Watch the clip in the thread I mentioned earlier. It's obvious that Froome was done. And, then---a miralcle occurs, he's dominant in every stage from there on out.
for which there is no proof.
So what? That means nothing in the cycling world. That happens all of the time and that does not mean doping. There are for example cyclists that only do well in the Pyrenees and bomb in the Alps. But that was not the case here, everyone can have a bad day.
Also, it may not have been Froome that upped his game but the rest flubbed when they were cycled down by Froome's team.
Where have I heard that before. Ah...
He looked beatable before the break; unbeatable thereafter. That doesn't happen naturally.
Right, and you can believe what you want too, fact is that testing is miles ahead of what it was in Armstrong's cycling days.
Watch the clip in the thread I mentioned earlier. It's obvious that Froome was done. And, then---a miralcle occurs, he's dominant in every stage from there on out.
20 seconds is nothing, that is not getting gassed, that is just not being able to handle the acceleration some other cyclist was able to achieve.
As a cyclist fan, of close to 40 years, that is not indicative of doping, that is indicative of one cyclist being able to place a jump on another cyclist. Sorry but that is just totally untrue as evidence of doping. As written before, cyclists have favorite climbs and favorite styles. Some cyclists love to place an explosive jump and others are much better at setting a constant but very high speed but are unable to respond to rapid attacks.
Maybe Froome dopes, who knows but his blood and urine samples do not prove that at all.
And of course he is going to drop most (not all) of his team, they flew up mountain after mountain for him letting him save his energy for the final climb and the final push. You cannot as a team cycle 95% to either catch up on escaped drivers or keep the peleton together so none of Froome's opponents could take time on Froome.
And a lot of good drivers get better during the Tour because they are conditioned to do so.
Yeah, I think he's doped. Pro cycling is always ahead of doping detection. It will always be thus.
Yeah, and Rasmussen wasn't doped either, right? He couldn't beat Armstrong doped, he had to wait for Armstrong to be out of the tour.
I can't imagine ANYONE doing this sport without some 'chemical help'. It's a brutal sport.
Armstrong's problem though was a problem many politicians have,it's not the crime, it's the coverup. His lying and cover-up ruined people's lifes. He came across as a total douchebag. A type of guy who'd throw his own mother under the bus to cover up his drug use.
That proves nothing, you can get gassed due to loads of reasons and still be able to perform 2 or more days later.
For one thing cyclist often get "honger-klop" which is when they did not eat properly during the day and in the end stage they do not have the nutrients/energy left to follow in the footsteps of the attackers. Then there is the fact that some drivers are much better on hills that are consistently uphill at approximately the same percentage and cyclists that excel on mountains that are very much the opposite of a steady climb.
And what hill did he drop from? He was in the Yellow jersey for all but 6 days? And for 4 of those days he was second. And twice 6th. He was never below position six in the yellow jersey classification. He did not have a completely gassed day. When he lost his yellow jersey he only lost 22 seconds on Aru. The only possibly weaker day was when he lost a little under 2 minutes but that was not against people who were dangerous to him in the general classification, the biggest competitor Aru was in the same group as Froome.
Could you point to which stage this supposedly happened?
Ooh, and I do not like Froome one bit, I am a fan of other riders but as his urine and blood are tested really really often, so unless he has a magic way of fooling the new and much improved testing, he has not been caught doping as far as we know.
On one climb to the finish line he lost over 20 seconds in the final 400 meters. I recorded it in that TDF thread no one cared about.
Froome is doping. It's obvious as hell. He was gassed and looked done. Then, he took a rest day and came back to dominate the second half of the tour. Hell, he even dropped his own team during a few stages. That's dope.
Don't be a homer. If you "know" Armstrong was doping, you should at least see that Froome is doping too. They both exhibit the same performances.
Contador was clean this year--at least for the most part. How do I know? His performance showed it. He got tired when he was supposed to, and he didn't have any miracle come back efforts. Froome got stronger as the tour went on. You don't get that from just eating spaghetti and some sleep.
20 seconds is nothing, that is not getting gassed, that is just not being able to handle the acceleration some other cyclist was able to achieve.
As a cyclist fan, of close to 40 years, that is not indicative of doping, that is indicative of one cyclist being able to place a jump on another cyclist. Sorry but that is just totally untrue as evidence of doping. As written before, cyclists have favorite climbs and favorite styles. Some cyclists love to place an explosive jump and others are much better at setting a constant but very high speed but are unable to respond to rapid attacks.
Maybe Froome dopes, who knows but his blood and urine samples do not prove that at all.
And of course he is going to drop most (not all) of his team, they flew up mountain after mountain for him letting him save his energy for the final climb and the final push. You cannot as a team cycle 95% to either catch up on escaped drivers or keep the peleton together so none of Froome's opponents could take time on Froome. Energy and drive help but, the numbers don't lie.
And a lot of good drivers get better during the Tour because they are conditioned to do so.
You bring up a good point. Yes, its true he used his influence to defend himself, but I think it was only natural because everyone was after him. Im betting if the other riders of the tour had his money and power and they were attacked too they might have done the same thing. Its a human trait to fight back.
What I found interesting in the documentary was the footage of the old TDF riders running into bars in France and grabbing beer to guzzle down in order to get the energy to make the mountain climbs. It seems all the riders were doing some sort of doping or cheating even back then lol.
I dated someone who did the Tour de France a few times in the late 80s. He was Serbian and everyone had to take steroids or be kicked off the team. He said everyone was pretty much doped to the gills.
To be honest, I'm not a huge Froome fan but, the way he dragged himself back on Landa's wheel after the mechanical this year deserves some respect. I find the French fans booing Froome to be cringe worthy and hope that they grow out of it soon.
Exactly. I doubt things have changed at all- its a sport you cannot get through without drugs of some kind.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?