DS Forums

 
 

The Pro Cycling Thread (Part 2)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14-07-2013, 16:56
SJB 2007
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dagenham, Essex.
Posts: 940
Froome incredible.... Quintana wonderful... Kennaugh brilliant

Loved today. I love it when the guys up front put their foot down, and the riders start popping out of the back... Oh the pain!

But again questions will be asked about Froome's performance... He seems on another level to the rest of the peloton... Not only another level, another planet!

God i hope he's clean.

Cycling news forum must be in meltdown!

PS. I did predict Froome Quintana... Just wish i put a couple of quid on them! :/
SJB 2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 14-07-2013, 17:04
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
I said yesterday that if he wanted to be sure of winning the Tour, Froome needed to do the attacking himself today - I'm rarely right but I'm glad I was today

Nicely done by Sky, I've said they lack strength in depth this year, but at least they've figured out how to utilise what they have, and the rest day should help Porte and Kennaugh recover to stay with Froome long enough that he doesn't end up completely isolated on Tuesday. Froome looks as if he could cope with it anyway though, and he'll surely stay glued to the front of the peleton now to avoid a repeat of what Saxo Bank did the other day.

Still testing days to come though - the TT should suit Froome, and not suit some of his main rivals, but Thursday-Saturday are all tricky stages, and I'd be surprised if Contador doesn't have something planned for the double Alpe d'Huez...unless he hasn't got the legs anymore, of course.
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:07
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
But again questions will be asked about Froome's performance... He seems on another level to the rest of the peloton... Not only another level, another planet!

God i hope he's clean.
Oh for goodness' sake! This is what I hate about cycling, why can't people just enjoy the Tour and not try to second guess or have suspicions about absolutely everything all of the time?!

Sky are probably the most scrutinised team in the world, in any sport, if they were cheating, they'd be caught. Testing has never been more stringent, and they've passed everything.

Why is it so hard to just believe that people are actually achieving great things and not cheating? Many riders have won the Tour in style before, clean riders have won on Ventoux before, so it's not as if Froome's actually doing anything completely remarkable at all. He's just doing it better than everyone else who's participating in the Tour this year.
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:12
paul2307
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 7,910
Oh for goodness' sake! This is what I hate about cycling, why can't people just enjoy the Tour and not try to second guess or have suspicions about absolutely everything all of the time?!

Sky are probably the most scrutinised team in the world, in any sport, if they were cheating, they'd be caught. Testing has never been more stringent, and they've passed everything.

Why is it so hard to just believe that people are actually achieving great things and not cheating? Many riders have won the Tour in style before, clean riders have won on Ventoux before, so it's not as if Froome's actually doing anything completely remarkable at all. He's just doing it better than everyone else who's participating in the Tour this year.
Remember someone called Lance Armstrong he never failed a drugs test by all accounts
paul2307 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:15
John259
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Posts: 14,282
and they've passed everything
AFAIK only urine is tested....
John259 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:16
Dare_Allan
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 2,298
But again questions will be asked about Froome's performance... He seems on another level to the rest of the peloton... Not only another level, another planet!
You can be as sure as you can about anything that Sky are riding clean. It is inconceivable that what is in effect a branch of British Cycling would be doping. There is a small possibility that a rogue rider might cheat but I can be certain that the scientific scrutiny Sky use on their performance data that they would know and get rid of anyone. Probably blow the whistle themselves.

There is a very simple difference between Sky and every other team out there, with the possible exception of GreenEdge. Professional, monitored, scinetifically backed out of competition training. The continental teams still believe that riding 150+ days a year is all the training you need. So they can never excel in the way Sky do.

When you add in the 20 years of British Cyclings World Class programme of identifying talent - finding people who are naturally disposed to having the physiology to do well when trained and you have a very clear reason why Sky can do what they do.

And they will keep on doing it. I can't wait to see what Kennaugh does over the next few years. What I can be sure of is that until the continental teams recognise that Cycling has moved on and out of competition training is required to succeed in the TdF that Sky will dominate
Dare_Allan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:18
d'@ve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,728
He won't be the last - Team Sky are shocking this year.


Superb Sky, superb Froome.
d'@ve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:18
Dare_Allan
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 2,298
Remember someone called Lance Armstrong he never failed a drugs test by all accounts
Lance Armstrong DID fail drugs tests. the results were covered up by friends at the UCI. And before you say "maybe they're covering for Sky", remember Sky is British cycling, and the UCI detest British Cycling, have changed the rules of the sport to harm British Cycling's success and little would give Pat McQuaid more pleasure than being able to show Sky doping.

He can't because they don't.
Dare_Allan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:22
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
Remember someone called Lance Armstrong he never failed a drugs test by all accounts
Did you miss the bit of my post where I said that testing is more stringent than it has ever been before?

Anyway:

Lance Armstrong DID fail drugs tests. the results were covered up by friends at the UCI. And before you say "maybe they're covering for Sky", remember Sky is British cycling, and the UCI detest British Cycling, have changed the rules of the sport to harm British Cycling's success and little would give Pat McQuaid more pleasure than being able to show Sky doping.

He can't because they don't.
Exactly.


Funny how no-one was claiming Froome was doping last year when he finished second to Wiggins, when he wouldn't have been second at all if Wiggins hadn't been team leader and a better time triallist. But now that he's team leader....

Some people really do seem to just love to complain, see things that aren't there and think the worst of people
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:22
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160


Superb Sky, superb Froome.


Their tactics on the 'ordinary' stages when things go a bit different to what they think is the script are still shocking though
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:25
Dare_Allan
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 2,298
Funny how no-one was claiming Froome was doping last year when he finished second to Wiggins, when he wouldn't have been second at all if Wiggins hadn't been team leader and a better time triallist. But now that he's team leader....
Indeed. Last yaer froome finished 3 minutes ahead of third placed Vincenzo Nibali who isn't riding this year as he did the Giro. The next best rider was 7 minutes down on Froome at the end.

He only has 4 minutes currently on a pack of riders between 4 and 5 back. This is therefore exactly in line with last year.
Dare_Allan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:28
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
Did you miss the bit of my post where I said that testing is more stringent than it has ever been before?

Anyway:



Exactly.


Funny how no-one was claiming Froome was doping last year when he finished second to Wiggins, when he wouldn't have been second at all if Wiggins hadn't been team leader and a better time triallist. But now that he's team leader....

Some people really do seem to just love to complain, see things that aren't there and think the worst of people
The thing that confused me, is who exactly do 'they' want to win if not Froome/Sky?

Using their reference that Froome/Sky are doping who exactly is in the frame to be clean and beat the dopers? Can anyone clean beat systematic and what would appear to be such a professional system that there has not been so much as a whisper about norty doings?

Is it just more that it is Froome/Sky than anything else?
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:28
Dare_Allan
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 2,298


Their tactics on the 'ordinary' stages when things go a bit different to what they think is the script are still shocking though
If Sky have a weakness its that they only thing they seem to use for selection is performance data. Presumably Lopez and Kiryienka put out better power data than Bernie Eisel but I'd pick Eisel every single time over those two because his race head is far superior.

They will be even stronger than they are with a bit more flexibility and taking account of how someone's mental performance will effect them.
Dare_Allan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:29
SJB 2007
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dagenham, Essex.
Posts: 940
Oh for goodness' sake! This is what I hate about cycling, why can't people just enjoy the Tour and not try to second guess or have suspicions about absolutely everything all of the time?!

Sky are probably the most scrutinised team in the world, in any sport, if they were cheating, they'd be caught. Testing has never been more stringent, and they've passed everything.

Why is it so hard to just believe that people are actually achieving great things and not cheating? Many riders have won the Tour in style before, clean riders have won on Ventoux before, so it's not as if Froome's actually doing anything completely remarkable at all. He's just doing it better than everyone else who's participating in the Tour this year.
I think he's clean... I was just saying that 'i hope' he's clean.

If that makes any sense. :/

I and you don't really know... Chris does, and he says he doesn't dope... Fair enough.

Being born and brought up in Kenya (rift valley) must have an effect on his metabolism. Like the Kenyan distance runners.... I'm not going to, or try to explain, but i'm sure that must be of some help.

At the moment Chris is so much better then any other cyclist... With the history of this sport, sadly questions will be asked.
SJB 2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:36
Dare_Allan
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 2,298
At the moment Chris is so much better then any other cyclist... With the history of this sport, sadly questions will be asked.
Which is the wrong question to ask.

Lance Armstrong admits to doping. Most if not ALL of his competition at the time he was riding have turned out to be using performance enhancing drugs.

You can extrapolate this to say that Armstrong would have won his 7 tours if no-one had been doping. And he would have been comparatively head and shoulders above them all.
Dare_Allan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:43
SJB 2007
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dagenham, Essex.
Posts: 940
Froome not the fastest to climb Mont Ventoux...

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...13103522034028
SJB 2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:57
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
With the history of this sport, sadly questions will be asked.
That's my point though, if people stopped trying to second guess everything and assuming the worst, they wouldn't be asking the questions, so this ridiculous continuance of suspicion wouldn't be continuing to ruin cycling.

Innocent until proven guilty is the general rule, so why cycling fans can't abide by that, I don't know.

Funnily enough, not being negative all the time actually makes watching the race more enjoyable


Is it just more that it is Froome/Sky than anything else?
It seems to be. All these fair-weather conspiracy theorists were nowhere to be seen when Sky did such a bad job of not letting Saxo Bank get away the other day, they only appear when Sky are doing well....
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 18:04
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
If Sky have a weakness its that they only thing they seem to use for selection is performance data. Presumably Lopez and Kiryienka put out better power data than Bernie Eisel but I'd pick Eisel every single time over those two because his race head is far superior.

They will be even stronger than they are with a bit more flexibility and taking account of how someone's mental performance will effect them.
So true.

A good percentage of cycling is headology - maybe even as much as 50%. Merckx was the master and Armstrong understood it completely. It's also where Indurain had the beating of Rominger. It's no good having the legs if your head is telling you that you're second 'cos that what you will be.

A team with an Eisel is worth far more in headology stakes to another team assessing the Team Sky weak points.
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 18:16
jcafcw
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,439
Remember someone called Lance Armstrong he never failed a drugs test by all accounts
He did fail a drug test. But it got covered up. The French lab even said they had a positive test but somehow he was never charged.
jcafcw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 18:56
SJB 2007
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dagenham, Essex.
Posts: 940
He did fail a drug test. But it got covered up. The French lab even said they had a positive test but somehow he was never charged.
Here's the story...

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/g...s-8577491.html

And i've just read today stage thread over at the Cycling news forum.... Funny as ****!
SJB 2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 19:14
Eater Sundae
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,674
Did you miss the bit of my post where I said that testing is more stringent than it has ever been before?

Anyway:



Exactly.


Funny how no-one was claiming Froome was doping last year when he finished second to Wiggins, when he wouldn't have been second at all if Wiggins hadn't been team leader and a better time triallist. But now that he's team leader....

Some people really do seem to just love to complain, see things that aren't there and think the worst of people
You don't read "The Clinic" then.
Eater Sundae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 19:49
John259
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Posts: 14,282
I just spent a bit of time on StreetView exploring the route of next Wednesday's time trial, and the route round from Alpe d'Huez back to Bourg d'Oisans on Thursday.

Ummm, challenging is putting it very mildly for both of them. The time trial course is very twisty and fairly steep in places, while the Col de Sarenne appears to be little more than a mountain goat track.
John259 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 21:02
culttvfan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,625
Why is it so hard to just believe that people are actually achieving great things and not cheating?

Er, because history suggests otherwise. Just taking the 'winners' from the last 2 decades or so:

1996 winner - Bjarne Riis - doped
1997 winner - Jan Ulrich - doped
1998 winner - Marco Pantani - tested positive in 1999, served a ban and missed that year's Tour
1999-2005 - What's the guy's name?
2006 winner - Floyd Landis - Subsequently failed a drugs test and stripped of win
2007 - Michael Rasmussen. Comfortably leading when thrown out for missing drugs tests and lying about whereabouts
2007 and 2009 winner - Alberto Contador - Also 'won' the 2010 Tour but later failed a drugs test. Was stripped of his 2010 win and served a ban.

Perhaps you're right though. Maybe people should just enjoy The Tour and not have these suspicions.
culttvfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 21:13
Mark F
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,251
Trouble is like with athletics people will see cycling as having a certain reputation.
Mark F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 21:26
SJB 2007
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dagenham, Essex.
Posts: 940
2007 - Michael Rasmussen. Comfortably leading when thrown out for missing drugs tests and lying about whereabouts
He took it all. I don't think he ever tested positive, but that is incredible after he admitted to taking...

EPO, growth hormone, testosterone, DHEA, insulin, IGF-1, cortisone and blood transfusions
SJB 2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:00.