TdF Stage 8
Last Post 07/10/2013 06:56 PM by Orange Crush. 43 Replies.
Author Messages
jmdirt

Posts:642

--
07/06/2013 04:12 PM
Since both of the threads on the professional racing forum belong here I'll pull the conversation over. ;[ Winning a mountain stage by a few minutes is believable. Winning a mountain stage at the same speed as the best dopers ever...;[ Another sign will be what happens tomorrow. Maybe CF & RP were on fire today and AV, AC, CE... were on bad days. CF & RP should show some signs of their effort today.;\ inferno, After you ranted about dopers you typed: "As far as Tejay is concerned I'm not sure what he did before the climbs but he looked like dog $4it and was no help to Cadel at all. HA.....this dude thinks he's a contender. BMC is a joke." Maybe TVG and/or BMC is racing clean(er). If that is the case, they looked awesome to me.;}
Inferno7

Posts:215

--
07/06/2013 05:37 PM
Good point JM
Dale

Posts:438

--
07/06/2013 06:02 PM
If Froome and company implode tomorrow I'll have a different take but if it's a repeat of today then I'll think it's a repeat of 1999
madvax

Posts:48

--
07/06/2013 06:52 PM
+1 Dale. I was so hoping for a good TdF. Hard to believe RP could do all that pulling and still dominate the rest of the field. I am so bummed.
Orange Crush

Posts:1143

--
07/06/2013 09:25 PM
+2 Dale. Maybe we can check with our new UCI prez to be what's going on? He has some Sky connections, no?
Keith Richards

Posts:694

--
07/07/2013 10:01 AM
Well, you all have your answer I think.
----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
Dale

Posts:438

--
07/07/2013 10:22 AM
+1 Keith, that was a believable performance... or rather a believable non-performance

Maybe it's not 1999
Orange Crush

Posts:1143

--
07/07/2013 11:26 AM
Maybe...or maybe they got slapped on the wrist.
JS

Posts:61

--
07/07/2013 01:07 PM
I'm with OC on this one, today was SKY damage control. The cycling world did a collective eyeroll after yesterday, literally every forum I visit whether it be local or international the sentiment was the same, SKY is cheating. Today was SKY's attempt at making things look less ridiculous and Porte was the sacrificial lamb.
Keith Richards

Posts:694

--
07/07/2013 01:24 PM
The conjecture and accusations by cycling's own fans is just crazy. It is like I used to say about Eric Clapton...he knows how good he is and his limitations, it is his fans calling him God that are ridiculous. Fans chocking out their own sport...just sad. I guess the riders have only themselves to blame. But then again, if you are a true fan of the sport from a historical perspective, you enjoy the sport for what it is.
----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
JS

Posts:61

--
07/07/2013 03:02 PM
Posted By Keith Jackson on 07/07/2013 01:24 PM
The conjecture and accusations by cycling's own fans is just crazy.

6.4w/kg is not conjecture.

Third fastest ascent is not conjecture.

large gap to other favorites on a short climb not conjecture.

After all we've been through as fans I'm surprised by your lack of skepticism.


jmdirt

Posts:642

--
07/07/2013 03:35 PM
I just can't get past the time up the climb. If EPO/CERA/Blood manip/HGH/testo were as great as we have all read and talked about then a clean guy could not even get close to the times of those who took full advantage of doping.

KR, two years ago I said a very similar thing "how could true cycling fans think/feel this way?". I sadly ate crow, lots o crow, for that.
jookey

Posts:126

--
07/07/2013 07:58 PM
Porte paid for yesterday. The time to the summit of a climb is a function of how hard they slammed it at the bottom. They were hammering. While this does not prove doping or not, how he entire climb is ridden need to be taken into into effect. If the group is chasing, you can surf and attack late.

Sky doing damage control by isolating froome today is absolutely assine. What is dumb is that sky did not hold Rogers back yesterday to support for today. They had two riders in position. Why sacrifice one. Now if froome cracks, they are do e.


Entheo

Posts:315

--
07/07/2013 08:57 PM
Posted By jeff sanford on 07/07/2013 01:07 PM
I'm with OC on this one, today was SKY damage control. The cycling world did a collective eyeroll after yesterday, literally every forum I visit whether it be local or international the sentiment was the same, SKY is cheating. Today was SKY's attempt at making things look less ridiculous and Porte was the sacrificial lamb.


LOL, Sky - so good they're ordered to the back of the peloton for outstanding performance on a mountain stage. they must not have gotten that memo during last year's tour.
JS

Posts:61

--
07/07/2013 09:31 PM
Posted By Michael Carbajal on 07/07/2013 07:58 PM
Porte paid for yesterday. The time to the summit of a climb is a function of how hard they slammed it at the bottom. They were hammering. While this does not prove doping or not, how he entire climb is ridden need to be taken into into effect. If the group is chasing, you can surf and attack late.

Sky doing damage control by isolating froome today is absolutely assine. What is dumb is that sky did not hold Rogers back yesterday to support for today. They had two riders in position. Why sacrifice one. Now if froome cracks, they are do e.



They hadn't intended on leaving Froome alone, Kennaugh was with him but was crashed out of the front group. Honestly, I don't think you understand how huge the fallout was from yesterday. Even Bob Roll commented how social media was blowing up with accusations. L'equipe printed a headline "Froome like Armstrong", SKY needed to do something, even if it meant Froome losing the lead for a bit so be it. After Saturdays fallout there was no way SKY was going to let Froome AND Porte kick the crap out of the best riders in the world, so Porte purposely loses enough time where he's no longer on the radar and looks semi-human. SKY is still going to crush this tour and Porte will not have another bad day, mark my words. Also, Rodgers is no longer with SKY he rides for Saxo-Tinkoff.
jookey

Posts:126

--
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:315

--
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:981

--
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:357

--
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:981

--
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:642

--
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:315

--
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:145

--
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:315

--
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:642

--
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:254

--
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:981

--
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:1143

--
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".
Cosmic Kid

Posts:981

--
07/09/2013 09:10 AM
Correction to my post above....I meant the Stage 12 w/ LA was preceded by an ITT, not followed. My bad!
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
Keith Richards

Posts:694

--
07/09/2013 09:54 AM
It is one thing to be skeptical, it is another thing to come up with Grassy Knoll level conspiracy theories. Dude had a week long training ride before he had to put in a 22 minute effort. If the stage after it had an uphill finish, Froome probably would have lost all the time he gained.
----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
jrt1045

Posts:357

--
07/09/2013 11:40 AM
KR

after the events of the last 15 years or so have unfolded, is the grassy knoll really the grassy knoll? I get to wear my tin foil hat and cast dispersion for 8 years about any result

With that said, Sky (under orders from Rupert Murdoch) hijacked the video feed to make us think stage 8 happened the way it did. CGI, baby!

Keith Richards

Posts:694

--
07/09/2013 11:47 AM
lol!
----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
ElleSeven

Posts:48

--
07/09/2013 03:41 PM
So if one were to use such list (e.g. the one that Cerv cites) for comparing performances in a credible way, what are the additional variables we'd need to control for, besides elapsed time on the timed segment? Off the top of my head I thought of these, of which some would be minor factors, others very important ones.

weather (wind, temperature, humidity)
road surface quality
road surface temperature
drag co-efficient
bike weight
wheel weight
efforts elsewhere on the course prior to the timed section
racing tactics as they played out on the day
length of the stage in which the climb occurs
position of that particular climb within that stage's sequence of climbs
total quantity and quality (1 through HC) of climbs for that stage
difficulty of previous stages leading up to that stage

… and so on.
jmdirt

Posts:642

--
07/09/2013 04:11 PM
Elle, you got about half of my list. A lot of that info is out there but it would take a while to pull it all together plus it would take even longer to check validity (the TdF archives has a lot of info.). There are certainly a lot of variables but even if 2001 was harder for LA/RL than 2013 was for CF was it enough to make up for turbo blood?

As I said I'm skeptical but I'm not saying it isn't possible. I'm asking the question though: is it possible? Everyone is dancing around it but no one will moon walk all over it. Yes or No?

Part of my questioning is also because so many people made it seem like turbo blood made the riders of the 2000's massively better. 10-20% better got tossed around a lot. Can even stacked variables make up for that?
BikeCzar

Posts:53

--
07/09/2013 05:31 PM
Is it possible? Well it just happened. Until a rider is found to be guilty it's not right to assume and accuse them of wrong doing.
jmdirt

Posts:642

--
07/09/2013 06:46 PM
Czar, I said that for 10 years so I'm with jrt "I am invoking my right to an incredible amount of skepticism/cynicism for 8 years about any result. I get to wear my tin foil hat and cast dispersion for 8 years about any result " only I get 10 years!

If CF wins stage 8 by three minutes but is two minutes slower up the Ax Thermes-Domaines climb I wouldn't have even blinked.
jrt1045

Posts:357

--
07/10/2013 11:42 AM
What is encompassed, pray tell, in the term marginal gains?

Are we supposed to believe this beard that Sky has this magical bike technology and human nutrition program (based in Tenerife) that no one else in the whole wide world is privy to? Pay no attention to the former dopers, doping doctors, suspect training locations and donkeys turning into racehorses

Skepticism of Sky is well earned as we've heard all of this before. Might be deserving of KR's "C'mon Son" picture. In the meantime, I can entertain myself by creating wild stories

Keith Richards

Posts:694

--
07/10/2013 11:52 AM
But isn't the guy with the record Laiseka, a climber (and kook) who was never mentioned in any doping scandals?
----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
Keith Richards

Posts:694

--
07/10/2013 01:55 PM
And if we are talking conspiracy theories...why is nobody talking about what had been a traditionally under performing Rabobank team having their best season ever after leaving their very anti-doping overseers?
----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
jrt1045

Posts:357

--
07/10/2013 02:08 PM
righto, KR

wondering the same, blinded by my skepticism of sky
jmdirt

Posts:642

--
07/10/2013 03:29 PM
RL was a Saiz wonder boy who had a mysterious joint condition and has never been heard from since the mid 2000's. He was first across the line that day because LA was chasing time and he was chasing points.

KR, I think in one of these threads I asked if Belkin has put electronic boosters in the Giants (if I didn't I meant to).
Orange Crush

Posts:1143

--
07/10/2013 06:56 PM
Keith - they have an American sponsor now, that always means trouble :-) Did Froome hold back today after he almost blitzed Martin? Haven't seen it, just a thought.


---
Active Forums 4.1