point that Froome is no Merckx, Hinault or Anquetil. He's not on cycling's Mount Rushmore.
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • kleinstroker
    kleinstroker Posts: 2,133
    Froome expects to be fully exonerated, and as he is someone who seems to be pretty good at understanding the rules, he's probably right. People like Hinault will then spend the rest of their lives huffing & puffing about it.
  • dolan_driver
    dolan_driver Posts: 831
    Beatmaker wrote:
    Philippa York wading in on Froome/Hinault/Sky. Again. http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-and-his-struggle-for-greatness/

    He might be correct in the assertion that disagreeing with the Badger will only provoke the angrier French fans to take matters into their own hands out on the Tour route. Hopefully not.

    DD.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    edited June 2018
    inseine wrote:
    Beatmaker wrote:
    Philippa York wading in on Froome/Hinault/Sky. Again. http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-and-his-struggle-for-greatness/

    So everyone should just accept what Hinault says, even if patently incorrect, just because he is a 'great' whilst Froome isn't?
    It would be interesting to know what Hinault's views on Philippa York are. I'm guessing they're somewhat 'old fashioned'.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    Timoid. wrote:
    Dorset Boy wrote:
    I think the sunshine has gone to Philippa York's head. She clearly hates Froome and tries to belittle his achievements.
    Just because the Badger was LE PATRON, doesn't mean his views are correct, or informed, and where he is patently wrong he should be called out on it.

    She avoided addressing what he said.


    But she does have a point that Froome is no Merckx, Hinault or Anquetil. He's not on cycling's Mount Rushmore.
    If they raced today Merckx, Hinault and Anquetil wouldn't be either.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • jam1e
    jam1e Posts: 1,068
    God that’s a s**t article.
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    RichN95 wrote:

    No he wasn't. He lost his results from the Giro were he tested positive, but kept everything from the rest of that season - including a Paris-Tours victory and two Vuelta stages. He lost some from the next season due to backdating (which included the off season), but he had to apply for that.

    So you admit he still lost results beyond the Giro right?
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:

    But she does have a point that Froome is no Merckx, Hinault or Anquetil. He's not on cycling's Mount Rushmore.
    If they raced today Merckx, Hinault and Anquetil wouldn't be either.

    Based on what? Show me your workings.

    They pulverised the opposition on all terrains in all types of races.
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • Vino'sGhost
    Vino'sGhost Posts: 4,129
    Timoid. wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:

    Different cases (banned not controlled substances) and both exceptions rather than the rule.
    Exceptions to what rule?
    The Bardini riders from last year's Giro took eight months to process. There's a Russian track rider whose ban has been in the appeal stage so long that she actually finished her two year ban and returned to racing. Alexandre Pliushcin's salbutamol case took eight months.

    3 of your 4 examples took 8 months. Froome's case is into month 10. So his case is already longer.

    It is not normal for a doping case to drag on for 10 months+

    Didn't you know that Rich is the final word on this?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    edited June 2018
    Timoid. wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:

    But she does have a point that Froome is no Merckx, Hinault or Anquetil. He's not on cycling's Mount Rushmore.
    If they raced today Merckx, Hinault and Anquetil wouldn't be either.

    Based on what? Show me your workings.

    They pulverised the opposition on all terrains in all types of races.
    Because they would be grossly overraced and up against specialists and a much stronger peloton. They would be forced to specialise themselves. Take Valverde back to the 1970s and he'd probably have got Merckx like palmares. And Dumoilin would have got Anquetil's in the 60s.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    Timoid. wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:

    No he wasn't. He lost his results from the Giro were he tested positive, but kept everything from the rest of that season - including a Paris-Tours victory and two Vuelta stages. He lost some from the next season due to backdating (which included the off season), but he had to apply for that.

    So you admit he still lost results beyond the Giro right?
    Because he chose to (the rider can apply for backdating if there have been undue delays). He gave away a Tirreno-Adriatico stage in exchange having the ban backdated six months.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:

    But she does have a point that Froome is no Merckx, Hinault or Anquetil. He's not on cycling's Mount Rushmore.
    If they raced today Merckx, Hinault and Anquetil wouldn't be either.

    Based on what? Show me your workings.

    They pulverised the opposition on all terrains in all types of races.
    Because they would be grossly overraced and up against specialists and a much stronger peloton. They would be forced to specialise themselves. Take Valverde back to the 1970s and he'd probably have got Merckx like palmares.


    Really? Valverde? A great champion, but there is no way in hell he touches Merckx. He isn't even Kelly level.

    You're just trolling now.
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    Timoid. wrote:
    Really? Valverde? A great champion, but there is no way in hell he touches Merckx. He isn't even Kelly level.

    You're just trolling now.
    If you took him back to the 1970s when most of the leaders where all-rounders and the competition was much lower he'd win a lot more than the considerable amount he has today.

    To be competitive today, those old riders would have to ride a modern race program - which means less, more specialised racing. Which in turn means fewer victories and a slimmer palmares.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • EnacheV
    EnacheV Posts: 235
    Gilbert is ready to lead a strike against Froomey

    https://twitter.com/PhilippeGilbert/sta ... 3077374976
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:
    Really? Valverde? A great champion, but there is no way in hell he touches Merckx. He isn't even Kelly level.

    You're just trolling now.
    If you took him back to the 1970s when most of the leaders where all-rounders and the competition was much lower he'd win a lot more than the considerable amount he has today.

    To be competitive today, those old riders would have to ride a modern race program - which means less, more specialised racing. Which in turn means fewer victories and a slimmer palmares.

    But that is completely different from saying that he would be the equal of Merckx. He might win less as he would be forced to ride a lot more including on the Cobbles and on the track over the winter.
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    Slowbike wrote:
    Beatmaker wrote:
    Philippa York wading in on Froome/Hinault/Sky. Again. http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-and-his-struggle-for-greatness/
    well - that was a load of non-descript waffle ... glad I can speed read!
    Anyone else find the comments section full of the usual prejudices? From the Froome bad so anyone criticising him is right to calling the writer of the piece "he". A range of prejudices. Prejudice bingo!
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    Timoid. wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:
    Really? Valverde? A great champion, but there is no way in hell he touches Merckx. He isn't even Kelly level.

    You're just trolling now.
    If you took him back to the 1970s when most of the leaders where all-rounders and the competition was much lower he'd win a lot more than the considerable amount he has today.

    To be competitive today, those old riders would have to ride a modern race program - which means less, more specialised racing. Which in turn means fewer victories and a slimmer palmares.

    But that is completely different from saying that he would be the equal of Merckx. He might win less as he would be forced to ride a lot more including on the Cobbles and on the track over the winter.
    In terms of ability he probably is the equal of Merckx. But they rode in different times so there palamares aren't equal. If you switched them around they'd probably have each others' careers
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Beatmaker wrote:
    Philippa York wading in on Froome/Hinault/Sky. Again. http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-and-his-struggle-for-greatness/
    well - that was a load of non-descript waffle ... glad I can speed read!
    Anyone else find the comments section full of the usual prejudices? From the Froome bad so anyone criticising him is right to calling the writer of the piece "he". A range of prejudices. Prejudice bingo!

    Seems to be the way these days - everyone has an opinion and theirs is right - if that doesn't align to whatever article or subject they're commenting on then slag off or insult the author or subject.
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:
    Really? Valverde? A great champion, but there is no way in hell he touches Merckx. He isn't even Kelly level.

    You're just trolling now.
    If you took him back to the 1970s when most of the leaders where all-rounders and the competition was much lower he'd win a lot more than the considerable amount he has today.

    To be competitive today, those old riders would have to ride a modern race program - which means less, more specialised racing. Which in turn means fewer victories and a slimmer palmares.

    But that is completely different from saying that he would be the equal of Merckx. He might win less as he would be forced to ride a lot more including on the Cobbles and on the track over the winter.
    In terms of ability he probably is the equal of Merckx. But they rode in different times so there palamares aren't equal. If you switched them around they'd probably have each others' careers


    So Valverde has equal ability to the greatest cyclist of all time? Respectfully that is a load of crahp.
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • Vino'sGhost
    Vino'sGhost Posts: 4,129
    Timoid. wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:
    Really? Valverde? A great champion, but there is no way in hell he touches Merckx. He isn't even Kelly level.

    You're just trolling now.
    If you took him back to the 1970s when most of the leaders where all-rounders and the competition was much lower he'd win a lot more than the considerable amount he has today.

    To be competitive today, those old riders would have to ride a modern race program - which means less, more specialised racing. Which in turn means fewer victories and a slimmer palmares.

    But that is completely different from saying that he would be the equal of Merckx. He might win less as he would be forced to ride a lot more including on the Cobbles and on the track over the winter.
    In terms of ability he probably is the equal of Merckx. But they rode in different times so there palamares aren't equal. If you switched them around they'd probably have each others' careers


    So Valverde has equal ability to the greatest cyclist of all time? Respectfully that is a load of crahp.
    He is a proper all round winner though.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,549
    Comparing riders from different eras is utterly pointless - the sport that Merckx dominated is very different from the sport today, due to changes in technology, better diet, differences in training techniques and sports science and so on.

Categories