[Closed] Wiggins v Froome - handbags at dawn?

I don't like Wiggo... I don't like Froome

So ...

[img] [/img]

(just don't let 'em smash each other up too much ...as I'd still like one of them to win the thing... preferably Wiggins)

freeagent - the don't need to support two team leaders. They ride as one team, each rider with a job to do. Wiggo's job will be the last rider to be there with Froome, no different to Froome being there for Wiggo last year - they were both protected riders until the very closing stages of each stage. It's pretty easy for the team to support.

They managed it last year with effectively two team members down, they don't have the World Champ sprinter to think about and they lost Konstantin Suitsou early on last year.

The bonus of Wiggo thinking he can hold his form is that should something happen to Froome, he's on hand to pick up the pieces. 2 years ago when Wiggo crashed out, bar EBH going for a few sprints (and Thomas trying to take the Henri Desgrange prize) the race was over for Sky. Had the same happened last year, Sky would still have had the winner.

Those cushions. Velvet? Crushed velvet? Crushed like my dreams before your fragile ones soon will be?

[i]mediocre rider at 25. two years off ill. returns as one of the best climbers in the world. Yeah right [/i]

Of course there is another side to this.....perhaps in his time off all the riders climbing better than him have given up drugs and combined with his improvement and their demise....he's better?

I'd like to see Wiggy defend his yellow jersey anyway. having won the bloody thing, the least he deserves is the chance to defend it!

Its true though Junkyard.

I still can't throw out the various LA books/pictorial comeback book that was a birthday present. Denial, its a powerful river that flows that our veins.

[i]But I'd be lying if I said that it affects my enjoyment of a decent mountain stage - this video is still great even if they were both up to their eyeballs:[/i]

That video is quite incredible....would be interesting to know the times involved on that climb that day compared to the current 'post drugs' era.

That video is quite incredible....would be interesting to know the times involved on that climb that day compared to the current 'post drugs' era.

Not sure about the times, but the calculated power outputs have definitely gone down - which is a fairly reliable proxy for cleanness.

Christ hora/junkyard get a room! 😉

If he was spanish or Italian you'd all be jumping at the chance to call him a doper.

Please explain the coherent thinking that has lead to you to this conclusion....

If you go to this page
[url] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_sport [/url]

And organise by country in each letter category, the yanks stand out an absolute mile as the heaviest dopers.

As this is a cycling discussion, here's a more relevant page;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling
Certainly not dominated by the yanks.

FWIW Operación Puerto has just concluded. For now. 1 year sentence + fine to Fuentes, which means he won't be going to jail (first offence, < 2 years). He's going to appeal anyway.

The Spanish public + media are not too happy about the result, and would have liked full disclosure. The judge has said the lack of "procedural guarantees" and the fundamental rights of the sportsmen/women whose blood is in the famous bags trumps any public interest argument about their origin, and the bags will be destroyed once the appeal has been heard.

In other words, it's got a way to go yet.

interesting tweets from mrs (?) froome @michellecound
[i]
Chris & Brad on the same start line, in the same kit? Mmmmmm… doubt it![/i]
[i]
To those claiming that this Wiggins/Froome thing is some sort of publicity stunt, you are wrong.[/i]

[i]To those claiming that this Wiggins/Froome thing is some sort of publicity stunt, you are wrong.[/i]

Froome's girlfriend on twitter:-

Chris & Brad on the same start line, in the same kit? Mmmmmm… doubt it!

-edit: must cut and paste faster --

Froome's other half is brilliant. Just when you think it's all a bit tense and could do with calming down a bit she very publicly sticks her oar in and makes it worse. Has Cath Wiggins got in on the act yet?

If anyones taking bets on a scrap my money's on Mrs Wiggins.

To those claiming that this Wiggins/Froome thing is some sort of publicity stunt, you are wrong.

what.
ever.

Froome's not fit to wipe Sir Wiggys arse! I mean WHAT has he done anyway? (in comparison!)

Brailsford should come out and say he's promoted Froome to Wiggy's pit bitch.

mrlebowski - Member
Mind games by Sky.

They have probably already worked out whose doing what & its a ploy to keep the other teams guessing

+1

Don't we all know enough about Sir Brailsford to know he wouldnt be letting public squabbling destroy his teams chances at success?

His playing on the 2012 Tour happenings to promote "young upstart vs old and experienced" as psychology against the rest, end of.

He is lucky enough to have to GC riders in the tour, giving him more options to win and split the efforts of the competition.

Thats is all.

Just think about the age differance .....

Froomey has YEARS in him yet - Wiggo ??

Hope mr Brailsford gives the old man the nod ...

I don't think it's as clear cut as people are making out.

Yes, it's in Sky's interests to keep their rivals guessing and force them into strategies for both opponents

But

There is very real competition and rivalry between the two men that may spill over into animosity behind closed doors. That isn't 'made up'.

Brailsford is a smart operator. My guess is that he has them both on a fairly long leash because it currently suits his purpose. I think we can expect the leash to shorten considerably over the next few months.

Tdf 2013 course is not set up for wiggo,froome was 3:21 down on wiggo last year,can't see that gap happing this year

The speed with which Wiggins dumped Garmin when Sky came a waving pounds in his face suggests that Wiggins will do what Wiggins wants to do. It remains to be seen how that will work out, because in GT racing, you are only as good as your team, and I don't think Sir Wiggins is much of a team player.

Shame that the first Brit to win a Tour isn't such a likeable chap...

Its true though Junkyard.

I still can't throw out the various LA books/pictorial comeback book that was a birthday present. Denial, its a powerful river that flows that our veins.

Except you denied Armstrong was a cheat despite a massive body of evidence proving that he was - where's the evidence that Froome has cheated, other than your own amazing insight?

Tdf 2013 course is not set up for wiggo,froome was 3:21 down on wiggo last year,can't see that gap happing this year

Most of that time was also lost during one of the many crashes during the first few stages.

Grim how do froome/wiggins compare to the other clean riders?

I do love the 'show me the evidence'.
Okay, just how many of the tour winners of the twenty years preceding last year do think won clean? Why do you think that that has changed?
How far behind Armstrong was Wiggins in '09, you know that big doper? Who didn't trigger the blood passport? Really?
Just what is that crazy blood disease that Froomie has/had and why does it flair up pre tour training conveniently messing up yer bloods?
did everybody just decide to stop doping in '06 like the usada disclosure statements would have you believe?
The only evidence I want to see is proof that they aren't doping. Full disclosure of everything, bloods, SRM, tests, the whole kit and kaboodle thank you.
Otherwise why should I believe that cycling has suddenly turned clean?
less dirty =/= clean I'm afraid. Doping is binary.
Sorry, I've been suckered before: I remember Riis on Hautacam.....

Otherwise why should I believe that cycling has suddenly turned clean?

Yeah, but as I've already said on this thread: if there's a level playing field and it's entertaining, why do you care? I don't care if Daniel Craig was up to his eyes on coke or teetotal when he filmed the last Bond film, I just wanted to see an entertaining film. Why do you treat sport differently?

Too many top riders have allegations or subsequently caught. Sorry the Brits must be training on a bike differently eh?

Fast forward 5yrs. Lets have a conversation then.

Wining, fame and money are big drawers to highly competative men.

Too many top riders have allegations or subsequently caught. Sorry the Brits must be training on a bike differently eh?

Fast forward 5yrs. Lets have a conversation then.

Wining, fame and money are big drawers to highly competative men.

LOL.

Welcome to the real world fanboi!

I'm not arguing they're definitely clean at all hora - but let's wait for some evidence eh?

Your switch to saying that 'if Lance wasn't clean then no-one can be' is only barely more logical than your staunch defence of him despite reams of evidence he was cheating.

Riders allround him before and after were/are being caught. Even one admitting who was NEVER caught.

Wake up.
Plenty of clean riders. Poor and will never be loaded with prize money.

Wake up.

[img] [/img]

Thats right grim. I did. Et tu?

Jimmy Saville was doping too wasn't he?

Am I getting confused?

They don't need to decide until at least the first mountain stage (barring accidents), 60km tts = possibly a minute or two between the top 5, between Froome and Wiggins it may be about a minute if both are on form. That can be wiped away by 1 bad summit, and even on form, Wiggins may loose 20 secs per mountain finish in theory... then there are the other riders who can put a spanner in the works. So it should be close.
If I was Brailsford, I would obviously have both protected on flat stages, have both give 100% in tts, then have Wiggins marking Contador or Nibali et al in the mountains and Froome having the chance to attack. If you chase Froome's attacks in the knowledge Wiggins is sat on your wheel, then you may just sit up or stop hammering.
So if handled well, it is a huge advantage. If badly, then a potential disaster

And as for doping, please, when Armstrong and Ulrich etc were at it, there were pointers showing they may not be clean aside from being good. There were the high speeds, (watch a mountain stage from the tour in the early 2000's - it was very different to now (except for the Vuelta last year which was a bit dodgy)) the testamony of ex-teammates, ex-teammates testing positive shortly after leaving the team. In Sky's case, they have hired people who turned out to be dopers and a team Dr who is suspect. They have now got rid of most of these. Most of these such as Michael Rodgers did not show such a great level of performance at Sky as before, however many other riders have improved a lot at Sky. But this does not necessarily provide evidence of doping as such to me. It does not clear Sky, but it does not damn them either. They have hired riders who would be team leaders in smaller teams and used them as domestics. Merckx's teams did this for example.
As for Froome's improvement, it has not been unusual for riders to develop into stage racers after the age of 25 or so. Wiggins improved around the age of 29 or so - after stopping concentrating on the track and while at a team (Garmin) who have been from the start very anti-doping, and do not seem to have many riders fail tests.

Weird.

[b]Hora[/b] defended Lance for so long, in the face of pretty damning evidence from 2004 onwards.

When unable to ignore the truth any more, then suddenly [i]everyone[/i] must be doping... because his hero couldn't be that different 😥

There are plenty of sports in which most don't dope and some have. This too is possible in Cycling. Hill climbs and changing speeds support the idea that cycling is becoming cleaner... Was

As for Froome... it is going to be interesting, but the idea that because someone improves in their mid 20s they are doping ignores the reason why the TdF has a young rider competition for people below the age of 26. Yes, some people have won the GC and the White Jersey, but only 3 since 1987. For endurance events, including Marathons, often people improve in their late 20s.

They have not slowed down. A Current rider, Cantador, holds the record for the fastest climbing rate. Both Froome and Wiggins have sustained climbing rates that are high enough for long enough to show they are capable of climbing cols as fast as the previous generation even if they appear careful not too. Armstrong had his team attack from the bottom of the climb but these days riders take it easy up the first ramps of a climb so their times for the climb don't create suspicion.

When Riis, Pantani and Ulrich set their records they dropped the peloton as soon as the climb started. Theses days the lead riders sit in the peloton pedaling on eggs then attack when the average climb rate won't be a record.

Hora defended Lance for so long, in the face of pretty damning evidence from 2004 onwards.

1999 onwards. The cortisone positive.

Edukator - Member
They have not slowed down. A Current rider, Cantador, holds the record for the fastest climbing rate. Both Froome and Wiggins have sustained climbing rates that are high enough for long enough to show they are capable of climbing cols as fast as the previous generation even if they appear careful not too. Armstrong had his team attack from the bottom of the climb but these days riders take it easy up the first ramps of a climb so their times for the climb don't create suspicion.

When Riis, Pantani and Ulrich set their records they dropped the peloton as soon as the climb started. Theses days the lead riders sit in the peloton pedaling on eggs then attack when the average climb rate won't be a record.

HA HA HA HA.

That is all.

[b]Edukator[/b] err...

are you saying Contador is clean? Or that many of us would believe him to be? Small matter of a 2 year ban? His climbing rate argues against you, not for you.

Your switch to saying that 'if Lance wasn't clean then no-one can be' is only barely more logical than your staunch defence of him despite reams of evidence he was cheating.

Edukator we have done this BUT

They have not slowed down. A Current rider, Cantador, holds the record for the fastest climbing rate.

Both Froome and Wiggins have sustained climbing rates that are high enough for long enough to show they are capable of climbing cols as fast as the previous generation even if they appear careful not too.

Armstrong had his team attack from the bottom of the climb but these days riders take it easy up the first ramps of a climb so their times for the climb don't create suspicion.

Or they simply lack the power to be able to do this .... given they are drug tested anyway why would they be worried that riding fast would be suspicious it is after all a race- your "reasoning is rather funny tbh again the proof is they dont

When Riis, Pantani and Ulrich set their records they dropped the peloton as soon as the climb started. Theses days the lead riders sit in the peloton pedaling on eggs then attack when the average climb rate won't be a record.

You do bang on anbout this but is as reasonable and well argued as Horas position

...possibly slower than clean riders - Indurain for example

Ya think??? Big Mig's all but admitted to doping!

There isn't any hard and fast 'evidence' to implicate anyone. That much is obvious.

The big problem is that there are some 'incredible' improvements across the Sky team, which individually don't really seem that much (well apart from the Tour double!) but if you view the whole lot from the perspective of the USADA reasoned decision and Hamilton's/Landis' admissions and all that was kicked up in the aftermath then what question pops up in my mind is 'are we really seeing clean cycling or is it just another 'New Dawn'?' i.e. just like in '99 after Festina, '06 after Armstrong, etc., etc....

Now if you come up with, 'sure of course it is', then good luck to you.

Just remember and keep in touch with Hora when it all goes tits up and shock horror we find out doping hasn't actually disappeared. Again. (ETA 😉 )

The dopers are always ahead of the testers. Always.

he actually failed a drug test as well for glenbutorol iirc in a race but got a prescription for it. I did expect a reaction to that one but from Edukator.
tbh I would not be surprised to discover he doped - frankly given what has happened in Spain re blood doping and Bertie I would not be surprised by any Spanish rider, now or in the past saddly.

I think Cadel was the first one I would have bet my house on tbh and he was about 4 minutes slower

RE SKY

i think the greatest damage LA has sone is that anytime someone good comes along they will be suspected of cheating and if a ggod team comes along then the same
Yes there are parallels with LA and Postal but they have also made some pretty clear statements on drugs as has Wiggo all his career. It is not impossible that they are systematically exploiting the naive public and doping to the eyeballs but i require more proof than it is a bit like Postal and LA.
yet to se eeven a whif of a smoking gun let alone the smoking gun [ staff personel choice aside]- have you any hard evidence?

So Cantador is a drug cheat that holds the climbing record because of drugs but a rider that drops him isn't. I'm afraid we're back to the kind of support Armstrong got on Anglo-Saxon forums even post 99.