April 19, 2014 Login  


TdF Stage 8
Last Post 07/10/2013 06:56 PM by Orange Crush. 43 Replies.
Printer Friendly
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 3 << < 123 > >>
Author Messages
jookey

Posts:86

--
07/08/2013 06:56 AM
My bad on the Rogers gaff. D'oh. I still cannot see how losing 17 minutes for Porte is going to help Sky. If Froome has some bad luck (bad day, crash), Sky has no second option. Gee, Saxo, Belkin, and Movistar all have multiple guys in the top ten just waitng to pounce. This should make for an interesting tour.
Entheo

Posts:299

--
07/08/2013 07:04 AM
bob roll commenting on social media gossip; now's that's rich.

roll, BFF of lance and levi, used to comment freely on-air about others who were implicated in doping (e.g. ullrich), but never a hint of suspicion about his idols, in spite of the mountain of evidence available way before USADA. like he didn't know, or he really is as dumb as he looks.

such a tool it's hard to even look at his bozo face on my TV; can't squeegee the slobber off the inside of the screen.
Cosmic Kid

Posts:717

--
07/08/2013 10:04 AM
OK, so let me get all these conspiracy stories straight.....

1) SKY is a team of dopers, but yet they fired everyone on their team who had a doping past. Amazingly, none of these fired employess have come out and said "well, here's the truth about AKY's program. I got fired as a PR stunt. They ALL dope and here are the details." Paging Sean Yates, Bobby Julich, et al.

2) SKY goes on a tear for one stage of the TdF (after a failry uneventful week which required little energy expenditure on their part). The whole world goes bezerk on Twitter and forums and SKY says "Schitt, we better take it down a notch. Ritchie, you are gonna have to struggle all day to sell the story. All you other guys who were up ther....you, too. Drop out on the second climb."

3) As a result of the great conspiracy, SKY ends up isolating their team leader all day, leaving them in a vulnerable position where they could have lost the Tour.

4) Porte, who has been faking it all day, then decides to attempt to bridge up to Froome and almost makes it. But then gets told in his earpiece to sit up and lose over 15 minutes. So SKY willingly gave up not only the podium, but any shot at a Top 10. Porte, who could have parlayed a TdF podium into a massive payday, is OK with this.

Seriously?

Wouldn't it have just made more sense for Porte et al to be up there for the majority of the race adn then "burn out" on the final climb?

I'm not saying that SKY is clean, but these conspiracy theories are pretty far out there.
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
jrt1045

Posts:277

--
07/08/2013 10:10 AM
I am invoking my right to an incredible amount of skepticism/cynicism for 8 years about any result

Have the beards, PR spins and unbelievable performances since 1999 taught us nothing? Sky = Murdoch = intrigue? goes hand in hand, Murdoch is a modern day PT Barnum

After all the the philosophical and personal battles to dope to the gills, what is sitting up and losing 20 minutes?
Cosmic Kid

Posts:717

--
07/08/2013 10:47 AM
Posted By j t on 07/08/2013 10:10 AM
I am invoking my right to an incredible amount of skepticism/cynicism for 8 years about any result

Mission accomplished!!!
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
jmdirt

Posts:468

--
07/08/2013 11:12 AM
The biggest question mark for me is the time up the climb (I'm taking Cerv's list as accurate...what is your source Cerv?). If all of the doping methods of the 2000's were as great as advertised how could a clean CF go as fast as LA & RL? I understand that the entire stage has to be taken into account and there is no such thing as apples to apples from year to year.

I agree with Cosmic, the conspiracy theory is too elaborate. That's not to say that the UCI (ASO) isn't beyond that type of thing but there are too many people involved. Did NASA fake the moon landing? Too many people involved. Do flu shots contain tracking devices? Well maybe.
ElleSeven

Posts:48

--
07/08/2013 03:06 PM
Personally, I have no idea whether Sky as a whole or Froome on his own have doped. Skepticism is of course not unwarranted at this point. We've been burned on so many occasions. I asked the crusty old fart across the street who, having riders in two of the bigger teams, is somewhat privy to ground-level gossip, and he says that he hasn't heard anything -- has he always had previously about other "usual suspects" -- to suggest that Sky are racing dirty. He's also the worst skeptic of all, with something of a grudge against the generation that succeeded his. I sort of expected him to roll his eyes when I asked him about Froome. Instead he said, in so many words, "He looks very strong but pretty normal to me. And the other thing is that he answers the questions that are asked, rather than deflecting them into insinuations about those who are asking. This completely separates him from literally all of the other cornered dopers about whom we now know the truth."
Entheo

Posts:299

--
07/08/2013 03:21 PM
Posted By Justin jmdirt on 07/08/2013 11:12 AM
The biggest question mark for me is the time up the climb (I'm taking Cerv's list as accurate...what is your source Cerv?). If all of the doping methods of the 2000's were as great as advertised how could a clean CF go as fast as LA & RL?


keep in mind that was the first real climb of the tour. not always, but usually eyebrow-raising performances occur deep into the tour when recovery should be more difficult. a little something extra in week 2 or 3 to boost performance. and riders' legs respond differently the first time they hit the hills. Sky went au bloc on the first mountain stage and paid for it on the second. i will say if froome isn't put into any difficulty over the next two weeks then my eyebrows will go up a bit. seems to me he should have at least one stage where he rides to limit his losses, providing another GC threat can go up the road on him.
RNDDUDE

Posts:78

--
07/08/2013 03:46 PM
CK, I concur.
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistant one. -Albert Einstein
CERV

Posts:136

--
07/08/2013 04:04 PM
Posted By Justin jmdirt on 07/08/2013 11:12 AM
The biggest question mark for me is the time up the climb (I'm taking Cerv's list as accurate...what is your source Cerv?). If all of the doping methods of the 2000's were as great as advertised how could a clean CF go as fast as LA & RL? I understand that the entire stage has to be taken into account and there is no such thing as apples to apples from year to year.

I agree with Cosmic, the conspiracy theory is too elaborate. That's not to say that the UCI (ASO) isn't beyond that type of thing but there are too many people involved. Did NASA fake the moon landing? Too many people involved. Do flu shots contain tracking devices? Well maybe.


It was linked off the cyclingnews clinic, so take that for what it is. http://www.fillarifoorumi.fi/forum/showthread.php?38129-Ammattilaispy%F6r%E4ilij%F6iden-nousutietoja-%28aika-km-h-VAM-W-W-kg-etc-%29&p=2045251#post2045251
Entheo

Posts:299

--
07/08/2013 05:03 PM
one must also keep in mind that froome is in actuality Jack the Pumpkin King who, as a skeleton, is very lightweight and hence can climb very well...

jmdirt

Posts:468

--
07/08/2013 06:45 PM
There is a lot of dancing going on but no one has answered the question: How can a clean rider climb as fast as doped riders. Not just any doped rider either, the best doped rider ever.

Compare 2001 TdF stage 12 to 2013 TdF stage 8 and look at all of the stage variables you want, do they equal turbo blood?
Yo Mike

Posts:207

--
07/08/2013 08:13 PM
/How can a clean rider climb as fast as doped riders. /

But.....Lance did that 7 years running....oh, wait....nevermind.

'Training' aside, it was the right day for Sky to make a move. C-dale softened the peloton up getting Sagan to the line first the day previous, and the day Sky put the hammer down was 2 days before a rest day.

I have no proof of course but Sky's 'human' performance yesterday looked a little too human. I think that Larunteja (sp?) posted in another thread that Kennough (sp?) had lost 5 kilo in 2 months w/o loss of power.

Hmmm.
Cosmic Kid

Posts:717

--
07/08/2013 11:28 PM
Posted By Justin jmdirt on 07/08/2013 06:45 PM
There is a lot of dancing going on but no one has answered the question: How can a clean rider climb as fast as doped riders. Not just any doped rider either, the best doped rider ever.

Compare 2001 TdF stage 12 to 2013 TdF stage 8 and look at all of the stage variables you want, do they equal turbo blood?


Well, to start with....it is Stage 8 vs Stage 12. And thatbStage 12 also followed an ITT, IIRC. So, LA should have been more fatigued going into that effort. Foome was coming off a relatively easy week, in comparison and had fresher legs. I think it is very difficult to compare rides from one year vs another as an indication of doping, personally. While it would shock me not in the least to have Froome come up dirty, I'm willing to wait until there is some actual evidence. So far there is none.
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
Orange Crush

Posts:842

--
07/08/2013 11:36 PM
La Preuve des 21 did a nice trend analysis over time that relatively clearly showed the different doping areas. It''' be interesting to see what they come up with after 2013 Tour based on their "radar stations".
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 3 << < 123 > >>


Active Forums 4.1

Latest Forum Posts
back in the saddle posted in Road Cycling

Guess he's gotta make a living... posted in The Dark Side

Interesting book posted in The Coffee Shop


PR: d'OH! posted in The Dark Side

Do you ride by miles or time? posted in The Coffee Shop

Amstel Gold - who have you got posted in Professional Racing

No articles match criteria.
  Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy  Copyright 2008-2013 by VeloNation LLC