Posts: 4705 Joined: 27.07.11 Location: Connecticut, USA PCM$: 321.00
supradyn wrote:
franki28 wrote: If it's possible to win a GT without doping, please tell me how
Go to the shop and buy PCM then start in normal. It's not possible to win GT on hard.
franki28 wrote:
I encourage britain to support their team, but man... I just can't see what's clean about Froome. However, the rest of team Sky looks OK(like everyone else)
Porte looks worse for me.
Noob!
Seriously, where'd you get that idea?
Winner of American Championship races which I can't remember since my sig was deleted :L
Posts: 82 Joined: 18.07.11 Location: Melbourne, Australia PCM$: 120.00
Just my two cents on the idea:
Wiggins is not doping. Any decent climber who could follow wheels on his teammates, whether doping or not, can stay with the pack. And unless Froome blows up one of these days and cracks really early, he's probably doping as well - all of the riders that he's dropped are by no means bad climbers. If Froome cracks and can't put together another good stage, then he may not be doping, just given everything already.
GreenEDGE 100%
Dropstaaf wrote:
What if they (Froome&Wiggins) are riding on the mountains slower than what they are capable of with those drugs, just to decrease the accusations coming from the audience, to make themselves less questionable?
No. Let's not make ridiculous conspiracy theories. Froome did go slower, but only to avoid dropping Wiggins. They're surely riding at their limits, what I, and others, question is - is that their clean limit?
well clearly Froome is not riding at his limit since he slowed down when Wiggo cracked.
Do you understand how what you stated is complete bullshit?
Jupi wrote:
I looked around a bit more and now I'm convinced that wattage calculations found on various sites multiply watts/kg with the rider's actual weight, which of course isn't very helpful when trying to compare performances. The 463 watts of Froome up La Planche is actually 503 if normalised for 78 kg. My w/kg calculation is in line with the Science of Sport article, which derives the 6.4-6.5 w/kg for the lead group from Brajko's SRM data, or with Ferrari's own calculation. When it comes to multiplying it with 78 however, I consitently get 10% higher values.
You should multiply it by 70, not 78. Unless they're Cancellara's, bikes don't produce power. "Racing is life. Everything before or after is just waiting."
Froome yesterday? That was so ridiculous i was laughing loudly, one even cannot cry about this anymore, just laugh.
If there was not a rider named Wiggins and Froome wanted to go at 100% percent, he would have won the stage by minutes. As he attacked, everybody was on the limit and he was absolutely flying for 10 metres and than realised what he is doing
Even more, he was looking like he was going to crack few minutes before. Rogers was also funny, droping proven climbers like they were children riding tricycles...
But even more laughable is fact, that sky fans are now pointing on the others that stayed with them, VsB and Nibali are one of the best climbers nowadays and Rogers/Froome caught them easily, then these two suffered till the end to barely hang on there in the group. Pinot is a fantastic talent, showing steady progression for two years at least, but i agree he is a bit suspicious too.
vward wrote:
Wiggins and Froome are doping ? Really ? big deal !
By the way, could you tell me how many tour de France winners and guys on podium (even on top 10) have ever been clean ? From Coppi to Contador, Anquetil, Merckx, Fignon, Indurain, Riis, Ullrich, Pantani, we all know that they were all doped. Even the weakests, who finished far behind the champions, used PED. History of cycling is an history of doping, from the first days until nowadays... it's pretty funny to see so much people discussing Sky's doping like if they will discover the "unknown truth"... why would you think that things have changed ? In 1999, after the Festina's case, everybody said "there's no more doping, the tests are really more efficient, mentality changed in the peloton..." think about that and look at the TDF top 10 of the years after 1999, it's kind of funny.
You really think Sky use PED and not the other teams ? Are you joking ? And Pinot, who wasn't prepared for the TDF, who just learn few weeks ago he'll have to do the Tour to replace Jeannesson, and who's today the strongest of the leaders on the most difficult stage of the Tour, you really think he's clean ?
And Rolland and Voeckler, who suffered from bad injuries few days ago, and suddenly wins 2 stages in a row, you really think they're clean ? Have you seen these 2 stages, how strong they were ? And how strong were the Euraicar guys last year ?
Unfortunately, the good question in cycling is not "Is X or y doping ? " but "Is there any clean guy 'round here ?"
(I'm not a british Sky's fan, just a french guy who try to be objective)
Pinot ? Unless he cracks one of these days, there's some reasonable doubts to have about him. Yesterday's performance was more than "miraculous".
Europcar ? They won stages from breaks ! And thei rclimbing skills, those maybe impressive compared to their fellow escapees was nowhere near the leader's. Last year they didn't really overperform, for human beings standards. Euraicar ? They're not especially thin for cyclists. Nothing like Wiggins, or the 2009 podium. Check the pictures again. They might be doping (the rumours have been around for a while), but definitely not with Aicar.
"Racing is life. Everything before or after is just waiting."
Dropstaaf wrote:
What if they (Froome&Wiggins) are riding on the mountains slower than what they are capable of with those drugs, just to decrease the accusations coming from the audience, to make themselves less questionable?
No. Let's not make ridiculous conspiracy theories. Froome did go slower, but only to avoid dropping Wiggins. They're surely riding at their limits, what I, and others, question is - is that their clean limit?
well clearly Froome is not riding at his limit since he slowed down when Wiggo cracked.
Do you understand how what you stated is complete bullshit?
Learn to read, I said that Froome did go slower than he could.
It should be called "bitter little europeans jealous of British domination and hiding behind their computer screens".
How about you take off those glasses and actually have a look through all the data and information that has been collected on Team Sky? I know thats hard for you, since you've just been making blind statements about Sky's innocence so far.... Thanks.
I dont think many people are saying Sky are 100% doped, but the ride data, and emergences out of nowhere are cause for suspicion, doctor. I mean there are obviously other riders/teams doped but this is just funny what Sky are doing.
BTW, more than just Europeans have a case against Sky.....
I keep getting into these arguments and I dont even want to be talking about this anymore, its just when things like this^^ are said I can't help it.
Edited by valverde321 on 13-07-2012 07:43
It should be called "bitter little europeans jealous of British domination and hiding behind their computer screens".
How about you take off those glasses and actually have a look through all the data and information that has been collected on Team Sky? I know thats hard for you, since you've just been making blind statements about Sky's innocence so far.... Thanks.
I dont think many people are saying Sky are 100% doped, but the ride data, and emergences out of nowhere are cause for suspicion, doctor. I mean there are obviously other riders/teams doped but this is just funny what Sky are doing.
BTW, more than just Europeans have a case against Sky.....
I keep getting into these arguments and I dont even want to be talking about this anymore, its just when things like this^^ are said I can't help it.
No point talking to him, his brain can't manage that much information. Just feel sorry for him and wish him to have fun in his BNP meetings.
Posts: 1470 Joined: 03.01.08 Location: Birmingham, England PCM$: 100.00
Sorry
I was unaware that this meassage board was a hub for medical and legal experts to discuss facts that are only available to those obviously in the know.
Just looked like a load of small boys throwing unfounded accusations around based on estimated data to the untrained eye.
So is this the future of cycling? Everytime a team or rider improves they are going to be instantly written off as a doper?
I was unaware that this meassage board was a hub for medical and legal experts to discuss facts that are only available to those obviously in the know.
Just looked like a load of small boys throwing unfounded accusations around based on estimated data to the untrained eye.
So is this the future of cycling? Everytime a team or rider improves they are going to be instantly written off as a doper?
What is the point of the sport continuing?
If you feel like someone better or more mature than us children, i think it will be better for you to leave this topic. For us it will be better too, as we dont like parents here much.
I still wonder how living on the island make you feel like you are the king of the world and only one with outlook, because people living there are often so arrogant. Fortunately i met many people from islands that are not like this, also here on the site some of the most friendly and polite members are from there.
Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 13-07-2012 08:34
Posts: 1470 Joined: 03.01.08 Location: Birmingham, England PCM$: 100.00
So i oppose your opinion and i'm arrogant. What kind of argument is that.
I'm not anti europe or anything. I'm anti people making up shit because they are bitter about one countries success.
No one on hear knows any facts yet you all talk like it's a forgone conclusion.
I'm also pretty sure that this thread is pretty close to being illegal.
You can't just post unfounded accusations on the web with no evidence other then "Froome wasn't this good when he was riding for a cntinental team, It's a bit strange he's suddenly reaching his full potential at the most scientifically advanced team in the world".
I was unaware that this meassage board was a hub for medical and legal experts to discuss facts that are only available to those obviously in the know.
Just looked like a load of small boys throwing unfounded accusations around based on estimated data to the untrained eye.
So is this the future of cycling? Everytime a team or rider improves they are going to be instantly written off as a doper?
What is the point of the sport continuing?
The amount of swearwords that could describe you right now..
Wiggins = Doper
Posts: 739 Joined: 29.12.09 Location: Brisbane, Australia PCM$: 445.75
ringo182 wrote:"Froome wasn't this good when he was riding for a cntinental team, It's a bit strange he's suddenly reaching his full potential at the most scientifically advanced team in the world".
Nothing wrong with speculating is there?
Froome wasn't even this good last year (pre-Vuelta)
judging by his results (of this time last year), he's been an inconsistent short-tour rider (capable of MAYBE a podium at a smaller race like Paris-Nice)
my doubts come from the fact that he's turned from that into a main GC rider, capable of dropping leading GC riders in climbs
now given the fact that Porte and Rogers have started taking MASSIVE turns on the front of the peloton, dropping elite climbing domestiques (like Szmyd) and even GT contenders (Valverde and Schleck to name just 2) then doubts are going to creep in
Edited by samdiatmh on 13-07-2012 09:09
Why does the topic Doping always surface when cyclists perform great? The success of Sky has NOTHING to do with doping, but with great preparations, hard training and good tactics.
The constant talk about doping gets me, and many others kinda angry. The sport isn't about doping, it's about performances. When someone is performing great, that doesn't mean they use doping. So let's just talk about a great Tour de France instead of insulting riders of using doping!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ringo182 wrote:
So i oppose your opinion and i'm arrogant. What kind of argument is that.
I'm not anti europe or anything. I'm anti people making up shit because they are bitter about one countries success.
No one on hear knows any facts yet you all talk like it's a forgone conclusion.
I'm also pretty sure that this thread is pretty close to being illegal.
You can't just post unfounded accusations on the web with no evidence other then "Froome wasn't this good when he was riding for a cntinental team, It's a bit strange he's suddenly reaching his full potential at the most scientifically advanced team in the world".
But you do see that calling most people here "bitter little jealous europeans" doesn't really help, right?
The problem with demanding facts is that the only facts that would be sufficient for many people to be convinced of doping seem to be positive tests. And hypothetically, if for instance Sky was doping, it's very unlikely (at least from what I've heard and read) that they would get caught since there are means to mask the doping. So either way, whether they are doping or not, you won't get the facts you need. See the problem?
So the only way to form an opinion is from circumstancial evidence, like those w/kg calculations or the comparison of results. By the way, that is not "making shit up"! And just because those evidences (that some here don't accept as facts, which is fine by me) can lead to doping accusations doesn't mean we're all jealous anti-Brits.
haasje33 wrote:
Why does the topic Doping always surface when cyclists perform great? The success of Sky has NOTHING to do with doping, but with great preparations, hard training and good tactics.
The constant talk about doping gets me, and many others kinda angry. The sport isn't about doping, it's about performances. When someone is performing great, that doesn't mean they use doping. So let's just talk about a great Tour de France instead of insulting riders of using doping!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You don't have to talk about doping if you don't want to, you don't even have to think about it, no one forces you. But don't attack those who do. It's a discussion forum after all.
Edited by cunego59 on 13-07-2012 09:25
haasje33 wrote: Why does the topic Doping always surface when cyclists perform great? The success of Sky has NOTHING to do with doping, but with great preparations, hard training and good tactics.
The constant talk about doping gets me, and many others kinda angry. The sport isn't about doping, it's about performances. When someone is performing great, that doesn't mean they use doping. So let's just talk about a great Tour de France instead of insulting riders of using doping!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, I don't want to sound bitter, but you probably don't watch cycling for too long, do you? Doping is always dicussed when we see incredibly strong performances, because often enough those riders were doped You just have to look at how many top riders just in the last ten years have been involved in doping scandals. You can ignore it, of course, but its just facts(Armstrong, Ullrich, Basso, Contador, Vino, Ricco, etc.....). So there will be speculations, as well, when there are new incredibly good riders suddenly! And stop thinking that this is all about you brits. The team/ riders could be from any other country and the discussion would be exactly the same, only that you would probably say they are doped as well.
If you don't like seeing this discussion, stop visiting this thread
Edited by johannes-w on 13-07-2012 09:53
You just have to look at how many top riders just in the last ten years have been involved in doping scandals. You can ignore it, of course, but its just facts(Armstrong, Ullrich, Basso, Contador, Vino, Ricco, etc.....). So there will be speculations, as well, when there are new incredibly good riders suddenly! 
