Tour De France 2013

[sitzmark]

Originally Posted by coppiceer .

Hello everyone,

I am new to this forum, but I have been an avid watcher of the TDF for many years and am a (Sir) Cris Froome fan.

I am probably being naive, but, should or could Chris Froome and the Sky management have imposed their position as the Yellow Jersey team to shut down the GC race and wait for Alejandro Valverde after his mechanical problem on stage 13?

Might have been able to dial down the peloton, but not likely the break. Belkin took it to Valverde, not Sky. With Contador in the break and gaining serious time on Froome prior to the mountain stages ... suicide for Froome to dial things back. Can't expect or ask him to sacrifice his position to salvage Valverde's. The wind and the break created too much uncertainty.

Not likely that Movistar has any ill will toward anyone/team but Belkin. If given a chance, Movistar may double down to hurt Belkin. Obviously not worth focusing the remainder of the TdF around a grudge .. but if the opportunity arises ...

 

[steve]

Also remember it's racing at the pro level not a social ride. Valverde took to long to change his wheel, he should have swapped bikes with a team mate instead because he had no race convey to ride back through. The only thing it proves, is the fact the race isn't over yet

 

[Northern Monkey]

Valverde's puncture cost him 90 seconds as it dropped him down into the second group but he lost over 10 minutes in the end despite being surrounded by team mates. He took the choice of dropping back to the second group or taking a team mates bike. He made the wrong choice and then his team were not strong enough to bridge or even to hold the gap.

 

[jhuskey]

A day for Sky to set a high tempo to off set the threat of a contender getting a jump off the front. Also could be the day Tommy V will try for a win or maybe AC and his team will explode the peloton on the climb. Either French riders will break.

 

[carbon ass]

If anyone out there thinks Sky are not doping then they must be watching another race . If that was any of the spanish riders you would be saying that they dope . Sky are doping and Brailsford is a disgrace .

Just let them dope and have done with it . Armstrong did not do anything the other riders were doing . Wiggo and Froome could not catch a ghost until they joined Sky and Dr Leinders . Its not there special socks that make them go faster . The world needs to wake up to a new generation of dopers a lot better at it than the old guard.

 

[alienator]

If anyone out there thinks Sky are not doping then they must be watching  another race . If that was any of the spanish riders  you would be saying that they dope .  Sky are doping  and Brailsford is a disgrace .  Just let them dope and have done with it . Armstrong did not do anything the other riders  were doing . Wiggo and Froome could not catch a ghost until they joined Sky and  Dr Leinders .  Its not there special socks that make them go faster .  The  world needs to wake up to a new generation of dopers  a lot better at it than the old guard.

Do you have any evidence to go with your accusation? It sure doesn't sound like you do.

 

[danfoz]

Originally Posted by coppiceer .

Hello everyone,

I am new to this forum, but I have been an avid watcher of the TDF for many years and am a (Sir) Cris Froome fan.

I am probably being naive, but, should or could Chris Froome and the Sky management have imposed their position as the Yellow Jersey team to shut down the GC race and wait for Alejandro Valverde after his mechanical problem on stage 13?

As I see it the race was already underway. It's not like anyone dialed it up once Valverde punctured, they just didn't slow down. He could have just as easily swapped bikes with a teammate but instead you got a bunch of bike racers trying to change a wheel... oy vey!

What an exciting race this year, I'm loving it!

 

[carbon ass]

Can you explain to me then How come Wiggo never won a thing or got near FC or TM in ITT until he was introduced to Mr Leinders . How come Froome has never done anything apart from crash on a descent in the tour when he was with Barlow world. Now all of a sudden they Join Sky who Hire Dr Leinders one of the most well known doping Drs i.e. Rabobank . They all of a sudden start performing at a new level . These are not new riders . Ring any bells i.e. Armstrong . You cannot tell me Sky and Brailsford did not check the CV of Leinders.
They knew exactly what they were doing and it's paid off big time . I mean look at there results over the last 2 years if you want to believe they are clean then thats fine but you are just hiding from the fact that something naughty is going on . Like I said in my previous post lets make doping legal it's the only way to get any kind of even playing field , Athletes cheat , thats what they do . Harsh but true . peace

 

[sitzmark]

A world that operates by guilty until proven innocent is not a very pleasant world. Some guilty will go free, or slide by for a long time, but far better to presume innocence and have to prove guilt - for anything, not just TdF doping.

What is it that you want ... a TdF where the team with the most money, and thereby the most access to technology always wins? That's what happens when there are no rules. The idea of "sport" is to level the playing field (as much as possible) and compete mentally and physically as humans against humans. That's why there are equipment rules and limitations in motor sports and why there are performance enhancement rules in athletic sports. Keep the rules ... enforce them with diligence and technology.

 

[alienator]

Can you explain to me  then How come Wiggo never won a thing or got near FC or TM  in ITT until he  was introduced to Mr Leinders .  How come Froome has never done anything apart from crash on a descent in the tour when he was with Barlow world.  Now all of a sudden  they Join Sky  who Hire Dr Leinders one of the most well known doping Drs i.e. Rabobank . They  all of a sudden start performing at a new level .  These are not new riders . Ring any bells  i.e. Armstrong .  You cannot tell me Sky and Brailsford did not check the CV of Leinders. They knew exactly what they  were doing and it's paid off big time . I mean look at there results over the last 2 years if you want to believe they are clean then thats fine but   you are just hiding from the fact that something naughty is going on .     Like I said in my previous post lets make doping legal it's  the only way to get any kind of even playing field , Athletes cheat , thats what they do . Harsh but true . peace   

There's no need to explain it. Further, neither you, me, nor anyone else here likely knows why Wiggins won when he did. Given all of the things that he could have done prior to winning--only one of which was doping--it's certainly off the mark to attribute it to one specific thing without having any evidence. Your Leinders correlation is meaningless without proof. Here's a rule, a hard fast rule: correlation is not causation. Many things--far more than you can imagine--correlate but have no causal link. Birds **** on our farm every day, and I ride my bike every day; however, the birds pooping do not cause me to ride my bike. Likewise, me riding my bike does not cause the birds to ****. Correlation only has value if it reflects some measure of causality. It takes more than suspicion and imagined links to prove a case. At this point, there is no reason to suspect doping by Froome or, if you prefer, Wiggins. Athletes cheat? Some have, and it's likely that some do. Do you know which ones do? No you don't. Do all athletes cheat? No they don't. Do all cyclists cheat? No, they don't. Even in the EPO days of the 90's and early 2000's, not everyone used EPO or doped in general. I'm hiding or others are hiding from the fact that something "naughty" is going on? That's laughable, especially given the faults in logic you've displayed. You offer "peace" from one side of your mouth, while out of the other comes insults. Interesting tactic.

 

[bing181]

Originally Posted by carbon ass .

Can you explain to me then How come Wiggo never won a thing or got near FC or TM in ITT until he was introduced to Mr Leinders . How come Froome has never done anything apart from crash on a descent in the tour when he was with Barlow world. Now all of a sudden they Join Sky who Hire Dr Leinders one of the most well known doping Drs i.e. Rabobank . They all of a sudden start performing at a new level .

What are you talking about. For his first "real" road season, Wiggins was 4th in the 2009 TDF while at Garmin. Brailsford has already commented on how remarkable Froome's performance was at the Commonwealth Games in 2006, when he was riding for Kenya as an amateur.

Clean cycling doesn't preclude one cyclist being better than another.

 

[carbon ass]

Wiggins hit the road in 2001 He could not compete with the best riders in a ITT until he joined sky. How many years was was that ?
Froome joined Barlow World and never won or got near winning a thing he came 84th in the tour and came 36th in the giro . As soon as he joined Sky he became a GC contender . Both riders are not new riders , there results have been average to say the least in pro cycling on the road [ Wiggins a great track rider no dispute]
You don't all of a sudden become that good . Do you think Contador and co are at home having a cup of tea while Sky are Training? Logic dictates that their results are suspicious . Whatever it is they are taking I want some .

 

[alienator]

Wiggins hit the road in  2001  He could not compete with the best riders in a ITT until he joined sky. How many years was was that ?  Froome joined Barlow World and never won or got near winning a thing he came 84th in the tour and  came 36th in the giro . As soon  as  he   joined Sky  he became a GC contender . Both riders are not new riders , there results have been average to say the least in pro cycling on the road  [ Wiggins a great track rider no dispute]   You don't  all of a sudden become  that good . Do you think Contador and co are at home having a cup of tea while Sky are Training? Logic dictates that their results are suspicious .   Whatever it is they are taking I want some .

So, you've still got nothing other than your suspicion which is based on........nothing. Logic doesn't dictate anything that you've said. Logic dictates that without facts in hand, there's no conclusion to be drawn right now, one way or another. Logic dictates it is possible that Sky provided the best fit for Froome (in terms of a team) and were better able to help him make the most of his natural talents. It's a good bet that Sky saw talent in Froome before he became part of the team in 2010, something that you apparently didn't see or overlooked.

 

[bing181]

Originally Posted by carbon ass .

Wiggins hit the road in 2001 He could not compete with the best riders in a ITT until he joined sky. How many years was was that ?

I regret even trying to engage you in discussion. Not only are your assumptions wrong, you can't even get your facts right. A rider who finishes 1 minute down on Cancellara in a World Championship ITT all the way back in 2005 is not someone who "could not compete with the best riders in a ITT".

 

[carbon ass]

Its just the other riders who dope when Sky Lose and when Sky win they are clean . Do you know the History of cycling ?
Lets do it again , 84th in the tour and came 36th in the Giro ,then join Sky and get podium in 2 grand tours and would have won both if he didn't have to let Wiggins suck his wheel .
And thats a normal gain in performance for a 27/28 year old rider ? You cannot seriously beleive that he got that good in less than half a season. I would question any rider who had those stats . It is suspicious .

 

[carbon ass]

Go and check Wiggos road stats . Contador etc etc all beat him in ITTs. The result you mentioned was his best result in ten years on the road and still got beat by a minute. He won nothing but the odd minor race against nobody and was always getting slaughtered by FC and co in ITT. He could not compete on the road with the best riders the Stats prove that . I am just pointing out the facts . You Cannot deny the facts . IMO it's very very suspicious .

 

[alienator]

Go and check Wiggos  road stats . Contador etc etc all beat him in ITTs. The result you mentioned was his best result in ten years on the road  and still got beat by a minute. He won nothing but the odd minor race against nobody  and was always getting slaughtered by FC and co in ITT.   He could not compete on the road with the best riders the Stats prove that .  I am just pointing out the facts . You Cannot deny the facts .  IMO it's very very suspicious .

Again, your "facts" prove nothing. Just because something is suspicious to you doesn't mean that it's deservedly suspicious. You have a paucity of facts in hand and are drawing conclusions based on very little, namely a rider's palmares. Since you have no clue what training was done or what made the difference in Wiggins' career or that of Froome, you're grasping at straws and imagining things that might not be true at all. It's easy to deny your conclusions given that they have no real basis. I suggest you learn what this means: correlation is not causation.

 

[alienator]

 Its just the other riders who dope when Sky Lose and when Sky win they are clean.

That's your statement. It's not one anyone else has made. Your arguing your belief as if your belief is fact. Given that you're not interested in an objective discussion, that you won't change your mind, and that you won't change anyone else's mind, what's the point in continuing any discussion with you?

 

[carbon ass]

Your right Facts prove nothing .
"correlation is not causation " as Armstrong said to Kimmage. ha ha

 

[alienator]

Your right   Facts prove nothing .  "correlation is not causation "  as  Armstrong said to Kimmage. ha ha

Dude, the only "facts" you've got are how Wiggins and Froome finished in previous races. That's it. You've certainly got nothing that suggest anything remotely like the Armstrong affair. In fact, there's nothing really that suggests doping at all. Feel free to be suspicious all you want. You don't have to use any rational thought if you don't feel like it. Others have used rational thought and as a result actually have written things worth reading. Here's one example: http://cyclingtips.com.au/2013/07/can-performance-be-used-as-an-indicator-of-doping/ Is there a reason you came here? Is there something in which you want to participate, or are you just here to rant about your doping suspicions? If you're looking for anyone to grant your suspicions credibility, you're going to have to bring more than you've brought so far.