From June 29 to July 21, 200 riders will take part in the most prestigious competition, Le Tour de France, for its 100th edition! Here is the route:
This route should really be interesting: starting in the beautiful and surprisingly mountainous Corsica, followed by transition stages that will bring the riders to the Pyrenees. July 10th, you shouldn't miss the Mont Saint Michel scene. Last week will take place in the Alps, for what should hopefully be the head to head battles between the favourites.
The Yellow Jersey : Worn by the current leader of the race, represents general time classification
The Green Jersey : Worn by the leader of the General points classification. A sprinters ranking.
The Polka-Dot Jersey : The jersey affiliated with the Best Climber Classification. More commonly known as "The King of The Mountains." It is very rare though that the best climber actually wins this classification though.
The White Jersey : For the Best Young Rider of the race. Basically the yellow jersey for 25 y.o. and younger. It is possible to win both the Yellow and White Jersey.
This Tour de France is the 100th edition, it is 3404km long with 21 stages, and two rest days
If you have any article, website, stats to add into the OP, tell me. Enjoy the Tour de France! Thanks to Hyperionn and Drolla for their work on the previous threads
Finally, it's on! Really sad i won't be able to enjoy Jalabert's comments, but i will watch anyways.
I'm hoping for an upset, but i don't thing it's going to happen this year =)
For our foreigner friends, watching it outside of France, i have a question: do you guys also have sequences during the broadcast on the little churches and landscape around the race or do they just focus on the race?
For my french-speaking fellow TLers, or people interested in hearing the french broacast, the official site is aweome, it has graphs, maps for each day, and real time timer for breakaways, and access to all the cameras live =)
Yes it's the same broadcast just with different commentators Just like everyone watches the same broadcast for Vuelta (which is not nearly as good) or how everyone watching the F1 today will see the same broadcast.
For me the tour was, is and always will be my personal sports highlight of the year - even after all the (recent) drama. I'm so looking forward to see the peleton climb the Ventoux and Alp d'Huez ... twice!
Here are the favourites for outright win: C Froome 4/5 A Contador 5/2 Joaquin Rodriguez 18/1 R Porte 18/1 N Quintana 22/1 T Van Garderen 25/1 C Evans 25/1 A Valverde 33/1 A Schleck 50/1 T Pinot 80/1 D Martin 80/1 J Van Den Broeck 80/1 R Hesjedal 100/1 Rolland 150/1 Kwiatkowski 400/1
Really looking forward to Cav V Griepel V Kittel v Kristoff v Sagan. Without crashes Cav could end up winning a ton of stages.
Tour de France has been 1 of my favourite sports highlight of the year since i was very small, also because cycling is incredible popular since the 90's because Bjarne Riis, i love it! This year is going to be exciting, ofc i'm with Saxo Bank Tinkoff Bank danish tv production and commentators is top notch as well which just makes it more of a join to see the french road and country love it :D
I'm not sure it will work for other countries, but France TV (the TDF production channel) developped this website where you can choose the cameras: 4 motos, TV direct, or several at once: http://www.francetvsport.fr/tour-de-france/direct-regie
What do you guys think about Bouhani can he finish ahead of Cavendish/Greipel/Kittel in some flat stages? And is he strong enough to finish in the first group in stages 2/3?
On June 29 2013 22:53 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: What do you guys think about Bouhani can he finish ahead of Cavendish/Greipel/Kittel in some flat stages? And is he strong enough to finish in the first group in stages 2/3?
Marc Madiot, FDJ manager, wasn't too enthusiastic and he was trying to lower the pressure on him in the interview he just did with french TV. He explained how Tour de France was another dimension. The FDJ team was also done in order to help Thibault Pinot in the mountains, Bouhanni doesn't have the team Cavendish, Greipel and Kittel have. But I think he has the talent to finish in the top 3 several times.
edit: By the way, the Orica bus crashed into the finish line banner :
On June 30 2013 00:34 beef42 wrote: You watched first stage of the annual French Bus Parking championships, and what a showing we had in our first stage!
Really tough tour for Sagan so far. Crash in stage 1 when he had a chance for yellow. Team is terrible and doesn't reel in breakaway in stage 2 (seriously, any other top cycling team would have taken control of the peloton much sooner and reeled in that no name breakaway) so he gets a close second. Stage 3 he admittedly loses a sprint, but to a guy who had a far superior lead out train while Sag was on his own entirely, and even then it was by mere inches. Still, I have confidence he will get at least a couple stages. The guy is just ridiculous.
Personally, I hate team time trials so I hope there isn't too much shakeup tomorrow.
On July 03 2013 19:22 Vault Boy wrote: Can someone post the dates of the watchable stages? (HC. Mountain-finish only)
You must hate this sport. Anyway, mountain stages: july 6th, 7th, 14th,18th, 19th and 20th. Not all mountain finishes though, you can go look them up yourself.
Hopefully Bouhani can show his worth tomorrow otherwise my fantasy team is in trouble. Can't wait for the mountain stages this sprinterfest for the yellow jersey has gone on long enough.
Bouhanni had a gastroenteritis the first 3 stages, was in the giant fall yesterday, and limped his way to see the medical staff. We'll see how he feels today
On July 04 2013 11:11 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Can't wait for the mountain stages this sprinterfest for the yellow jersey has gone on long enough.
Gotta wait until Saturday I guess. I agree on the sprinterfest. It never really interests me.
Man, I'm always planning on watching the last 45-60 minutes of every flat stage to see if a breakaway group can stay away and win it, but everytime I forget to put on the tele . Can't watch Saturday but will definitely find a way to tune in on Sunday.
Who are you guys cheering for? I'm glad Froome is now leading the team instead of Wiggins (most boring tour winner ever). Other than that I hope Contador will do well and maybe the Dutch guys can win a stage (Laurens ten Dam/Robert Geesink). I hope Mollema can get a top 10 ranking as well.
On July 04 2013 11:11 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Can't wait for the mountain stages this sprinterfest for the yellow jersey has gone on long enough.
Gotta wait until Saturday I guess. I agree on the sprinterfest. It never really interests me.
Man, I'm always planning on watching the last 45-60 minutes of every flat stage to see if a breakaway group can stay away and win it, but everytime I forget to put on the tele . Can't watch Saturday but will definitely find a way to tune in on Sunday.
Who are you guys cheering for? I'm glad Froome is now leading the team instead of Wiggins (most boring tour winner ever). Other than that I hope Contador will do well and maybe the Dutch guys can win a stage (Laurens ten Dam/Robert Geesink). I hope Mollema can get a top 10 ranking as well.
ten Dam will be the last one of that team to get a stage win if you ask me. Mollema could even get a top5 if all goes well
On July 04 2013 18:57 BenKen wrote: Ah I forgot about this! So I guess Talansky is the new American hope? I don't follow year cycling year round, just enjoy the TDF broadcast.
Talansky and also Van Garderen. I'm not 100% sure on their roles though as they have other GC riders in their teams + Van Garderen was involved in that big crash on the first day.
On July 04 2013 11:11 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Can't wait for the mountain stages this sprinterfest for the yellow jersey has gone on long enough.
Gotta wait until Saturday I guess. I agree on the sprinterfest. It never really interests me.
Man, I'm always planning on watching the last 45-60 minutes of every flat stage to see if a breakaway group can stay away and win it, but everytime I forget to put on the tele . Can't watch Saturday but will definitely find a way to tune in on Sunday.
Who are you guys cheering for? I'm glad Froome is now leading the team instead of Wiggins (most boring tour winner ever). Other than that I hope Contador will do well and maybe the Dutch guys can win a stage (Laurens ten Dam/Robert Geesink). I hope Mollema can get a top 10 ranking as well.
ten Dam will be the last one of that team to get a stage win if you ask me. Mollema could even get a top5 if all goes well
Hah ok. I don't follow the sport much (only usually the TDF) but I remember ten Dam attacking a lot last year. Would be even more awesome if Mollema can place top 5 indeed!
On July 04 2013 11:11 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Can't wait for the mountain stages this sprinterfest for the yellow jersey has gone on long enough.
Gotta wait until Saturday I guess. I agree on the sprinterfest. It never really interests me.
Man, I'm always planning on watching the last 45-60 minutes of every flat stage to see if a breakaway group can stay away and win it, but everytime I forget to put on the tele . Can't watch Saturday but will definitely find a way to tune in on Sunday.
Who are you guys cheering for? I'm glad Froome is now leading the team instead of Wiggins (most boring tour winner ever). Other than that I hope Contador will do well and maybe the Dutch guys can win a stage (Laurens ten Dam/Robert Geesink). I hope Mollema can get a top 10 ranking as well.
ten Dam will be the last one of that team to get a stage win if you ask me. Mollema could even get a top5 if all goes well
Hah ok. I don't follow the sport much (only usually the TDF) but I remember ten Dam attacking a lot last year. Would be even more awesome if Mollema can place top 5 indeed!
I might be wrong though, cycling isn't an exact science a lot of things can happen ^^
On July 04 2013 11:11 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Hopefully Bouhani can show his worth tomorrow otherwise my fantasy team is in trouble. Can't wait for the mountain stages this sprinterfest for the yellow jersey has gone on long enough.
Well they come in fun varieties too, such as today's stage. Cannondale walking all over everyone all day and then Sagan taking the sprint finish, not too bad.
hmmm Froome to show off I think and hope. Interesting to see how many of the top guys are there from each team when it gets down to the last 15 or so riders.
On July 06 2013 04:41 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Any predictions on whether it will be won by attackers or GC contenders?
Thing is, if they let someone ride he will definitely get the yellow as well and I'm not sure how many teams want to see that happen. So my guess is a GC contender
Actually the italian commentators were speaking of people losing time on purpose today to have a chance tomorrow, they even gave few names but I can't remember them
So sad about Taaramäe having already lost any chance of contention this Tour :c
Todays stage was pretty straight forward I had no doubts the breakaway being reeled back in, and the finish was pretty much textbook for Sagan Nice victory for him though!
On July 06 2013 05:22 Wazabo wrote: Actually the italian commentators were speaking of people losing time on purpose today to have a chance tomorrow, they even gave few names but I can't remember them
That's true, there have been a couple of those riders. Some of them might be in the breakaway tomorrow and sunday, but as I said I don't see one of them winning tomorrow.
fucking mad they cut to adverts on the UK broadcast for what seemed like 1KM... before the ads they were together... come back and Froome is away out front, pissed!
Textbook performance by sky. Sadly that leads to a boring Tour. But as I felt sorry for Froome last year when he had to wait for Wiggins every fucking mountain I'll be okay with today. Was positively surprised by the netherlanders. In the past it always felt as if Rabobank underperformed but todays performance by Mollema and ten Dam was impressive.
Is anyone btw questioning Sky's performance or am I the only one? I mean last year it was utter domination and now again. And how can it be that Froome was in no way an extreme talent during his amateur carreer, is now the best rider in the tour? Everyone seems to go three times as fast when they join Sky.
On July 07 2013 01:51 norlock wrote: Is anyone btw questioning Sky's performance or am I the only one? I mean last year it was utter domination and now again. And how can it be that Froome was in no way an extreme talent during his amateur carreer, is now the best rider in the tour? Everyone seems to go three times as fast when they join Sky.
Yeh I definitely believe they're doped but you never know I guess.
On July 07 2013 01:51 norlock wrote: Is anyone btw questioning Sky's performance or am I the only one? I mean last year it was utter domination and now again. And how can it be that Froome was in no way an extreme talent during his amateur carreer, is now the best rider in the tour? Everyone seems to go three times as fast when they join Sky.
To be fair not all of them go faster when joining Sky, just a couple of them. Froome just rode the 3rd fast time on Ax 3-Domaines, putting himself among the likes of Armstrong and Ullrich.
On July 07 2013 01:51 norlock wrote: Is anyone btw questioning Sky's performance or am I the only one? I mean last year it was utter domination and now again. And how can it be that Froome was in no way an extreme talent during his amateur carreer, is now the best rider in the tour? Everyone seems to go three times as fast when they join Sky.
To be fair not all of them go faster when joining Sky, just a couple of them. Froome just rode the 3rd fast time on Ax 3-Domaines, putting himself among the likes of Armstrong and Ullrich.
On July 07 2013 01:51 norlock wrote: Is anyone btw questioning Sky's performance or am I the only one? I mean last year it was utter domination and now again. And how can it be that Froome was in no way an extreme talent during his amateur carreer, is now the best rider in the tour? Everyone seems to go three times as fast when they join Sky.
To be fair not all of them go faster when joining Sky, just a couple of them. Froome just rode the 3rd fast time on Ax 3-Domaines, putting himself among the likes of Armstrong and Ullrich.
...that's questionable company.
If we believe hard enough they were honourable and competed in the spirit of competition. ;_;
sigh, I really wanted to believe cycling was cleaning up. Sky last year was dominant, but their times and power outputs looked pretty normal. I felt very confident that was a legit win for wiggins at the time.
Then they turn around and put in the most questionable performance I have seen in a bike race in quite a while. I mean, maybe Froome is just that much better than everyone. Seems unlikely, but i can get behind that I guess. But now here is Richie fucking Porte, a guy who before joining SKY was nothing more than a solid domestique better known for time trialing rather than climbing. You want me to believe that Porte is now the second best climber in the tour de france? Out climbing the top climbers like quintana, contador, rolland, pinot, etc.
I just don't know, I find it pretty discouraging. Like all signs over the last few years were good then to see this just destroys my illusion. idk, i will wait to the end of the tour to decide for sure what I feel about it. My bullshit detector is most definitely pinging at the moment, though.
Why did Movistar today helped Froome to stabilize his position and return him to main pack? It seemed to me that Movistar was really helping him today. But my knowledge about this is pretty low, can someone explain strategy of today's leg to me?
On July 08 2013 01:29 PetrBlaha wrote: Why did Movistar today helped Froome to stabilize his position and return him to main pack? It seemed to me that Movistar was really helping him today. But my knowledge about this is pretty low, can someone explain strategy of today's leg to me?
It was indeed weird, but doing that they were trying to win the stage, secure Quintana white jersey, secure Valverde 2nd position and most importantly the #1 team spot.
On July 07 2013 01:51 norlock wrote: Is anyone btw questioning Sky's performance or am I the only one? I mean last year it was utter domination and now again. And how can it be that Froome was in no way an extreme talent during his amateur carreer, is now the best rider in the tour? Everyone seems to go three times as fast when they join Sky.
To be fair not all of them go faster when joining Sky, just a couple of them. Froome just rode the 3rd fast time on Ax 3-Domaines, putting himself among the likes of Armstrong and Ullrich.
...that's questionable company.
its obvious that they are doping more/better then the rest. the time of froome is too insane. Froome (23:14 Minutes) Armstrong (22:59 Minutes) - 2001 Roberto Laiseka (22:57 Minutes) - 2001 Jan Ullrich (23:00 Minutes) - 2003 According to a german article Antoine Vayer (the former festina "doctor") said those times are "mutant-level". So yeah its pretty obvious. I just hope next year we have a more exciting tour when wiigins/froome are in different teams. Just like ullrich/armstrong. ^^
He's doping on good training. That's a pretty huge accusation you're making there. Brailsford is the man behind Team GB success too... in your head did all the fast Olympic athletes have a magic doping method too?!
12 years on to be 15 seconds slower than those riders is not "mutant-level". He had sat behind Porte, Kennaugh all race until that point too. We saw today how human team Sky are anyway. I must admit I was surprised how quickly the challengers fell away up the hill but I think it was them screwing up the tactics. Quintana was really very naive going so early. Who knows what might have happened if he didn't do that. Froome is just tactically very strong, he was well rested and he's a phenomenal bike rider. One day he'll get the credit he deserves for this.
It's hardly a huge accusation in cycling, fans have been burned way too many times over the years.
Froome's times and power outputs are in line with high performing dopers on that climb and the rest of the peleton fell miles behind him (performing in a manner more consistent with post-biological passport cycling), it's pretty natural that people are going to be sceptical given the company he's keeping there, and his performance in the Alps will certainly be watching with interest.
It may be that he's clean, and that would be great, but history hasn't really been kind to optimistic fans before.
Either way it almost feels like the race for yellow has been decided already.
Utterly despicable that Cavendish wont get punished for purposefully crashing a fellow rider during the sprint. He passes the guy, there is over a meter left of empty street on his left and he purposefully fully steers into him. People like that should get removed from the competition.
On July 11 2013 00:33 RvB wrote: Never thought Mollema would perform this good!
So happy for him. German commentators said that he was really motivated today and he really showed that. I feel a bit bad because when I saw how much Froome lost during the last kilometres I felt as if he lost time and today's victory on purpose just to avoid some additional pressure from the doping debate. But of course I'm happy for Martin whos performance is incredible with all the injuries he had to endure again.
On July 11 2013 00:33 RvB wrote: Never thought Mollema would perform this good!
So happy for him. German commentators said that he was really motivated today and he really showed that. I feel a bit bad because when I saw how much Froome lost during the last kilometres I felt as if he lost time and today's victory on purpose just to avoid some additional pressure from the doping debate. But of course I'm happy for Martin whos performance is incredible with all the injuries he had to endure again.
Meh there will always be doping issues and pressure. Like Martin now had the 4th fastest average speed ever during a tour time trial yet its suppose to be clean? Find it somewhat hard to believe. Good thing i enjoy watching it regardless of the fact if there "clean" or not.
On July 10 2013 08:10 Gorsameth wrote: Utterly despicable that Cavendish wont get punished for purposefully crashing a fellow rider during the sprint. He passes the guy, there is over a meter left of empty street on his left and he purposefully fully steers into him. People like that should get removed from the competition.
Veelers looked behind, sees Cav and changes direction from originally going left (same as all other riders since the road was turning left) to swerving right in order to block Cav and slow him down. Definite intent from Veelers agreed?
On July 10 2013 08:10 Gorsameth wrote: Utterly despicable that Cavendish wont get punished for purposefully crashing a fellow rider during the sprint. He passes the guy, there is over a meter left of empty street on his left and he purposefully fully steers into him. People like that should get removed from the competition.
Veelers looked behind, sees Cav and changes direction from originally going left (same as all other riders since the road was turning left) to swerving right in order to block Cav and slow him down. Definite intent from Veelers agreed?
Veelers fault for certain, I'm not sold on intent though. Unfortunate all around.
Cav looking vulnerable this year... this Kittel guy is something else. I've been reading about his success last year but I'm still pretty surprised at his success. Hopefully Cav will have more luck with Renshaw in front of him next year
I had to miss almost all of todays stage. Come home and see "Contador attacked, Froome losing time". Never would've expected it from this stage. Commentators always mention wind but I can't remember such a situation. Cool.
Wow epic stage. Btw, on Belkin racing at head of peloton with Valverde punctured, Movistar did that to them as well last year in de Tour de Suisse, so they were on payback I guess.
But the move of the day goes to Tinkoff, breaking away from the peloton with Froome in it!
I think I've spent the last 2 hours at work reading write ups about todays stage... I can't wait to go home and watch it! Reminds me of those crazy stages along the coast in the Netherlands... except they were in the middle of mainland France.
On July 13 2013 05:24 KarlKaliente wrote: I think I've spent the last 2 hours at work reading write ups about todays stage... I can't wait to go home and watch it! Reminds me of those crazy stages along the coast in the Netherlands... except they were in the middle of mainland France.
Sorry for the newb question, but what's the best place to go to watch a full stage if I'm in the US. seems a lot of stuff is region-locked or subscription based.
Love him or hate him, Contador is the most exciting stage race contender period. So refreshing to have him back after last year's snoozefest of a tour.
Saxo collectively has massive balls for TTTing to victory on a flat stage. You sense weakness and you go for it, that is the way bike riding should be.
Really like Bakelants, he just goes for it even on stages where he probably shouldn't. Makes it fun! Sagan popping a big one handed wheelie as he fell back into the main pack after winning the sprint as part of a breakaway.
Sky controlling the front of the peloton through 1/2 way up Ventoux (and indulging in some illegal feeding it seems), Porte and Froome still there on the front.
Quintana and Nieve (who's pretty impressive so far) aren't exactly adding to their 40s lead, though I do wonder if Quintana is just getting a breather while he's with someone else for a bit before he looks to kick again to the top.
haha, i'm a diehard bike racing fan, but this was ridiculous. Even Armstrong at his best didn't look so easy on Mt Ventoux. Oh well, another winner who will enjoy his title for 2 years before having his entry removed.
I used to fucking LOVE this event, I spent hours in front of the TV while sitting on my spinning bike. Then I learned a lot about the methods they use to achieve machine like success. Nowadays I'm stuck with reading medical science papers about how to further enhance human capabilities. For me at least there is no point anymore in watching people try what you can calculate. Unfortunately I think that this is less of a sport then esports. Sad but true.
Oh and to all the people wanting to insult me, because clearly some people drive clean: Please look at the raw numbers of what they are doing. If this was possible by normal means, the winner of a kickboxing match would be determined by RIP rather then KO.
LOL The French get owned on Bastille day and look at them crying Best climber in the world (although Quintana is possibly as good) in the best team, that's all it is.
Last time I saw anyone riding like this (multiple sprints up a mountain) was the Michael Rasmussen/Alberto Contador rides in 2007. At least back then there were two riders who were able to do it. Also related to the video, I miss Mauricio Soler, poor guy.
I guess it's not fair to call someone a cheater without any evidence outside of whatever evidence his perfomance provides, innocent until proven guilty right? Doesn't matter, a race where the same rider trashes everybody else on every time trial and on every mountain finish is just not exciting to follow.
On July 15 2013 00:59 prplhz wrote: Last time I saw anyone riding like this (multiple sprints up a mountain) was the Michael Rasmussen/Alberto Contador rides in 2007. At least back then there were two riders who were able to do it. Also related to the video, I miss Mauricio Soler, poor guy.
I guess it's not fair to call someone a cheater without any evidence outside of whatever evidence his perfomance provides, innocent until proven guilty right? Doesn't matter, a race where the same rider trashes everybody else on every time trial and on every mountain finish is just not exciting to follow.
I beg to differ. This have been the most exciting tour for ages imo. So full of action, so full of attacks and offensive riding. Until Froome crushed today the tour was open. Sky was in big big trouble going into todays stage.
On July 15 2013 00:59 prplhz wrote: Last time I saw anyone riding like this (multiple sprints up a mountain) was the Michael Rasmussen/Alberto Contador rides in 2007. At least back then there were two riders who were able to do it. Also related to the video, I miss Mauricio Soler, poor guy.
I guess it's not fair to call someone a cheater without any evidence outside of whatever evidence his perfomance provides, innocent until proven guilty right? Doesn't matter, a race where the same rider trashes everybody else on every time trial and on every mountain finish is just not exciting to follow.
I beg to differ. This have been the most exciting tour for ages imo. So full of action, so full of attacks and offensive riding. Until Froome crushed today the tour was open. Sky was in big big trouble going into todays stage.
Big trouble? Yes they showed some weakness but Froome was still 2+ minutes ahead of his closest competitor. It only seemed like it was close because he lost a bit of time on a flat stage.
It is an exciting tour, though. Contador, even when he is not the best, attacks and attacks until he has no more. Yes, I am a fanboy, love his style. It is also fun to watch quintana, this guy is shaping up to be the next climbing great.
If i have to chose between a tour like now, or back in the day armstrong, where there are attacks and things happen or some of the tours we had in recent years where the top stays together in a group and nothing ever happends i'll gladly take this years tour.
On July 15 2013 00:59 prplhz wrote: Last time I saw anyone riding like this (multiple sprints up a mountain) was the Michael Rasmussen/Alberto Contador rides in 2007. At least back then there were two riders who were able to do it. Also related to the video, I miss Mauricio Soler, poor guy.
I guess it's not fair to call someone a cheater without any evidence outside of whatever evidence his perfomance provides, innocent until proven guilty right? Doesn't matter, a race where the same rider trashes everybody else on every time trial and on every mountain finish is just not exciting to follow.
I beg to differ. This have been the most exciting tour for ages imo. So full of action, so full of attacks and offensive riding. Until Froome crushed today the tour was open. Sky was in big big trouble going into todays stage.
I would disagree. Sure sky had a problem here in there but all three important stages (ax 3 domaines, tt, ventoux) have been absolutely dominated by froome. The other teams especially movistar are trying a lot and that is awsome to watch but their is no competition for froome.
e: still it's exciting to watch because bakelants, quintana do not care for standard tactics they just go ahead and try to fight.
On July 15 2013 00:59 prplhz wrote: Last time I saw anyone riding like this (multiple sprints up a mountain) was the Michael Rasmussen/Alberto Contador rides in 2007. At least back then there were two riders who were able to do it. Also related to the video, I miss Mauricio Soler, poor guy.
I guess it's not fair to call someone a cheater without any evidence outside of whatever evidence his perfomance provides, innocent until proven guilty right? Doesn't matter, a race where the same rider trashes everybody else on every time trial and on every mountain finish is just not exciting to follow.
I think Aubisque (The climb in your video) was probably the least ridiculous ascent of 2007 tour.
This is probably the most ridiculous ascent of that tour, they were going around 7.2 W/Kg during that 4.5 minutes, which is borderline ridiculous. And dont forget the direct quote from Rasmussen. "I have used doping substances and methods during the period 1998-2010, including EPO, growth hormone, testosterone, DHEA, insulin, IGF-1, cortisone and blood transfusions,"
For today, It looks like Froome did last 15.65 km of the climb (After that point climb gets steeper) in 48:35, which is well below the expected time of 50:46 and he broke the record since Pantani after today's 220 km of hard racing.
I know that most of these guys are doping and I'm actually fine with that. (That's the way of cycling works, funny but true) But I lose my shit when the bald dickhead Brailsford said that there wont be any repeated attacks in "new cycling" or people wont win by minutes, or Porte's arrogance before tour when he was losing 15-20 minutes every stage without helping Contador in 2011 or Froome motoring away Contador without getting out of his saddle considering the fact that he was climbing like this 4 years ago:
(Dont forget that he was kicked out of 2010 Giro because he was holding motors on the climbs, what a talent)
Another thing that I hate is that UCI and ASO covers people like Armstrong, Wiggins and Froome but do not hesitate to shaft riders like Rasmussen because he was not charismatic or he could not bring money to cycling because of various reasons. (Contador got away with a warning ban and I think that Clenbuterol thing is made up to punish him mildly. Dont forget that ASO banned Contador's team in 2008 because of doping incidents in 2007 even though Contador was on a different team and he was the defending champion, so I think that ASO does not like Contador at all )
I believe Rasmussen was canned by his team, not by the UCI. I would agree the UCI seems corrupt, though.
Also, look how much weight Froome has lost since then without losing even a bit of power, in fact he has gained ridiculous power. Makes zero sense and the only reasonable conclusion is that he is doping, imo. We should have greater clarity once the times are confirmed and analyzed. He didn't even look tired, though. I wouldn't be surprised if he could have dropped another 30 seconds off that time but wanted to avoid greater suspicion.
On July 15 2013 02:21 petered wrote: I believe Rasmussen was canned by his team, not by the UCI. I would agree the UCI seems corrupt, though.
Also, look how much weight Froome has lost since then without losing even a bit of power, in fact he has gained ridiculous power. Makes zero sense and the only reasonable conclusion is that he is doping, imo. We should have greater clarity once the times are confirmed and analyzed. He didn't even look tired, though. I wouldn't be surprised if he could have dropped another 30 seconds off that time but wanted to avoid greater suspicion.
UCI and ASO forced Rabobank to kick him out, they didnt want to put their hands in the dirt. And Rabo knew what was going on completely, their magic doctor Leinders made him a flying chicken. (Can you guess that on which team is he working right now)
I keep seeing conflicting reports about Froome's time today. Looks like he was actually within fairly normal ranges. I may have to retract the "obviously doping" stance.
On July 15 2013 02:29 petered wrote: I keep seeing conflicting reports about Froome's time today. Looks like he was actually within fairly normal ranges. I may have to retract the "obviously doping" stance.
Froome's time is around 48.5 minutes, so he's way faster than 2008-2013 GT numbers (left graph) and he's just on par with 2002-2007 dope fest numbers. (right graph) There is no way that he's doing this with bread and water considering his past.
Edit: The numbers look less ridiculous compared to Ax-3 Domaines, he was beating 2002-2007 doped numbers by around %2
Edit 2: #TDF, Mont Ventoux, last 6.15 km, 8.00 %, 492 m 2002 | Lance Armstrong: 17 min 53 sec 2013 | Chtris Froome: 17 min 41 sec
On July 15 2013 02:29 petered wrote: I keep seeing conflicting reports about Froome's time today. Looks like he was actually within fairly normal ranges. I may have to retract the "obviously doping" stance.
Froome's time is around 48.5 minutes, so he's way faster than 2008-2013 GT numbers (left graph) and he's just on par with 2002-2007 dope fest numbers. (right graph) There is no way that he's doing this with bread and water considering his past.
Edit: The numbers look less ridiculous compared to Ax-3 Domaines, he was beating 2002-2007 doped numbers by around %2
Edit 2: #TDF, Mont Ventoux, last 6.15 km, 8.00 %, 492 m 2002 | Lance Armstrong: 17 min 53 sec 2013 | Chtris Froome: 17 min 41 sec
No comment is necessary for this comparison
Yeah, I just saw that last update. A few people were measuring the climb from different starting points. Apparently the first few kilometers were quite slow, and calculations including that portion were closer to normal ranges. His finish does seem quite damning.
Where are you getting the pVAM and DpVam graph? I am familiar with those calculations but I don't know the source.
On July 15 2013 02:29 petered wrote: I keep seeing conflicting reports about Froome's time today. Looks like he was actually within fairly normal ranges. I may have to retract the "obviously doping" stance.
Froome's time is around 48.5 minutes, so he's way faster than 2008-2013 GT numbers (left graph) and he's just on par with 2002-2007 dope fest numbers. (right graph) There is no way that he's doing this with bread and water considering his past.
Edit: The numbers look less ridiculous compared to Ax-3 Domaines, he was beating 2002-2007 doped numbers by around %2
Edit 2: #TDF, Mont Ventoux, last 6.15 km, 8.00 %, 492 m 2002 | Lance Armstrong: 17 min 53 sec 2013 | Chtris Froome: 17 min 41 sec
No comment is necessary for this comparison
Yeah, I just saw that last update. A few people were measuring the climb from different starting points. Apparently the first few kilometers were quite slow, and calculations including that portion were closer to normal ranges. His finish does seem quite damning.
Where are you getting the pVAM and DpVam graph? I am familiar with those calculations but I don't know the source.
On July 15 2013 02:29 petered wrote: I keep seeing conflicting reports about Froome's time today. Looks like he was actually within fairly normal ranges. I may have to retract the "obviously doping" stance.
Froome's time is around 48.5 minutes, so he's way faster than 2008-2013 GT numbers (left graph) and he's just on par with 2002-2007 dope fest numbers. (right graph) There is no way that he's doing this with bread and water considering his past.
Edit: The numbers look less ridiculous compared to Ax-3 Domaines, he was beating 2002-2007 doped numbers by around %2
Edit 2: #TDF, Mont Ventoux, last 6.15 km, 8.00 %, 492 m 2002 | Lance Armstrong: 17 min 53 sec 2013 | Chtris Froome: 17 min 41 sec
No comment is necessary for this comparison
Yeah, I just saw that last update. A few people were measuring the climb from different starting points. Apparently the first few kilometers were quite slow, and calculations including that portion were closer to normal ranges. His finish does seem quite damning.
Where are you getting the pVAM and DpVam graph? I am familiar with those calculations but I don't know the source.
Kinda hilarious that these days results alone are enough to convince people that riders are doping. You guys do know that the aim of a race is to finish first right? And some people are just freaks and will be outliers (ie the winners). That being said it wouldn't surprise me at all if 90%+ of the peloton is doping right now (probably in a way that can't be tested or possibly isn't even illegal yet).
The only thing that stands out to me is if Froome is doping then why isn't the rest of the peloton? What happened to Porte? Do Sky just give the good stuff to their GC contender?
The reason a lot of people are calling foul is that people are still being faster/equal to times that were set by others who were caught using doping. Its hard to find someones believable at that point.
On July 15 2013 09:22 AndyJay wrote: Kinda hilarious that these days results alone are enough to convince people that riders are doping. You guys do know that the aim of a race is to finish first right? And some people are just freaks and will be outliers (ie the winners). That being said it wouldn't surprise me at all if 90%+ of the peloton is doping right now (probably in a way that can't be tested or possibly isn't even illegal yet).
The only thing that stands out to me is if Froome is doping then why isn't the rest of the peloton? What happened to Porte? Do Sky just give the good stuff to their GC contender?
They could all be doping, but if that's the case then Froome might just be one of those guys whose body just responds to the current PEDs better than everyone else (I.e. Armstrong).
I like to think Froome is clean, albeit his performances being equivalent to or better than the previous generation's proven dopers does raise eyebrows.
Even with doping factored in though there is something glorious about the Tour, alas I wish I got to watch more road racing but it's slim pickings over here. Even if riders aren't riding clean, the raw physicality of it is impressive as hell.
It does sound like I'm a bit down on things, but with Tyson Gay and Asafa Powell just testing positive, the former of which I instinctively felt would never dope, it is a bit of a kick in the teeth
I think that this argument of "he wins, ergo he dopes" is pretty weak. I've read the thread and I understand how insane that Ventoux climb was, but in and of itself I don't feel like it is evidence of doping. And I don't even particularly like Froome.
Also the rules are insane. Daily pisstests for riders in jersies, whereabouts, off-season controls, etc. It would be pretty unbelievable if this hulking beast of an antidoping effort is just failing to find it.
On July 15 2013 16:42 beef42 wrote: I think that this argument of "he wins, ergo he dopes" is pretty weak. I've read the thread and I understand how insane that Ventoux climb was, but in and of itself I don't feel like it is evidence of doping. And I don't even particularly like Froome.
Also the rules are insane. Daily pisstests for riders in jersies, whereabouts, off-season controls, etc. It would be pretty unbelievable if this hulking beast of an antidoping effort is just failing to find it.
not only the climb was insane but he did not seem to even be at 100% or something close to that. He was speaken to his manager and after his first attack he seemed like he was containing himself and was temporizing. Even zith that his time is ridiculous for a human, I can't even imagine what it would have been like if there were competition and if he climbed it at maximum pace the whole time.
On July 15 2013 16:42 beef42 wrote: I think that this argument of "he wins, ergo he dopes" is pretty weak. I've read the thread and I understand how insane that Ventoux climb was, but in and of itself I don't feel like it is evidence of doping. And I don't even particularly like Froome.
Also the rules are insane. Daily pisstests for riders in jersies, whereabouts, off-season controls, etc. It would be pretty unbelievable if this hulking beast of an antidoping effort is just failing to find it.
The rules are not enforced so it's totally pointless. Besides these rules existed when Armstrong was still running strong and it didn't catch him, neither did worked for Landis. Road and Track cycling are plagued with doping. There is no willingness to enforce these rules because the Tour de France (and other major Tours) is highly profitable. And as long as you can have a good storyline it doesn't matter that someone is sucking blood everyday.
On July 15 2013 16:42 beef42 wrote: I think that this argument of "he wins, ergo he dopes" is pretty weak. I've read the thread and I understand how insane that Ventoux climb was, but in and of itself I don't feel like it is evidence of doping. And I don't even particularly like Froome.
Also the rules are insane. Daily pisstests for riders in jersies, whereabouts, off-season controls, etc. It would be pretty unbelievable if this hulking beast of an antidoping effort is just failing to find it.
Of course he's innocent while there's no evidence but considering the past of cycling, you can't blame people for considering his climb as suspicious.
I saw the race live yesterday, it reminded me some.climbing of Pantani, Contador or Armstrong. Enough said.
I'm not sure what to think about it at the moment. His performance is in line with doped Armstrong. Furthermore, the length which he's above the competition just doesn't seem realisitic.
According to the ITV Podcast team yesterday Froome popped in to have oxygen before doing fulfilling his media obligations and receiving the various jerseys.
Is this kind of thing commonplace, or a privilege for the stage winner or what? As a layman it does rather illustrate quite how hard these guys have to push,
I cannot fathom that people still believe there is such a thing as a non cheating winnner of the Tour de France? cheating and the Tour de France has gone hand in hand since the very first edition of the Tour de France where you have stories of riders being helped during night time and having outside help to sabotage the other riders with thumbnails during the course and going on to feature team managers giving rival riders poisoned water bottles, you have the very first Tour de France doped rider dating back to the 1920's that would take multiple substances that included Cocain just to finish the race.
The entire point is that the newspaper that started the Tour de France, wanted a race thats so difficult that only one rider would ever finish it. The entire premise of the race is based around Cheating, cycling is secondary and it allways has been.. there has never been a 100% Clean rider (what i mean by that, is that whoever won the race.. did so with some amount of cheating in some form)
And regarding what Froome did yesterday, when Armstrong climbed the very same peek in 1999 he did so with an avage speed of 22.29 km/h at that time you have reports of reporters sitting together and calling it inhumane & superhuman (hinting at cheating, and thats only the 11th fastest time recorded) the year after he posted a 21.83 km/h avarage speed on the same peek.. froome? he posted a time of 21.86 km/h well within the spectrum of superhuman V02/max.
And for those wondering froome refused to release his numbers earlier this year, his watt output, V02/max and such and you only do that for one reason and thats because your going to be posting something thats beyond that at some point and you only do that while doped.
Ahh cool this is one event i know ill be able to buy a vast variety of drugs at.
rofl the reason why people are doping and gettign away with it is because there is more money in getting around regs than enforcing them. Regs are also reactive
On July 16 2013 02:07 Dybdal wrote: And for those wondering froome refused to release his numbers earlier this year, his watt output, V02/max and such and you only do that for one reason and thats because your going to be posting something thats beyond that at some point and you only do that while doped.
No you do it because terrible pseudo-scientists will take your results as evidence of doping when they aren't.
Dave Brailsford and team Sky are legit. Just like the British Cycling team is legit. All this nonsense has to stop. Sky will hand every single piece of data over that people want, and it still isn't enough. How many urine samples does it take? Follow him around if you like? They've said they would even allow that! We know Brailsford's methods are exceptional and give riders an extra edge - the GB cycling team is evidence of this.
And then there are always exceptional performers in Sport. It's not inconceivable that 10 years on training and equipment has improved enough that the outliers can almost touch pre-doping times. It's a shame Froome may have to wait as many as 10 years to get the credit he deserves.
On July 16 2013 02:07 Dybdal wrote: And for those wondering froome refused to release his numbers earlier this year, his watt output, V02/max and such and you only do that for one reason and thats because your going to be posting something thats beyond that at some point and you only do that while doped.
No you do it because terrible pseudo-scientists will take your results as evidence of doping when they aren't.
Dave Brailsford and team Sky are legit. Just like the British Cycling team is legit. All this nonsense has to stop. Sky will hand every single piece of data over that people want, and it still isn't enough. How many urine samples does it take? Follow him around if you like? They've said they would even allow that! We know Brailsford's methods are exceptional and give riders an extra edge - the GB cycling team is evidence of this.
And then there are always exceptional performers in Sport. It's not inconceivable that 10 years on training and equipment has improved enough that the outliers can almost touch pre-doping times. It's a shame Froome may have to wait as many as 10 years to get the credit he deserves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay48ZWkoeHU
They never released Froome V02/max this year, despite many people asking for it
Training and equipment only improved for Sky it seems
On July 16 2013 02:07 Dybdal wrote: And for those wondering froome refused to release his numbers earlier this year, his watt output, V02/max and such and you only do that for one reason and thats because your going to be posting something thats beyond that at some point and you only do that while doped.
No you do it because terrible pseudo-scientists will take your results as evidence of doping when they aren't.
Dave Brailsford and team Sky are legit. Just like the British Cycling team is legit. All this nonsense has to stop. Sky will hand every single piece of data over that people want, and it still isn't enough. How many urine samples does it take? Follow him around if you like? They've said they would even allow that! We know Brailsford's methods are exceptional and give riders an extra edge - the GB cycling team is evidence of this.
And then there are always exceptional performers in Sport. It's not inconceivable that 10 years on training and equipment has improved enough that the outliers can almost touch pre-doping times. It's a shame Froome may have to wait as many as 10 years to get the credit he deserves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay48ZWkoeHU
There are so many lies in this post.
1- How the fuck Leinders is legit? (Rabobanks and Chicken's former doping doctor) 2- Some swimming coach with dodgy history is also legit as well? 3- Froome was the worst cyclist in 2010 on the team, now he's beating dopers from 2002-2007 (Pre bio passport era) 4- Equipment does not matter on a climb, you mostly fight against gravity, not wind. 5- So this genius baldhead could not realize that Froome is the real deal until Angliru when your beloved sir couldnt climb at all? How can you explain this mastermind? 6- Froome only got into a wind tunnel this year, how do you explain this amazing scientific training? 7- Last year's sir is sucking big time right now, how can you explain that? (You can mention JTL as well) 8- The most talented rider from 2010, EBH is incapable of doing nothing at the moment. He was the best climber, best time trialist and the best sprinter of the team, suddenly he cant do jack shit. 9- You mention urine samples, I mention Lance and horde of dopers from 90's
I might add more questions or comments if necessary
On July 16 2013 02:23 MrTortoise wrote: Ahh cool this is one event i know ill be able to buy a vast variety of drugs at.
rofl the reason why people are doping and gettign away with it is because there is more money in getting around regs than enforcing them. Regs are also reactive
its kind of the same logical problem as piracy.
That's not exactly true. For example, the AFLD (french anti-doping agency) alone has a 10 million euros budget, that's far more than any cycling team can spend in doping. The thing is, it takes time to develop tests for the newest drugs. but it's only a matter of time, and every samples are kept nowadays.
On July 16 2013 02:07 Dybdal wrote: And for those wondering froome refused to release his numbers earlier this year, his watt output, V02/max and such and you only do that for one reason and thats because your going to be posting something thats beyond that at some point and you only do that while doped.
No you do it because terrible pseudo-scientists will take your results as evidence of doping when they aren't.
Dave Brailsford and team Sky are legit. Just like the British Cycling team is legit. All this nonsense has to stop. Sky will hand every single piece of data over that people want, and it still isn't enough. How many urine samples does it take? Follow him around if you like? They've said they would even allow that! We know Brailsford's methods are exceptional and give riders an extra edge - the GB cycling team is evidence of this.
And then there are always exceptional performers in Sport. It's not inconceivable that 10 years on training and equipment has improved enough that the outliers can almost touch pre-doping times. It's a shame Froome may have to wait as many as 10 years to get the credit he deserves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay48ZWkoeHU
Given the fact that many people in cycling are doping, would you say it is possible to beat everyone while not doping? Or do you simply deny that doping is going on in cycling?
Hard to say if Froome is doping, I'm worried he probably is. However Sky does seem to go to great lengths to show they are riding legitimately, they are quite open, have a doping critic with them and seem to bery helpful in making sure it's all fair. But I can't really judge if that's of any value. An other explanation that Sky is doing so well last years could also be better techonology. They train very rigorously on wattage and their riders have the Osymetric gears which theoretically give a fairly big advantage. Perhaps those improvements are the reason the best fair rider of now is doing about as good as the dopers of ten years back..
I hope so but I'm still a bit doubtful. I'm curious to see if soon everyone will be switching to the Osymetric gears though, the results so far seem astonishing.
I wonder if Froome sometimes isn't thinking, perhaps I should go a little less hard, just to avoid so many annoying questions. It is coming to the point that winning the tour by a landslide is being called a doper while winning by a small margin means you're a fantastic competitor
On July 16 2013 02:07 Dybdal wrote: And for those wondering froome refused to release his numbers earlier this year, his watt output, V02/max and such and you only do that for one reason and thats because your going to be posting something thats beyond that at some point and you only do that while doped.
No you do it because terrible pseudo-scientists will take your results as evidence of doping when they aren't.
Dave Brailsford and team Sky are legit. Just like the British Cycling team is legit. All this nonsense has to stop. Sky will hand every single piece of data over that people want, and it still isn't enough. How many urine samples does it take? Follow him around if you like? They've said they would even allow that! We know Brailsford's methods are exceptional and give riders an extra edge - the GB cycling team is evidence of this.
And then there are always exceptional performers in Sport. It's not inconceivable that 10 years on training and equipment has improved enough that the outliers can almost touch pre-doping times. It's a shame Froome may have to wait as many as 10 years to get the credit he deserves.
There are so many lies in this post.
1- How the fuck Leinders is legit? (Rabobanks and Chicken's former doping doctor) 2- Some swimming coach with dodgy history is also legit as well? 3-snip Froome was the worst cyclist in 2010 on the team, now he's beating dopers from 2002-2007 (Pre bio passport era) 4- Equipment does not matter on a climb, you mostly fight against gravity, not wind. 5- So this genius baldhead could not realize that Froome is the real deal until Angliru when your beloved sir couldnt climb at all? How can you explain this mastermind? 6- Froome only got into a wind tunnel this year, how do you explain this amazing scientific training? 7- Last year's sir is sucking big time right now, how can you explain that? (You can mention JTL as well) 8- The most talented rider from 2010, EBH is incapable of doing nothing at the moment. He was the best climber, best time trialist and the best sprinter of the team, suddenly he cant do jack shit. 9- You mention urine samples, I mention Lance and horde of dopers from 90's
I might add more questions or comments if necessary
What is the problem with saying Bailsford has been exceptional with his training methods when you look at his results? Is it because you are saying anything he has done well was down to him pushing drugs on his cyclists?
On July 16 2013 02:07 Dybdal wrote: And for those wondering froome refused to release his numbers earlier this year, his watt output, V02/max and such and you only do that for one reason and thats because your going to be posting something thats beyond that at some point and you only do that while doped.
No you do it because terrible pseudo-scientists will take your results as evidence of doping when they aren't.
Dave Brailsford and team Sky are legit. Just like the British Cycling team is legit. All this nonsense has to stop. Sky will hand every single piece of data over that people want, and it still isn't enough. How many urine samples does it take? Follow him around if you like? They've said they would even allow that! We know Brailsford's methods are exceptional and give riders an extra edge - the GB cycling team is evidence of this.
And then there are always exceptional performers in Sport. It's not inconceivable that 10 years on training and equipment has improved enough that the outliers can almost touch pre-doping times. It's a shame Froome may have to wait as many as 10 years to get the credit he deserves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay48ZWkoeHU
Your entire post is laughable.
Straight to the point. 1) http://bikepure.org/ before this year (and 2012) Froome has given this organization every scientific number they have requested from him becomming the organizations poster boy for clean riding. This year? they have asked multiple times and he has refused every single one of them leaving bikepure no other option than http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/06/news/bike-pure-removes-froome-ahead-of-tour_292019removing him from their site.
And your argument that this "terrible pseudo-science" aka junk science isnt accurate or misused is just.. im speechless!
2) How many urine samples does it take? Follow him around if you like? They've said they would even allow that!
The same was said about pretty much everyone in the 1990's that did EPO and 60% of every single sample they froze down from that period came back positive when they were re-tested in 2006 to learn how to better detect EPO. The point is that testing has allways been behind the curve and it allways will be.
3) It's not inconceivable that 10 years on training and equipment has improved enough that the outliers can almost touch pre-doping times.
This is about the dumbest argument i've ever heared, So your saying that training methods & equipment is somehow improving riders lung capacity & red bloodcell count to such a degree that it eclipsis EPO usage? because im sorry to say.. bullshit, the only thing that humans can do to improve humans endurance beyond what the EPO riders of the 1990's->2011 was doing is by using chemicals of some sort. Humanity did not start evolving super human british people in the last 30 years.
1) Performance numbers do not prove doping, they are just fuel for the uninformed - like you. No athletes want to be bullied into giving data that is important for tactics but not important for proving/disproving doping. 2) They are under far more intense scrutiny now. Where are they hiding the fridges when they are staying in some lodges as other teams and have reporters/cameramen in their faces 24/7? 3) Wrong, he has not eclipsed any of the previous EPO times. Athletes improve over time, see: any sport ever.
Also to those saying where was Froome in 2010? Suffering from a form of schistosomiasis.
Honestly what did froome expect of the pro cycling universe since the last 10 years has been infested with doping winners, and veterans from all over the world admitting to have doped throughout the last 23 years of pro cycling. Doping has been in cycling since it's dawn in 1903. Ofcourse he will get asked the question, he just have to proved ha hasn't doped i love watching cycling anyways..
At some point the best climbers used low rhythm in high gears and power to climb fast on to the hills. Than somebody not known as a special climber came with "special training" that allowed him to climb, with high rhythm in lower gears relying on stamina over power, faster than everybody else. This guy had nothing to hide, was willing to undergo all doping tests. His name was Lance Armstrong and it was obvious then and its been confirmed recently what his special training was.
In the end I dont care whether Froome (as well as Wiggins last year) uses doping, history tells us he is and he is probably not alone, either way if he is he'll get caught in 10 years from now, when his teammates are no longer paid to remain silent. The sport remains interesting either way, with the insane distances and speeds they are driving for 3 weeks.
With regards to media questions, the media got burned for not finding out Armstrong used doping, now they get burned for asking questions, whatever.
I dont think its the media's place to find out if someone is using doping. It was there job with Armstrong and its not there job with Froome. Asking an athlete during an interview if they use doping is beyond insulting. Seriously what do you expect? That the guy will admit to it on the spot?
On July 16 2013 06:51 Gorsameth wrote: I dont think its the media's place to find out if someone is using doping. It was there job with Armstrong and its not there job with Froome. Asking an athlete during an interview if they use doping is beyond insulting. Seriously what do you expect? That the guy will admit to it on the spot?
I don't see why the media should enquire into one guy with superhuman performance but ignore another.
I do agree that they shouldn't just straight up ask an athlete about it, because that has no merit and is simply trying to provoke a reaction, but there should be continued investigative journalism into team preparation and doping.
This is cycling, and the scar Armstrong left on the sport will ensure every stand out performer for the next decade or two is subject to scrutiny, but rigorous investigation from the media can help with catching and deterring dopers, as well as giving some supporting evidence of riders being clean. In the long run it is better to ask the questions now even if the answers come up as "no, they weren't doping" than to completely ignore the question and 10 years down the line go through the same shit again.if they were.
In the meantime hopefully fans can enjoy the races for what they are, even when the only interesting part of the GC is for positions 2 and below.
On July 16 2013 04:58 Klive5ive wrote: 1) Performance numbers do not prove doping, they are just fuel for the uninformed - like you. No athletes want to be bullied into giving data that is important for tactics but not important for proving/disproving doping. 2) They are under far more intense scrutiny now. Where are they hiding the fridges when they are staying in some lodges as other teams and have reporters/cameramen in their faces 24/7? 3) Wrong, he has not eclipsed any of the previous EPO times. Athletes improve over time, see: any sport ever.
Also to those saying where was Froome in 2010? Suffering from a form of schistosomiasis.
Now, I am not 100% convinced that Froome is doping, but lets be clear: He is in fact eclipsing the times of the doping era. Saying otherwise is just ignorant. Over the last 15 kilometers of Mt Venoux he posted the second fastest time ever at 48:35, a mere 2 seconds off the time of Lance Armstrong in 2002 for the record and ahead of the times of many other confirmed dopers.
You are correct that this doesn't count as proof of doping. Ross Tucker (well respected sports physiologist) has already called this performance plausible, and I am inclined to believe him. I am holding out judgement for now. Still, no matter how you frame it his performance was fairly extreme in the range of normal human performance. Denying that does nobody any good.
Getting away from the doping talk for a moment, here is a video of Quintana at the top of Mt Venoux. Just in case you ever doubted the effort these guys give!
I'd be surprised if there was any kind of Sky/Brailsford-endorsed doping, much more so than I would be if Froome or any other rider did so independently. The guy's track pedigree and Olympic-focused programme's success is what got Sky on board in the first place, from the oft they've been extremely anti-doping and hell Brailsford has even become a knight of the realm in the UK.
It would take humongous, monstrous balls to be running any kind of doping programme with all that in the background. That said, I suppose Armstrong created an entire charitable empire around his doped-up achievements so it's not inconceivable.
About EBH not showing improvements, or even going backwards since joining Sky as any kind of 'proof' of anything, that's rather silly. I defer to those more knowledgable on road cycling in the most part, but his relative lack of progression could be ascribed to any number of other factors, personal motivation etc etc.
On July 16 2013 06:51 Gorsameth wrote: I dont think its the media's place to find out if someone is using doping. It was there job with Armstrong and its not there job with Froome. Asking an athlete during an interview if they use doping is beyond insulting. Seriously what do you expect? That the guy will admit to it on the spot?
Are you stupid? If journalists aren't looking for strange things about Froome than who is supposed to do that? So you just want it to go back to like it was with Armstrong, no journalist brave enough or lazy to look for anything(apart from some individuals)? And yes, just straight up asking the rider is stupid. Those are the lazy ones, just asking things without any actual research
On July 16 2013 10:48 Wombat_NI wrote: I'd be surprised if there was any kind of Sky/Brailsford-endorsed doping, much more so than I would be if Froome or any other rider did so independently. The guy's track pedigree and Olympic-focused programme's success is what got Sky on board in the first place, from the oft they've been extremely anti-doping and hell Brailsford has even become a knight of the realm in the UK.
It would take humongous, monstrous balls to be running any kind of doping programme with all that in the background. That said, I suppose Armstrong created an entire charitable empire around his doped-up achievements so it's not inconceivable.
About EBH not showing improvements, or even going backwards since joining Sky as any kind of 'proof' of anything, that's rather silly. I defer to those more knowledgable on road cycling in the most part, but his relative lack of progression could be ascribed to any number of other factors, personal motivation etc etc.
Yeah, I concur. I mean, I can't believe that the french finance minister is really using offshore funds. His pedigree is outstanding and with that background it would require major balls to pull it off and lie to the whole national assembly.
LOL
I don't want anyone to misunderstand, I'm not on a crusade against Froome nor do I care about who wins the Tour, all runners are doped anyway, Froome just has the talent and dedication to make most of these products but any attempts to deny doping in highly profitable sports is beyond ludicrous.
If there is no attack by any of the top players on the first climb it should be fine since they can then descent in peace but if there are people trying to win time im worried someone is going over the edge.
On July 18 2013 22:39 fusefuse wrote: this crowd :/ hindering everyone, especially the peloton, having to funnel through drunk halfnaked overly attached foreigners
As heard on Eurosport. "Its like splitting the waves but its not Moses its Porte".
On July 19 2013 00:32 Prog wrote: I just heard that it is not allowed to get food from a team-car in the last x km. Can anyone with more knowledge confirm this?
Edit: I just got another source confirming it. We'll see how that effects Froome.
Should be just a cash penalty. Shouldnt have any effect on his standings.
The problem is that Froom is simply stronger then Contador. You cant get away from a guy who gos faster then you whenever he wants to. Especially with the big time difference between Froom and the rest there isnt a lot of places to succesfully attack either. Its not about winning 10-20 seconds anymore. He is just to far behind to overcome against a stronger opponent.
Exciting stuff I read that the team car broke down and couldn't get nutrition to Froome, dunno if that's true or not. Still exciting stage overall, nice to see a Frenchman finally win xD
The article is nice and all but there is just far too much incentives for runners to take drugs throughout the year to game the system. If you want to base your reasoning on facts, more power to you but it won't take away the fact that many have done it before and if I had the chances to trade a possible worsened health when I'm older for the recognition of fans, I probably would too.
Until the incentives are too low in comparison to the risks, doping will continue. It's just how things are.
Great stage today. The emergence of Quintana is fun to watch, but sad to see Contador keep falling behind. End of an era really.
Also, we aren't "armchair doping scientists" we are rightfully skeptical fans of a sport with a remarkably dirty past. Were we still armchair doping scientists when we were skeptical of Armstrong's dominance of the tour? nah we were right.
Within the very article that you have linked, it mentions that in order to produce the power that Froome does, he must have a VO2 max "that is close to the known limits of man" (quote straight from the article). So this doesn't disprove that he is doping, just like his dominant performance from the tour doesn't prove he is doping. I personally would like to see his VO2 max tested now. If it isn't close to the known limits of man, well guess what I am still suspicious. If it is, then I am convinced he is clean since he is simply a freak. Oh and the analyst who is proclaiming Froome to be clean? Frederic Grappe, who in 2001 wrote this about armstrong
He then commented on the accusations that have been made against Lance Armstrong regarding 'impossible' power outputs. "Certain people say silly things. When we are told that a rider is not able to put out 420 - 430 Watts in a time trial, that is false. Not so long ago, one of the riders with whom I was involved climbed Mont Faron at a power of 400 Watts for 20 minutes, and he is far from being Armstrong. Consequently, I am not astonished that Armstrong or others can produce 460 or 470 Watts on a mountain. It is not impossible."
In addition, a cadence of 80-90 rpm to produce this power on climbs is also not impossible, according to Grappe. "It is the result of many days of hard work. With what has happened in the past 10 years, many riders are using bigger gear ratios. Some have lost the suppleness, i.e. they are not able to utilise higher pedalling frequencies...a high pedalling frequency makes it possible to relieve the muscles," said Grappe who expressed his annoyance of people's poor analysis of the data.
Grappe also commented about the inaccuracy of hematocrit testing, which he said can change by up to 5 percent depending on the status of the rider (upright, lying down, dehydrated, previously active etc.). "We see riders who can reach 50% naturally, and that can move to 51%. That does not mean doping."
I mean, it is fine to be a fanboy and all (your profile states you are from the UK), but cycling fans have every right to be suspicious given the sport's past. I want Froome to be clean (and quintana and rodriguez and contador). Doesn't mean I'm not going to give extreme performances a very long look before I buy into it.
Despite your claim otherwise you sound exactly like an armchair doping scientist to me. It's barely an insult but I seemed to have pushed a button somehow.
However, if sticking up for a man I see to be rather obviously innocent makes me a "fanboy" then I gratefully accept the slur - although actually it's not the case. Usain Bolt didn't have a room full of reporters ruining his world record by jabbering on about doping. What Froome has achieved in this Tour has been nothing short of spectacular and yet his incredible performance have been marred not because of what he has done but because of the wrongdoing of others.
On July 19 2013 07:16 Klive5ive wrote: Despite your claim otherwise you sound exactly like an armchair doping scientist to me. It's barely an insult but I seemed to have pushed a button somehow.
However, if sticking up for a man I see to be rather obviously innocent makes me a "fanboy" then I gratefully accept the slur - although actually it's not the case. Usain Bolt didn't have a room full of reporters ruining his world record by jabbering on about doping. What Froome has achieved in this Tour has been nothing short of spectacular and yet his incredible performance have been marred not because of what he has done but because of the wrongdoing of others.
Being a fanboy isn't a bad thing, but it can affect your judgement. It was hard for me to accept that Contador doped because I am a fanboy. It seems to me you are a fanboy of Froome which means that you aren't coming into the situation with an open mind.
You are correct that it is unfair to Froome personally that he has to suffer because of the history of the sport, but that is the sad fact of cycling, and considering cycling's history it is the only option. Look at the last couple of decades of cycling champions: Riis - doper Armstrong - doper Pantani - doper ullrich - doper landis - doper contador - doper
And countless more. It is only healthy to have a fair amount of skepticism, even though froome hasn't done anything personally to deserve it.
And guess what, I am not doing any of my own science/calculations. So I couldn't possibly be an armchair doping scientist. I read up on what other experts say and decide for myself. Just because you blindly accept a man's innocence and only highlight someone's opinion when it agrees with your own doesn't mean I have to. I am the one with an open and fair mind in all of this, because I am allowing my mind to be swayed one way or the other based on evidence. If you want to lock into one opinion based on very limited evidence, be my guest, but it is dumb to criticize me for withholding judgement until there is a clearer picture.
On July 19 2013 07:16 Klive5ive wrote:Usain Bolt didn't have a room full of reporters ruining his world record by jabbering on about doping.
He is more likely doped anyway. Thing is, cycling bears a huge stigma with past history of doping including past winners like Armstrong or Landis, or past stars like Zabel, Pantani or Ullrich. Every low skill ceiling sports flooded with money is bound to have doping issues, there is nothing you can do to avoid that.
Pretty much every top 5 guys over the last twenty years has been caught and you want us to believe that Froome is clean ? LOL I can write a list with 50+ names with just the very best.
Hell even Evans was linked to a shady doctor at some point in his carreer and he was probably one of the most "legit" top guys (i.e: a fairly boring and "mediocre" winner without the "omg this guy isnt human" kind of performances).
There is a good point in terms of the reaction to Usain Bolt and Froome. If anything the former's achievements are more suspicious if we're taking the 'how dominant he is against former/current dopers' method of judgement, but by and large he is lauded as an exceptional outlier in a way that Froome isn't.
I can understand why that is the case. Cycling and athletics suffer by being sports purely decided by physical capabilities, on the most part it's the key thing that differentiates competitors.
Sports like tennis and football, where rumours abound of doping issues to me get less scrutiny for this because the additional skillsets and techniques also come into play. I mean no matter how much you dope, you're unlikely to have the exquisite control running with the ball at pace that Lionel Messi does, or the artistry of a Roger Federer.
EDIT: Oh also in case you've missed some of the action and want a quick recap this dude over at /r/peloton does these awesome recaps: http://vimeo.com/cyclocosm
On July 19 2013 20:17 Oldgrain wrote: Gotta love peter sagan...
EDIT: Oh also in case you've missed some of the action and want a quick recap this dude over at /r/peloton does these awesome recaps: http://vimeo.com/cyclocosm
What a baller. How could anyone not love Sagan.
Also I love those recaps, very entertaining and well done.
Anyone think any GC guys will gain/lose time on Annecy-Semnoz tomorrow? I doubt anything close to change their standings but I hope there are some attacks...
On July 19 2013 20:17 Oldgrain wrote: Gotta love peter sagan...
EDIT: Oh also in case you've missed some of the action and want a quick recap this dude over at /r/peloton does these awesome recaps: http://vimeo.com/cyclocosm
What a baller. How could anyone not love Sagan.
Also I love those recaps, very entertaining and well done.
Anyone think any GC guys will gain/lose time on Annecy-Semnoz tomorrow? I doubt anything close to change their standings but I hope there are some attacks...
There will be attacks tomorrow but I dont think it will happen until the final climb.
Positions 2-5 are still completely open and anything can happen.
On July 19 2013 20:17 Oldgrain wrote: Gotta love peter sagan...
EDIT: Oh also in case you've missed some of the action and want a quick recap this dude over at /r/peloton does these awesome recaps: http://vimeo.com/cyclocosm
What a baller. How could anyone not love Sagan.
Also I love those recaps, very entertaining and well done.
Anyone think any GC guys will gain/lose time on Annecy-Semnoz tomorrow? I doubt anything close to change their standings but I hope there are some attacks...
Almost anything can happen in the top 2-5 since the differences are pretty small. Froome has won this so long as he stays on his bike basically. I dont see how he can lose 5 minutes with the current state of things.
On July 19 2013 20:17 Oldgrain wrote: Gotta love peter sagan...
EDIT: Oh also in case you've missed some of the action and want a quick recap this dude over at /r/peloton does these awesome recaps: http://vimeo.com/cyclocosm
What a baller. How could anyone not love Sagan.
Also I love those recaps, very entertaining and well done.
Anyone think any GC guys will gain/lose time on Annecy-Semnoz tomorrow? I doubt anything close to change their standings but I hope there are some attacks...
Almost anything can happen in the top 2-5 since the differences are pretty small. Froome has won this so long as he stays on his bike basically. I dont see how he can lose 5 minutes with the current state of things.
Yeah it has been a very good race for second place. Froome just too strong for the others.
On July 20 2013 22:07 DaCruise wrote: Buhh Roland. I hope he gets dq´d for that move. Not a worthy winner of the mountain jersey.
Yeah that was such a dirty move. Apparently he isn't being punished for it, at least according to finnish eurosport they said that the official KOM points came and he had won it. Unbelievable decisions.
My bet is that there waiting for the finish so they can see if the points matter for Roland. If he doesn't win the jersey they just punish him while if he would win with the points they give him some meaningless cash penalty or something.
I dont see how an impartial jury could not punish that move within minutes. But hey i thought they would do the same when Cavendish drove Veelers into the road and they did nothing there.
On July 20 2013 22:37 Gorsameth wrote: My bet is that there waiting for the finish so they can see if the points matter for Roland. If he doesn't win the jersey they just punish him while if he would win with the points they give him some meaningless cash penalty or something.
I dont see how an impartial jury could not punish that move within minutes. But hey i thought they would do the same when Cavendish drove Veelers into the road and they did nothing there.
Yeah they just announced that the jury will look at it after the race.
Pretty sure the move will receive some form of punishment. Hopefully they drop him from the KOM ranking or remove a good amount of points (not just 2).
On July 20 2013 22:51 fusefuse wrote: ow nieve isnt even contesting it atm by the looks of things
good to see voigt out there at front : D
There are so many points for the uphill finish that I think Nieve is just hoping for a long shot. He managed to get ahead on the earlier uphill finishes probably hoping to do the same today.
On July 20 2013 23:07 fusefuse wrote: Oh right yeah, just found out they get mountain points for the finish as well :0 and with a gap of only a minute, rolland seems fucked
Movistar and Katusha wont let todays victory go to a break-away. The big boys will duke it out for the victory on the final climb, which gives Froome or Quintana a good shot at winning the mountain jersey.
On July 21 2013 00:18 Oghren . wrote: Now we have to play the waiting game and wait until Froome gets disqualified.
If you watch the tour with that mentality, then why bother at all? AFAIK there is no real reason to suspect Froome has been doping apart from him having a good performance and having improved. If that is your mentality, then riders can only be either good and doped or bad and possibly doped. I don't like this trend of always crediting doping for results, let's just say that Froome is very strong unless something apart from performance points heavily towards doping.
Team Sky (and Froome in particular) are closely watched all the time and it would be hard for them to carry out any significant doping operation. They are also in some sense the national British team and managed by someone who do not want to see British cycling be dragged through a doping scandal.
I think Quintana is every bit as suspicious as Froome. He is 23 riding his first TDF ever and finishes second and he didnt participate in any races in the 2 months leading up to the tour, which is very uncommon.
He apparently had 5 weeks of training back at home in Columbia before the tour And as he lives pretty high up there in Columbia, I guess the conditions were what he stayed there for
But its fun conspiring isn't it Because if they don't get dragged down you can still remain suspicious But if they do, you can run around yelling I KNEW IT What a fun way to follow sports
Team Sky (and Froome in particular) are closely watched all the time and it would be hard for them to carry out any significant doping operation.
Orly? And Armstrong wasn't watched closely??? Its just a question of who has the faster development of technology. Dopers or Anti-Dopers.
I'm not saying it is impossible or even unlikely, but they are certainly watched very closely. Overall I would guess riders today are tested more thoroughly than in Armstrong's era, but I wasn't watching cycling then and am not an insider in any cycling organization so don't really know. From what I hear team Sky are followed by a journalist who has access to medical staff and would love to write about doping, and they have released data on Froome that people who are knowledgeable about the matter have not deemed likely to be doctored or indicative of doping.
In any case I would never argue that I know whether or not Froome is doping. My point is more along the lines of how can you enjoy the tour if you label anyone who performs well a cheater? You cannot root for a winner, because how could he possibly win if not for doping? I could only really imagine enjoying the tour in one of three states: 1) Suspension of disbelief: I willingly ignore doping allegations, and instead act and feel as though everything is fair. 2) Belief that overall most riders are actually clean. 3) Belief that overall all riders are doping and therefore it is fair, even if it is illegal.
On July 21 2013 01:54 DaCruise wrote: I think Quintana is every bit as suspicious as Froome. He is 23 riding his first TDF ever and finishes second and he didnt participate in any races in the 2 months leading up to the tour, which is very uncommon.
Also Froome showed moments of pain Quintana never did... + he is from Columbia.
Only the most notorious dopers get caught during the Tour de France. Doping is done mostly during training because there are fewer controls and you still get a lot of benifits. Btw I think the scandels had an effect and there is a lot less doping now than during armstrong's domination but the top ten are probably still dopers.
On July 21 2013 05:00 Gorsameth wrote: So unless I missed it there is once again no penalties for riders intentionally obstructing another. Really a weak showing from the jury this tour.
What did you expect when the rider making the foul was a frenchman? Not like the tour de france jury would penalize a frenchman. If Anton pushed him of the raid, he'd be thrown out of the tour.
On July 21 2013 05:00 Gorsameth wrote: So unless I missed it there is once again no penalties for riders intentionally obstructing another. Really a weak showing from the jury this tour.
What did you expect when the rider making the foul was a frenchman? Not like the tour de france jury would penalize a frenchman. If Anton pushed him of the raid, he'd be thrown out of the tour.
It doesn't work like this. The jury don't give penalties in this case if the rider who almost felt don't ask for it.
If Anton didn't ask it, it's normal that the frenchman is not punished. It has nothing to do with the nationality.
In any case, you're not thrown out of the tour unless you beat someone or dope.
A great tour and a real spectacle. Certainly fitting for the 100th edition.
hats off to all involved!
---
Shame about the really sad moment for Lieuwe Westra, who after waking up ill wasn't able to handle the final stage and had to abandon the race so close to the end =(
Congrats to Froome, and best of luck to Quintana. Froome did his job but made the GC contest quite boring, here's to Quintana's and others' future success :>
Couldn't follow the race too much this year but I realized that 100th edition is a good opportunity to see it in person. I left home on 13th and hitchhiked to French Alps (well, I had some points of interest on my way there too, so not just for TdF). This is me on stage 19, waving flag of Poland! + Show Spoiler +
Thanks! I was definately more impressed by what they do as I had to walk a bit uphill to find a good place. It was the only stage I saw and it was pretty short... but I didn't know about "caravan" and that was a nice surprise. Also it surprised me that the peloton was totally quiet! You always hear crowd on the TV so you don't realise that but they were totally quiet. Overall I liked it and I think it was worth, an interesting trip with a memorable "finish" : )