# Anybody but...



## Nazz44 (Jun 26, 2003)

Froome.


----------



## love4himies (Jun 12, 2012)

Why do I have a feeling that unless he crashes, he'll win.


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

Froome

(Pulling for Quintana, Valverde-Landa) Go MovieStar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!))


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

I'm rooting for Ritchie Porte. 

I know BMC probably doesn't have a strong enough team to pull it off, but, considering this is the last season for the team... at least in its current form, it would be good to see them go out of top..


----------



## YCornelius (Apr 11, 2018)

Nazz44 said:


> Froome.


If the rest of the peloton decided to ally together with the sole purpose of denying Sky do you reckon they could? What tactics could they employ?


----------



## jnbrown (Dec 9, 2009)

I don't see Froome even remotely not winning, barring crash, illness etc.
It makes me not want to watch it.


----------



## T K (Feb 11, 2009)

Anyone but Cav winning sprints or anyone from Sky or Astana winning anything.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

I'm on the anyone but Froome as well. Even before what happened today, I thought Nibali had the best shot, and still do.


----------



## Doug B (Sep 11, 2009)

jnbrown said:


> I don't see Froome even remotely not winning, barring crash, illness etc.
> It makes me not want to watch it.



Well, I guess we will see how today's crash plays out.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

YCornelius said:


> If the rest of the peloton decided to ally together with the sole purpose of denying Sky do you reckon they could? What tactics could they employ?



All the GC tried that once...didn't work.


----------



## morgan1819 (Nov 22, 2005)

Finx said:


> I'm rooting for Ritchie Porte.
> 
> I know BMC probably doesn't have a strong enough team to pull it off, but, considering this is the last season for the team... at least in its current form, it would be good to see them go out of top..


DOH!

Well, at least you were right about BMC.


----------



## Finx (Oct 19, 2017)

morgan1819 said:


> DOH!
> 
> Well, at least you were right about BMC.


Pretty sure I jinxed him. Same thing happened with TvG. As soon as I started rooting for me, he kinda fell apart.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

According to something Landa said this past winter most of Sky's riders have to ride tempo and can't ride at change of pace racing.


----------



## 9W9W (Apr 5, 2012)

Finx said:


> I'm rooting for Ritchie Porte.
> 
> I know BMC probably doesn't have a strong enough team to pull it off, but, considering this is the last season for the team... at least in its current form, it would be good to see them go out of top..


I was in a CCC store last year, figured I'd pick up a new pair of shoes. This was a major store in a major shopping center in a major Polish city. As I shopped I noticed they had full sizes only. I chalked it up to one style only, but soon realized the whole store men and women sold only full sizes! I figured

Jim Ochowicz was just on the other day announcing sponsorship by CCC and I googled them to learn that they are indeed a Polish based company. WTF? No half sizes in your own home market despite a presence in every large metro in the country?

Very strange.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

KoroninK said:


> According to something Landa said this past winter most of Sky's riders have to ride tempo and can't ride at change of pace racing.


yeah, and anyone can see this. Froome (and before him Wiggins) doesn't like tempo change.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Marc said:


> All the GC tried that once...didn't work.


I think this could work if all GC teams are in it fully. 
That means:
1. no GC team will ever pull, make Sky pull, regardless who is in yellow
2. GC teams will need to attack, they might even have to send their own GC rider (and not just some no name rider) to do the attacking to invoke a response from Sky. Froome doesn't like tempo change much, so this will mess him up, and over the course of the Tour, it'll have an effect on him

The problem is that the GC teams only give a halfassed attempt, so it's not gonna work. And it's unlikely that all GC teams will give it an all out attempt like I said above because that will probably

1. look bad for the sport (maybe even worse than doping)
2. alienate a lot of fans, especially the English or English-speaking fans
3. probably no GC rider will want to be "the bait" to incite Sky, their sponsors won't like it if they act foolish (even though if it's to bring down Sky).

so, not gonna happen, and Sky will win again


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

aclinjury said:


> yeah, and anyone can see this. Froome (and before him Wiggins) doesn't like tempo change.


Actually, Froome saves a lot of energy when his team rides tempo.


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

aclinjury said:


> I think this could work if all GC teams are in it fully.
> That means:
> 1. no GC team will ever pull, make Sky pull, regardless who is in yellow
> 2. GC teams will need to attack, they might even have to send their own GC rider (and not just some no name rider) to do the attacking to invoke a response from Sky. Froome doesn't like tempo change much, so this will mess him up, and over the course of the Tour, it'll have an effect on him
> ...


You raise good points and I agree. If a GC contender wants yellow they have to earn it instead of riding on SKY's coat tails and waiting for other GC contenders to falter. I believe it was Movistar and Tinkoff who isolated and dropped Froome in 2016 Vuelta Stage 15.


----------



## jrush (Jul 18, 2018)

I feel like today was an attempt to force Sky to exert more energy and put them more into the tank heading into what should be a decisive stage. I feel like Landa will attack in the same way tomorrow and you may even see Valverde go earlier. Force Sky to break early force the race onto only the shoulders of Froome and Thomas and see how the deal with the attacks of fresher riders.

Just a thought but feel like today was just the start of a very different strategy and an attempt to actually push sky to the limit. Guess time will tell


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

It was a combination of Movistar and Contador's Tinkoff team that used their teams to work together to isolate Froome, however they didn't start doing it soon enough for it to truly work. At that time Contador and Valverde were very willing to work together and help each other. Now the problem is there isn't another team out there that will work with a Quintana led Movistar Team (even if he's one of 3 leaders).

Landa likely won't do anything tomorrow as he was suffering the effects of that crash pretty badly today. From comments Valverde said and what he did not say after the stage I don't think he intends on doing anything like he did today again. If he does anything it'll be to go out in a break to go stage hunting.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

I'm loving this Tour. So many misguided people who don't like Froome and Sky. Yet they animate the race today and show how Tours are won, while being the most gracious bunch of pro cyclists on the circuit. I love it. Wasn't really a fan of any one team, but with all the unwarranted abuse, I tend to root for them more. Nibali and Quintana are such whiners - F em. TOmmy D is gracious too, though these mountains look like too much for him.

and I look forward to enjoying Warren Barguil's win tomorrow on d'Huez.

so for me, it's anyone but Quintana or Nibali.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

Sky. Anybody but Sky.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

il sogno said:


> Sky. Anybody but Sky.


Yup....the GC was always a lock as soon as he was allowed to race. There's basically no suspense. Would be nice if we would just get on with it and crown the GC already, and move on.



BCSaltchucker said:


> I'm loving this Tour. So many misguided people who don't like Froome and Sky. *Yet they animate the race today* and show how Tours are won, while being the most gracious bunch of pro cyclists on the circuit. I love it. Wasn't really a fan of any one team, but with all the unwarranted abuse, I tend to root for them more. Nibali and Quintana are such whiners - F em. TOmmy D is gracious too, though these mountains look like too much for him.
> 
> and I look forward to enjoying Warren Barguil's win tomorrow on d'Huez.
> 
> so for me, it's anyone but Quintana or Nibali.


Only on mountain stages. They wheel suck on flats...then on the mountains they burn their teammates. It is basically as predictable as sunrises and sets at this point.

They're a more soft-spoken UK Postal.


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

Marc said:


> Yup....the GC was always a lock as soon as he was allowed to race. There's basically no suspense. Would be nice if we would just get on with it and crown the GC already, and move on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I guess there is still the possibility that Froome gets his meds wrong and has a bad day. Having a single dominant rider and dominant team has been the norm, not the exception, for as long I I've been watching the Tour


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

nice result. and Thomas said it himself at the end 'he's probably the best one ever', talking about Froome.

I guess he forgets about Eddy and Lemond

did you see the ahole spectator punch froome in the head, somewhere around 7km to go? That just makes this victory sweeter imho.

glad the lead group waited for Nibali to get almost back. it seems like they waited, anyways


----------



## Christine (Jul 23, 2005)

Forgive my ignorance, I was home unexpectedly today and had the luxury of watching the Alpe d'Huez.

Thomas got to the top in yellow, and they say that "if you win Huez in yellow, it's likely you'll finish in Paris in yellow." 

Does this mean Thomas will possibly go for the overall win, against his teammate Froome?

The announcers seem to think that people are booing Froome, but could they be yelling "Frooooome"?

And why the hate? (sorry I don't usually follow very closely).


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

Christine said:


> And why the hate? (sorry I don't usually follow very closely).


it's the typical Euro cynicism, tinged with xenophobia. like the fable of francois who gets an offer from genie for anything, but the genie will give his neighbour twice . so he asks to have one of his eyes poked out.

the Euro fans have always hated a winner. they booed and spat and punched Eddy Merckx, even knocked him off his bike so he failed to win a 6th Tour. The Tifosi in Italy booed punched and threw pee on Roche when we was winning the Giro in 87. they posted ugly hate banners against Armstrong and booed him too when I was there in 04, long before suspicion of doping. They Booed Lemond when he was beating their bully-hero Hinault.

they like the underdogs, and also they love their compatriot riders, is all. Gave so many french riders a pass and worship to this day, even ones like Virenque who was an admitted EPO user. 

I have sympathies that a frenchman hasn't won their national grand tour in 33 years. Kind of like how it is sad in Canada that a Canadian team hast won the Stanley cup in 26 years.

-

yeah Thomas is looking like he could win. hard to say what doing the Giro will do to Froome and Dumoulin in week 3


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

il sogno said:


> Sky. Anybody but Sky.





BCSaltchucker said:


> it's the typical Euro cynicism,* tinged with xenophobia.* like the fable of francois who gets an offer from genie for anything, but the genie will give his neighbour twice . so he asks to have one of his eyes poked out.
> 
> the Euro fans have always hated a winner. they booed and spat and punched Eddy Merckx, even knocked him off his bike so he failed to win a 6th Tour. The Tifosi in Italy booed punched and threw pee on Roche when we was winning the Giro in 87. they posted ugly hate banners against Armstrong and booed him too when I was there in 04, long before suspicion of doping. They Booed Lemond when he was beating their bully-hero Hinault.
> 
> ...



Not at all. Unbelievable results are just that. Not even the entire GC teaming up against Sky/Froome could beat him...at which point anyone dreaming of him still being clean is dreaming. No xenophobia at all....just realists who see the unbelievable and admit it is. Claiming xenophobia has anything to do with it, just makes you sound more desperate and like you want to change the topic.


When was the last time a single rider could do this? Oh yea, Lance Armstrong....who also had an adoring fan base who ate it up with a UCI desperate for their poster-child to not get caught. Only difference is Lance was a jagoff, and Froome is soft spoken. But same game.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

Marc said:


> Not at all. Unbelievable results are just that. Not even the entire GC teaming up against Sky/Froome could beat him...at which point anyone dreaming of him still being clean is dreaming. No xenophobia at all....just realists who see the unbelievable and admit it is. Claiming xenophobia has anything to do with it, just makes you sound more desperate and like you want to change the topic.
> 
> 
> When was the last time a single rider could do this? Oh yea, Lance Armstrong....who also had an adoring fan base who ate it up with a UCI desperate for their poster-child to not get caught. Only difference is Lance was a jagoff, and Froome is soft spoken. But same game.


unbelievable like Indurain, and Lemond, and Hinualt and Merckz, and Anquetil ... just history repeating itself. legends of each generation. some people just can't see it when it happens that we have a legend in the sport, they feel they have to cynical about it.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

They don't seem to boo Sagan, or even the the prima donna Cavendish when he was winning. So to say that the French booed Froome because they are xenophobic say you're a Froome jocker. 

But speaking of xenophobia, France itself has a very large population of Muslim and North African immigrants. I mean even their newly crowned World Cup Soccer team is mostly of African descents. So to say that the French are xenophobic over a suspected British team or Froome.... get this weak sauce argument outta here! Don't hold water, at all.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

BCSaltchucker said:


> unbelievable like Indurain, and Lemond, and Hinualt and Merckz, and Anquetil ... just history repeating itself. legends of each generation. some people just can't see it when it happens that we have a legend in the sport, they feel they have to cynical about it.



I love that you mention Anquetil. "Leave me in peace; everybody takes dope."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Anquetil#Doping


Pot, meet kettle. Clearly Anquetil is xenophobic too.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

BCSaltchucker said:


> unbelievable like Indurain, and Lemond, and Hinualt and Merckz, and Anquetil ... just history repeating itself. legends of each generation. some people just can't see it when it happens that we have a legend in the sport, they feel they have to cynical about it.


History repeating it's self. US Postal = Sky. Not really that complicated. Also Merckx was given a couple of bans for doping. It's called, we've seen this before and we know what they're doing and it's literally not believable. Plus at this point they are being even more arrogant about it than Lance and US Postal were and that says a lot.


----------



## BacDoc (Aug 1, 2011)

BCSaltchucker said:


> unbelievable like Indurain, and Lemond, and Hinualt and Merckz, and Anquetil ... just history repeating itself. legends of each generation. some people just can't see it when it happens that we have a legend in the sport, they feel they have to cynical about it.


You are right!

There are some guys that become legendary and even if there is controversy about what they "use" or how they "train", a select few are lucky enough and skilled enough and hungry enough to transcend mortal athletic performance. 

I'm not big fan of team Sky but this is very exciting tour and lots of riders besides Sky are raising bar.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

KoroninK said:


> History repeating it's self. US Postal = Sky. Not really that complicated. Also Merckx was given a couple of bans for doping. It's called, we've seen this before and we know what they're doing and it's literally not believable. Plus at this point they are being even more arrogant about it than Lance and US Postal were and that says a lot.


disagree. no evidence of that at all

but we won't know which of the teams are dirty for another decade maybe, Ill admit. more likely Astana. could be anybody doing transfusions playing the hematocrit game still


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

BCSaltchucker said:


> disagree. no evidence of that at all
> 
> but we won't know which of the teams are dirty for another decade maybe,* Ill admit. more likely Astana.* could be anybody doing transfusions playing the hematocrit game still



Because they're such a dominant force in grand tour racing the last 5 years?

So you think that the Kazakh team is doping....and just plain sucks at it?


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

It's funny when people say it's now the whole team sky (not just Froome) that are the only ones doping when:
1) Today's ascent was about 4 minutes slower than the record.
2)Froome Thomas, Bardet, Dumoulin, Landa (and almost Nibali) crossed the line almost together. 

I just don't understand why other teams don't come up with some new strategies to beat team sky instead of continuing to follow them up the climb until the last few kilometers only to be out-gunned by Froome (or Thomas this year). 
How does that saying go? The definition of stupid is when you do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

ngl said:


> It's funny when people say it's now the whole team sky (not just Froome) that are the only ones doping when:
> 1) Today's ascent was about 4 minutes slower than the record.
> 2)Froome Thomas, Bardet, Dumoulin, Landa (and almost Nibali) crossed the line almost together.
> 
> ...



They did over the years...nothing ever worked...even having all the GC competitors teaming up together on one mountain stage to beat Froome/Sky couldn't do it....Froome just attacked, then attacked, then attacked, and dropped all of them. Hence why they ride wheels--they know nothing will work short of bad luck.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

BCSaltchucker said:


> disagree. no evidence of that at all
> 
> but we won't know which of the teams are dirty for another decade maybe, Ill admit. more likely Astana. could be anybody doing transfusions playing the hematocrit game still


And Sky WILL be at the top of that list when it comes to light.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

ngl said:


> It's funny when people say it's now the whole team sky (not just Froome) that are the only ones doping when:
> 1) Today's ascent was about 4 minutes slower than the record.
> 2)Froome Thomas, Bardet, Dumoulin, Landa (and almost Nibali) crossed the line almost together.
> 
> ...


Because they have tried. Literally the ONLY time it worked was 2015 with Contador had a very strong Tinkoff team and Valverde/Quintana had a very strong Movistar team. Valverde and Contador were able to use their combined teams to finally break Sky/Froome on the final day in the mountains. However it still only succeeded in Quintana gaining around 30 to 45 seconds on Froome. There haven't been two teams that strong since to even try something like that again. Also I'm sure it helps when the two leaders in that case Contador and Valverde are also very good friends.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

Marc said:


> Because they're such a dominant force in grand tour racing the last 5 years?
> 
> So you think that the Kazakh team is doping....and just plain sucks at it?


they have a documented history of doing so, is all. 

heck Landis thinks they're all on the juice still

though I guess this isn't the doping forum, so off limits topic?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

ngl said:


> It's funny when people say it's now the whole team sky (not just Froome) that are the only ones doping when:
> *1) Today's ascent was about 4 minutes slower than the record.*
> 2)Froome Thomas, Bardet, Dumoulin, Landa (and almost Nibali) crossed the line almost together.
> 
> ...


Part of the reason was the Nibali crash. After Nibali crashed, the riders got confused. Dumoulin had caught up to Froome and was believed to have relayed the message to the other riders that Nibali had crashed. That was why you see the riders sort of riding 4-wide and looking at each other at this point. And they didn't go again until Bardet attacked. And afterwards, fans were calling the Bardet attack a dirty move, but Bardet later tweeted after the race that he wasn't aware that Nibali had crashed. It was argued that Bardet didn't understand the communication from the other riders because Bardet might not have understood or confused about English. By this point, Nibali was over a minute down on these guys. Yet by the end, Nibali managed to be only down by around 13 seconds. So the fact that Nibali was able to make up about 1 minute on these guys suggested that at least these guys spent about 1 minute slowing down for Nibali.

To suggest that the pace is slower by 4 minute this year means no doping is quite naive. But you believe what you have to. And yes they have tried to beat Sky, just like they've tried to beat US Postal, but they simply can't. Sky has too much money to hire the top dogs, everyone who has moved from Sky to another team gets to be the new top dog on the other team. And then you add in their doping program, probably most sophisticated in the pro tour right now. Then you'll understand why the other teams are not stupid for doing the same thing, they simply have no answers. When it comes to doping, whoever has the most money usually wins, money to conduct the program, money to hush officials, money to hire scientists and doctors to produce a 1500-page of salbutamol "studies" including dog salbutamol studies, and money to hire lawyers for good measure. US Postal has shown that with enough money, you can get away, and they did (until Armstrong decided to come out of retirement). Sky ripping the playbook from Postal.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> They don't seem to boo Sagan, or even the the prima donna Cavendish when he was winning. So to say that the French booed Froome because they are xenophobic say you're a Froome jocker.
> 
> But speaking of xenophobia, France itself has a very large population of Muslim and North African immigrants. I mean even their newly crowned World Cup Soccer team is mostly of African descents. So to say that the French are xenophobic over a suspected British team or Froome.... get this weak sauce argument outta here! Don't hold water, at all.


Ah, yes, France, the home of the term "chauvinism". Before anyone swallows this lyrical waxing about the French treatment / integration of the, in particular, North African, immigrants and their descendants, they should visit some of the suburbs of Paris, Lyons and Marseille to experience just how welcome they feel in France.

Soccer offers a route out of the grinding poverty and unemployment in these ghettos To use the example of the French national soccer team as proof that there is no French xenophobia is bizarre


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

KoroninK said:


> And Sky WILL be at the top of that list when it comes to light.


And Sky WILL NOT be at the top of that list when it comes to light.

I can say that with as much justification as you have for your view.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

So.... Sky ride as a train -> boring and doing

Sky attack with 80Km to go ->doping

Dumoulin maintains pace with Sky leaders on consecutive mountain top finishes -> Sky doping. -> Dumoulin not doping.

Froome makes a long range attack in the Giro and wins the stage -> doping

Alaphilippe makes a long range attack in the TdF and wins the stage -> not doping

Sky have a fairly but not outstandingly successful season so far -> doping

QS have an outstandingly successful season so far -> not doping.

Hmmmm.


----------



## Christine (Jul 23, 2005)

We have a long and established dataset of known dopers. How do these riders' times compare? Isn't there a realistic finishing time that we can expect without doping?

I guess it's too complex, considering the various routes/conditions/health/training every year.

Oh, and a spectator just shoved and yelled at Froome.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

coldash said:


> Ah, yes, France, the home of the term "chauvinism". Before anyone swallows this lyrical waxing about the French treatment / integration of the, in particular, North African, immigrants and their descendants, they should visit some of the suburbs of Paris, Lyons and Marseille to experience just how welcome they feel in France.
> 
> Soccer offers a route out of the grinding poverty and unemployment in these ghettos To use the example of the French national soccer team as proof that there is no French xenophobia is bizarre


and racism exists in the US too, in fact I read that entire population of people was once exterminated in the US. Have you even visited some of the inner city projects and enclaves in the US? I have. But the English speaking folks accusing the French of xenophobic don't seem to say the same about the US or the UK huh? But let's be honest here, you're a Froome jocker first and foremost huh


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> and racism exists in the US too, in fact I read that entire population of people was once exterminated in the US. Have you even visited some of the inner city projects and enclaves in the US? I have. But the English speaking folks accusing the French of xenophobic don't seem to say the same about the US or the UK huh? * But let's be honest here, you're a Froome jocker first and foremost huh*


. 
Is that really the best you can do? A poor substitute for a reasoned argument


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

aclinjury said:


> Part of the reason was the Nibali crash. After Nibali crashed, the riders got confused. Dumoulin had caught up to Froome and was believed to have relayed the message to the other riders that Nibali had crashed. That was why you see the riders sort of riding 4-wide and looking at each other at this point. And they didn't go again until Bardet attacked. And afterwards, fans were calling the Bardet attack a dirty move, but Bardet later tweeted after the race that he wasn't aware that Nibali had crashed. It was argued that Bardet didn't understand the communication from the other riders because Bardet might not have understood or confused about English. By this point, Nibali was over a minute down on these guys. Yet by the end, Nibali managed to be only down by around 13 seconds. So the fact that Nibali was able to make up about 1 minute on these guys suggested that at least these guys spent about 1 minute slowing down for Nibali.
> 
> To suggest that the pace is slower by 4 minute this year means no doping is quite naive. But you believe what you have to. And yes they have tried to beat Sky, just like they've tried to beat US Postal, but they simply can't. Sky has too much money to hire the top dogs, everyone who has moved from Sky to another team gets to be the new top dog on the other team. And then you add in their doping program, probably most sophisticated in the pro tour right now. Then you'll understand why the other teams are not stupid for doing the same thing, they simply have no answers. When it comes to doping, whoever has the most money usually wins, money to conduct the program, money to hush officials, money to hire scientists and doctors to produce a 1500-page of salbutamol "studies" including dog salbutamol studies, and money to hire lawyers for good measure. US Postal has shown that with enough money, you can get away, and they did (until Armstrong decided to come out of retirement). Sky ripping the playbook from Postal.


I really don't understand why I am posting again, but:
1) They only lost about a minute waiting for Nibali. It was stated this ascent was one of the slower ones according to Lance's podcast. 
2) I don't agree with Bardet's excuse that was he didn't understand English. His Director would have been updating him in his ear piece during the whole stage. I'm calling BS on this one. Look, if a guy doesn't want to hold up then I'm totally fine with it, but don't lie about it. This is one of the reasons some of the other GC riders won't work with Bardet.
3) Call me naive if you want because I really don't care. I could tell you I'm 64 (and racing (and losing) since I was 17) but it obviously won't matter. 
4) " but they simply can't" If I had someone in my organization with this attitude I would fire them on the spot! There are a few simple tactics to isolate Froome before the last climb, BUT, you shouldn't implement the same strategy over and over again knowing it won't work!
5) I wish people would stop blaming the strongest team for doping. There is always going to be a "strongest team". If there was no Team SKY next year I bet we would still be having this argument about another team.
6) WADA lost their Salbutamol case, sorry, Froome won the Salbutamol Case because it was only an AAF. It was never a Doping Case in the first place. WADA never ever had a leg to stand on in the first place. There is a lot of WADA information (guide lines , white papers, etc)in the interweb if anyone wants to read them.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

coldash said:


> .
> Is that really the best you can do? A poor substitute for a reasoned argument


What I saw was a poor attempt at Froome jocking and I called it. Gotta love that xenophobic bs reasoned argument being applied to the French by an (English?) Froome jocker. If France was Nazi Germnay, then you would have a point about the French being a xenophobic nation. But at this point, you're just a Froome jocker hiding under any veil of "reasoned argument" to get your Froome jocker message across. Nothing more.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> What I saw was a poor attempt at Froome jocking and I called it. Gotta love that xenophobic bs reasoned argument being applied to the French by an (English?) Froome jocker. If France was Nazi Germnay, then you would have a point about the French being a xenophobic nation. But at this point, you're just a Froome jocker hiding under any veil of "reasoned argument" to get your Froome jocker message across. Nothing more.


Ah, I see. It _really_ is the best you can do.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

But let's move past the xenophobic stuff. It's for political forum
Dear me I don't want to sound like I'm pro-French or anti-Froome or anti-British, which I'm not.

Let's take a look at David Walsh. Here's a guy who has spent a good chunk of his career criticizing Armstrong. Yet, when it came to Froome, he was adamant that Froome was clean. In fact, as recent as Sept 2017, Walsh still believed Froome was clean.
(https://www.rte.ie/sport/cycling/2017/0920/906364-david-walsh-i-believe-chris-froome-is-clean/)

Yet only 2 months later, by Dec 2017, after having a conversation with Froome, Walsh was no longer a defender of Froome after the adverse test during Vuelta.



> Walsh added: “The hardest thing about our conversation on Friday evening was telling him that I no longer trusted him in the way that I once did.”


(https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...rse-test-result-vuelta-a-espana-a8115196.html)

If Walsh, a veteran cycling critique, was bamboozled by Sky and Froome into believing that they were all clean, even to the point of defending them, then it doesn't surprise me at all that regular Brit and Froome fans would embrace them as totally clean. But eventually, even Walsh would have to take his Sky issued blinders off and see the truth eh.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> But let's move past the xenophobic stuff. It's for political forum
> Dear me I don't want to sound like I'm pro-French or anti-Froome or anti-British, which I'm not.
> 
> Let's take a look at David Walsh. Here's a guy who has spent a good chunk of his career criticizing Armstrong. Yet, when it came to Froome, he was adamant that Froome was clean. In fact, as recent as Sept 2017, Walsh still believed Froome was clean.
> ...


Interesting that you brought this up. Recently , July 8, as I was in transit with nothing better to do, I picked up a print copy of Walsh’s most recent view on this (London Sunday Times). It will be behind a paywall so you’ll have to do with this transcript 


> I cannot blame those who voiced their disapproval of Chris Froome because I know him well and also doubted him. It was a judgment call I now regret


The rest of the article is a devastating analysis of WADA’s performance in this debacle.

I suppose that now makes Walsh an “English Froome jocker”. To save you embarrassment, Walsh is Irish.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

coldash said:


> Interesting that you brought this up. Recently , July 8, as I was in transit with nothing better to do, I picked up a print copy of Walsh’s most recent view on this (London Sunday Times). It will be behind a paywall so you’ll have to do with this transcript
> 
> 
> The rest of the article is a devastating analysis of WADA’s performance in this debacle.
> ...


and notice I didn't straight up label Walsh was an an "English Froome jocker" because I wanted to still believe in his critical eyes. But alas, I guess Sky's 1500-page body of evidence must have impressed him enough to flip position again? Now, I wonder what Paul Kimmage thinks of Walsh? 

But I'll tell you what, aside from cycling, I've followed running a bit, and some of those (Brits) who are critical of Mo Farah tend to (now) also be critical of Froome in the same breadth, especially after Mo went to the US and suddenly got better in ways nobody would think a runner with his capacity could have. But I digress into running. Anyway believe what you want to believe if that will keep the faith going. Lately, there has been a resurgence of the Lance loyalists, not because they think Lance was clean, or even like the guy, but because they just want their faith back.

but hey, I was impressed by Froome dawg, the ultra sick asthma suffer, blasting thru all those French smoke clouds on the way to the top of Huez like nothing yo!


----------



## rufus (Feb 3, 2004)

coldash said:


> So.... Sky ride as a train -> boring and doing
> 
> Sky attack with 80Km to go ->doping
> 
> ...


No, they're all doping. But Sky has been caught with unexplained packages on their doorstep and Froome has been caught with a positive result during competition.


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

Marc said:


> They did over the years...nothing ever worked...even having all the GC competitors teaming up together on one mountain stage to beat Froome/Sky couldn't do it....Froome just attacked, then attacked, then attacked, and dropped all of them. Hence why they ride wheels--they know nothing will work short of bad luck.


I know my comments are falling on deaf ears, but as I said earlier, the GC contenders can't wait until the last mountain to attack Froome! 

Let's forget about about Froome doping or not doping just for a moment and look at Thursday's stage as an example. Valverde attacked with one helper. Do you honestly think SKY was concerned? Now Movistar just wasted 2 riders. Then we start getting ill fated attacks by other GC contenders. Sky continues to ride tempo (as dictated by Froome) and up the pace as required while Froome continues to conserve energy. Am I the only one that sees this? Now fast forward to the last few kilometers where we have Froome (and G) against a host of (tired) GC contenders. Sorry, I don't blame this on doping. 

Movistar has a pretty good team this year. Can anyone explain why the whole Movistar team (and maybe solicit some help from another team) wouldn't attack on the 2nd or 3rd climb to isolate Froome from the SKY train?

Also, does anyone wonder if Landa is just conserving energy until Valverde and Quintana lose enough time so he can become the highest place Movistar rider in the Tour and maybe become the team leader next year?

Ya know, I didn't know what "xenophobic" meant. I had to look it up.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

ngl said:


> I really don't understand why I am posting again, but:
> 1) They only lost about a minute waiting for Nibali. It was stated this ascent was one of the slower ones according to Lance's podcast.
> 2) I don't agree with Bardet's excuse that was he didn't understand English. His Director would have been updating him in his ear piece during the whole stage. I'm calling BS on this one. Look, if a guy doesn't want to hold up then I'm totally fine with it, but don't lie about it. This is one of the reasons some of the other GC riders won't work with Bardet.
> 3) Call me naive if you want because I really don't care. I could tell you I'm 64 (and racing (and losing) since I was 17) but it obviously won't matter.
> ...


If Froome is cleared then WHY have Petacchi and Ulissi not been given official apologies AND results back? Same thing they were given bans for that Froome gets off on and oh yeah, Petacchis UNADJUSTED numbers are still LOWER than Froome's ADJUSTED numbers.

A MAJOR red flag on Sky is very simple that before Castroviejo joined Sky he couldn't climb a mole hill, let alone a mountain and now he's dropping climbers? Sorry, but that just doesn't fly.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

ngl said:


> I know my comments are falling on deaf ears, but as I said earlier, the GC contenders can't wait until the last mountain to attack Froome!
> 
> Let's forget about about Froome doping or not doping just for a moment and look at Thursday's stage as an example. Valverde attacked with one helper. Do you honestly think SKY was concerned? Now Movistar just wasted 2 riders. Then we start getting ill fated attacks by other GC contenders. Sky continues to ride tempo (as dictated by Froome) and up the pace as required while Froome continues to conserve energy. Am I the only one that sees this? Now fast forward to the last few kilometers where we have Froome (and G) against a host of (tired) GC contenders. Sorry, I don't blame this on doping.
> 
> ...


Apparently you've missed the fact that Landa is injured and doing all he can to stay as high as possible. He said that he almost abandoned the race on the last stage in the Alpes because of how bad his back is right now. Movistar also is not even close to as strong of a team as what they had in 2015.
As for team leader, at Movistar that is Valverde until he retires. You are actually referring to race leader and yes Movistar makes a distinction between these two. Valverde going into this race actually said he wasn't a race leader and there were only 2 race leaders. 3 Leaders because he's the team leader. Different title.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

coldash said:


> And Sky WILL NOT be at the top of that list when it comes to light.
> 
> I can say that with as much justification as you have for your view.


They'll be at the top of the list just like US Postal and Kelme were for their era.


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

KoroninK said:


> If Froome is cleared then WHY have Petacchi and Ulissi not been given official apologies AND results back? Same thing they were given bans for that Froome gets off on and oh yeah, Petacchis UNADJUSTED numbers are still LOWER than Froome's ADJUSTED numbers.


Well Jesus, I didn't mean to piss you off! So you want me to start defending this whole process because you don't like Froome, SKY or the fact that WADA had no case.

Just for sh!ts and giggles did you ever think that they (along with a whole lot of others) might be given official apologies AND results back in due time? I doubt it, but maybe. WADA has already acknowledged some potentially innocent people may have been found guilty while some potentially guilty people were found innocent. WADA now realizes urine samples are not the best method for testing intake. 
You know whats amusing, the fact that no matter what I say now or what I said in my above post you are not going to agree. 



KoroninK said:


> A MAJOR red flag on Sky is very simple that before Castroviejo joined Sky he couldn't climb a mole hill, let alone a mountain and now he's dropping climbers? Sorry, but that just doesn't fly.


You know what, I think you are on to something! Maybe you and I should lynch the whole team just like they used to do in the old days.


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

KoroninK said:


> Apparently you've missed the fact that Landa is injured and doing all he can to stay as high as possible. He said that he almost abandoned the race on the last stage in the Alpes because of how bad his back is right now. Movistar also is not even close to as strong of a team as what they had in 2015.
> As for team leader, at Movistar that is Valverde until he retires. You are actually referring to race leader and yes Movistar makes a distinction between these two. Valverde going into this race actually said he wasn't a race leader and there were only 2 race leaders. 3 Leaders because he's the team leader. Different title.


You are so full of hate you can't even think straight or read straight. Did you ever think for a second that Movistar may be sending out false data? Maybe I will check again but, I thought Landa was above Valverde and Quintana on the GC classification. Maybe I can't read straight either.


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

aclinjury said:


> Part of the reason was the Nibali crash. After Nibali crashed, the riders got confused. Dumoulin had caught up to Froome and was believed to have relayed the message to the other riders that Nibali had crashed. That was why you see the riders sort of riding 4-wide and looking at each other at this point. And they didn't go again until Bardet attacked. And afterwards, fans were calling the Bardet attack a dirty move, but Bardet later tweeted after the race that he wasn't aware that Nibali had crashed. It was argued that Bardet didn't understand the communication from the other riders because Bardet might not have understood or confused about English. By this point, Nibali was over a minute down on these guys. Yet by the end, Nibali managed to be only down by around 13 seconds. So the fact that Nibali was able to make up about 1 minute on these guys suggested that at least these guys spent about 1 minute slowing down for Nibali.
> 
> To suggest that the pace is slower by 4 minute this year means no doping is quite naive. But you believe what you have to. And yes they have tried to beat Sky, just like they've tried to beat US Postal, but they simply can't. Sky has too much money to hire the top dogs, everyone who has moved from Sky to another team gets to be the new top dog on the other team. And then you add in their doping program, probably most sophisticated in the pro tour right now. Then you'll understand why the other teams are not stupid for doing the same thing, they simply have no answers. When it comes to doping, whoever has the most money usually wins, money to conduct the program, money to hush officials, money to hire scientists and doctors to produce a 1500-page of salbutamol "studies" including dog salbutamol studies, and money to hire lawyers for good measure. US Postal has shown that with enough money, you can get away, and they did (until Armstrong decided to come out of retirement). Sky ripping the playbook from Postal.


You know, I feel really bad (figuratively speaking) reading your post. I had no idea you and KoroninK feel so saddened and violated from what happening in this years TdF.
Please accept my sincere apologies and I will not bother you guys any further.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

ngl said:


> You are so full of hate you can't even think straight or read straight. Did you ever think for a second that Movistar may be sending out false data? Maybe I will check again but, I thought Landa was above Valverde and Quintana on the GC classification. Maybe I can't read straight either.


Landa is ahead of both on GC. However that does NOT change the fact that he IS injured. Also Valverde IS and WILL BE the team leader there until the day he retires. That is not in dispute. The team has a distinction between team leader and race leader. Those are two different things in that team with different roles and different responsibilities. It's not really that difficult to understand. Landa even said today after the race that his back is getting worse not better and then specifically thanked Valverde for riding with him.
Obviously you are not understanding that Movistar does things differently than other teams.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

ngl said:


> Well Jesus, I didn't mean to piss you off! So you want me to start defending this whole process because you don't like Froome, SKY or the fact that WADA had no case.
> 
> Just for sh!ts and giggles did you ever think that they (along with a whole lot of others) might be given official apologies AND results back in due time? I doubt it, but maybe. WADA has already acknowledged some potentially innocent people may have been found guilty while some potentially guilty people were found innocent. WADA now realizes urine samples are not the best method for testing intake.
> You know whats amusing, the fact that no matter what I say now or what I said in my above post you are not going to agree.
> ...



Maybe you're the one that needs top open your eyes to what is going on. It will eventually come out, always does. Apparently today Wiggins has started to make some interesting comments regarding Sky.

By the way Petacchi himself has his lawyers already looking into filing a lawsuit over the entire situation.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

KoroninK said:


> Maybe you're the one that needs top open your eyes to what is going on. It will eventually come out, always does. Apparently today Wiggins has started to make some interesting comments regarding Sky.
> 
> By the way Petacchi himself has his lawyers already looking into filing a lawsuit over the entire situation.


Wiggins comments were more to do with the DCMS committee’s processes e.g.



> Sir Bradley Wiggins has condemned the parliamentary report into the Team Sky Jiffy bag affair and the team’s use of the corticosteroid triamcinolone as “fabricated” and based on “unsubstantiated evidence The 2012 Tour de France winner, interviewed on ITV4, also stated that further facts have come to light which he would hope might be made public in the future.


However, I’ve seen allegations that WADA knew that the salbutamol test was unfit for purpose at the time when they/the UCI chose leaked the confidential results. If that is the case, I hope that they will be made to pay the price for their deceit and I hope any other innocents caught up in this will be treated fairly. 

I also hear that some Spanish teams / riders are feeling a bit vulnerable right now


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

coldash said:


> Wiggins comments were more to do with the DCMS committee’s processes e.g.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As I said interesting comments.

Until Petacchi and Ulissi are cleared, given results back AND a formal public apology then Froome is just as guilty as they are. Really just that simple.

Highly doubt they are anymore vulnerable than literally anyone else who is in pro cycling. Well except for Sky who can and will pay off any and everyone.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

KoroninK said:


> As I said interesting comments.
> 
> Until Petacchi and Ulissi are cleared, given results back AND a formal public apology then Froome is just as guilty as they are. Really just that simple.


Froome is innocent of the so-called salbutamol “positive “ as confirmed by the UCI. the others may be innocent but they have to present their case. You may not like that but that’s your problem


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

coldash said:


> Froome is innocent of the so-called salbutamol “positive “ as confirmed by the UCI. the others may be innocent but they have to present their case. You may not like that but that’s your problem


If the test is inaccurate as the claim, then they all need to be cleared. Otherwise the test is accurate and Froome is guilty. It's just that simple. They do NOT have represent any case. Either they are all guilty or they are all innocent if the test in inaccurate. By the way Petacchi's unadjusted numbers are still LOWER than Froome's adjusted numbers. If the adjust the numbers they are BELOW the limit.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

KoroninK said:


> If the test is inaccurate as the claim, then they all need to be cleared. Otherwise the test is accurate and Froome is guilty. It's just that simple. They do NOT have represent any case. Either they are all guilty or they are all innocent if the test in inaccurate. By the way Petacchi's unadjusted numbers are still LOWER than Froome's adjusted numbers. If the adjust the numbers they are BELOW the limit.


Right now according to the UCI / WADA, Froome is innocent. Until the others successfully appeal their case, they are not innocent. That may change at some point in the future but until then, that is the position . It’s just that simple.


----------



## Number9 (Nov 28, 2004)

BCSaltchucker said:


> nice result. and Thomas said it himself at the end 'he's probably the best one ever', talking about Froome.
> 
> I guess he forgets about Eddy and Lemond
> 
> [stuff deleted]


During the Coors Classic circa mid-80s, Lemond was contesting the sprint finish argy bargy at the Old Sac criterium. How many GC type riders do that? That and coming back from being nearly killed by a shotgun blast and winning the TdF makes him my candidate for best ever tour cyclist.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

coldash said:


> Right now according to the UCI / WADA, Froome is innocent. Until the others successfully appeal their case, they are not innocent. That may change at some point in the future but until then, that is the position . It’s just that simple.


I'm sorry but either the test is faulty or it's not faulty. You can't have it both ways which is what WADA and the UCI are trying to do. Either they are all guilty or none are. There is no in between. The test cannot be good for everyone except Froome. It's really that simple rather you like it or not. By the way the position that ONLY Froome is not guilty does NOT fly. That is a very bad case of preferential treatment.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

KoroninK said:


> I'm sorry but either the test is faulty or it's not faulty. You can't have it both ways which is what WADA and the UCI are trying to do. Either they are all guilty or none are. There is no in between. The test cannot be good for everyone except Froome. It's really that simple rather you like it or not. By the way the position that ONLY Froome is not guilty does NOT fly. That is a very bad case of preferential treatment.


Nope.

1). There is context. The test, according to what has been released so far, was inadequate given the environmentals. These may not be the same in other cases. For those that are, a not quilty should follow

2). IIRC, One of those being talked about fessed up and admitted to taking too much. He is guilty, irrespective of the validity of the test 

Despite your wishes to the contrary, it has now been established that the test is non-binary which is one of the factors that now have to be considered


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Tom D. is a class act. I find it hard NOT to pull for him! And has doesn’t have much support...


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

PBL450 said:


> Tom D. is a class act. I find it hard NOT to pull for him! And has doesn’t have much support...


Agreed, I would be pleased to see him win. He does have, however, quite a lot of support in the form of the Sky train. He seems, sensibly, IMO, to be almost surgically attached to them. Good tactics


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

coldash said:


> Nope.
> 
> 1). There is context. The test, according to what has been released so far, was inadequate given the environmentals. These may not be the same in other cases. For those that are, a not quilty should follow
> 
> ...


Either it IS or it IS NOT accurate. It CANNOT be both. That one who "fessed up" did so because they did NOT see a way to beat the UCI and WADA. Thus a forced confession (or a confession under duress) to get a lighter ban. Petacchi has also actually come out and stated that this obviously means he is innocent and he is now looking into legal action if the UCI does not make things right. They MUST go back and apply this SAME factors to ALL others that were given bans from this test.
Without doing so IS preferential treatment to Sky and Froome. You may not like, but that IS EXACTLY what they are doing.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

KoroninK said:


> Either it IS or it IS NOT accurate. It CANNOT be both. *That one who "fessed up" did so because they did NOT see a way to beat the UCI and WADA.*Thus a forced confession (or a confession under duress) to get a lighter ban. Petacchi has also actually come out and stated that this obviously means he is innocent and he is now looking into legal action if the UCI does not make things right. They MUST go back and apply this SAME factors to ALL others that were given bans from this test.
> Without doing so IS preferential treatment to Sky and Froome. You may not like, but that IS EXACTLY what they are doing.


Where is your evidence for that assertion. You just make up “facts” to suit your prejudice

They should review these cases and take into account the “environmentals”

BTW. A speed radar gun can be 100% accurate but if it is used incorrectly and picks up background traffic it can give a false reading as far as the so called guilty driver is concerned. If the driver can prove that in this instance he committed no offense then he is innocent. That doesn’t mean that all drivers who were caught by this device previously are innocent.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

KoroninK said:


> If Froome is cleared then WHY have Petacchi and Ulissi not been given official apologies AND results back?


yeah well .. they should be given such. of course


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

coldash said:


> Agreed, I would be pleased to see him win. He does have, however, quite a lot of support in the form of the Sky train. He seems, sensibly, IMO, to be almost surgically attached to them. Good tactics


Agreed. Sky's tactics seem to work great for Tom D, so he may as well just keep using them. It can't hurt. 

PBL, It's hard to not pull for him.


----------

