Yet Another Cycling Forum

General Category => Freewheeling => Racing => Topic started by: quixoticgeek on May 15, 2018, 09:07:01 pm

Title: Giro 2018
Post by: quixoticgeek on May 15, 2018, 09:07:01 pm

Haven't spotted a Giro 2018 thread.

Anyone know why Tom Dumoulin needed to swap bikes at 18km from the end today?

J
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Nuncio on May 15, 2018, 09:56:17 pm
Braked too late and crashed (http://cyclingpub.com/article/3970/Giro+d%27Italia+-+Tom+Dumoulin%3A+I+braked+too+late+and+crashed)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 16, 2018, 04:02:25 pm
Simon Yates seems to be winning at a canter. Explosive finishing on summit climbs every time. Wasn't he banned or was that his brother?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 16, 2018, 04:18:09 pm
Simon Yates seems to be winning at a canter. Explosive finishing on summit climbs every time. Wasn't he banned or was that his brother?

4 month ban for a team admin error.

He's doing really well, but of course so far the race has suited him. Both his wins have been short explosive climbs. Zoncolan on Saturday will be decisive because he still needs more time on Dumoulin before next week's ITT.

It's a 2 horse race now. Froome out of the picture (thankfully), Pinot just can't match Yates.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Giropaul on May 16, 2018, 07:33:00 pm
Quixoticgeek - a good source of race detail in Dutch is Wielerflits on Facebook. Lots of in-depth analysis and stories.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: quixoticgeek on May 16, 2018, 07:36:59 pm
Quixoticgeek - a good source of race detail in Dutch is Wielerflits on Facebook. Lots of in-depth analysis and stories.

If I Spoke Dutch that would be more useful :p But thanks for the heads up.

J
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: JonJo on May 17, 2018, 08:23:25 am
Simon Yates seems to be winning at a canter. Explosive finishing on summit climbs every time. Wasn't he banned or was that his brother?

That was quite an effort from Yates yesterday. A bit too long to be called explosive and he looked to have expended a lot of energy for a fairly small gain. Surprised Dumoulin kept so close though. Suppose they could both burn a few matches yesterday as the next couple of days look fairly easy for the GC contenders.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 17, 2018, 08:29:40 am
2 seconds plus time bonus on Dumoulin, but a bit more on everybody else....important If top step of podium goes to Dumoulin
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TheLurker on May 18, 2018, 07:28:49 pm
Annoyingly I only found out last night that Quest are showing one hour highlight programmes.  I think it's sourced by Eurosport and I know some people find their commentary a bit odd, but hey it's free.

Quest (Freeview 37) generally about 7pm
Quest+1 (F 83) one hour later.


Correction Q+1 is 83, not 38.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 18, 2018, 08:16:09 pm
In which case you are just in time.

Key stages are Saturday and sunday
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 18, 2018, 11:15:50 pm
In the video at the bottom of this page, (http://www.velonews.com/2018/05/giro-ditalia/zoncolan-d-day-froomes-giro-hopes_466545) Froome cracks a joke! He fumbles the delivery but it’s a veritable joke. His first ever?

I’m pretty sure he also hints, probably not deliberately, that Sky will try something on tomorrow’s stage long before the Zoncolan.

(Link not for those whom Froome makes apoplectic.)

It’s been a jokey Giro (http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/racing/giro-ditalia/thought-lets-hide-see-happens-adam-hansen-explains-tim-wellens-hid-giro-peloton-380286) so far. I reckon Dumoulin will have the last laugh although I hope Yates will grin to the end.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: quixoticgeek on May 19, 2018, 04:39:16 pm

Well that was an exciting stage finish. Froome at least has a chance at the Podium now. Will be interesting how the next week pans out.

J
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: woollypigs on May 19, 2018, 05:38:12 pm
https://twitter.com/Eurosport_UK/status/997877367732240386

Dinosaur !!!!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on May 19, 2018, 07:08:13 pm

Well that was an exciting stage finish. Froome at least has a chance at the Podium now. Will be interesting how the next week pans out.

J

I think Yates did what was necessary as best as he could, Froome is still at 3 minutes+ (bet he was suffering from asthma today  ;) )
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 24, 2018, 06:21:44 pm
Do not read any further if you haven’t seen it yet.

Froome absolutely destroyed Yates launching an attack today! This is going to be a cracking 3 days. The last day isn’t a procession like TdF is right?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: gonzo on May 25, 2018, 06:34:53 am
The giro does always seem to be more exciting than the tour. I wonder if it's the geography of it or that the best teams don't focus their season on it?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 25, 2018, 07:06:06 am
Today is the day.

(https://cdn-cyclingtips.pressidium.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Finestre.jpg)

They are going up the Finestre. This is what it looked like on Wednesday. Followed by two more climbs one of them an MTF.

It will be won or lost today. I think we may see a repeat of yesterday, with TD benefiting from Froome's attacks.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Nuncio on May 25, 2018, 09:16:25 am
And a further 70km or so after the Finistre. With Froome having nothing to loose (what does he care if he comes 2nd or 20th?) the race could be enlivened for a long time if he attacks up there. Was Yates' slight capitulation yesterday a blip because of the nature of the climb, or a sign of fatigue? 

Nicely poised.
Title: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 01:18:36 pm
Team Sky just obliterated everyone on Finistre! Yates has no one.

Ok I think Haig is with him.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 01:41:33 pm
Holy shit!! Froome attacking !!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Gus on May 25, 2018, 01:54:01 pm
and everything exploded with 80km to go, I love the Giro, it unpredictable'
Title: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 01:56:58 pm
Wonder how the 2nd climb gonna go!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 02:02:55 pm
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180525/3f403fda8157a94a278d6eaaacd69386.jpg)

Lol
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: spesh on May 25, 2018, 02:32:41 pm
Shameless nicked from the Bikeradar thread on today's stage (https://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13092276&start=460#p20350568):

"Watching Froome descending, bit like watching a cat falling out a tree. Legs all over the show but still lands on its feet."

;D
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 02:38:25 pm
The ultimate insult! Maglia rosa time been dropped from the screen!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 25, 2018, 02:47:42 pm
Is this an action replay of the day that Chavez lost 25 minutes? How is it that Michelton Scott's 2 leaders have gone from being solid to horrific in the space of a couple of days (each, not the same 2 days)?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Nuncio on May 25, 2018, 02:49:24 pm
Right. CyclingNews live update, YACF and Twitter about to be shut down, and I'm going into radio silence until I get home to watch the Eurosport recording. I might even do some work before that.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 03:02:14 pm
In the lead!!!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 25, 2018, 03:22:54 pm
Just as well his asthma isn't troubling him today or his bilharzia.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 25, 2018, 03:27:04 pm
What a breathtaking performance. ;)
Let's hope his Di2 doesn't let him down.:)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Jaded on May 25, 2018, 03:29:01 pm
Let's hope his Di2 doesn't let him down.:)

Well, as long as he isn't dehydrated or hasn't taken too much of it...  ;D
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: pumpkin on May 25, 2018, 03:29:12 pm
Arguably one of the great stages of the modern era and a career defining moment for froome in a career we thought he had defined.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 03:38:44 pm
Froome must be busting for a pee!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Karla on May 25, 2018, 03:48:28 pm
I really hope Froome crashes right now.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sg37409 on May 25, 2018, 05:18:55 pm


It's a 2 horse race now. Froome out of the picture (thankfully), Pinot just can't match Yates.

 ;D ;D ;D

Who’d have believed it ?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 06:15:50 pm
It’s also legal so far. I bet Froome and his bike is being given a good going over right now. The salty tears on Twitter is funny as heck as well.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: onb on May 25, 2018, 06:25:10 pm
Sorted of reminded me of an epic ride once ridden by Floyd Landis in the tour .Just saying.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 25, 2018, 06:27:12 pm
One for the history books.

From spesh’s BikeRadar thread, this (https://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13092276&e=1&view=unread#p20351327) was interesting. Looks like he put more time into Doom on the descents than the climbs!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 25, 2018, 06:41:58 pm
Summary of the stage (http://www.velonews.com/2018/05/giro-ditalia/froome-team-sky-raided-giro_467556) for those who missed it.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TheLurker on May 25, 2018, 07:03:08 pm
Is this an action replay of the day that Chavez lost 25 minutes? How is it that Michelton Scott's 2 leaders have gone from being solid to horrific in the space of a couple of days (each, not the same 2 days)?
I can think of two possibilities; one he's just out and out cooked after trying to build the lead on Dumoulin before the TT the other is illness in the team.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 25, 2018, 07:21:52 pm
Sorted of reminded me of an epic ride once ridden by Floyd Landis in the tour .Just saying.

Froome should write a book on training tips. How to go from absolutely no results of note at all ever to second step of GT podium, then 5 (probably 6) GT wins including the triple GT which puts you in the company of Merckx and Hinault.

And all from nowhere. Quite remarkable.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Karla on May 25, 2018, 07:25:08 pm
The cyclingnews commentators described today as a miracle.

I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 25, 2018, 07:49:40 pm
Sorted of reminded me of an epic ride once ridden by Floyd Landis in the tour .Just saying.

Froome should write a book on training tips. How to go from absolutely no results of note at all ever to second step of GT podium, then 5 (probably 6) GT wins including the triple GT which puts you in the company of Merckx and Hinault.

And all from nowhere. Quite remarkable.

You can achieve anything with a combination of the right pillows and beetroot juice.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 25, 2018, 07:52:36 pm
Give it a couple of years and Froome will be crying on Jeremy Kyle.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: spesh on May 25, 2018, 08:37:07 pm
One for the history books.

From spesh’s BikeRadar thread, this (https://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13092276&e=1&view=unread#p20351327) was interesting. Looks like he put more time into Doom on the descents than the climbs!

Linky no worky, but I was just perusing the thread, and I assume you're referring to this post:

Quote
Using Giro live updates, I think this is where Froome took time on Dumoulin:

Finestere climb 37s
Finistere descent 1 min 15
Sestriere climb 49s
Sestriere descent 25s
Valley 15s
Final climb 3s
So 1 min 40 gained descending

https://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13092276&start=1120#p20351327

Though some of time gain on the descent off Finestre could be ascribed to the Dumoulin group waiting for Reichenbach...

A few posts, down, it's also pointed out that for all that Sky drilled it at the bottom of Finestre, Froome's ascent of the col was by no means the fastest. Carapaz was 20 seconds quicker than Froome up the final climb, albeit 3 minutes slower than Santambrogio and Nibali in 2014, in far worse weather conditions.

https://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13092276&start=1120#p20351339

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: spesh on May 25, 2018, 08:40:42 pm
Apropos of nothing, does anyone else find Carlton Kirby to be almost as irritating as Liggett and Sherwen were in the last few years before they were replaced by Boulting and Millar?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 25, 2018, 08:42:17 pm
Froome was slowest ascent ever apparently.

No ONE like Kirby. Luckily I am deaf so oblivious to all his meanderings.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: rafletcher on May 25, 2018, 08:48:32 pm
Apropos of nothing, does anyone else find Carlton Kirby to be almost as irritating as Liggett and Sherwen were in the last few years before they were replaced by Boulting and Millar?

No, he’s worse!  Even my wife complained yesterday. “He’s hysterical”
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: rafletcher on May 25, 2018, 08:53:55 pm
Sorted of reminded me of an epic ride once ridden by Floyd Landis in the tour .Just saying.

Froome should write a book on training tips. How to go from absolutely no results of note at all ever to second step of GT podium, then 5 (probably 6) GT wins including the triple GT which puts you in the company of Merckx and Hinault.

And all from nowhere. Quite remarkable.

And of course Merckx and Hinault were squeaky clean  ::-)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Vince on May 25, 2018, 08:58:43 pm
I'm sure I heard the commentator refering to Ron Dennis and Pots of Evil.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: andyoxon on May 25, 2018, 09:13:56 pm
Quite a stage.  Go on Froomey win all three!  OK, actually it'd be good if Dumoulin won Le Tour.  Tomorrow's a biggy.

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Ian H on May 25, 2018, 09:14:08 pm

You can achieve anything with a combination of the right pillows and beetroot juice.

Is this from the advice section in Cosmopolitan?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TheLurker on May 25, 2018, 09:36:53 pm
Though some of time gain on the descent off Finestre could be ascribed to the Dumoulin group waiting for Reichenbach...
So Dumoulin falls because of Reichenbach?

I'll get my coat....
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: spesh on May 25, 2018, 09:42:23 pm
;D

See also the 2016 TdF:

https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=98314.msg2054446#msg2054446
https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=98314.msg2058569#msg2058569
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 25, 2018, 09:55:34 pm
https://twitter.com/LottoJumbo_road/status/1000105610489286662?s=19

"He did a Landis"

(for those that don't get the inference, Landis did something remarkably similar in 2006...only to test positive later that evening)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 25, 2018, 10:37:00 pm
3 minutes slower than Santambrogio and Nibali in 2014, in far worse weather conditions.

Santambrogio! I'd forgotten all about him. ISTR that was the year he suddenly started winning everything in sight, and was making everyone else at the Giro look slow... Everyone was soooooo surprised when he got busted.

Wasn't he a team-mate of 'Killer' Di Luca? They were a rum bunch and no mistake.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 25, 2018, 10:38:30 pm

You can achieve anything with a combination of the right pillows and beetroot juice.

Is this from the advice section in Cosmopolitan?

If not, it should be.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 25, 2018, 10:39:05 pm
I'm sure I heard the commentator refering to Ron Dennis and Pots of Evil.

I definitely heard Ron Dennis mentioned, although Sean Kelly always calls him Ronan Dennis.

Kelly also seems to think Yates rides for Michelin-Scott (formerly Ulrika-Greenedge).
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 26, 2018, 07:03:01 am
Wow, I thought Morzine was the most impressive bit of bike racing in the last 20 years but that beats it. Landis succeeded because no-one thought he'd make it, I reckon TD thought the same on the descent. To quote Greg Lemond "unbelievable", but bugger me it was entertaining.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Salvatore on May 26, 2018, 07:34:25 am
I'm sure I heard the commentator refering to Ron Dennis and Pots of Evil.

I definitely heard Ron Dennis mentioned, although Sean Kelly always calls him Ronan Dennis.

Kelly also seems to think Yates rides for Michelin-Scott (formerly Ulrika-Greenedge).

In his excitement at one point yesterday Kelly mentioned the group of Pozzitivo.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 26, 2018, 07:40:47 am
Lead article on Cyclingtips:

https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/only-love-can-break-your-heart-a-lamentation-on-chris-froome/
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 26, 2018, 09:10:04 am
Anyway, dodgy Froome apart it's been an exciting race. And it's not over, Froome burnt a lot of matches yesterday and today the boot will probably be on the other foot. Dumoulin's team will be putting on the Pain.

Yates? Didn't conserve his energy. Inexperience. But he is a future GT contender. Thursday was where it all fell apart and the other teams noticed.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 26, 2018, 09:14:10 am
I'm sure I heard the commentator refering to Ron Dennis and Pots of Evil.

I definitely heard Ron Dennis mentioned, although Sean Kelly always calls him Ronan Dennis.

Kelly also seems to think Yates rides for Michelin-Scott (formerly Ulrika-Greenedge).

In his excitement at one point yesterday Kelly mentioned the group of Pozzitivo.
Ron Dennis seems to crop up every couple of days, very distracting!

You can rely on King Kelly. BTW who is the current "kin kelly" I keep hearing references to ? Possibly team staff? Or an Italian rider not picked for the Giro?

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 26, 2018, 09:18:02 am
Anyway, dodgy Froome apart it's been an exciting race. And it's not over, Froome burnt a lot of matches yesterday and today the boot will probably be on the other foot. Dumoulin's team will be putting on the Pain.

Yates? Didn't conserve his energy. Inexperience. But he is a future GT contender. Thursday was where it all fell apart and the other teams noticed.
Yes, agree with all that.
( Although ... it's possible that he doesn't have the legs to beat Tom over 3 weeks, and being leader after 17 stages was the best he could have hoped for - and he got that, so thanks Simon for giving it a go  :thumbsup: )

[I do wonder how many people still find the race exciting, when all they talk about is Froome's "dodgy" antics. I do find this genuinely puzzling - look at how few actual race comments there are on this thread. Each to his own I guess ... ]
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 26, 2018, 09:29:53 am
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180525/3f403fda8157a94a278d6eaaacd69386.jpg)

Lol
They've put a lot of effort into that, good work!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 26, 2018, 09:40:48 am
Anyway, dodgy Froome apart it's been an exciting race. And it's not over, Froome burnt a lot of matches yesterday and today the boot will probably be on the other foot. Dumoulin's team will be putting on the Pain.

Yates? Didn't conserve his energy. Inexperience. But he is a future GT contender. Thursday was where it all fell apart and the other teams noticed.
Yes, agree with all that.
( Although ... it's possible that he doesn't have the legs to beat Tom over 3 weeks, and being leader after 17 stages was the best he could have hoped for - and he got that, so thanks Simon for giving it a go  :thumbsup: )

[I do wonder how many people still find the race exciting, when all they talk about is Froome's "dodgy" antics. I do find this genuinely puzzling - look at how few actual race comments there are on this thread. Each to his own I guess ... ]

He blew a lot of energy doing a few things he didn't need to do. You know from your own riding that you can only go into the red so many times.  He's had a great ride...he'll come back and win it sometime. It was the TT that killed him, but it kept him in pink for a few more days.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Mr Larrington on May 26, 2018, 10:09:28 am
;D

See also the 2016 TdF:

https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=98314.msg2054446#msg2054446
https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=98314.msg2058569#msg2058569

My homework at the time found Biff sotp did the Reichenbach Falls gag for the 2013 WOrlds.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 26, 2018, 11:37:48 am
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/05/25/16/4C9FBB8000000578-5772091-image-a-2_1527263950197.jpg)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 26, 2018, 11:47:11 am
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/05/25/16/4C9FBB8000000578-5772091-image-a-2_1527263950197.jpg)

See my post above!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 26, 2018, 11:52:09 am
Froome burnt a lot of matches but only the same amount as Dumoulin did to keep it to 40 seconds. Dumoulin towed 4 other riders for a third of the stage and looked cooked at the finish.

It was actually quite an unbelievable ride from Dumoulin as well.

I'll take the result at face value and let the authorities deal with any doping issues.  It was an amazing stage to watch live and, drugs or no drugs, it was still an historic 80km solo time-trial by Froome.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 26, 2018, 11:52:33 am
https://twitter.com/LottoJumbo_road/status/1000105610489286662?s=19

"He did a Landis"

(for those that don't get the inference, Landis did something remarkably similar in 2006...only to test positive later that evening)
Looks like the lawyers had a word! An hour later:

LottoNLJumbo Cycling

@LottoJumbo_road

Disclaimer to avoid any misinterpretation: this is not an insinuation, but a way to express the admiration for an exceptional achievement. Congratulations to Chris Froome and Team Sky.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sojournermike on May 26, 2018, 12:46:26 pm
https://twitter.com/LottoJumbo_road/status/1000105610489286662?s=19

"He did a Landis"

(for those that don't get the inference, Landis did something remarkably similar in 2006...only to test positive later that evening)
Looks like the lawyers had a word! An hour later:

LottoNLJumbo Cycling

@LottoJumbo_road

Disclaimer to avoid any misinterpretation: this is not an insinuation, but a way to express the admiration for an exceptional achievement. Congratulations to Chris Froome and Team Sky.


Isn’t this what makes cycle racing such great fun;)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 26, 2018, 12:55:33 pm
It's a circus. It'd be great if everybody would accept that. It's like watching a film....suspension of disbelief is required.

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: hubner on May 26, 2018, 01:08:51 pm
Quote
I'll take the result at face value and let the authorities deal with any doping issues.

But the authorities secretly dealt out the dope, legally all within the rules to the favoured rider(s) of course!


Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 26, 2018, 01:24:42 pm
Quote
I'll take the result at face value and let the authorities deal with any doping issues.

But the authorities secretly dealt out the dope, legally all within the rules to the favoured rider(s) of course!

Look, this is simple.  The reputation of professional cycling is shot.  Nobody can do anything special without the spectre of doping hanging over them.

I think it's irretrievably damaged actually.  Other sports just don't dig deep enough into doping* (presumably to stop their sport's reputation ending up the same way).

You either watch it, enjoy the special moments,  and let the authorities deal with the rules, for better or for worse, or don't watch it.  I don't see any point in continually watching it and continually bitching about it.

Or....has "guess the doper" become an intrinsic part of the enjoyment now?

It seems that, for some, enjoyment of pro cycling is inversely proportional to the performance of the top cyclists.  The more special the moment the more cynical, and miserable, the experience of the viewer.


*Jamaican sprint program.  Kenyan/Ethiopian long-distance.  Football, even Snooker FFS, etc etc.  I have a feeling that, if they spot-checked every professional sports person right now, a high percentage would be caught with something dodgy coursing through their veins.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sojournermike on May 26, 2018, 02:39:30 pm
Quote
I'll take the result at face value and let the authorities deal with any doping issues.

But the authorities secretly dealt out the dope, legally all within the rules to the favoured rider(s) of course!

Look, this is simple.  The reputation of professional cycling is shot.  Nobody can do anything special without the spectre of doping hanging over them.

I think it's irretrievably damaged actually.  Other sports just don't dig deep enough into doping* (presumably to stop their sport's reputation ending up the same way).

You either watch it, enjoy the special moments,  and let the authorities deal with the rules, for better or for worse, or don't watch it.  I don't see any point in continually watching it and continually bitching about it.

Or....has "guess the doper" become an intrinsic part of the enjoyment now?

It seems that, for some, enjoyment of pro cycling is inversely proportional to the performance of the top cyclists.  The more special the moment the more cynical, and miserable, the experience of the viewer.


*Jamaican sprint program.  Kenyan/Ethiopian long-distance.  Football, even Snooker FFS, etc etc.  I have a feeling that, if they spot-checked every professional sports person right now, a high percentage would be caught with something dodgy coursing through their veins.


This is part of the circus. Anyone who has followed sport for any length of time may well dislike doping, or perhaps more relevantly hypocrisy, but it has become a part of the ‘game’ in an increasingly relativistic social culture. Let’s face it, over the years the dopers have done some amazing things and there are many records that are probably beyond the range of unassisted elite individuals, even at the edge of the curve.

I suspect your addenda probably understates the prevalence of marginal performance enhancement across all sport.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 26, 2018, 05:07:00 pm
I suspect your addenda probably understates the prevalence of marginal performance enhancement across all sport.

Agreed, I just don't have the time to type every single sport.

Also good to see a Pro like Thibauld Pinot looking like me climbing a steep hill.  A man desperately in need of a pint of Shandy and some Crisps.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: αdαmsκι on May 26, 2018, 07:57:57 pm
I enjoyed the Giro. It was a really interesting race. Right up to the unbelievable 80km solo attack across the Alps by Froome. We now wait for a court to decide who's actually won the Giro
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Mr Larrington on May 26, 2018, 09:26:53 pm
The Condensed Giro, by P@nd3m1c Pr0duckt10nzTM®:

C FroomeC me bide mi tiem!
S CummingsOi! That is my line, C Froome! I will tuough u up! I will kill u utterly to DETH 4 that!
Bethany (7+1)Fight! Fight! Yay! (does vigorous soft-shoe shuffle)
Bethany's MumShurrup, you little skank!  I'm tryna watch Eastenders!
S YatesNOT FAIR!!1!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 27, 2018, 08:14:55 am
The Condensed Giro, by P@nd3m1c Pr0duckt10nzTM®:

C FroomeC me bide mi tiem!
S CummingsOi! That is my line, C Froome! I will tuough u up! I will kill u utterly to DETH 4 that!
Bethany (7+1)Fight! Fight! Yay! (does vigorous soft-shoe shuffle)
Bethany's MumShurrup, you little skank!  I'm tryna watch Eastenders!
S YatesNOT FAIR!!1!
For a less serious view - from the other side of the TV screen - you can read the "overly-simplified race reports" of Chad Haga (great name, wot??):

https://twitter.com/ChadHaga
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 27, 2018, 08:40:04 am
RichN95 on the BikeRadar forum – dunno who he is but he’s astonishingly knowledgeable about pro cycling – has another silly summary here. (https://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13092276&start=1220#p20351652) (I hope my link works this time!)

Meanwhile, poor Pinot is likely to abandon with only a stage to go. He’s been struck down with dehydration and fever.

Riders who’ve impressed me this year: Sam Oomen, Felix Grossschartner, Jack Haig, Pello Bilbao, George Bennett (who sounds genuinely annoyed social media thinks he accused Froome of doping), and Lopez and Carapaz in their epic ding-dong battle.

It’s been good viewing! I hope ASO is taking notes.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Legs on May 27, 2018, 08:48:40 am
Add Schachmann and Reichenbach to that list!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 27, 2018, 09:27:06 am
Okay – on the condition that Reichenbach promises to do a crash course on descending! He’s as bad as Pinot was a few years ago albeit without Pinot’s emo drama.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: D.A.L.E. on May 27, 2018, 10:06:23 am
I think George Bennett might be my new favourite.

'I'm not saying Froomey's railed a load of gear' had me howling.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Karla on May 27, 2018, 03:31:14 pm
" ... just that he's made a bigger comeback than Easter Sunday"
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: andyoxon on May 27, 2018, 03:37:10 pm
Well I'm giving Froome the botd in the Giro for an amazing performance - anything else is just pure speculation.   :P
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: quixoticgeek on May 27, 2018, 03:37:45 pm
Made the mistake of reading some articles about Froome's efforts at the Giro. One thing that irks me, is that had there not been a information breach, we wouldn't know about the AAF, and so he'd be competing without the big cloud over his head.

I've never really followed a whole grand tour closely before, but this Giro has been amazing. I really feel for Yates, to come so close, and then implode, but the two mountain stages this week where Froome pulled out the stops have been amazing to watch. He's innocent until proving guilty, I hope that the AAF doesn't mean that we have to rewrite GC of this years Giro.

Bring on le tour.

J
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on May 27, 2018, 04:01:48 pm
So, Froome learned his cyclecraft riding on gravel roads, riding in the heat.

Then, on gravel roads, in the heat, he rides away from the peloton, and surprises people with his (relatively) fast descending skills on poor surfaces.

He even commented on it, how like the roads were to the ones he rode on when he was a teenager.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 27, 2018, 04:26:24 pm
He also trains in South Africa. My SA mate says the area he trains in has shite roads.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: PaulF on May 27, 2018, 06:18:04 pm
Well he’s done it http://www.giroditalia.it/eng/news/sam-bennett-vince-a-roma-il-giro-e-di-froome/, I’m with the botd camp and think it’s a great comeback.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: andyoxon on May 27, 2018, 07:18:46 pm
First Brit ever to win the Giro...
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 27, 2018, 07:25:16 pm
Well I'm giving Froome the botd in the Giro for an amazing performance - anything else is just pure speculation.   :P

No it isn't. He has a doping case hanging over his head.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 27, 2018, 07:26:56 pm
So, Froome learned his cyclecraft riding on gravel roads, riding in the heat.

Then, on gravel roads, in the heat, he rides away from the peloton, and surprises people with his (relatively) fast descending skills on poor surfaces.

He even commented on it, how like the roads were to the ones he rode on when he was a teenager.

So why was he so fucking shit at bike handling until recently? He fell off going uphill in this Giro. It's just more PR bullshit.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 27, 2018, 07:32:55 pm
So why was he so fucking shit at bike handling until recently? He fell off going uphill in this Giro. It's just more PR bullshit.

He put 60 seconds into Dumoulin on the stage 19 decent.  That's not drugs (unless it's booze..which helps my own descending)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 27, 2018, 07:37:11 pm
So why was he so fucking shit at bike handling until recently? He fell off going uphill in this Giro. It's just more PR bullshit.

He put 60 seconds into Dumoulin on the stage 19 decent.  That's not drugs (unless it's booze..which helps my own descending)

See bolded. You probably don't remember him zigzagging up the San Luca in a 2009 Giro or crashing into a race official on a time trial. I do.

Until the last year or two he was a shit descenders. He has improved but this stuff about 'roads like in Kenya" is horseshit.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: andyoxon on May 27, 2018, 07:42:21 pm
Well I'm giving Froome the botd in the Giro for an amazing performance - anything else is just pure speculation.   :P

No it isn't. He has a doping case hanging over his head.

Yes, it is - this is the Giro now, that was a salbutamol overdose then...
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on May 27, 2018, 07:46:08 pm
Froome should never have been able to start the Giro. It'll be interesting to see if results get deleted.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 27, 2018, 07:52:12 pm
Well I'm giving Froome the botd in the Giro for an amazing performance - anything else is just pure speculation.   :P

No it isn't. He has a doping case hanging over his head.

Yes, it is - this is the Giro now, that was a salbutamol overdose then...

Might be the Giro too if he suffers from the same kidney malfunction (which he'd never had before,) that afflicted him for one day only in the Vuelta.  ;D ;D

Seriously, you need to inform yourself before commenting. For those of us who look into the details it's a total farce.

Meanwhile, here's some footage of a young rider who 2 years later would turn into the greatest GT rider of his generation and possibly ever, failing to keep up with Simon Gerrans  on a climb. Something, that a mere 2 years later would become this riders speciality...

https://youtu.be/lEGpv0xn0E8

Zigzagging ha ha ha ha  ;D
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 27, 2018, 07:54:55 pm
Froome should never have been able to start the Giro. It'll be interesting to see if results get deleted.

I agree that his case should have been resolved before this but it's not his fault, especially if he didn't break any rules*

It just adds pressure upon pressure.    It's the TdF soon and he stands a great chance of winning it.  If they ARE going to ban him then every month they delay means another result being voided.

*Shit rules, open to legal abuse.

Just out of interest which Grand Tour Winners are there who haven't been officially investigated now?  It must be a handful in 20 years.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 27, 2018, 08:05:59 pm
Froome should never have been able to start the Giro. It'll be interesting to see if results get deleted.

On the Cycling Podcast last night, Daniel Friebe said the result would stand regardless of the outcome of the salbutamol case. I don't know if that's definitive or where he got his information but he sounded pretty certain. It seems highly likely that he'll lose the Vuelta but beyond that, who knows? And that uncertainty is a real problem. Without making any comment on his guilt or innocence, I agree with you that he really shouldn't have been taking part in the Giro while the case was unresolved. It has proved to be a major distraction from the racing, which has generally been highly entertaining.

It's almost as disappointing as Pinot's capitulation.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Von Broad on May 27, 2018, 08:28:31 pm

https://youtu.be/lEGpv0xn0E8

Zigzagging ha ha ha ha  ;D

In a previous life: Froome the Audaxer!

Don't understand a word of Italian, but I like they way they manged to weave Rupert Murdoch into the commentary early on.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on May 27, 2018, 09:00:40 pm
The delay in resolving this Froome doping case is solely because of Froome/ Sky.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sojournermike on May 27, 2018, 10:14:04 pm
Froome should never have been able to start the Giro. It'll be interesting to see if results get deleted.

I agree that his case should have been resolved before this but it's not his fault, especially if he didn't break any rules*

It just adds pressure upon pressure.    It's the TdF soon and he stands a great chance of winning it.  If they ARE going to ban him then every month they delay means another result being voided.

*Shit rules, open to legal abuse.

Just out of interest which Grand Tour Winners are there who haven't been officially investigated now?  It must be a handful in 20 years.

Given how thin they’ve got, I don’t think there are enough to make up a handful;)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Andrew Br on May 27, 2018, 10:28:06 pm
Okay – on the condition that Reichenbach promises to do a crash course on descending!..........

A crash course is the last thing he needs.

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 27, 2018, 10:33:31 pm
Very good, Andrew.

It seems highly likely that he'll lose the Vuelta but beyond that, who knows?

Given that Froome is apparently arguing his innocence rather than admitting to an accidental overdose of salbutamol, he may have reasonable confidence that he can win his case outright. Otherwise why not say sorry and take a short, backdated ban? He’s risking a greater punishment, so “highly likely” is strong language here.

And that uncertainty is a real problem. Without making any comment on his guilt or innocence, I agree with you that he really shouldn't have been taking part in the Giro while the case was unresolved.

There is some tension in this statement, because banning someone from racing in effect does comment on guilt. It harms the athlete, arguably without the possibility of adequate restitution should they prove innocent. And to the extent that restitution is possible, who is volunteering to pay the damages? In Froome’s case, those would be huge.

For these reasons and our cultural expectation of the rule of law, the regs say the salbutamol test result should not have been made public. The newspapers only got a hold of it because the UCI is corrupt and leaky as many such organisations are. Julie Harrington (the new British Cycling boss) made some good comments about this at the time, warning especially against the risk of trial in the court of public opinion. We’ve seen that that court is unconcerned with your rights and dishes out differential justice depending on whether you’re popular, British, arrogant, too successful, etc. Froome got slammed.

All of that notwithstanding, an athlete’s career burns briefly and all parties have a wish to avoid the uncertainty you mention. Those are two good reasons to force the gears of justice to grind more quickly in these cases. If you can’t get a plausible defence together in a few months, maybe there’s a good reason. I’m super-curious to hear why this case has taken so long.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: andyoxon on May 27, 2018, 10:41:30 pm

Might be the Giro too if he suffers from the same kidney malfunction (which he'd never had before,) that afflicted him for one day only in the Vuelta.  ;D ;D

Seriously, you need to inform yourself before commenting. For those of us who look into the details it's a total farce.


OK, thanks for the advice...  ;)  The curious incident of salbutamol overdose in the Vuelta is unresolved, but that does not by necessity mean that what he's acheived in this Giro, his 80km break to win the stage etc, is suspect. 
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 27, 2018, 10:50:23 pm
In so far as he was prepared to use banned methods to win one GT?

No, you are quite right, I can't possibly see how that has any bearing on his willingness to use banned methods for a subsequent GT. Not at all. No.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 27, 2018, 11:04:08 pm
Flatus, you’re leaping to wild conclusions again. How about waiting for the outcome of Froome’s case before telling us what you imagine he’s prepared to do to win a race? What we each imagine without evidence to be his intentions does not constitute an argument, even if we repeat it stridently ad infinitum.

Dumoulin has some comments on his race here. (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/no-regrets-for-tom-dumoulin-at-giro-ditalia/)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: quixoticgeek on May 27, 2018, 11:10:00 pm
Why did Froome not miss this Giro until his name is clear? Let's go through the steps

1) Had news of his AAF not been leaked, we wouldn't know about it, and he would have competed without anyone knowing about the suspect result. As it is, with the case unresolved, he's innocent until proven guilty.

1a) For many people, once news of the AAF occured, to miss out on the Giro would be seen as an admission of Guilt. If he is of the view that he hasn't done anything wrong, and given noone should have found out about the AAF yet, why would you risk people interpretting what you did as wrong?

2) Organisers of the Giro paid Froome a substantial appearance fee, probably a 7 digit number. Chances are, there is a clause in the contract that says if he doesn't appear, he will have to pay a substantial amount, and not receive his payment. Not riding the Giro when he's not been banned from riding probably means he would have been hit hard in the wallet.

3) Everyone gets older. As we age, our abilities reduce, this gives any athlete a very finite window of peak physical fitness. So if he puts off having a go at the Giro now, especially predicated upon 1, & 1a, he's throwing away a potential once in a life time chance to win the Giro, which comes with the additional chance to be the 1st Brit to win the Giro, as well as a once in a life time chance to hold the title of all 3 at once. When your life's sole purpose has been to achieve these goals, and you have a single window of opportunity, why would you throw away that chance? Especially given 1, & 1a?

I know that there is a substantial proportion of those who follow pro cycling that hate Team Sky, all Team Sky's riders, and Chris Froome especially, but for now, he's achieved an amazing feat, he's not been found guilty of any wrong doing. Well done Chris, well ridden.

Of course if it turns out he has been cheating, as with any riders in the pro peloton, have the tar and feathers on standby.

J
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 27, 2018, 11:18:58 pm
Without evidence? What do you think the AAF is?
It isn't a wild conclusion, it's a fact.

Le Monde reported that his defence was going to centre around a malfunctioning kidney, that stored up all the Salbutamol but then shat it all out on one day. Curiously, it only ever happened once.

It takes a particular type of ignorance, wilful or otherwise, to not understand what has gone on here. Froome found himself in a pickle. Chest infection and asthma. 3 options. Withdraw from the race, continue and risk health, or take a risk and use oral or nebulised Salbutamol, both banned.

Informed opinion (ie.medics) is that the only way the huge quantity or the drug could have got in his system was through one of these banned methods.

Malfunctioning kidney or the action of self-confessed unethical team with a history of subterfuge, evasion and outright lying?
Title: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 27, 2018, 11:18:58 pm
Given that Froome is apparently arguing his innocence rather than admitting to an accidental overdose of salbutamol, he may have reasonable confidence that he can win his case outright.

That’s one way of spinning it. The team are not disputing the fact that double the permitted level of salbutamol was found in his urine sample. What they are arguing about is why his urine contained that much salbutamol.

They need to convince WADA that the arbitrary limit set for permissible salbutamol level in the urine is based on flawed reasoning. Good luck with that.

Quote
There is some tension in this statement, because banning someone from racing in effect does comment on guilt. It harms the athlete, arguably without the possibility of adequate restitution should they prove innocent.

Yes, of course, but that’s why I was careful in my choice of words and emphatically did not say he should have been banned from racing, only that it would have been preferable if he weren’t at the Giro.

If Sky were members of the MPCC, he would have been withdrawn from all racing pending the outcome of the investigation even if the AAF had not been made public.

Quote
All of that notwithstanding, an athlete’s career burns briefly and all parties have a wish to avoid the uncertainty you mention. Those are two good reasons to force the gears of justice to grind more quickly in these cases. If you can’t get a plausible defence together in a few months, maybe there’s a good reason. I’m super-curious to hear why this case has taken so long.

I share your curiosity. I have no idea why they are so confident they can provide a plausible explanation. It seems unlikely based on what I’ve read but I’m not going to speculate any further than that.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: fd3 on May 27, 2018, 11:22:00 pm
First Brit ever to win the Giro...
1. Nicole Cooke
2. He's Kenyan
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: andyoxon on May 27, 2018, 11:33:48 pm
First Brit ever to win the Giro...
1. Nicole Cooke
2. He's Kenyan

1. Giro d'Italia Femminile / Rosa?
2.  Born in Kenya, but yet he's British... 

 :)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: quixoticgeek on May 27, 2018, 11:35:22 pm
First Brit ever to win the Giro...
1. Nicole Cooke
2. He's Kenyan

1. Giro d'Italia Femminile / Rosa?
2.  Born in Kenya, but yet he's British... 

 :)

Have any kenyen's won the Giro?

J
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: David Martin on May 27, 2018, 11:41:53 pm
Without evidence? What do you think the AAF is?
It isn't a wild conclusion, it's a fact.
It is an AAF. It is not a proof of doping. Salbutamol is a particularly interesting case.

Quote
Le Monde reported that his defence was going to centre around a malfunctioning kidney, that stored up all the Salbutamol but then shat it all out on one day. Curiously, it only ever happened once.
They do have to sell column inches.

Quote
It takes a particular type of ignorance, wilful or otherwise, to not understand what has gone on here. Froome found himself in a pickle. Chest infection and asthma. 3 options. Withdraw from the race, continue and risk health, or take a risk and use oral or nebulised Salbutamol, both banned.
There is no evidence that he used oral salbutamol. Nebulised is a different issue. It is to do with routes of administration and the pharmacokinetics.
Quote
Informed opinion (ie.medics) is that the only way the huge quantity or the drug could have got in his system was through one of these banned methods.
Your medics are not well informed. There are published studies showing that these levels are credible from legitimate uses of Salbutamol. They also appear to make a common error of mistaking quantity with concentration. A little bit of pharmacokinetic modelling shows that these levels are possible, given the right conditions, and that the test can distinguish between oral and inhaled doses. There are different metabolic products  from the lungs and the gut, but inhaled Salbutamol is ingested both through the lungs and the gut.
Quote
Malfunctioning kidney or the action of self-confessed unethical team with a history of subterfuge, evasion and outright lying?
Nonsense from Le Monde or a credible case actually built on facts rather than the populist myth gained from 'the clinic'?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 27, 2018, 11:58:53 pm
Without evidence? What do you think the AAF is?
It isn't a wild conclusion, it's a fact.
It is an AAF. It is not a proof of doping. Salbutamol is a particularly interesting case.

Quote
Le Monde reported that his defence was going to centre around a malfunctioning kidney, that stored up all the Salbutamol but then shat it all out on one day. Curiously, it only ever happened once.
They do have to sell column inches.

Quote
It takes a particular type of ignorance, wilful or otherwise, to not understand what has gone on here. Froome found himself in a pickle. Chest infection and asthma. 3 options. Withdraw from the race, continue and risk health, or take a risk and use oral or nebulised Salbutamol, both banned.
There is no evidence that he used oral salbutamol. Nebulised is a different issue. It is to do with routes of administration and the pharmacokinetics.
Quote
Informed opinion (ie.medics) is that the only way the huge quantity or the drug could have got in his system was through one of these banned methods.
Your medics are not well informed. There are published studies showing that these levels are credible from legitimate uses of Salbutamol. They also appear to make a common error of mistaking quantity with concentration. A little bit of pharmacokinetic modelling shows that these levels are possible, given the right conditions, and that the test can distinguish between oral and inhaled doses. There are different metabolic products  from the lungs and the gut, but inhaled Salbutamol is ingested both through the lungs and the gut.
Quote
Malfunctioning kidney or the action of self-confessed unethical team with a history of subterfuge, evasion and outright lying?
Nonsense from Le Monde or a credible case actually built on facts rather than the populist myth gained from 'the clinic'?

Using scientific methodology and evidence?  How very 2016*

*Now can we all just get back to gut feelings and pub gossip?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 28, 2018, 12:36:11 am
Without evidence? What do you think the AAF is?

It’s not even evidence of an overdose of salbutamol, much less evidence of Froome’s “willingness to use banned methods”. That’s leaping to conclusions twice in a single bound.

Froome found himself in a pickle. Chest infection and asthma. 3 options. Withdraw from the race, continue and risk health, or take a risk and use oral or nebulised Salbutamol, both banned.

You’ve created this out of whole cloth. Stating it emphatically doesn’t prove anything. Besides, what about the TUE option for something stronger?

The team are not disputing the fact that double the permitted level of salbutamol was found in his urine sample. What they are arguing about is why his urine contained that much salbutamol.

They need to convince WADA that the arbitrary limit set for permissible salbutamol level in the urine is based on flawed reasoning. Good luck with that.

It doesn’t seem so unlikely to this layman, given some of the lab tests and other salbutamol cases I’ve skim-read. There is room for doubt when experts disagree, and that’s all Froome needs. Also, I understand Froome’s urinary concentration of salbutamol has been recalibrated down to 1429 ng/ml. That may explain his cockiness about proving his innocence … or the cockiness could be a bluff.

If Sky were members of the MPCC, he would have been withdrawn from all racing pending the outcome of the investigation even if the AAF had not been made public.

I know. Given how that breaks the presumption of innocence, it seems like a good reason not to join the MPCC (itself increasingly lacking credibility for other reasons).

I think there was someone in this Giro with a swollen face from an insect bite he couldn’t treat for some MPCC reason. Not cool.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Exit Stage Left on May 28, 2018, 01:37:40 am
Congratulations to Chris Froome and Team Sky. Let's hope they can keep up their winning ways at the Tour de France.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 07:18:10 am
Without evidence? What do you think the AAF is?
It isn't a wild conclusion, it's a fact.
It is an AAF. It is not a proof of doping. Salbutamol is a particularly interesting case.

It is still evidence. It still needs an explanation.

Quote
Quote
Le Monde reported that his defence was going to centre around a malfunctioning kidney, that stored up all the Salbutamol but then shat it all out on one day. Curiously, it only ever happened once.
They do have to sell column inches.


Bit like the German TV report that exposed the attempt to bury Contador's clen positive. Damn the free press.

Quote
Quote
It takes a particular type of ignorance, wilful or otherwise, to not understand what has gone on here. Froome found himself in a pickle. Chest infection and asthma. 3 options. Withdraw from the race, continue and risk health, or take a risk and use oral or nebulised Salbutamol, both banned.
There is no evidence that he used oral salbutamol. Nebulised is a different issue. It is to do with routes of administration and the pharmacokinetics.

Is it banned?

Quote
Quote
Informed opinion (ie.medics) is that the only way the huge quantity or the drug could have got in his system was through one of these banned methods.
Your medics are not well informed. There are published studies showing that these levels are credible from legitimate uses of Salbutamol. They also appear to make a common error of mistaking quantity with concentration. A little bit of pharmacokinetic modelling shows that these levels are possible, given the right conditions, and that the test can distinguish between oral and inhaled doses. There are different metabolic products  from the lungs and the gut, but inhaled Salbutamol is ingested both through the lungs and the gut.

We will have to wait and see as to what explanations are accepted for twice the permitted level being present, on top of probable route of administration.

Quote
Quote
u
Malfunctioning kidney or the action of self-confessed unethical team with a history of subterfuge, evasion and outright lying?
Nonsense from Le Monde or a credible case actually built on facts rather than the populist myth gained from 'the clinic'?

Balanced and impartial view, or one who's nationalist sporting fervour blinds him.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 07:24:56 am
Quote from: Samuel D
You’ve created this out of whole cloth. Stating it emphatically doesn’t prove anything. Besides, what about the TUE option for something stronger?

Why not a TUE?  Hmmm...Let me ponder that one for a while  ::-)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 28, 2018, 08:41:28 am
It doesn’t seem so unlikely to this layman, given some of the lab tests and other salbutamol cases I’ve skim-read. There is room for doubt when experts disagree, and that’s all Froome needs. Also, I understand Froome’s urinary concentration of salbutamol has been recalibrated down to 1429 ng/ml. That may explain his cockiness about proving his innocence … or the cockiness could be a bluff.

I suspect it's simply a case that they've got a lot to lose if the case against Froome is upheld so they need to fight it using whatever legal means are available (much like their approach to winning races).

Even at the adjusted level, Froome's salbutamol reading is still well in excess of the limit. But that's one for Team Sky and WADA's lawyers to fight over, I won't pretend to claim any kind of special understanding of the science so let's wait and see what comes out of the case. Although it's unlikely that any of us will ever get to see the evidence so the speculation is unlikely to end even then.

As for the time it is taking, that's not so unusual - the very similar Ulissi case took a long time to resolve. The difference was that it was kept out of the public eye until the verdict was delivered.

Quote
I know. Given how that breaks the presumption of innocence, it seems like a good reason not to join the MPCC (itself increasingly lacking credibility for other reasons).

I think there was someone in this Giro with a swollen face from an insect bite he couldn’t treat for some MPCC reason. Not cool.

I've said before that I think Sky's non-membership of the MPCC is a red herring if looking for evidence of bending the rules. However, since membership is voluntary and teams who sign up do so out of a desire to be seen to be clean, they shouldn't have a problem with voluntarily suspending their own riders even if it isn't required by the UCI. And a lot of the younger riders are totally on board with that - Tim Wellens voluntarily withdrew from last year's Tour after suffering an allergic reaction to an insect bite rather than have the treatment that would have allowed him to continue racing because it would have required a TUE.

On the other hand, Lotto-Jumbo quit the MPCC because George Bennett (another rider who did very well at this year's Giro) registered a low cortisol level, requiring them to withdraw him from the 2015 Giro. And that's one of the problems with credibility the MPCC has - teams will quit the organisation rather than follow its rules. Or they can just ignore the rules, like Astana, who let Lars Boom race in the 2015 Tour even though he had also registered a low cortisol level.

Mitchelton-Scott quit the MPCC because they felt its aims had already been achieved when some of its recommendations were incorporated into UCI regulations.  :facepalm:
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 09:01:51 am
If Team Sky had been in the MPCC they wouldn't have been able to abuse the TUE system to dope riders with cortisone for a performance advantage. They wouldn't have needed to order in so much Kenacort. There would most likely never have been a "jiffybag" because it is highly likely it contained Kenacort.

Yes, David, will be along to tell me this is myth.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 28, 2018, 09:04:21 am
It doesn’t seem so unlikely to this layman, given some of the lab tests and other salbutamol cases I’ve skim-read. There is room for doubt when experts disagree, and that’s all Froome needs. Also, I understand Froome’s urinary concentration of salbutamol has been recalibrated down to 1429 ng/ml. That may explain his cockiness about proving his innocence … or the cockiness could be a bluff.

I suspect it's simply a case that they've got a lot to lose if the case against Froome is upheld so they need to fight it using whatever legal means are available (much like their approach to winning races).

Even at the adjusted level, Froome's salbutamol reading is still well in excess of the limit. But that's one for Team Sky and WADA's lawyers to fight over, I won't pretend to claim any kind of special understanding of the science so let's wait and see what comes out of the case. Although it's unlikely that any of us will ever get to see the evidence so the speculation is unlikely to end even then.

As for the time it is taking, that's not so unusual - the very similar Ulissi case took a long time to resolve. The difference was that it was kept out of the public eye until the verdict was delivered.

Quote
I know. Given how that breaks the presumption of innocence, it seems like a good reason not to join the MPCC (itself increasingly lacking credibility for other reasons).

I think there was someone in this Giro with a swollen face from an insect bite he couldn’t treat for some MPCC reason. Not cool.

I've said before that I think Sky's non-membership of the MPCC is a red herring if looking for evidence of bending the rules. However, since membership is voluntary and teams who sign up do so out of a desire to be seen to be clean, they shouldn't have a problem with voluntarily suspending their own riders even if it isn't required by the UCI. And a lot of the younger riders are totally on board with that - Tim Wellens voluntarily withdrew from last year's Tour after suffering an allergic reaction to an insect bite rather than have the treatment that would have allowed him to continue racing because it would have required a TUE.

On the other hand, Lotto-Jumbo quit the MPCC because George Bennett (another rider who did very well at this year's Giro) registered a low cortisol level, requiring them to withdraw him from the 2015 Giro. And that's one of the problems with credibility the MPCC has - teams will quit the organisation rather than follow its rules. Or they can just ignore the rules, like Astana, who let Lars Boom race in the 2015 Tour even though he had also registered a low cortisol level.

Mitchelton-Scott quit the MPCC because they felt its aims had already been achieved when some of its recommendations were incorporated into UCI regulations.  :facepalm:


My bold

Ullissi 's AAF was announced by his team in June after the Giro, in September with the case ongoing the UCI stopped him racing.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 28, 2018, 09:16:26 am
Ullissi 's AAF was announced by his team in June after the Giro, in September with the case ongoing the UCI stopped him racing.

Thanks. I was going from memory rather than checking facts...
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 09:24:08 am
It is not surprising that a few major teams have pulled out of the MPCC. They see Team Sky shitting all over the race scene with Cortisone abuse and they realise that with that Team Sky have shot the MPCC down in flames.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 28, 2018, 09:30:03 am
It is not surprising that a few major teams have pulled out of the MPCC. They see Team Sky shitting all over the race scene with Cortisone abuse and they realise that with that Team Sky have shot the MPCC down in flames.

They also see founder-members AG2R, whose boss, Vincent Lavenu, is one of the big cheeses in the organisation, having three riders banned for EPO use.  :facepalm:

There would most likely never have been a "jiffybag" because it is highly likely it contained Kenacort.

I don't think you do yourself any favours with this kind of comment because it's so easily dismissed as speculation. You can make a good case against Sky by sticking to the known and undisputed facts.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 09:40:41 am
It is obviously speculation. It is not being claimed as fact. We will most likely never know...because Sky "lost" the records when the only copy of records (apparently) went missing when Freeman's laptop was "stolen".

So where does that leave us? We can either accept the warm diahorrea spoon fed to us by Sky, or we can apply A bit of critical thought bearing in mind the context of bike racing. We can look at the trail of explanations from Team Sky that were revealed as lies and ask ourselves why they were lying.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 28, 2018, 09:46:31 am
I think Sky have given us enough rope with the known facts, without the need to resort to speculation.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on May 28, 2018, 09:50:35 am
Whatever was in the jiffy-bag, it wasn't within the doping regulations.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 10:11:29 am
I think Sky have given us enough rope with the known facts, without the need to resort to speculation.

That doesn't really make any sense at all. It is speculation that has caused the rope to be given. If there hadn't been speculation about possible contents of the jiffybag there would not have been any interest in pursuing the case. The 'jiffybag' leaker speculated as to the contents.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on May 28, 2018, 10:53:39 am
I think Sky have given us enough rope with the known facts, without the need to resort to speculation.

That doesn't really make any sense at all. It is speculation that has caused the rope to be given. If there hadn't been speculation about possible contents of the jiffybag there would not have been any interest in pursuing the case. The 'jiffybag' leaker speculated as to the contents.

I’m not talking about the Jiffy bag. There are plenty of known facts unrelated to the Jiffy bag.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 11:11:54 am
Such as...
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 12:18:20 pm

Rather than the populist myth gained from 'the clinic'?

Except it is only 95% nonsense.

The remaining 5% is from a few posters with an encyclopaedic knowledge of racing and riders from decades,  and don't consider everything through the prism of doping.

Consider this post:

"Perhaps a better point to make would be that Team Sky stated their aim to have a British Tour de France winner within 5 years. At the start line of the Vuelta in 2011, Bradley Wiggins was a one-hit wonder and because of how early he'd crashed out of the Tour that year, we still did not know that he could be that. Geraint Thomas was still a northern classics contender and even with that, it's taken him until outside the original Team Sky 5 year time frame for him to develop his climbing to the extent that that could have been feasibly him. Peter Kennaugh was the name most often touted as the potential British Tour winner, thanks to his 2009 Girobio performance, but he was still far too raw at that point to know whether he could become one or not. His 5th place in the Tour de Pologne that year was his first promising sign at the pro level - a race where Froome was climbing with the sprinters. Froome had been mentioned by a few people as potentially having the level, but only in passing. Mainly because he hadn't even been the most promising young African climber on Barloworld, because John-Lee Augustyn had. And he didn't have a contract offer on the table, and was looking at domestique ProTour minimum wage with Garmin or Lampre, the two teams who had expressed an interest. He was a guy who could be an OK climbing helper or stagehunter, or could be taken on as a reclamation project. By not signing him up again until after that Vuelta, Sky lost a lot of money because his value went through the ceiling.

If, given their stated aim of a British Tour de France winner within five years, Sky had a rider who, albeit born and raised overseas, had the British flag next to his name, and had the talent to match the best times of the EPO generation and do it clean, why would they have been willing to let him go for peanuts to much lower budget teams, unless they were just as surprised by his sudden improvement as the rest of us?"
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Mr Larrington on May 28, 2018, 01:32:40 pm
So, Froome learned his cyclecraft riding on gravel roads, riding in the heat.

Then, on gravel roads, in the heat, he rides away from the peloton, and surprises people with his (relatively) fast descending skills on poor surfaces.

He even commented on it, how like the roads were to the ones he rode on when he was a teenager.

So why was he so fucking shit at bike handling until recently? He fell off going uphill in this Giro. It's just more PR bullshit.

Contador fell off going uphill in the TdF last year.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 03:04:27 pm
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/philippa-york-chris-froome-and-trying-to-understand-the-unbelievable/
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 28, 2018, 03:12:13 pm
Again just conjectures and waffle. We need hard evidence from the tour organisers and testers.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 03:21:43 pm
Again just conjectures and waffle. We need hard evidence from the tour organisers and testers.

Bollocks. It's informed opinion from the best British Grand Tour climber before Froome.

"Hard evidence from the tour organisers"?  What evidence do you think they might posses and why on earth would they provide it? That you ask this speaks to your lack of understanding of the interests at play. The organisers paid €1.4M to Froome to ride the Giro. They are delighted with what he did. They didn't pay him €1.4M to do nothing or abandon. They emphatically do not want to expose him. Has any Tour organiser ever exposed doping?

Testers? They got him for Salbutamol, and he is currently doing his best to get off. Besides, the testers are two steps behind which is why the biggest busts have come via non-testing means.

Here are Phillips York's qualifications for saying what she said (including 3 Grand Tour 2nd places):

1976
1st Scottish Junior Road Race Championship
1978
 1st  Amateur National Road Race Championship
1st Overall Tour of the Peak
1st Scottish Hill-Climb Championship
2nd Overall Premier Calendar
1979
1st  Amateur National Road Race Championship
1st Overall Merlin Plage Trophy
1st Paris–Evreux
1st Overall Route de France (Under-23)
1st GP de la Ville de Lillers
1st GP de la Boucherie
4th Amateurs' road race, Road World Championships
1980
8th Overall Tour de Romandie
1981
5th Overall Tour de l'Aude
7th Overall Tour de Romandie
7th Overall Dauphiné Libéré
1982
2nd Overall Tour de l'Avenir
7th Overall Tour de Romandie
1983
1st Stage 10 Tour de France
3rd Overall Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré
1984
1st Stage 2 Tour de Romandie
2nd Overall Tour du Haut Var4th Overall Tour de France Mountains classification1st Stage 11
4th Overall Midi Libre1st Stage 4
5th Overall Tour de Romandie
6th Overall Paris–Nice
1st Stage 11
6th Road race, Road World Championships
7th Overall Volta a Catalunya
1985
1st  Overall Volta a Catalunya
2nd Overall Vuelta a España
3rd Giro del Piemonte
4th GP de Wallonie
6th Overall Paris–Nice
6th Overall Critérium International
7th Overall Tour du Haut Var
9th Overall Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré
10th Road race, Road World Championships
1986
2nd Overall Vuelta a España
1st Stage 6
2nd Overall Tour de Suisse
6th Overall Vuelta a Aragón
10th GP d'Isbergues
1987
2nd Overall Giro d'Italia Mountains classification
1st Stage 21
4th Overall Tour de Romandie
5th Liège–Bastogne–Liège
6th Overall Tour Mediterranean
7th Overall Catalan Week
1988
2nd Overall Bicicleta Vasca
3rd Overall Critérium International
3rd Liège–Bastogne–Liège
3rd Overall Route du Sud
6th Overall Vuelta a España
8th Overall Volta a Catalunya
9th Overall Paris–Nice
1989
1st  Overall Tour of Britain
3rd Overall Tour de Romandie
1st Stage 4
2nd Overall Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré
1st Stage 7
2nd GP de Wallonie
3rd Overall Tour de Romandie
7th GP Bessèges
8th Paris–Camembert
9th GP des Amériques
10th Tour de France
1st Stage 10
1990
1st  Overall Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré
1st Stage 4 Tour de Romandie
2nd Overall Tour de Suisse
2nd Overall Tour of Britain
4th GP Ouest-France
4th Giro di Lombardia
4th Tour of Andalucia
7th GP Rennes
9th Flèche Wallonne
1991
2nd Overall Tour de Romandie
2nd Classique des Alpes
4th Overall Critérium du Dauphiné Libéré
4th Overall Tour of Britain
5th Grand Prix des Amériques
5th Overall Tour de Suisse
1st Stage 5
1992
6th Giro del Lazio
7th Giro del Piemonte
9th Overall Catalan Week
9th Liège–Bastogne–Liège
9th Overall Tour of Britain
1993
6th Overall Midi Libre
7th Overall Vuelta a Asturias
9th Classique des Alpes
1994
6th Coppa Placci
7th Coppa Sabatini
9th Overall Tour of Galicia
1995
National Road Race Championship
9th Classique des Alpes


Now let's see yours...
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on May 28, 2018, 04:18:33 pm
I have taken a long time to come round to the Flatus view of things; it might well be said that he has still not managed to convince me but after the total of Froome's performances in this Giro it is the man in rose in Rome that has convinced me - "Unclean, unclean, my heart is telling me!" (and the flipside of the coin is that Yates has impressed me as probably clean!). I think we have seen enough examples of riders doping while at the same time testing clean for clean tests or giving logical scientific reasons for their out of limit results for me to make up my own mind, based on my own gut feeling (and others can come to their own conclusions, i have no intention to try to persuade them.
The length that the case is taking would seem completely normal to me. I can't think of a single case from Virenque onwards where the lawyers have not managed to spin things out over several years whenever they have got "stuck in". The lesser riders get a quick resolution but GT contenders have it otherwise. Not a good thing for cycling or for the UCI but good money for the lawyers! If the riders were really interested in their legacy and the image of the sport they would find a better way of doing things, but there we are, money speaks. (It could also be that a certain quantity of drug abuse affects the individual's capacity to make reasoned logical decisions; it's something that I am convinced was the case with Lance Armstrong).

I am not sure how much attention I will pay to the TdF - it might well depend on who isn't riding!

please don't ask me to listen to reason, reason means what the other bloke has to say!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 28, 2018, 05:30:52 pm
Just caught up with the highlights over lunch (after a jolly nice - if muggy - walk to the local Arts Week tea stops);


What about that Sam Bennett eh?  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Exit Stage Left on May 28, 2018, 06:09:58 pm


Here are Phillipa York's qualifications for saying what she said (including 3 Grand Tour 2nd places):







You forgot the testosterone abuse case in 1992.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 06:11:43 pm
No I didn't, actually.

 But So what? What difference does that make? That is like trying to discredit Landis for shopping Armstrong, or criticising Leipheimer for saying that *Geert Leinders had done his blood doping.


*Geert Leinders...The doctor later employed by Team Sky as a 'consultant' after their disastrous debut in pro-cycling. As a complete coincidence once they employed him they started Winning.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Exit Stage Left on May 28, 2018, 06:20:58 pm
Surely it makes for more of an informed opinion, and is therefore a useful attribute.

Quote
Robert Millar, a contemporary of Hinault's and a former Tour King of the Mountains, made the following observation in a column for Cyclingnews:

"The high-profile withdrawal of Laurent Jalabert is just one step of a necessary process which is going to hang heavily over this year's event and it doesn't matter if guys like Bernard Hinault stand up and say things have changed or not. That's exactly the kind of attitude that allowed the deceptions to continue for as long as they have."
Millar also acknowledged his role in those deceptions.

"I started writing my explanation (of my experience of doping) back in February and to my shame it has sat in a folder unfinished. I think I wanted it to be a story of sorts but I now know it doesn't need to be entertaining – facts, names and places will do.
"This latest affair has reminded me I really need to get on with it and send it to someone who I think will use it wisely. I'm not seeking to be a hero or a martyr for doing so . . . but if it helps understand why the culture got as bad as it did, or why Omerta dominated, then so be it."

It was a brave piece of writing and raised a question that Hinault, and many other gods in the sport have never addressed:

What has hurt cycling more? The doping or its denial?

https://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/paul-kimmage-no-escaping-the-shadow-29401215.html
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 06:30:01 pm
In that respect, yes, it does.

By the way, Geert Leinders, who doped Rabobank from 2002 to 2009 was recommended to team Sky by their own staff who were ex-Rabobank.

He's banned for life now. How unfortunate that Team Sky didn't know of his past before hiring him.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 28, 2018, 06:35:04 pm
This thread appears to have turned into slagging off Froome and Team Sky rather than one about the Giro 2018.

Taking aside whether or not Froome, or indeed Team Sky, should have been riding, surely the performance of Froome was outstanding.  From being 4min 52sec down after stage 15 to winning by 46sec is simply unheard of in modern racing.  While he clawed some of the deficit back in the TT, his 80km attack will be the stuff of legend for years to come.  Perhaps we could acknowledge that achievement?

Does anyone believe Froome cheated in this year’s Giro?  Aside from the debate as to whether or not he should have been there, the fact is he was allowed to race and after a disastrous start he never gave up and made an audacious attack during which he made significant gains during descents while his main competitor, Dumoulin, later admitted he was waiting for support and expected Froome to crack.  Dumoulin lost the race on the descents that day and whatever you may believe in terms of PEDs, I don’t think there is any evidence to show they assist during descending!  Page 1 of this thread got it almost spot on when Flatus noted they were going up the Finestre and “It will be won or lost today. I think we may see a repeat of yesterday, with TD benefiting from Froome's attacks.”  It was won that day and Froome’s attack benefitted Froome in a manner we have not seen in years.  We are now onto page 6 with much of the discussion centred on an almost visceral hatred of Team Sky and Froome and reference to matters going back as far as 2011 that seem to have no bearing on this Giro.  A pity as it detracts from an incredible performance by Team Sky and Froome.

Arch critic of Team Sky and Froome, David Walsh, even appears to have changed his tune and heaped praise in The Sunday Times (27 May) on what Froome achieved.  He even went so far as to state “There is no evidence that Froome doped to deliver that scintillating performance on Friday and while many will be sceptical, there are also reasons for believing Froome is a unique athlete and one blessed with extraordinary toughness.  That means accepting that if there was something wrong at the Vuelta last year, it was a one off”.  It would appear Walsh sees nothing wrong with Froome in this Giro and also accepted his entitlement to ride the Giro 2018 as he makes no comment in that respect.

So why not drop the vitriol and axes, acknowledge what a superb Giro Froome and the whole of Team Sky have had, and wait for the outcome of something that shouldn’t have even been in the public domain as trial by public opinion is hardly the best way forward for anyone.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on May 28, 2018, 06:58:18 pm
Fuck that.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Jakob on May 28, 2018, 07:04:23 pm
Again just conjectures and waffle. We need hard evidence from the tour organisers and testers.

"I have never failed a doping test".
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 28, 2018, 07:11:16 pm
Is there any concrete(ish) news/opinion on which results The FroomeDog will lose if he gets a ban for the Vuelta AAF? So far I've only heard big gallic shrugs  :-\

(assume for sake of argument that he's found guilty between now and the TdeF start!)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 07:17:20 pm
No is the short answer.
There is a longer answer, but no is quicker and just as informative.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 28, 2018, 07:30:55 pm
Having anything concrete or concrete(ish) does not appear to deter posters on this thread from slagging Team Sky or Froome off!

There has been speculation any ban would take place from the date of test while other speculation suggets any ban from date of decision.  Team Sky and Froome appear to believe they will show that Froome and Team Sky did nothing wrong.  Perhaps they hope to show the test was not fit for purpose, assumptions on how substance is 'processed' in body is incorrect or something that questions the results.  The public will have to wait and see and may never find out as presumably UCI will either confirm a ban or state there is no case to answer without giving reasons.

Either way, this does not detract from the performance of Froome and what even critics like David Walsh admits was scintillating.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on May 28, 2018, 07:36:37 pm
Landis did a spectacular ride but he cheated and it doesn't count.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 28, 2018, 08:57:22 pm
Taking aside whether or not Froome, or indeed Team Sky, should have been riding, surely the performance of Froome was outstanding.  From being 4min 52sec down after stage 15 to winning by 46sec is simply unheard of in modern racing.  While he clawed some of the deficit back in the TT, his 80km attack will be the stuff of legend for years to come.  Perhaps we could acknowledge that achievement?
It's not entirely unprecedented in modern cycling - it's been done once before in this century. Landis tested positive. There are stories of legendary days like this (eg Chiapucci).  All of them have admitted taking drugs. Chris Froome is currently awaiting a hearing for overdosing on asthma medication. All these things are facts.
Quote
Dumoulin, later admitted he was waiting for support and expected Froome to crack.  Dumoulin lost the race on the descents that day and whatever you may believe in terms of PEDs, I don’t think there is any evidence to show they assist during descending!
The thing is, that Dumoulin then got help - Reichenback worked with Dumoulin (and Pinot a little), and they lost time to Froome on the valley floor. So you have to believe that for the last 4 days, Froome is the fastest climber in the race, the fastest descender in the race, and also capable of taking time out of 2.5 riders chasing him on the flat after they have had a comparative rest on the descent.

Maybe it is possible.  Maybe Froome produced the best clean grand tour day in history. If that day is viewed as clean in 15 years time, then he should go down as the best grand tour rider ever. From this vantage point, there's something fishy about Sky, something strange about Froome, and something even stranger about that particular stage. So while it was an epic ride, and a massive spectacle, I can't help but be sceptical.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 09:20:26 pm
bla

Arch critic David Walsh??????

What planet are you on????

Walsh was hagiographer-in-chief for Team Sky, punting the marginal gains bullshit and ghost writing Froome's autobiography.

It was only after the Govermental committee that Walsh became a turncoat and said he was sceptical of Team Sky.

Walsh has made his living off the back of Team Sky in recent years
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 28, 2018, 09:22:51 pm
Landis and Chiapucci took banned substances whereas Froome took an allowed substance and the only question is whether he exceeded the permitted dose or whether there is a reason for the result.  That is a fact.  As is the fact that Simon Yates was banned for taking a substance without a TUE that was blamed on his team doctor only after a positive test resulted.  Was the team taking a hit?  Why hasn't anyone questioned whether Yates was taking 'stuff', particularly as his team is not part of the MPCC; he rode away from everyone and then suddenly expires.  How peculiar.  Anyone questioning? Tom Dumoulin's rise has been quite spectacular and also rides for a team not in the MPCC.  He also started riding with a Rabobank team.  But no questions about other riders.  Only Froome.  Perhaps the recent article by David Walsh should be read as he seems to have his finger on the pulse regarding doping.

Dumoulin has stated he was not getting the help he needed on the flat and the TV coverage showed that.  He also climbed faster than Froome on the final climb.  No doubting what Dumoulin has said about that stage that also included the fact if he went 1:1 with Froome that day he would have lost as Froome is the better climber.  Don't forget Domoulin won Giro 2017 on the last day because of a TT which is his speciality.

Yes, in 15yrs time we may know more, but until then why not, in the absence of evidence, support the line of Walsh who has been a massive sceptic of Team Sky, and just accept that Froome produced an incredible performance at the Giro?  Or is it easier just to bash Team Sky and Froome?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Karla on May 28, 2018, 09:25:42 pm
Landis and Chiapucci took banned substances whereas Froome took an allowed substance and the only question is whether he exceeded the permitted dose or whether there is a reason for the result. 

You claim to know what Froome did and didn't take?  Ha!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 28, 2018, 09:28:41 pm
Landis and Chiapucci took banned substances whereas Froome took an allowed substance and the only question is whether he exceeded the permitted dose or whether there is a reason for the result. 

You claim to know what Froome did and didn't take?  Ha!

Do you?

I can only go on the facts rather than supposition based on bias or obvious dislike of a team and/or rider.

Had Froome took a banned substance he would have been suspended immediately.  This has not happened.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 28, 2018, 09:33:53 pm
Walsh has made his living off the back of Team Sky in recent years

As you have stated in another thread on Team Sky:

"There is precisely zero likelihood that Froome is a clean rider. Zero. Based on career trajectory alone.  There are precisely no informed observer's who think that he is. Not even Walsh, now that he has banked his 30 pieces of silver."

So Walsh clearly supported your theories.  But now Walsh appears to have changed his tune.  No doubt you another conspiracy theory about that.

It appears from your postings you will never believe that Froome can win a race without PEDs.  You flame alternative views and attempt to ridicule those who have a different opinion to yours.  Brave stuff on an internet forum.  Pity you have nothing that would stand-up in a court room.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Karla on May 28, 2018, 09:53:59 pm
Landis and Chiapucci took banned substances whereas Froome took an allowed substance and the only question is whether he exceeded the permitted dose or whether there is a reason for the result. 

You claim to know what Froome did and didn't take?  Ha!

Do you?

I can only go on the facts rather than supposition based on bias or obvious dislike of a team and/or rider.

Had Froome took a banned substance he would have been suspended immediately.  This has not happened.

Are you one of those people who thinks Vladimir Putin should be given the benefit of the doubt over whether he poisons former agents abroad?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 28, 2018, 09:59:55 pm
Not sure whether comment by Karla is contributing to the debate about Giro 2018.

But for the record, the evidence points to Russia.  That is the difference between performance of Froome in Giro 2018.  Only evidence is of a very good piece of riding and a hell of a lot of tenacity.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on May 28, 2018, 10:08:26 pm
When you do a 'connect the dots' picture, do you recognise the picture before you reach the very last dot?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 10:18:42 pm
Walsh has made his living off the back of Team Sky in recent years

As you have stated in another thread on Team Sky:

"There is precisely zero likelihood that Froome is a clean rider. Zero. Based on career trajectory alone.  There are precisely no informed observer's who think that he is. Not even Walsh, now that he has banked his 30 pieces of silver."

So Walsh clearly supported your theories.  But now Walsh appears to have changed his tune.  No doubt you another conspiracy theory about that.

It appears from your postings you will never believe that Froome can win a race without PEDs.
  You flame alternative views and attempt to ridicule those who have a different opinion to yours.  Brave stuff on an internet forum.  Pity you have nothing that would stand-up in a court room.

I ridicule who rock up not knowing what they are talking about.

Walsh has changed tack on Team Sky twice, not once. You are unaware of this.


As to the bolded: Not at all. I think he can win the Anatomic Jock Race  ;D ;D ;D ::-)

Anyway, you registered here today. You are amongst people who for the most part know each other in person, and have done so for over a decade. It's not for you to tell people here what they should or should not say.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 28, 2018, 10:52:10 pm
It's not for you to tell people here what they should or should not say.

My apologies.  I didn't realise that was your job.

Please carry on.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 28, 2018, 10:57:33 pm
It's not for you to tell people here what they should or should not say.

My apologies.  I didn't realise that was your job.

Please carry on.

Hmmm....and with that you have confirmed my suspicions.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 28, 2018, 11:01:26 pm
No is the short answer.
There is a longer answer, but no is quicker and just as informative.
Thanks  ;D

I feared as much ...
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 29, 2018, 09:59:56 am
Landis and Chiapucci took banned substances whereas Froome took an allowed substance and the only question is whether he exceeded the permitted dose or whether there is a reason for the result.  That is a fact.  As is the fact that Simon Yates was banned for taking a substance without a TUE that was blamed on his team doctor only after a positive test resulted.  Was the team taking a hit?  Why hasn't anyone questioned whether Yates was taking 'stuff', particularly as his team is not part of the MPCC; he rode away from everyone and then suddenly expires.  How peculiar.  Anyone questioning?
Chiapucci was taking something that was not tested for - he ended up hitting the 50% rule, but that's not a positive test either.
If you read the thread, you'll notice that I was questioning why the 2 M-S leaders both looked very strong, and then had a major issue and lost half an hour.

Salbutamol is an interesting substance - it's allowed via inhaler (to a certain number of puffs), but it's banned via injection or pills. Froome had a level in his urine that is very difficult to achieve via inhaler, so when you say it's a permitted substance, that's open to doubt.
 
Quote
Yes, in 15yrs time we may know more, but until then why not, in the absence of evidence, support the line of Walsh who has been a massive sceptic of Team Sky, and just accept that Froome produced an incredible performance at the Giro?  Or is it easier just to bash Team Sky and Froome?
Walsh flip flops on whether he thinks Sky are clean.  For years he defended Wiggins and Frome. Then Froome had his AAF, and Walsh got cold feet. Now he's back onside. I think that Sky decided that getting the guy who pursued Armstrong on side was crucial to the perception of cleanliness, so they have worked hard to convince him. On the other hand, other critics (eg Kimmage) have had all the promises made to them broken.
I'm reserving judgement on this performance. Modern cycling has a lot of false dawns, and I have insufficient faith in Sky to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 29, 2018, 10:21:00 am
"A Cyclist's"  behaviour is unusual.

He registered yesterday, and then posted prolifically on one thread and one thread only, and with a definite agenda. Seems to have an axe to grind. Perhaps very butthurt from prior experience.

Seems odd.

And yet the style of prose is eerily familiar. That pompous, tedious and self-opiniated tone,  whilst curiously uniformed and unable to think beyond two dimensions.

Reminds me of someone.

Sounds like a sockpuppet account. Somebody without the courage to post under their own username and somebody who's previous attempts to shut down discussion of Froome or Sky have been shot down with ease.

Brave stuff on an internet forum

Indeed.  Hoist by your own petard, eh VM.  ::-)

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 29, 2018, 10:21:51 am
If you read the thread, you'll notice that I was questioning why the 2 M-S leaders both looked very strong, and then had a major issue and lost half an hour.

As a practising cyclist, I don’t see anything odd about losing half an hour in those mountains. If you’re exhausted you’re exhausted! Unless you possess Froome-like courage, you’re also likely to go to pieces mentally. Yates and Chaves are both young to boot.

Chaves was so tired he couldn’t keep up with the processional pace in Rome. I think he finished last on that stage.

Salbutamol is an interesting substance - it's allowed via inhaler (to a certain number of puffs), but it's banned via injection or pills. Froome had a level in his urine that is very difficult to achieve via inhaler …

Why make that claim, DuncanM? This thread has too much of this impossible style of ‘debate’: wild claims thrown out that cannot be argued against rationally because the writer has demonstrated no curiosity for the truth. Come on. If you know Froome and Sky are doping, there should be no need for these methods that remind me of recent politics in English-speaking nations.

I'm reserving judgement on this performance. Modern cycling has a lot of false dawns, and I have insufficient faith in Sky to give them the benefit of the doubt.

That’s a reasonable approach and similar to the one I take. But then stick to that and leave the salbutomal dosages to experts who stand a chance of navigating the complexity of those matters.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 29, 2018, 10:32:23 am
They already are and have already spoken, hence the discussion on social media. For example:

http://www.velonews.com/2017/12/news/anti-doping-expert-on-froome-it-doesnt-quite-add-up_453381
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 29, 2018, 10:32:28 am
Slightly off-topic but.. (Edit.  Flatus just made it on-topic)

Let's say Froome is found to have been taking something significantly stronger than Salbutomol*

Let's say SKY had engineered a US Postal Service style set-up.  That's what we're talking about right?  Froome can't run his own private doping program without SKY being aware surely, they track performance data better than any WADA lab.

Brailsford's name runs through British cycling like Blackpool rock.  There's no aspect of team SKY that he doesn't oversee, he knows what's in every jiffy bag, I have no doubt about that.

What would this do to British cycling?



*I'm not convinced Salbutomol is the doper's first choice for 5 hour Mountain stages. A short TT definitely but I don't think it has long-lasting effects.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 29, 2018, 10:38:58 am
You assume that Froome isn't using methods that are, as yet, undetectable.

Whatever he did or didn't do, his transformation In the space of several weeks in 2011 (when his contract was up and he was heading for relegation to pro-continental teams, on much lower pay) was literally unbelievable.

What would it do to British Cycling? Probably make them very relieved them at they severered the siamese link with Team Sky.

It's funny how Sky don't talk about marginal gains anymore, isn't it.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sojournermike on May 29, 2018, 10:43:02 am
Slightly off-topic but.. (Edit.  Flatus just made it on-topic)

Let's say Froome is found to have been taking something significantly stronger than Salbutomol*

Let's say SKY had engineered a US Postal Service style set-up.  That's what we're talking about right?  Froome can't run his own private doping program without SKY being aware surely, they track performance data better than any WADA lab.

Brailsford's name runs through British cycling like Blackpool rock.  There's no aspect of team SKY that he doesn't oversee, he knows what's in every jiffy bag, I have no doubt about that.

What would this do to British cycling?



*I'm not convinced Salbutomol is the doper's first choice for 5 hour Mountain stages. A short TT definitely but I don't think it has long-lasting effects.


It would open up all the questions that should have been asked and answered long ago.

It should also open up similar questions about our success in other sports.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 29, 2018, 10:44:27 am
They already are and have already spoken, hence the discussion on social media. For example:

http://www.velonews.com/2017/12/news/anti-doping-expert-on-froome-it-doesnt-quite-add-up_453381

First, social media is not a reasonable discussion. It’s along the lines of this thread, usually: wild claims made by people who seem unaware of their ignorance.

Second, the experts that matter are in court, not giving pop interviews to the media.

Third, that particular expert was speaking before Froome’s urine concentration was adjusted downward to 1429 ng/ml. Maybe that would have changed his view on the likelihood of a few extra puffs producing the result. Even without that, he declares it possible.

Fourth, if you’re at all honest with yourself, it’s impossible to read that interview as evidence in favour of Froome doping. I invite readers of this thread to read it and come to their own conclusions.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 29, 2018, 10:50:48 am
They already are and have already spoken, hence the discussion on social media. For example:

http://www.velonews.com/2017/12/news/anti-doping-expert-on-froome-it-doesnt-quite-add-up_453381

First, social media is not a reasonable discussion. It’s along the lines of this thread, usually: wild claims made by people who seem unaware of their ignorance.

Second, the experts that matter are in court, not giving pop interviews to the media.

Third, that particular expert was speaking before Froome’s urine concentration was adjusted downward to 1429 ng/ml. Maybe that would have changed his view on the likelihood of a few extra puffs producing the result. Even without that, he declares it possible.

Fourth, if you’re at all honest with yourself, it’s impossible to read that interview as evidence in favour of Froome doping. I invite readers of this thread to read it and come to their own conclusions.

1429 is still way higher than the 1000 limit. Loads of riders are using salbutamol inhalers, and yet very few have been over the limit (that we know of), and they have been handed bans. The hearing is waiting on Sky - if there was overwhelming evidence that would have cleared Froome, everything would have been done by now.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 29, 2018, 11:01:08 am
They already are and have already spoken, hence the discussion on social media. For example:

http://www.velonews.com/2017/12/news/anti-doping-expert-on-froome-it-doesnt-quite-add-up_453381

First, social media is not a reasonable discussion. It’s along the lines of this thread, usually: wild claims made by people who seem unaware of their ignorance.

It is good that you are, at last, showing some self-awareness.

Joking apart, what you say is for the most part correct. The signal to noise ratio on social media is weak...but where there is signal it is often crucial. The most obvious and example is when somebody tweeted " Just so you know, Lance doped" 😉

Quote
Second, the experts that matter are in court, not giving pop interviews to the media.

Those that matter to the case, yes. However, there is a bigger perspective to this than 'the case'. As you will no doubt be aware, criminals are frequently acquitted for their crimes by courts. We all know of such people, and we dont start pretending that they havent committed crimes just because a prosecution lawyer fails to prove it. If Froome succeeds in escaping this AAF it will not change my overall view of whether he is or isn't a clean athlete.

Quote
Third, that particular expert was speaking before Froome’s urine concentration was adjusted downward to 1429 ng/ml. Maybe that would have changed his view on the likelihood of a few extra puffs producing the result. Even without that, he declares it possible.

Fourth, if you’re at all honest with yourself, it’s impossible to read that interview as evidence in favour of Froome doping. I invite readers of this thread to read it and come to their own conclusions.

Which is why I haven't quoted it as 'evidence of doping'.Ive quoted it as an example of an expert talking usefully and informatively about the case, on social media.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: andyoxon on May 29, 2018, 11:13:42 am
I wonder what the 'opposing camps' will make of this...

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 May 3.
Futility of current urine salbutamol doping control (https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bcp.13619)
Heuberger JAAC et al.

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 29, 2018, 11:14:42 am
1429 is still way higher than the 1000 limit.

Even that judgement should be left to experts. If you model the body as an empty 1000 ml container and add 1100 ml of water to it, you get an overflow of 100 ml. If you up the ‘dose’ to 1200 ml, you get an overflow of 200 ml or an increase in overflow of 100%.

If instead you model the body as a 100 ml container, a 1100 ml dose gives a 1000 ml overflow while the 1200 ml dose produces 1100 ml of overflow, an increase of just 10%.

So by increasing the dose by the same amount, the body might overflow by a seemingly unrelated amount. In this way 1429 ng/ml may be “way higher” than the tolerated amount or just a bit higher. The studies I’ve seen – and I’ve only skim-read a few in the Google-able public domain – are contradictory.

Of course the real situation with salbutomal in the human body is not modelled like this but is more complex and affected by many known and some unknown factors with large fudge factors. Definitely one for the experts.

The hearing is waiting on Sky - if there was overwhelming evidence that would have cleared Froome, everything would have been done by now.

These are more claims unjustified by the facts I have seen. We don’t know who the hearing is waiting on. It might be Sky or Froome or their agents – I’d guess it is, but that can only be a guess – or it might be a cautious LADS concerned not to expose the UCI to a legal case down the line that would compromise its authority on future cases and open it up to paying damages in this one.

Nor do we know that overwhelming evidence would have cleared Froome by now. How can you know that? There’s an elaborate bureaucracy to satisfy for the purpose of ensuring fairness and preventing corruption. Unless you know every step in that process, your claims are just guesses.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 29, 2018, 11:27:51 am
However, there is a bigger perspective to this than 'the case'. As you will no doubt be aware, criminals are frequently acquitted for their crimes by courts. We all know of such people, and we dont start pretending that they havent committed crimes just because a prosecution lawyer fails to prove it.

You must not realise the implications of these statements. Society certainly ‘pretends’ that people who haven’t been successfully prosecuted are innocent. This is inherent to Dicey’s rule of law. It’s what being civilised means.

If Froome succeeds in escaping this AAF it will not change my overall view of whether he is or isn't a clean athlete.

Oh, I know! You are not interested in striving for objective truth since you already ‘know’ your truth. You can feel it in your belly. You’re proud that you’re not hoodwinked by established experts.

I feel something in my belly too when I survey this thread, but it’s not truth.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 29, 2018, 11:35:17 am
I knew you would respond with both those points. Entirely predictable.

Civilisation doesn't hinge on cycling. Besides, does the law provide objectivity? Perhaps youve never had the unedifying experience of sitting on a jury.

Many of us rightly suspected Armstrong of being guilty of doping despite his innocence.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 29, 2018, 11:36:54 am
I wonder what the 'opposing camps' will make of this...

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 May 3.
Futility of current urine salbutamol doping control (https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bcp.13619)
Heuberger JAAC et al.
That study is super dodgy.
Read this thread: https://twitter.com/scienceofsport/status/993413989890707457?lang=en
The author's other work includes a study that "demonstrates" that EPO use does not improve performance in cyclists.  :o There's at least one other interview out there with the authors who state that drug use cannot improve performance, it can only bring it back to that of a healthy individual.

Samuel
Read the above thread and look at the other studies.  I believe that the 1429 number is after adjusting for dehydration. The studies quoted include more puffs on the inhaler than Froome says he took (he says he only took a couple at the finish, whereas all the models are simulating all the allowed puffs in one go), and in only one case was the individual over 1000, and that was by 29, not by 429.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Exit Stage Left on May 29, 2018, 12:01:48 pm
I'm most interested in the 'informal' aspects of the status of team leaders in the Peloton. Teams and riders always profess to be 'clean', and to aspire to 'clean-up' the sport. That satisfies the sponsors, who may wish to distance themselves from corruption.

The Peloton's a gang though, with its own views. Most riders are domestiques, and rely on their leader winning. Suspicion of Froome connects him to the Peloton. If he projected an image of purity, that would alienate his fellow riders. Sky appear sufficiently impure to operate successfully within their milieu. 
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 29, 2018, 12:23:13 pm
It's hard to know.

20 years ago, the vow of public silence reigned but with openness between riders as to their various nefarious methods. Unsurprising in an era of team-sponsored doping and movement between teams on a yearly basis.  Riders who ignored the public vow of silence were chased out. Witness Bassons, who spoke publically and repeatedly about doping, and Simeoni who testified against Lance's doctor, Michele Ferrari. Witness also the difference in treatment meted out by other riders when riders were busted depending on picking order and popularity.  Basso vs The Cobra.

Then it went underground, with riders not discussing their doping strategies with other riders. These days? There seem to be coded and not-so-coded messages from riders on occasions, such as from Dumoulin, who now prefers not to comment.

In the final analysis, pro cycling is part of the entertainment industry and not purely about supreme athleticism.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: rogerzilla on May 29, 2018, 09:13:43 pm
I think you'll always get cheating in power sports like athletics and cycling.  Even some of the guys at your local club "10" are probably taking something, whether it's to win or just to try and hang on to a PB as they age.  It's been going on since the early days (although the Pelissier brothers were yanking the journo's chain in "Les Forçats De La Route") but the pharmacology evolves.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 29, 2018, 09:14:50 pm
Froome Finistere power details have been released on the internet. I’ll get a link soon.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 29, 2018, 09:19:08 pm
Froome Finistere power details have been released on the internet. I’ll get a link soon.

Only a small amount of power data has been released (3km of the climb)

Froome - 397W
Dumoulin - 395W

Froome actually whooped Dumoulin on the descent.

Froome's amazing performance MAY come down to the lack of real quality within the lead contenders + Team SKY's dominance at setting their riders up for days like this.

Would like to see average power stats from the breakaway to the end though.  That was basically a 2 man TT (I don't think Dumoulin was receiving much in the way of help from Pinot and the others)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: quixoticgeek on May 29, 2018, 09:20:43 pm
I think you'll always get cheating in power sports like athletics and cycling.  Even some of the guys at your local club "10" are probably taking something, whether it's to win or just to try and hang on to a PB as they age.  It's been going on since the early days (although the Pelissier brothers were yanking the journo's chain in "Les Forçats De La Route") but the pharmacology evolves.

Ever read the list of what's banned? sudofed is banned at concentrations over 150µg/litre in urine. How many standard cough pills do you need to take to be over the limit there?

The question comes into if people are doing it intentionally...

J



Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: rogerzilla on May 29, 2018, 09:34:47 pm
I don't think salbutamol would help Froome all that much.  Even if he is asthmatic, asthma normally relieves itself after about 20 minutes of exercise.  The inhaler is just to get you through that first 20 minutes, otherwise you'd be sitting at the side of the road wheezing.  It has a few minor side-effects but I don't think they're particularly beneficial.

The suspicion on my part arises from the fact that previous Grand Tour winners have been cheats or genetic freaks, sometimes both at once.  Merckx: genetic freak.  Anquetil: genetic freak (look at his appalling lifestyle).  LeMond: genetic freak, look at his VO2 - it was off the scale.  Hinault: genetic freak (rock-hard Breton farming genes) and intimidating to other riders.  Delgado: cheat.  Armstrong: cheat.  Pantani: cheat.  Ullrich: cheat.  Then Sky turn out two clean winning riders in succession, just like that.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: rafletcher on May 29, 2018, 09:42:07 pm
You missed out Indurain  :)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: rogerzilla on May 29, 2018, 10:05:01 pm
You missed out Indurain  :)
Genetic freak to end all genetic freaks  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 29, 2018, 10:11:50 pm
Major EPO user
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on May 29, 2018, 10:23:31 pm
Both of the above.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Exit Stage Left on May 29, 2018, 11:00:10 pm
It's hard to know.

20 years ago, the vow of public silence reigned but with openness between riders as to their various nefarious methods.

Then it went underground, with riders not discussing their doping strategies with other riders.
In the final analysis, pro cycling is part of the entertainment industry and not purely about supreme athleticism.

Atlanta 96 was the first Olympic games with the pros, and when they came under the scrutiny of the men in blazers. The collapse of the Soviet Empire released a lot of the expertise that corrupted Corinthian ideals. You could argue that Barcelona 1992 represented the purest moment in the modern era.

They shouldn't have integrated the amateur and professional bodies in my opinion. It imposes an inappropriate template on a commercial activity. 
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 29, 2018, 11:52:11 pm
1984 Olympics had the yank cyclists blood transfusing.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on May 30, 2018, 09:25:42 am
I don't think salbutamol would help Froome all that much.  Even if he is asthmatic, asthma normally relieves itself after about 20 minutes of exercise.  The inhaler is just to get you through that first 20 minutes, otherwise you'd be sitting at the side of the road wheezing.  It has a few minor side-effects but I don't think they're particularly beneficial.

The suspicion on my part arises from the fact that previous Grand Tour winners have been cheats or genetic freaks, sometimes both at once.  Merckx: genetic freak.  Anquetil: genetic freak (look at his appalling lifestyle).  LeMond: genetic freak, look at his VO2 - it was off the scale.  Hinault: genetic freak (rock-hard Breton farming genes) and intimidating to other riders.  Delgado: cheat.  Armstrong: cheat.  Pantani: cheat.  Ullrich: cheat.  Then Sky turn out two clean winning riders in succession, just like that.

It does wonders in intensive pig farming (where men in white coats also cut off piggy balls; perhaps we should suggest that to Sky's doctors  :sick: )

Not a great GT winner but in the rock hard farming stock you could include Quintana and Poulidor (obviously breton artichokes are more rock hard than limousin cattle); also I think Louison Bobet.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on May 30, 2018, 10:38:41 am
I knew you would respond with both those points. Entirely predictable.

Civilisation doesn't hinge on cycling. Besides, does the law provide objectivity? Perhaps youve never had the unedifying experience of sitting on a jury.

Many of us rightly suspected Armstrong of being guilty of doping despite his innocence.

Flatus, no nastiness intended but what do you think would be necessary to convince you that Froome is clean? Since I have now come round to your point of view after a long while sitting on the fence with my legs dangling on the optimisyic side, I feel in need of one or two reference points. What has convinced me is that there are too many inconsistencies in this last Giro. I am starting to see similarities with Armstrong's performance curve (and mental attitude).

Is a belief that rules don't apply to them common to dopers? I have become convinced that drugs have a negative impact on the capacity to make logical decisions.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 30, 2018, 10:56:44 am
I don't think salbutamol would help Froome all that much.  Even if he is asthmatic, asthma normally relieves itself after about 20 minutes of exercise.  The inhaler is just to get you through that first 20 minutes, otherwise you'd be sitting at the side of the road wheezing.  It has a few minor side-effects but I don't think they're particularly beneficial.
Your view supports that referenced by Flatus earlier:

Dr. Tom Bassindale: I was surprised that something as innocuous as Salbutamol would cause a positive test with Chris Froome. It’s an unlikely drug to take for performance-enhancing use. The evidence is quite mixed, and studies suggest toward it not being performance-enhancing. If you are an asthmatic, it only gets you back to ‘normal’ breathing, and there’s not a huge boost beyond that when taken as an inhaler.
Read more at http://www.velonews.com/2017/12/news/anti-doping-expert-on-froome-it-doesnt-quite-add-up_453381#Cb4GFOsmvVHJeLyV.99

Quote from: rogerzilla
The suspicion on my part arises from the fact that previous Grand Tour winners have been cheats or genetic freaks, sometimes both at once.  Merckx: genetic freak.  Anquetil: genetic freak (look at his appalling lifestyle).  LeMond: genetic freak, look at his VO2 - it was off the scale.  Hinault: genetic freak (rock-hard Breton farming genes) and intimidating to other riders.  Delgado: cheat.  Armstrong: cheat.  Pantani: cheat.  Ullrich: cheat.  Then Sky turn out two clean winning riders in succession, just like that.
this is the problem with Guilt By Suspicion - the human mind is crap at evaluating probabilities. We see patterns and make conclusions - but natural chance creates patterns too. It is inevitable that at some point the next genetic freak will be hired by a team that already has one. That doesn't rule out cheating, but I'm just pointing out some realities ...


(leaving probability aside - wasn't Wiggo a very successful track rider before Sky assimilated him into their evil machine of world road-racing domination? froome, maybe not ... )
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Peter on May 30, 2018, 11:00:37 am
I have become convinced that drugs have a negative impact on the capacity to make logical decisions.

Bloody Hell!  I seem to have been on something all my life.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 30, 2018, 11:20:21 am
Dr. Tom Bassindale: I was surprised that something as innocuous as Salbutamol would cause a positive test with Chris Froome. It’s an unlikely drug to take for performance-enhancing use. The evidence is quite mixed, and studies suggest toward it not being performance-enhancing. If you are an asthmatic, it only gets you back to ‘normal’ breathing, and there’s not a huge boost beyond that when taken as an inhaler.
Read more at http://www.velonews.com/2017/12/news/anti-doping-expert-on-froome-it-doesnt-quite-add-up_453381#Cb4GFOsmvVHJeLyV.99
My bold. The limit is there, not to stop riders using their inhalers, or because taking 9 puffs when they should have 8 is going to confer some great advantage, but to prevent oral and injected use which apparently has similar effects to kenacort *.

Whether Froome's "2 or 3 puffs" after the end of the race are responsible for his concentration of 1429 is what we are all waiting for this case to determine. Unless Brailsford writes a tell all book in which he spills beans right left and centre, then I suspect we'll never get beyond suspicion and inuendo about all this stuff. There's too much smoke now - I reckon that the only way that Froome could be cleared in the court of public opinion would be for someone at the drugs lab to be caught spiking Sky tests...

*citation needed - will have to look it up in a bit if I get a chance.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Giropaul on May 30, 2018, 11:36:52 am
I think you'll always get cheating in power sports like athletics and cycling.  Even some of the guys at your local club "10" are probably taking something, whether it's to win or just to try and hang on to a PB as they age.  It's been going on since the early days (although the Pelissier brothers were yanking the journo's chain in "Les Forçats De La Route") but the pharmacology evolves.

Ever read the list of what's banned? sudofed is banned at concentrations over 150µg/litre in urine. How many standard cough pills do you need to take to be over the limit there?

The question comes into if people are doing it intentionally...

J

For professional riders, they will have to check everything with the team doctors. Riders have been sacked for not following this protocol, even if the substance is not banned. When I used to work with pro teams I kept a MIMS with me, and riders knew to check everything. It’s well known that cough and cold remedies are especially problematic.

I do think that at the more amateur levels of the sport ignorance may occur, but recent cases have shown that the principle of absolute liability holds fast.

If a sportive is a UCI event then riders may get tested.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 11:50:39 am
I knew you would respond with both those points. Entirely predictable.

Civilisation doesn't hinge on cycling. Besides, does the law provide objectivity? Perhaps youve never had the unedifying experience of sitting on a jury.

Many of us rightly suspected Armstrong of being guilty of doping despite his innocence.

Flatus, no nastiness intended but what do you think would be necessary to convince you that Froome is clean? Since I have now come round to your point of view after a long while sitting on the fence with my legs dangling on the optimisyic side, I feel in need of one or two reference points. What has convinced me is that there are too many inconsistencies in this last Giro. I am starting to see similarities with Armstrong's performance curve (and mental attitude).

Is a belief that rules don't apply to them common to dopers? I have become convinced that drugs have a negative impact on the capacity to make logical decisions.

Unfortunately nothing would convince me, and that is because I'm not looking at a single event such as Stage 19 of the Giro but the whole context of Froome's place in cycling, and the conduct of his team, Sky.

If you look at the most vociferous pro-Froome posters on this thread, whether it be Samuel or Veloman and his sockpuppet 'A Cyclist',  their entire argument rests on whether he has failed a drugs test (ditto Wiggins). Of course we know from prior experience that passing dope tests tells us little about the cleanliness of the rider in question. The biggest busts have come about from price actions and whistle-blowers, and careful athletes can beat the anti-doping system.

Riders cannot prove they are clean. and therefore benefit of the doubt can be accorded, or in other words a little suspension of disbelief.

However, what do you do when certain events are have no credible explanation? For me Froome stands out head and shoulders above everybody because prior to Vuelta 2011 he had no pedigree. No wins of note. Nothing. A few weeks before the Vuelta he was climbing with the gruppetto. He was a mediocre mountain domestique who's team were looking to pass him off to a pro-continental team when his contract was up at the end of the season.

And then he nearly won the Vuelta (2nd). The following year he was clearly the strongest rider in the TdF and would have likely won had he not been working for Wiggins. The rest is history. Of course, when questions started to be asked about this miracle transformation from low-grade nobody to the greatest tour rider of his generation we were fed the Bilharzia story, which poses more questions than it answers, for example why did he not show any signs of brilliance before he contracted bilharzia, and why didn't Team Sky, self-professed masters of detail, not pick it up until the final weeks of his contract?

In recent years we have been made aware that Team Sky used TUEs to win races. One of their key players, Shane Sutton, admitted that this self-proclaimed "whiter than white" team are unethical.

So here we have an unethical team, caught out lying on numerous occasions, caught abusing the TUE system for competitive advantage, freely using Tramadol, ordering Testosterone patches et etc etc employing a rider with the most astonishing of transformations.

Hmmm...Nothing to see here  :facepalm:

So is he doping now? Who knows. It may well be that he did something 7 years ago that changed him forever. Something within him changed profoundly and for the life of me I can't find a precedent. Even transformations due to EPO (such as Ricco) were not as stark.  He is on his way to becoming the greatest Grand Tour rider ever....from nothing.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: fd3 on May 30, 2018, 03:10:36 pm
... Then Sky turn out two clean winning riders in succession, just like that.
You can’t compare wiggins with Froome or Hinault, etc.  wiggins won one tdf in a year where there was an exceptional amount of time trialing and the other TTer rode the Giro before hand.  It was at best a two hours race and the better TTer with the better support team won. 
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 30, 2018, 03:11:49 pm
I hope TdF get sued plenty by banning Froome on hearsay.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 30, 2018, 03:18:24 pm
I hope TdF get sued plenty by banning Froome on hearsay.

What? Where? Linky?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 03:18:46 pm
So an AAF is now "hearsay"  :facepalm:
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 30, 2018, 03:20:49 pm
I hope TdF get sued plenty by banning Froome on hearsay.

What? Where? Linky?

Twitter talks. It’s being said Froome is going to banned from entering by any means necessary. I can’t put a link to it yet as it’s all unverified. But legally I can’t see how they can justify it. I do know/think that the rule for adverse analytical results should mean an immediate suspension of said athlete from now on.
Title: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on May 30, 2018, 03:24:01 pm
So an AAF is now "hearsay"  :facepalm:

Yes hearsay. It’s been leaked, it involves a drug that’s on the legal lists of drugs approved by UCI. Also it is currently being fought by a bunch of lawyers. I’d be taken to the cleaners if I said Froome is doping in an official legal way no?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: pumpkin on May 30, 2018, 03:26:52 pm
I hope TdF get sued plenty by banning Froome on hearsay.

What? Where? Linky?

Twitter talks. It’s being said Froome is going to banned from entering by any means necessary. I can’t put a link to it yet as it’s all unverified. But legally I can’t see how they can justify it. I do know/think that the rule for adverse analytical results should mean an immediate suspension of said athlete from now on.

Some of this is covered in the Lance Armstrong podcast on this case from December incl. an interview with a Doctor who talks about Salbutamol. there is ASO and the UCI and WADA etc
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 30, 2018, 03:27:30 pm
I hope TdF get sued plenty by banning Froome on hearsay.

What? Where? Linky?

Twitter talks. It’s being said Froome is going to banned from entering by any means necessary. I can’t put a link to it yet as it’s all unverified. But legally I can’t see how they can justify it. I do know/think that the rule for adverse analytical results should mean an immediate suspension of said athlete from now on.

Well they couldn't when they tried using 'the detriment of the image of the race' clause with Boonen. Froome's gonna keep CAS busy.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 30, 2018, 03:33:54 pm
So an AAF is now "hearsay"  :facepalm:

Yes hearsay. It’s been leaked, it involves a drug that’s on the legal lists of drugs approved by UCI. Also it is currently being fought by a bunch of lawyers. I’d be taken to the cleaners if I said Froome is doping in an official legal way no?
It's obviously a grey area - to say the least - but I'd say it's loosely comparable to a school sacking their French teacher following an allegation of <random dodgy behaviour> that is still under investigation.  Such allegations CAN be hopelessly without grounds - but they still create bad PR. If no one knew about the allegation, there would be no scandal, no harm to anyone. .

At least until the relevant court's decision ...
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 03:52:23 pm
So an AAF is now "hearsay"  :facepalm:

Yes hearsay. It’s been leaked, it involves a drug that’s on the legal lists of drugs approved by UCI. Also it is currently being fought by a bunch of lawyers. I’d be taken to the cleaners if I said Froome is doping in an official legal way no?

No. Hearsay would mean the AAF is a rumour.

It isn't.

Here's hoping Froome gets fully busted really soon.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 30, 2018, 03:54:44 pm
It may be that by making these rumoured moves ASO hopes to speed along the case. Since they’re only rumours – it’s always rumours these days – they’re not committed to this course and can easily permit Froome to race if needed.

ASO has far too much power nowadays and it would be good for the sport to have that cut back. Nothing good can come out of ASO and the UCI’s cosiness under Lappartient’s leadership. But this doesn’t have much to do with Froome.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 30, 2018, 04:03:59 pm
ASO would be "not inviting" him, right? I don't understand how it can be restraint of trade if you are simply not inviting someone to a particular (invitation only) event.

The AAF is not a rumour - Sky confirmed the AAF and condemned the leak ages ago. They are simply saying that despite the test, Froome broke no rules.

Also, I don't understand why whether or not Froome is invited to the Tour is under the Giro 2018 topic.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 30, 2018, 04:16:35 pm
ASO would be "not inviting" him, right? I don't understand how it can be restraint of trade if you are simply not inviting someone to a particular (invitation only) event.

It's not an invitation event, it's a WT race, so ASO have an obligation to allow all the WT teams to race, just as the WT teams have an obligation to be there (ignoring the sub-category of New WT races), AIUI there's no provision in the WT rules for an organiser to exclude a specific rider from a WT team BUT there is the detriment of the race clause in the Tour rules, although it's never been successfully enforced when challenged. If ASO had registered the race as 2.HC they could have just not invited Sky, but that boat has sailed.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 30, 2018, 04:39:57 pm
ASO would be "not inviting" him, right? I don't understand how it can be restraint of trade if you are simply not inviting someone to a particular (invitation only) event.

No. First, ASO has to invite all UCI World Tour teams. Second, if they invite other teams, it’s teams rather than riders. The teams choose who to send. Third, they can ban any individual they like as they did with Boonen in 2009 over his cocaine habit until he or Quick-Step started legal proceedings for discrimination as Froome would do too.

A private hotel can also ban anyone they like but if their reason is that they don’t like the look of someone’s face, they’ll rightly expose themselves to expensive legal trouble.

Also, I don't understand why whether or not Froome is invited to the Tour is under the Giro 2018 topic.

It shouldn’t be, but Flatus turns every thread on racing (and many besides (https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=108168.msg2290272#msg2290272)) into tireless invective against Sky and all who disagree with his crude tropes. Letting that slide every time proves that bullying works and lowers the tone of the whole forum. In the absence of effective forum moderation, someone has to stand up to his hectoring, regardless of whether Froome found a one-time permanent doping method seven years ago or not. I am all for robust debate as my post history shows, but we shouldn’t tolerate a playground slanging match every time we disagree … or indeed any time we disagree.

That’s all I have to say on the matter until new facts emerge. Going back to the Giro, here are three interesting titbits on the race:

INRNG’s commentary (http://inrng.com/2018/05/the-moment-the-2018-giro-was-won/), insightful as always and with intelligent reader comments.

Lance Armstrong’s analysis (https://soundcloud.com/user-411867241) of Froome’s big attack on Stage 19.

Something about power (http://www.cyclist.co.uk/news/4807/giro-ditalia-power-play-froomes-finestre-watts-revealed) but more interestingly a video of Sky’s Portal talking Froome through the curves on the descent. Did Dumoulin benefit from a similar team effort? Probably not. This may have had something to do with Froome’s success.

Did you know that Froome was the only Giro contender to recon the Zoncolan? The other teams thought Google Maps would do. This may have had something to do with his success.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: D.A.L.E. on May 30, 2018, 04:40:56 pm

Unfortunately nothing would convince me, and that is because I'm not looking at a single event such as Stage 19 of the Giro but the whole context of Froome's place in cycling, and the conduct of his team, Sky.

If you look at the most vociferous pro-Froome posters on this thread, whether it be Samuel or Veloman and his sockpuppet 'A Cyclist',  their entire argument rests on whether he has failed a drugs test (ditto Wiggins). Of course we know from prior experience that passing dope tests tells us little about the cleanliness of the rider in question. The biggest busts have come about from price actions and whistle-blowers, and careful athletes can beat the anti-doping system.

Riders cannot prove they are clean. and therefore benefit of the doubt can be accorded, or in other words a little suspension of disbelief.

However, what do you do when certain events are have no credible explanation? For me Froome stands out head and shoulders above everybody because prior to Vuelta 2011 he had no pedigree. No wins of note. Nothing. A few weeks before the Vuelta he was climbing with the gruppetto. He was a mediocre mountain domestique who's team were looking to pass him off to a pro-continental team when his contract was up at the end of the season.

And then he nearly won the Vuelta (2nd). The following year he was clearly the strongest rider in the TdF and would have likely won had he not been working for Wiggins. The rest is history. Of course, when questions started to be asked about this miracle transformation from low-grade nobody to the greatest tour rider of his generation we were fed the Bilharzia story, which poses more questions than it answers, for example why did he not show any signs of brilliance before he contracted bilharzia, and why didn't Team Sky, self-professed masters of detail, not pick it up until the final weeks of his contract?

In recent years we have been made aware that Team Sky used TUEs to win races. One of their key players, Shane Sutton, admitted that this self-proclaimed "whiter than white" team are unethical.

So here we have an unethical team, caught out lying on numerous occasions, caught abusing the TUE system for competitive advantage, freely using Tramadol, ordering Testosterone patches et etc etc employing a rider with the most astonishing of transformations.

Hmmm...Nothing to see here  :facepalm:

So is he doping now? Who knows. It may well be that he did something 7 years ago that changed him forever. Something within him changed profoundly and for the life of me I can't find a precedent. Even transformations due to EPO (such as Ricco) were not as stark.  He is on his way to becoming the greatest Grand Tour rider ever....from nothing.
FWIW, this is a fantastically put together post. It sums up my, and most people I know, feelings towards the subject perfectly.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 30, 2018, 04:55:26 pm
That’s all I have to say on the matter until new facts emerge. Going back to the Giro, here are three interesting titbits on the race:

INRNG’s commentary (http://inrng.com/2018/05/the-moment-the-2018-giro-was-won/), insightful as always and with intelligent reader comments.

Something about power (http://www.cyclist.co.uk/news/4807/giro-ditalia-power-play-froomes-finestre-watts-revealed) but more interestingly a video of Sky’s Portal talking Froome through the curves on the descent. Did Dumoulin benefit from a similar team effort? Probably not. This may have had something to do with Froome’s success.

Did you know that Froome was the only Giro contender to recon the Zoncolan? The other teams thought Google Maps would do. This may have had something to do with his success.
That's not strictly true.  At least one of them tried to in the spring, but was stopped by snow (can't remember who - might have been Yates). Same for the Finestre.

There was an interview with the guy behind Veloviewer on one of the podcasts talking about how the GC teams that use his stuff (and that includes Sky and Sunweb) do this sort of thing regularly - you can essentially insert into the app pace notes like a rally driver and read them out to your guys as you drive along. So it's entirely possible Dumoulin could have benefitted the same way on the descent if he wasn't waiting for Reichenback.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: D.A.L.E. on May 30, 2018, 05:00:05 pm
That’s all I have to say on the matter until new facts emerge. Going back to the Giro, here are three interesting titbits on the race:

INRNG’s commentary (http://inrng.com/2018/05/the-moment-the-2018-giro-was-won/), insightful as always and with intelligent reader comments.

Something about power (http://www.cyclist.co.uk/news/4807/giro-ditalia-power-play-froomes-finestre-watts-revealed) but more interestingly a video of Sky’s Portal talking Froome through the curves on the descent. Did Dumoulin benefit from a similar team effort? Probably not. This may have had something to do with Froome’s success.

Did you know that Froome was the only Giro contender to recon the Zoncolan? The other teams thought Google Maps would do. This may have had something to do with his success.
That's not strictly true.  At least one of them tried to in the spring, but was stopped by snow (can't remember who - might have been Yates). Same for the Finestre.

There was an interview with the guy behind Veloviewer on one of the podcasts talking about how the GC teams that use his stuff (and that includes Sky and Sunweb) do this sort of thing regularly - you can essentially insert into the app pace notes like a rally driver and read them out to your guys as you drive along. So it's entirely possible Dumoulin could have benefitted the same way on the descent if he wasn't waiting for Reichenback.
Alex Dowsett was on Instagram talking about how he uses his GPS map screen to descend mountains (with the caveat that he was 100% plugging his teams GPS sponsor), obvious I know, but there's that option too.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 30, 2018, 05:21:22 pm
Did you know that Froome was the only Giro contender to recon the Zoncolan?
That's not strictly true.  At least one of them tried to in the spring, but was stopped by snow (can't remember who - might have been Yates).

Then it is strictly true. Trying doesn’t count here!

By the way, I’d like to know who this other person was who tried. The thread has enough rumour. Let’s pin down the facts where we can.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 05:25:56 pm
Yes, like stating that Dumoulin "probably" didn't have anybody talking him through the descent  ::-)

We need more of Samuel D's facts.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 30, 2018, 05:27:55 pm
Did you know that Froome was the only Giro contender to recon the Zoncolan?
That's not strictly true.  At least one of them tried to in the spring, but was stopped by snow (can't remember who - might have been Yates).

Then it is strictly true. Trying doesn’t count here!

By the way, I’d like to know who this other person was who tried. The thread has enough rumour. Let’s pin down the facts where we can.
Talk about selective quoting. You actually said (my bold):
Quote
Did you know that Froome was the only Giro contender to recon the Zoncolan? The other teams thought Google Maps would do.
That isn't strictly true.  ;) Pinning down facts goes both ways.  :P 
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 06:11:21 pm

It shouldn’t be, but Flatus turns every thread on racing (and many besides (https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=108168.msg2290272#msg2290272)) into tireless invective against Sky and all who disagree with his crude tropes. Letting that slide every time proves that bullying works and lowers the tone of the whole forum. In the absence of effective forum moderation, someone has to stand up to his hectoring, regardless of whether Froome found a one-time permanent doping method seven years ago or not. I am all for robust debate as my post history shows, but we shouldn’t tolerate a playground slanging match every time we disagree … or indeed any time we disagree.

More whiney  ad hominem attack from Samuel D, who has a history of personal attack.

I prefer to play the ball rather than the man.

Also, I don't understand why whether or not Froome is invited to the Tour is under the Giro 2018 topic.

To answer your question, DuncanM, it is inevitable that the conversation would head this way in this thread. Froome is an extremely divisive rider for reasons set out by me upthread.

That is why every major bike racing website has carried a headline article either straight up denouncing Froome, or at least doubting his legitimacy. Similar articles are also to be found in newspapers, such as the Guardian.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on May 30, 2018, 08:32:37 pm
I think you'll always get cheating in power sports like athletics and cycling.  Even some of the guys at your local club "10" are probably taking something, whether it's to win or just to try and hang on to a PB as they age.  It's been going on since the early days (although the Pelissier brothers were yanking the journo's chain in "Les Forçats De La Route") but the pharmacology evolves.

Ever read the list of what's banned? sudofed is banned at concentrations over 150µg/litre in urine. How many standard cough pills do you need to take to be over the limit there?

The question comes into if people are doing it intentionally...

J

Yes when I was a debutant tt (and anything else but not successfully so) rider I did read the list that was in the Welsh CU handbook of the time (at least I think that that was where it was). It was very long even then. More important I have taken medicines that contained banned substances since my racing days and they frequently had a mention in the paper notice to say that various ingredients were on the banned list. Ignorance was not a valid reason for innocence! (I haven't seen much of this in the last few years; does that say something about my drugtaking habits?)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: David Martin on May 30, 2018, 08:51:53 pm

Quote
Quote
Informed opinion (ie.medics) is that the only way the huge quantity or the drug could have got in his system was through one of these banned methods.
Your medics are not well informed. There are published studies showing that these levels are credible from legitimate uses of Salbutamol. They also appear to make a common error of mistaking quantity with concentration. A little bit of pharmacokinetic modelling shows that these levels are possible, given the right conditions, and that the test can distinguish between oral and inhaled doses. There are different metabolic products  from the lungs and the gut, but inhaled Salbutamol is ingested both through the lungs and the gut.

We will have to wait and see as to what explanations are accepted for twice the permitted level being present, on top of probable route of administration.
His description of what he took, when  and the timings work together to provide the 'perfect storm' that give a high reading whilst being within the legal amount of consumption. Bear in mind that the AAF is not in itself sufficient, the offence is to take more than a certain amount in a stated time. It is known (see reference to the medical literature above) that it is possible to exceed the AAF limit whilst being within the legal limit.

Quote

Quote
Quote
u
Malfunctioning kidney or the action of self-confessed unethical team with a history of subterfuge, evasion and outright lying?
Nonsense from Le Monde or a credible case actually built on facts rather than the populist myth gained from 'the clinic'?

Balanced and impartial view, or one who's nationalist sporting fervour blinds him.
Strangely enough, I follow the evidence and the mechanisms. Balance does not mean two opposing views but weighing each approach with the credibility it requires. Suggesting that Froome used oral salbutamol is crazy - why would he do that when he knows he will be tested and it will take some time to clear. Oral doses are orders of magnitude higher than inhaler doses. Likewise for nebulisers, again a massive dose compared to that used from an inhaler.  Read the product sheets, routes of administration, half lives through the different metabolic pathways, do some basic maths (mass in divided by volume multiplied by a reasonable constant for metabolic processing, through an exponential decay with a delay, integrate and you get your possible ranges of compound in the test. Numbers which are very close to those seen empirically when testing elite athletes.

Or presume that because you don't like Sky and Froome is winning that he must be cheating and construct evidence to fit your conclusion.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 09:07:41 pm

Quote
Quote
Informed opinion (ie.medics) is that the only way the huge quantity or the drug could have got in his system was through one of these banned methods.
Your medics are not well informed. There are published studies showing that these levels are credible from legitimate uses of Salbutamol. They also appear to make a common error of mistaking quantity with concentration. A little bit of pharmacokinetic modelling shows that these levels are possible, given the right conditions, and that the test can distinguish between oral and inhaled doses. There are different metabolic products  from the lungs and the gut, but inhaled Salbutamol is ingested both through the lungs and the gut.

We will have to wait and see as to what explanations are accepted for twice the permitted level being present, on top of probable route of administration.
His description of what he took, when  and the timings work together to provide the 'perfect storm' that give a high reading whilst being within the legal amount of consumption. Bear in mind that the AAF is not in itself sufficient, the offence is to take more than a certain amount in a stated time. It is known (see reference to the medical literature above) that it is possible to exceed the AAF limit whilst being within the legal limit.

Quote

Quote
Quote
u
Malfunctioning kidney or the action of self-confessed unethical team with a history of subterfuge, evasion and outright lying?
Nonsense from Le Monde or a credible case actually built on facts rather than the populist myth gained from 'the clinic'?

Balanced and impartial view, or one who's nationalist sporting fervour blinds him.
Strangely enough, I follow the evidence and the mechanisms. Balance does not mean two opposing views but weighing each approach with the credibility it requires. Suggesting that Froome used oral salbutamol is crazy - why would he do that when he knows he will be tested and it will take some time to clear. Oral doses are orders of magnitude higher than inhaler doses. Likewise for nebulisers, again a massive dose compared to that used from an inhaler.  Read the product sheets, routes of administration, half lives through the different metabolic pathways, do some basic maths (mass in divided by volume multiplied by a reasonable constant for metabolic processing, through an exponential decay with a delay, integrate and you get your possible ranges of compound in the test. Numbers which are very close to those seen empirically when testing elite athletes.

Or presume that because you don't like Sky and Froome is winning that he must be cheating and construct evidence to fit your conclusion.

I have read the exact opposite. That the AAF limit allows significant leeway such to ensure that the legal dosage is exceeded by a wide margin.

With regards to the Le Monde report, it is you who poo-pooed it out of hand. No rationale behind it other than attributing it to a desire to promote their newspaper. You are nowhere near as objective as you claim. Out of hand rejection of anything that doesn't support your preconceived position.

When all is said and done, I'm not particularly interested in the AAF. I've seen little to suggest a major performance-enhancing benefit. I'm mildly interested to see how Sky handle the case, and I'm interested in the machinations of the UCI, RCS and ASO. But I don't think in the bigger picture it is hugely significant. It may tell us something about Team Sky's much vaunted attention to detail. This is why little of my posting on Froome has to do with the AAF.

Yes, I dislike Team Sky and Froome and I firmly believe that the are cheats and liars.

Felt the same way about Armstrong too, despite the lack of positive tests and apparent adherence to the rules.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sg37409 on May 30, 2018, 09:59:57 pm
Froome Finistere power details have been released on the internet. I’ll get a link soon.

Only a small amount of power data has been released (3km of the climb)

Froome - 397W
Dumoulin - 395W


A lot less data publishing for froome than dumolin. And were subject to the cherry picking of velon.  If they (sky) wanted to cloud the issue whilest still publishing they couldn't have done a better job
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 30, 2018, 10:09:40 pm
So is he doping now? Who knows. It may well be that he did something 7 years ago that changed him forever. Something within him changed profoundly and for the life of me I can't find a precedent. Even transformations due to EPO (such as Ricco) were not as stark.  He is on his way to becoming the greatest Grand Tour rider ever....from nothing.

So if you have no idea if he is ‘doping’ in Giro 2018 then why not just say well done for being so tenacious and never giving up and well done for a scintillating ride on stage 19.  Dumoulin just messed it up by thinking Froome would crack, which he didn’t, and waiting for another rider who he said descended “like an old lady” which allowed more time to be gained by Froome on descents, and then Dumoulin finds the other riders are not interested in riding with him.  Seems to me that Froome knew he would be put under a microscope in the race regards testing and just threw caution to the wind with a scintillating attack that worked.  Probably surprised himself by the outcome.  Seems that not acknowledging a good ride based on prejudice is your forte.

As you probably refuse to even consider the diagnosis and treatment of bilharzia just over 7 years ago might have something to do with an improvement, will you consider other reasons?  Maybe he was deliberately exposed to radiation as part of the Sky secret programme that resulted in his super powers on a bike.  Fits with the nothing to greatest Grand Tour rider ever theory you have.  Or perhaps they exposed the parasites, that are known to effect health and therefore performance, to radiation and that resulted in improved performance.  Or maybe the people at British Cycling/Sky spotted something other than a low-grade nobody and saw potential and future brilliance so they signed him, only to discover, after much head scratching as to why there was inconsistencies in performance, he had a parasite that was responsible for the inconsistency.  They treated the parasite and potential was realised.  No. Far too sensible.  Let’s stick with the radiation to explain what happened all those years ago to transform Froome for ever.  British Cycling useless at spotting talent anyway, I mean, look at Simon Yates who went through the British Cycling programme.  So radiation must be the answer, either deliberate or accidental.  Plenty of precedent for this to happen.

I suppose this hatred of Team Sky and Froome is a bit like some folk who are racist, homophobic or whatever.  Once they have made their mind up about it, nothing will ever change that mind-set, no matter whether or not they have proof.  Pity.  The performance of Froome in Giro 2018 was quite something and appears all down to tenacity, doggedness, bravery, skill in descending and a cock-up or errors of judgement made by the bloke who eventually came second.  Pity some folk can’t see that and acknowledge that.  They are blinded by their own bigotry.

Yes, I dislike Team Sky and Froome and I firmly believe that the are cheats and liars.

And I assume nothing is going to change your mind.  And I assume you believe they cheated in Giro 2018.  A clearly well balanced argument there.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 10:11:22 pm
Should I register a sockpuppet of my own to talk to you, Veloman?

Then I could address your ridiculous attempt at a straw man and your fatuous ellision of homophobic and racist bigotry with a mistrust of Team Sky and their ethics.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 30, 2018, 10:24:32 pm
That is why every major bike racing website has carried a headline article either straight up denouncing Froome, or at least doubting his legitimacy. Similar articles are also to be found in newspapers, such as the Guardian.

You're right.

Guardian really slated him of here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/27/chris-froome-flash-of-magic-giro-italia (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/27/chris-froome-flash-of-magic-giro-italia)

The Times on Monday gave a resume titled "Incredible Giro victory puts Froome among elite" and on Tuesday gave "Eight reasons to explain the ride of Froom's life" none of which involved anything untoward.

Why even David Walsh became a fan after his "scintillating ride" on stage 19.

Yet for some, they just can't bring themselves to acknowledge what an incredible ride it was and persist with the vitriol.

Oh well, some folks eh?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 30, 2018, 10:25:15 pm
Should I register a sockpuppet of my own to talk to you, Veloman?

No idea what you are talking about.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 10:29:02 pm
Should I register a sockpuppet of my own to talk to you, Veloman?

No idea what you are talking about.

Of course you do Veloman.

Next time you try creating a sockpuppet maybe leave it a little longer than 4 minutes between logging out of your usual account and registering a new one. Makes it a bit less obvious. You'll have to change your trademark pompous and tedious writing style too  ;)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 30, 2018, 10:34:35 pm
Then I could address your ridiculous attempt at a straw man and your fatuous ellision of homophobic and racist bigotry with a mistrust of Team Sky and their ethics.

Bigot = obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, and intolerant towards other people's beliefs and practices.

Might describe a racist, someone homophobic, or whatever.  Might describe someone who obstinately puts the same old stuff across and no matter what other view is provided will denounce it or the person giving that view.  They will always firmly believe what they believe, no matter what.  Even if a cyclist performs a remarkable feat that even previous sceptics acknowledge as being something special, they will continue with the same vitriol and same old viewpoint.  No straw man in that, just a straightforward observation based on postings.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 30, 2018, 10:38:09 pm
Why did you create a sockpuppet purely to post in this thread, Veloman?

Really weird behaviour.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 30, 2018, 10:59:00 pm
As this thread is about the Giro 2018, perhaps we can acknowledge the great ride by the winner and his team:

https://www.teamsky.com/article/froome-wins-giro-d-italia

Commiserations of course to those not reaching the top spot on the podium, but a thrilling and most memorable race that will no doubt be remembered for some time to come.

I look forward to seeing Simon Yates in years to come and hope he develops the potential he has displayed. 
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on May 30, 2018, 11:08:29 pm
Every bit as thrilling and memorable as the 2006 Tour de France.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: jsabine on May 31, 2018, 12:43:31 am
That is why every major bike racing website has carried a headline article either straight up denouncing Froome, or at least doubting his legitimacy. Similar articles are also to be found in newspapers, such as the Guardian.

You're right.

Guardian really slated him of here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/27/chris-froome-flash-of-magic-giro-italia (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/27/chris-froome-flash-of-magic-giro-italia)

I assume you're cherry-picking, otherwise I can't see why you avoided Chris Froome’s Giro victory will lead only to more contortions (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/27/chris-froome-giro-victory-questions-adverse-analytical-finding), Unanswered questions leave Chris Froome in the shadow of suspicion (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2018/may/28/unanswered-questions-leave-chris-froome-in-the-shadow-of-suspicion), or even - from a month ago - Team Sky accused of deceiving Giro d’Italia organisers over Froome’s status (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/03/team-sky-chris-froome-giro-d-italia-accused-14m-mauro-vegni).

FWIW, I think it was a great ride, a magnificent achievement. I'm quite happy to accept that he's innocent until proven guilty (and frankly, I'm not really interested enough in bike racing to be too bothered either way). But Sky's lack of transparency about *anything* does them no favours and, if cheating is wrong, then doing something because it might not be explicitly prohibited if you interpret the rules in the right way is scarcely the conduct of anyone with any pretensions to ethics.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 06:54:21 am
Then I could address your ridiculous attempt at a straw man and your fatuous ellision of homophobic and racist bigotry with a mistrust of Team Sky and their ethics.

Bigot = obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, and intolerant towards other people's beliefs and practices.

Might describe a racist, someone homophobic, or whatever.  Might describe someone who obstinately puts the same old stuff across and no matter what other view is provided will denounce it or the person giving that view.  They will always firmly believe what they believe, no matter what.  Even if a cyclist performs a remarkable feat that even previous sceptics acknowledge as being something special, they will continue with the same vitriol and same old viewpoint.  No straw man in that, just a straightforward observation based on postings.

Your straw man was constructing a fantasy argument about radiation and trying to ascribe it to me.

Again you are mentioning homophobia and racism as examples of bigotry when no examples are required. It's a poor analogy to boot but an obvious attempt to smear.

It's also very obvious, Veloman, that you are trying to use your sockpuppet account as a filibuster. You tried this tactic before on another Sky thread with your Veloman account and the structure and phraseology of your posts are identical.

Creating a sockpuppet is not 'excellence', Veloman. Neither is filibustering, and invoking racism and homophobia in a discussion on bike racing.

I've reported you, Veloman. The mods will, I suspect, have access to IP addresses for your 'A Cyclist' account which they can compare with those from your Veloman account.

I doubt you were clever enough to use a proxy 😉

In the meantime, until this is resolved, I suggest Veloman's sockpuppet is ignored by all.

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: De Sisti on May 31, 2018, 07:55:07 am

sock puppet
noun: sockpuppet


A false online identity, typically created by a person or group in order to promote their own opinions or views.

A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 31, 2018, 08:26:28 am
Bear in mind that the AAF is not in itself sufficient, the offence is to take more than a certain amount in a stated time.

AIUI, no and yes.  The rules state the AAF is sufficient in and of itself as evidence that the max dose was exceeded unless Froome proves by means of a pharmokinetic study that he can replicate the reading.

It appears that Froome has has chosen not to do down the pharmokinetic study route like Ulissi did (although we don't know for sure) but is instead challenging the fitness of the test. I thought this (https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/could-froome-lose-his-giro-or-be-blocked-from-the-tour-a-sports-lawyer-qa/) was interesting from a CAS lawyer.

I think he's onto a loser but it'll be a long time before it's totally settled at CAS. I predict he'll race the tour and the case will be settled in the UCI tribunal in the third week of the Vuelta with the CAS case being settled early next year, at that point if any punishment isn't backdated it's possibly career over, unless of course he's been drinking from the same fountain as Piti and Horner.

If he wins the repercussions could be very interesting, salbutamol will have to be removed from the specified substance list as there's no fit test for threshold, either it'll have to back to being a prohibited substance without a TUE or everyone gets a free pass to take as much as they want by whatever method.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on May 31, 2018, 10:11:48 am
I thought this (https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/could-froome-lose-his-giro-or-be-blocked-from-the-tour-a-sports-lawyer-qa/) was interesting from a CAS lawyer.

Indeed. Interesting too that he sees the UCI as the source of the delay.

More new content in this Velonews podcast (http://www.velonews.com/2018/05/podcast/vn-podcast-ep-96-making-sense-froomes-giro-win_467825). The first 45 minutes has, first, some chat about the race including interviews with Froome and Svein Tuft, and then a debate among Andrew Hood and Fred Dreier about the AAF situation. Hood’s reporting is maybe the best on cycling at the moment, but Dreier usually gets on my nerves. However, from about the 30 minute mark they do a good job suggesting why Froome is hated with the fanatical, blind hatred seen in this thread and on social media. Dreier’s rant puts his finger on it. Worth a listen.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 10:23:03 am
I thought this (https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/could-froome-lose-his-giro-or-be-blocked-from-the-tour-a-sports-lawyer-qa/) was interesting from a CAS lawyer.

Indeed. Interesting too that he sees the UCI as the source of the delay.

More new content in this Velonews podcast (http://www.velonews.com/2018/05/podcast/vn-podcast-ep-96-making-sense-froomes-giro-win_467825). The first 45 minutes has, first, some chat about the race including interviews with Froome and Svein Tuft, and then a debate among Andrew Hood and Fred Dreier about the AAF situation. Hood’s reporting is the maybe the best on cycling at the moment, but Dreier usually gets on my nerves. However, from about the 30 minute mark they do a good job suggesting why Froome is hated with the fanatical, blind hatred seen in this thread and on social media. Dreier’s rant puts his finger on it. Worth a listen.

Fanatical, blind hatred seen in this thread?  Exaggeration much  ::-)

The only fanaticism I can see are two posters, one of which is a sockpuppet, invoking homophobia, racism, claiming bullying, and launching personal attacks in order to try and shut down debate about racing cyclists. You should take a step back and listen to your rabid ranting, Samuel. It's pretty weird.

 I don't think anybody will thank you for the tone of personal nastiness you've introduced into this and other threads, Samuel.

I don't need to listen to a podcast to know why I dislike Froome's participation in grand tours, nor do I need an explanation of why I think Team Sky have sent cycling firmly back. The DCMS committee, the jiffybag, the denied-then-admitted TUEs, the testosterone, the Tramadol, the ZTP hypocrisy, and all the lies in between are still there.

 They aren't going away, Samuel.However, I will listen to the podcast. All views are welcomed by me, even if I disagree with some of them.

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 10:55:55 am
Just listened. Apart from a few points with which I agree, such as motor-doping and whether from Froome's perspective he should be racing GTs, apart from this it is overwhelmingly fatuous.

One of them asks why Froome would dope knowing that he is under scrutiny. Ummm....ask Armstrong if he ever failed a dope test. Seriously...how idiotic. If Froome is doping, he has done so successfully and it has made him a multi-millionaire. The question is why would he not continue if he has evaded detection successfully.

Let's be clear, I'm not talking about Salbutamol. This is a red herring and from what I've read about the substance it does not account for Froome's unbelievable transformation.  Which brings me to my final point. The reporter in this podcast attempts to claim that people dislike Froome because he rides with his elbows pointing out. The reporter should speak for himself only. Most people who doubt Froome do so based on a rational examination of whether his sudden leap in performance in 2011 has an explanation that doesn't involve doping.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: andyoxon on May 31, 2018, 11:03:56 am
Just listened. Apart from a few points with which I agree, such as motor-doping and whether from Froome's perspective he should be racing GTs, apart from this it is overwhelmingly fatuous.

One of them asks why Froome would dope knowing that he is under scrutiny. Ummm....ask Armstrong if he ever failed a dope test. Seriously...how idiotic. If Froome is doping, he has done so successfully and it has made him a multi-millionaire. The question is why would he not continue if he has evaded detection successfully.

Let's be clear, I'm not talking about Salbutamol. This is a red herring and from what I've read about the substance it does not account for Froome's unbelievable transformation. Which brings me to my final point. The reporter in this podcast attempts to claim that people dislike Froome because he rides with his elbows pointing out. The reporter should speak for himself only. Most people who doubt Froome do so based on a rational examination of whether his sudden leap in performance in 2011 has an explanation that doesn't involve doping.

The fact remains, that apart from 'no smoke without fire' suspicions, you don't know what's behind F's performance, one way or another...   ;)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 11:14:14 am
No, I don't, and I haven't claimed that I do. What I do know is that his sudden change from soon-to-be sub World Tour level rider to the greatest cyclist of his generation  is pushing the bounds of credibility beyond stretching point, such that I, and so it would seem many/most seasoned observers, are no longer willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

That was 2011.

In the intervening years we have learnt from leaks, hacks and a government committee investigation, that Froome's team is unethical and spins webs of lies that later are exposed, and explanations that push the bounds of credibility.

I was about to say "No, he hasn't failed a dope test", but of course he has. I have to say that even if his Salbutamol case goes against him and he is banned, this will still not account for his performances.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Exit Stage Left on May 31, 2018, 11:21:55 am
What would be the debate if Yates had won? He served a suspension after all.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: hatler on May 31, 2018, 11:37:19 am
Given that every successful bike racer will at some point have been not as good as the best, is the deduction from this that anyone who becomes successful at top level pro-racing is on the sauce ?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 31, 2018, 11:52:57 am
Given that every successful bike racer will at some point have been not as good as the best, is the deduction from this that anyone who becomes successful at top level pro-racing is on the sauce ?
No, but there is often a progression that looks legit. You get some outliers (eg Rusty Woods) who come to the sport late from another discipline,  but usually you see a rider do well at age group cycling, then U23, then in 1 day or short stage races (or portions within them like the TT), and then finally, after riding some grand tours for others and finishing way down, make progress towards top 20 and up. Both Yates follow this progression.
Flatus' argument (and I have some sympathy for this view) is that Froome came to road cycling late, and was a journeyman for a few years, winning nothing of note (and not showing much in TTs either). And then, in his mid-late 20s, just before he's let go by Sky, he is the best grand tour rider of a generation. There's no baby steps, no slow creep up the rankings, he just goes from the 150th best GC rider in the world to the top 1 and then stays there for 6 years. Step changes like that look suspicious.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: D.A.L.E. on May 31, 2018, 11:55:42 am
Given that every successful bike racer will at some point have been not as good as the best, is the deduction from this that anyone who becomes successful at top level pro-racing is on the sauce ?
No, but there is often a progression that looks legit. You get some outliers (eg Rusty Woods) who come to the sport late from another discipline,  but usually you see a rider do well at age group cycling, then U23, then in 1 day or short stage races (or portions within them like the TT), and then finally, after riding some grand tours for others and finishing way down, make progress towards top 20 and up. Both Yates follow this progression.
Flatus' argument (and I have some sympathy for this view) is that Froome came to road cycling late, and was a journeyman for a few years, winning nothing of note (and not showing much in TTs either). And then, in his mid-late 20s, just before he's let go by Sky, he is the best grand tour rider of a generation. There's no baby steps, no slow creep up the rankings, he just goes from the 150th best GC rider in the world to the top 1 and then stays there for 6 years. Step changes like that look suspicious.

But, but... hard work... dedication... sacrifice...

(Like the 149 who were ahead of him were lazy fuckers...)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on May 31, 2018, 12:05:43 pm
The standard refutation is that he was ill and as soon as he was better, his performances picked up. That's fair enough, but the magnitude is astonishing.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 31, 2018, 12:29:48 pm
Given that every successful bike racer will at some point have been not as good as the best, is the deduction from this that anyone who becomes successful at top level pro-racing is on the sauce ?

The bolded doesn't hold for the company Froome is keeping though. Merckx - won two stages in his first GT, Hinault - won the GC in his first GT. Froome showed no evidence of having that kind of talent, right up until he was nearly out of contract and was called on as a last minute replacement for Lars Petter Nordhaug.

Given the number that have proved to be on the sauce it's a difficult to deduction to avoid, you have to believe that a clean rider is so talented he can beat a doped rider who can train harder and recover faster, or you believe Hesjedal and doping makes you slower.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 12:32:54 pm
The standard refutation is that he was ill and as soon as he was better, his performances picked up. That's fair enough, but the magnitude is astonishing.

Except that he cannot always have been ill. Where were the magic performances before the bilharzia?

Oh I forgot. It was Sky's marginal gains that brought the best out of him...but only in the final months of his contract when they were looking to dump him to lower league teams for very little money.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 31, 2018, 12:34:41 pm
The standard refutation is that he was ill and as soon as he was better, his performances picked up. That's fair enough, but the magnitude is astonishing.

I thought it was Michelle's nutrition that made the difference, all them support staff at Sky were useless.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 12:36:10 pm
 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 31, 2018, 12:45:33 pm
...
 attempts to claim that people dislike Froome because he rides with his elbows pointing out. The reporter should speak for himself only. Most people who doubt Froome do so based on a rational examination of whether his sudden leap in performance in 2011 has an explanation that doesn't involve doping.
He gives really vacuous interviews too!

<sigh>
Anyway ... we have another noise-to-signal ratio problem here. Across the internet there are a HELL of a lot of people criticising Froome on spurious grounds - his dodgy elbows, being a fake Brit (i.e. Kenyan-born), being better than other (presumably clean) riders, riding for a team that made spurious claims .... Then add in the all "no smoke without fire" bollox. And there are still people timing climbs on the telly and leaping to conclusions.

The sum total of all this noise can make me almost sympathetic to Froome - I tend to dig my heels in and promote the "innocent until proven otherwise" stance even more. There was just as much noise from the anti-Wiggo camp - who are mostly the same people, despite Sir Brad's career and circumstances being very different, and having not one AAF against him.

I also wish we could have a decent chat/debate/argument about pro racing without 90% of the posts being about Sky cheats. We KNOW you think they're dirty cheats, can we just park it for a few weeks??  ::-)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 12:47:28 pm
We KNOW you think he's innocent.

Why don't you park it?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 31, 2018, 01:09:58 pm
We KNOW you think he's innocent.

Why don't you park it?

- I didn't say that! :)

- I've parked it quite happily, thanks - but you insist on driving into it and dragging the whole issue up again. On every cycling thread!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 01:20:22 pm
Every cycling thread being  2.  ::-)

Besides, I know you like to stalk me here, but if you look closely you will see there are many people talking on this thread. Have a look and see what they are talking about.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: hatler on May 31, 2018, 01:23:15 pm
How do Froome's times on the climbs in this Giro compare with previous riders' times ?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 31, 2018, 01:29:41 pm
Besides, I know you like to stalk me here,
As you well know, there is plenty of evidence of the reverse behaviour  :-*

Quote
but if you look closely you will see there are many people talking on this thread. Have a look and see what they are talking about.
Perhaps I was not clear - I am NOT singling out the Great Flatus for banging on about Sky Cheats. I'm well aware it's a hot topic for thousands of internet cycling "enthusiasts". But it's like smoking, or racists, or helmet discussions ... just because there's a lot of you, that doesn't make you popular. It just makes you harder to ignore.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: spesh on May 31, 2018, 01:32:21 pm
How do Froome's times on the climbs in this Giro compare with previous riders' times ?

Covered this over 200 posts ago:

... for all that Sky drilled it at the bottom of Finestre, Froome's ascent of the col was by no means the fastest. Carapaz was 20 seconds quicker than Froome up the final climb, albeit 3 minutes slower than Santambrogio and Nibali in 2014, in far worse weather conditions.

https://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13092276&start=1120#p20351339
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 01:34:56 pm
Haven't got times to hand but from memory nothing outrageous, certainly in comparison to some of his earlier races (Ventoux 2013 springs to mind)

Of course, comparing climb times is problematic because the same climb may appear in different years but at a different point in a stage or indeed in the race. There may be different tactics at play and differing priorities. Certainly in this Giro, even with his Stage 19 attack, Froome's cycling is not as out there as in the past. There are plausible explanations for his ability to gap Dumoulin. What is unusual is his resurrection from the dead as highlighted by Phillipa York.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 31, 2018, 01:43:10 pm
You'd expect Finistre to be slow given the conditions of the surface this year, ISTR Zoncolan was fast but ICBW. Second fastest Giro ever, not that you can put much store in times and speeds, after all LBL has more elevation than any stage in this year's Giro.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Karla on May 31, 2018, 03:24:34 pm
Besides, I know you like to stalk me here,
As you well know, there is plenty of evidence of the reverse behaviour  :-*

You two are so sweet  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on May 31, 2018, 04:02:14 pm
Besides, I know you like to stalk me here,
As you well know, there is plenty of evidence of the reverse behaviour  :-*

You two are so sweet  :thumbsup:
Don't worry K, I'm sure you'll find your own special forum someone one day  :)


So while I'm ranting about people ranting about cheats ...

It's not that I think all riders are clean. Or that cheating isn't important. Or that Team Sky riders will never get caught out, so we may as well accept they are "officially" clean:
the trouble is that we are all speculating about these cases. You have the uncertainties of the science, plus the uncertainties of the treatment/training regimes, and then the subjectivity of the officials in the sport; Froome might get away with all this, and Wiggo might get found out and all his wins deleted from history. Yates might get banned next week. And we can't control it.

So until actual verdicts are reached in these cases, I view it as a fairly tedious side-show. It's like arguing about whether Cliff Richard* will be found guilty of <whatever>, or which rider has the most unpleasant wife based on what we see in public.


*Insert latest celeb to be entwined in some scandal of massive "public interest".
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on May 31, 2018, 04:09:41 pm
So until actual verdicts are reached in these cases, I view it as a fairly tedious side-show.

I dunno about that, it can be pretty entertaining, where else do you see folk trying to work out the size of a cow from the size of a steak?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on May 31, 2018, 04:14:21 pm
It's like arguing about whether Cliff Richard* will be found guilty of <whatever>

<Mistletoe and Wine>
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 06:07:54 pm
bla bla bla doping bla bla

I leave the thread alone for 5 hours and come back to find you are still going on about doping  ::-)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 31, 2018, 07:29:44 pm
Let's be clear, I'm not talking about Salbutamol. This is a red herring and from what I've read about the substance it does not account for Froome's unbelievable transformation.  Which brings me to my final point. The reporter in this podcast attempts to claim that people dislike Froome because he rides with his elbows pointing out. The reporter should speak for himself only. Most people who doubt Froome do so based on a rational examination of whether his sudden leap in performance in 2011 has an explanation that doesn't involve doping.

Must be the exposure to radiation explanation.  British Cycling probably early adopter of technique and gains by track cyclist resulting in the 'medal machine' they generated was used to transform Froome.  Much more believable than diagnosing and treating some parasite inside Froome.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 31, 2018, 07:30:48 pm
I dunno about that, it can be pretty entertaining, where else do you see folk trying to work out the size of a cow from the size of a steak?

Excellent summary of some posts on this thread!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 07:31:10 pm
The Veloman sockpuppet troll is back.

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 31, 2018, 07:35:22 pm
Of course, comparing climb times is problematic because the same climb may appear in different years but at a different point in a stage or indeed in the race. There may be different tactics at play and differing priorities. Certainly in this Giro, even with his Stage 19 attack, Froome's cycling is not as out there as in the past. There are plausible explanations for his ability to gap Dumoulin. What is unusual is his resurrection from the dead as highlighted by Phillipa York.

Resurrection from the dead?

I would agree he was down and many thought he was out in terms of podium, but he was definitely not out of the race as he was still riding.  Stages show how he benefitted from terrain that suited him while Yates completely imploded and Dumoulin got the tactics wrong.

Stage 14.  Froome wins on Zoncolan with Yates only 6s behind and Dumoulin 37s behind.  Froome in 5th position 3m10s off lead of Yates and Dumoulin 1m24s behind Yates.  So although a good win for Froome, still significant time differences between podium spots.

Stage 15.  Bad day for Froome as Yates surges to win and finishes 1m32s ahead of Froome who also finishes 51s behind Dumoulin and other GC contenders.  Overall, Froome’s deficit increases to 4m52s on Yates and 2m41s on Dumoulin.  Fortunately for Froome a rest day awaits.

Stage 16.  TT day.  Froome loses 13s to Dumoulin and Yates does enough to stay in pink while losing time to both.  Race appears to be between Yates and Dumoulin as Froome 3m50s behind Yates and 2m54s behind Dumoulin.

Stage 17/18.  Sprint stages with Froome and others managing to stay upright and free from any mechanicals so no time changes.

Stage 19.  Boom!  Yates completely implodes.  Froome attacks from way off the finish in a never been seen before tactic by him.  Dumoulin gets his tactics completely wrong and allows Froome to escape, particularly on the descents, and Froome finishes 40s ahead of Dumoulin with the help of 10s win bonus and 3s intermediate sprint bonus.  In reality he turned a 2m54s deficit into a 27s lead that was increased to 40s by time bonuses.  Very large chunk of that time was gained on descents while Dumoulin was descending with someone he described as descending “like an old lady”.  The official time gap reported between Froome and Dumoulin was 3m10s excluding time bonuses and hardly a ‘Landis’ performance.

Stage 20.  Dumoulin failed to break Froome who even managed to gain another 6s on him with a late surge by which time Dumoulin had no interest in racing him and conceded.

This is hardly resurrection from the dead stuff, more a comeback based on a good performance in a TT, which is no surprise as we all know he can TT, and a scintillating performance on a mountain day when the leader completely imploded and the next hopeful got the tactics wrong and allowed Froome to stay away.  Most definitely a remarkable comeback after being written off, but reversal in fortunes can be explained without any reference to PEDs, cheating, unethical behaviour etc.  Froome did change his saddle as he was suffering from saddle sores and instead of the Fizik that Sky use he swapped it for a Specialized saddle with the name covered.  Eagle eyed reporters did notice that.  Not the first time such things have happened in cycling and will not be the last.  He also had very good support from the non-riding team in terms of replenishment that must have been pre-planned.

Pippa York has previously criticised Froome so no surprise there regarding current comments.  Can’t wait for the book about all the cheating that was involved in generating that palmarés for York.  Still under consideration apparently.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 07:43:52 pm
^
Veloman sockpuppet troll post.

Why not just log in with your Veloman account and post? Why the dishonesty?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: vorsprung on May 31, 2018, 08:15:45 pm
The Phillipa York story is here

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/philippa-york-chris-froome-and-trying-to-understand-the-unbelievable/

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sg37409 on May 31, 2018, 10:09:48 pm
^
Veloman sockpuppet troll post.

Why not just log in with your Veloman account and post? Why the dishonesty?

I thought you played the ball, not the man Flatus ?  Every post he makes you slag off because of who its from.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 10:16:43 pm
^
Veloman sockpuppet troll post.

Why not just log in with your Veloman account and post? Why the dishonesty?

I thought you played the ball, not the man Flatus ?  Every post he makes you slag off because of who its from.

No, I'm not slagging him off. There are no personal comments made by me. I'm pointing out a forum member has created a sockpuppet account.  On some forums creating a sockpuppet account results in a permanent ban of all accounts associated with the IP address.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: hubner on May 31, 2018, 10:30:29 pm
Maybe Froome got a TUE because of the saddle sore, nobody will ever know because it's all done in secret.

In any case, maybe the legal doping (TUEs, Salbutamol etc) is a red herring to cover up the real doping which involve undetectable substances and methods.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Robert S. Thorn on May 31, 2018, 10:36:01 pm
I think personally that Froome's stage 19 has been overhyped simply because of how stage 19 destroyed Yates.  Compare Froome's ride to other riders such as Dumoulin and with historical similar days and it's really not exceptional.

I don't know if Froome, Dumoulin, Yates or any other pro rider is doping or cheating in any way but I do know that Froome pulled out a mammoth effort on stage 19 and backed it up on stage 20 and that is to be admired in my book until proven otherwise. 
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Exit Stage Left on May 31, 2018, 10:49:39 pm
I can see how Froome is a bit of a nightmare if you're a right-on public sector worker. What with him going to a posh private school in South Africa, being a self-employed sub-contractor to the Murdoch empire, and pushing the envelope of the rules for his win bonus. Couple that with a belief that sport should exhibit 'fairness' and it's all negative.

Turn those ideas on their head, and you can see how he's a poster boy for the 'cycling is the new golf' boys and girls in the City.

I'm all in favour of a bit of tension between different worldviews, and I would imagine the journalists are like pigs in shit. Roll on the Tour.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: hubner on May 31, 2018, 10:55:56 pm
I don't understand the "innocent until proven guilty" comments given that doping is so ingrained in cycling and for so long. Or is it "they all dope so the best still win"?



Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on May 31, 2018, 11:16:36 pm
^
Veloman sockpuppet troll post.

Why not just log in with your Veloman account and post? Why the dishonesty?

I thought you played the ball, not the man Flatus ?  Every post he makes you slag off because of who its from.

No, I'm not slagging him off. There are no personal comments made by me. I'm pointing out a forum member has created a sockpuppet account.  On some forums creating a sockpuppet account results in a permanent ban of all accounts associated with the IP address.

Nothing personal, ever.  Well maybe:

I ridicule who rock up not knowing what they are talking about.

...... That pompous, tedious and self-opiniated tone,  whilst curiously uniformed and unable to think beyond two dimensions.

Bit of a pattern emerges from other threads where comments are not solely concentrated on the debate/argument.

Anyway, the Giro 2018 has finished and apparently life goes on.

What is the next race to consider and will there be a dedicated thread for it?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on May 31, 2018, 11:23:28 pm
So. Why the sockpuppet, Veloman?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sojournermike on June 01, 2018, 07:44:46 am
I don't understand the "innocent until proven guilty" comments given that doping is so ingrained in cycling and for so long. Or is it "they all dope so the best still win"?


Not quite so simple I’m afraid. The best clean athlete may not be the best doped athlete, as responses to doping are different in the same way to response to different training loads is different. In general a ‘good’ doper will have an advantage over a ‘good’ clean athlete, if only because they can train more and harder and still recover. Through in some oxygen vector doping and some of the new stuff and the playing field is not level.

So in a doped field you’re probably measuring response rates and the effectiveness of the doping/training regime and in a clean field the underlying genetic ability/resilience and the effectiveness of the training regime.

I don’t pretend to know the prevalence of doping in cycling today - it may be lower than in many other sports (athletics and various forms of ‘football’ spring to mind), but even that is a bit misleading an idea. There are all sorts of approaches adopted at elite level that might be thought of as blurring the boundaries. Even something as simple as diet - we’re not about to prescribe a standard (country of origin based?) based diet for all elite athletes are we?

Mike
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 01, 2018, 07:51:36 am
Armstrong was innocent until 2012. By which time he had been retired for a couple of years. If he hadn't staged a comeback in 2009, he would most likely still be innocent.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on June 01, 2018, 07:52:31 am
What about that Sam Bennett eh?  :thumbsup:
Yup, he had some cracking wins, didn't he.

Is he riding the Tour?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 01, 2018, 07:54:04 am
What about that Sam Bennett eh?  :thumbsup:
Yup, he had some cracking wins, didn't he.

Is he riding the Tour?

I'm sure you'll be along to answer that soon.

Everybody else just wants to talk about drugs  ;D
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on June 01, 2018, 08:06:36 am
I don't understand the "innocent until proven guilty" comments given that doping is so ingrained in cycling and for so long. Or is it "they all dope so the best still win"?

You need to bear in mind the 2 uses of "innocence":

The legal, as in

Quote
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.".


and the more general meanings:
Quote
innocence
ˈɪnəsəns/Submit
noun
the state, quality, or fact of being innocent of a crime or offence.
"they must prove their innocence"
synonyms:   guiltlessness, blamelessness, freedom from guilt, freedom from blame, irreproachability, clean hands
"the accused protested his innocence"
lack of guile or corruption; purity.
"the healthy bloom in her cheeks gave her an aura of innocence"
synonyms:   harmlessness, innocuousness, lack of malice, inoffensiveness
"they questioned the innocence of our motives"
euphemistic
a person's virginity.
"all the boys lost their innocence with her"
synonyms:   virginity, chastity, chasteness, purity, lack of sin, sinlessness, impeccability, spotlessness;

To pursue this, you need to consider sporting "laws" to be comparable to others; of course they're not identical, but in the 21stC that is broadly how things work.


So - for example - I'm not saying Froome has commited no crimes, or doping offences, or broken any cycling "laws" (and I'm not saying he is a virgin); I am saying that he is innocent of crimes as defined by the rules of pro-cycling i.e. no infractions have been proven.

It may well be that 98% of pros have broken anti-doping rules; but are still innocent in the legal/technical sense. (or in other words - they haven't been caught!)

Clear?? :)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Robert S. Thorn on June 01, 2018, 08:18:01 am
And of course there is the inevitable hyped up and over zealous reaction of both the media and the losers in anything that in some way the winner(s) must have cheated.  It's what makes social media buzz, what pays journos excessive amounts of money, what keeps Murdoch rich, etc.

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 01, 2018, 09:05:12 am
And of course there is the inevitable hyped up and over zealous reaction of both the media and the losers in anything that in some way the winner(s) must have cheated.  It's what makes social media buzz, what pays journos excessive amounts of money, what keeps Murdoch rich, etc.

So can you give me examples of when there has been "inevitable hyped up and over zealous reaction of both the media and the losers in anything that in some way the winner(s) must have cheated" when other people have won Grand Tours over the last 5 years?

To help you out, Giro: 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 (Nibali x2,  Contador, Quintana, Dumoulin.

Vuelta: 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 (Horner, Aru, Contador, Quintana)

Tour Dr France: 2014 (Nibali.)

There is only one, Horner's Vuelta win, and even then it was low key compared to the reaction to Froome.

So what you cite as "inevitable", isn't actually. But it does pose an interesting question as to why it happens every time Froome wins. Why do you think that is?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on June 01, 2018, 09:36:56 am
What about that Sam Bennett eh?  :thumbsup:
Yup, he had some cracking wins, didn't he.

Is he riding the Tour?
I doubt they'll take him and Sagan to the Tour.
All the big sprint guys seemed to be at the Tour of California (Kittel, Gaviria, Sagan, Cav, Greipel?). It seems like the Giro got the next level down (Viviani, Bennet, Modolo etc) - I  reckon it's because the mountains were so hard that getting over them would impact on Tour form.
It's interesting how the Giro and the Vuelta are not attracting the top sprinters - too many mountain top finishes?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: TigaSefi on June 01, 2018, 09:40:40 am
What about that Sam Bennett eh?  :thumbsup:
Yup, he had some cracking wins, didn't he.

Is he riding the Tour?
I doubt they'll take him and Sagan to the Tour.
All the big sprint guys seemed to be at the Tour of California (Kittel, Gaviria, Sagan, Cav, Greipel?). It seems like the Giro got the next level down (Viviani, Bennet, Modolo etc) - I  reckon it's because the mountains were so hard that getting over them would impact on Tour form.
It's interesting how the Giro and the Vuelta are not attracting the top sprinters - too many mountain top finishes?

Cavendish railed against Giro and Vuelta organisers for making their tours sprinters unfriendly.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Robert S. Thorn on June 01, 2018, 10:01:00 am
And of course there is the inevitable hyped up and over zealous reaction of both the media and the losers in anything that in some way the winner(s) must have cheated.  It's what makes social media buzz, what pays journos excessive amounts of money, what keeps Murdoch rich, etc.

So can you give me examples of when there has been "inevitable hyped up and over zealous reaction of both the media and the losers in anything that in some way the winner(s) must have cheated" when other people have won Grand Tours over the last 5 years?

To help you out, Giro: 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 (Nibali x2,  Contador, Quintana, Dumoulin.

Vuelta: 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 (Horner, Aru, Contador, Quintana)

Tour Dr France: 2014 (Nibali.)

There is only one, Horner's Vuelta win, and even then it was low key compared to the reaction to Froome.

So what you cite as "inevitable", isn't actually. But it does pose an interesting question as to why it happens every time Froome wins. Why do you think that is?

It's not necessary for me to list them as a simple google search will reveal page after page after page of allegations of cheating.  It spreads of course in it's outrage to all sports, the Bolt / Gatlin issue immediately springs to mind.  Even the likes of Paula Radcliffe have been accused of cheating by those that could not best her.

For whatever reason people seem determined to out Froome as a cheat.  He may well be a cheat but I don't subscribe to trial by outrage.  What really bothers me is whilst one person becomes the public target others possibly have a greater chance of avoiding detection as the resources for monitoring and testing are finite.  Once the spotlight shines it is almost inevitable that resources become focused.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 01, 2018, 10:05:57 am
In which case  you'll be able to provide some links to back up your claims, within cycling. Start by newspaper articles and mainstream cycling websites (cyclingnews, velonews, Cyclingtips etc). Or perhaps key figures such as Hinault, Lemond etc calling riders into question. Or maybe even Tour organisers.

Random forum posts are neither here nor there.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: inappropriate_bike on June 01, 2018, 10:45:15 am
Cavendish railed against Giro and Vuelta organisers for making their tours sprinters unfriendly.

Hopefully this is a general trend because organisers have realised that sprint stages make for pretty bad television viewing. (Except for 5 minutes at the end of the race.)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 01, 2018, 11:06:14 am
Generally, yes, but it's also an opportunity for smaller teams to get a bit of the spotlight with breakaways.Also gives everybody else a rest (apart from sprint teams)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: pumpkin on June 01, 2018, 11:10:13 am
Bespoke Live on R5 last night had some interesting talk on the case. May well be a year before a verdict will be reached.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 01, 2018, 11:14:10 am
This isn't going to help with the sport's credibility issues. If he wins the Tour that'll be three Grand Tours waiting to find out if they need to find a new winner.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on June 01, 2018, 11:17:44 am
Cavendish railed against Giro and Vuelta organisers for making their tours sprinters unfriendly.

Hopefully this is a general trend because organisers have realised that sprint stages make for pretty bad television viewing. (Except for 5 minutes at the end of the race.)

I hope it's not, echelon racing makes fantastic viewing and sprinting is a skill, both team and individual and the sprint trains don't always get it right. IMO GT parcours are already tilted too heavily to the climbers.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on June 01, 2018, 11:21:22 am
Bespoke Live on R5 last night had some interesting talk on the case. May well be a year before a verdict will be reached.

A final verdict at CAS, that's about right I reckon, but no-way will UCI want it not settled at CADF before the worlds, that's their race and Froome  stands a chance of taking the triple crown.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: LEE on June 01, 2018, 03:00:52 pm
I hope it's not, echelon racing makes fantastic viewing and sprinting is a skill, both team and individual and the sprint trains don't always get it right. IMO GT parcours are already tilted too heavily to the climbers.

Exactly this.

It's not all about 15km climbs, which in themselves can have hours of dull peloton riding, leading up to the final climb.

It's about finding the best cyclist.  In my book that's the best all-round cyclist.

Doping allegations aside, Bradley Wiggins' and Chris Froome's ability to Time-trial and to climb is a tough combination of skills to beat.   The ability to sprint never usually bags you much of a time gap but it's as thrilling to watch the final 15km of a sprint stage as it it to watch the final 15km of a Mountain finish.

What's not to like about 4 or 5 teams hauling ass at 65km/hr all trying to launch their sprinter at 75km/hr?  The only downside is that TV can't convey the incredible speed very well.  My parents just think they are cycling very quickly.  I have difficulty explaining just how impossible it actually is for a normal human to cycle as quickly as a Cavendish.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on June 01, 2018, 05:39:49 pm
Armstrong was innocent until 2012. By which time he had been retired for a couple of years. If he hadn't staged a comeback in 2009, he would most likely still be innocent.

This, quite definitely. He was convinced he would never get caught - which is why I'm convinced that doping eventually affects a rider's ability to make sensible and logical decisions (like when to get out!).
I actually got bored with the TdF when Armstrong was riding - preferred to go and ride my bike, even when it came to Limoges!

If Froome rides the TdF this year I probably won't be bothered to follow it, but he's not the only one to have that effect on me. The sprint finishes will still excite me though especially if Cav manages to be in the mix. (The Williams sisters have the same boring effect on me in tennis; come to think of it Jeannie Longho had that effect also).
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 01, 2018, 05:52:00 pm
I'll still watch it and most likely enjoy it, even if Froome rides and wins, just as I enjoyed the Giro.

 It's funny to mention Armstrong again, because it was the way Sky and their leaders rode from 2011 onwards that seemed remarkably reminiscent of USPS. People reacted at the time, howls of laughter in the media tent whilst watching the race apparently. They'd seen it all before.   

The ensuing relevations of TUE abuse, Tramadol, employment of doping doctors, jiffy bags, spurious excuses to account for unlikely performances, government investigations, testosterone patches, failed drug tests, lies, 'lost' medical records and so on came as no surprise.

It's strange they don't talk about marginal gains anymore. Apparently this accounted for their early successes, but surely with movement of teams staff and riders to other teams these gains have been adopted by all.

Last Friday they claimed it was 'nutrition strategy'.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 01, 2018, 08:32:51 pm
In which case  you'll be able to provide some links to back up your claims, within cycling. Start by newspaper articles and mainstream cycling websites (cyclingnews, velonews, Cyclingtips etc). Or perhaps key figures such as Hinault, Lemond etc calling riders into question. Or maybe even Tour organisers.

Random forum posts are neither here nor there.

Great pity Hinault did not get his facts straight before commenting.

A Team Sky Spokesperson said: ‘It is disappointing that Bernard is so outspoken given he has his facts wrong. Chris has not had a positive test, rather an adverse analytical finding for a prescribed asthma medication. As an ex-rider himself, Bernard will appreciate the need for fairness for each and every athlete.

“And at the current time, Chris is entitled to race. This process would normally be confidential to protect the athlete and establish the facts. Unfortunately, it was leaked.

“However, both Chris and the team are following the process that has been put in place by the UCI.”

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/29/chris-froome-cycling-bernard-hinault-giro-ditalia (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/29/chris-froome-cycling-bernard-hinault-giro-ditalia)

He also asked why Froome gets so much time to resolve the matter forgetting the cases with Ulissi and Petacchi took considerable time to resolve.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 01, 2018, 08:38:27 pm
What's not to like about 4 or 5 teams hauling ass at 65km/hr all trying to launch their sprinter at 75km/hr?  The only downside is that TV can't convey the incredible speed very well.  My parents just think they are cycling very quickly.  I have difficulty explaining just how impossible it actually is for a normal human to cycle as quickly as a Cavendish.

As the peloton contains teams who are really only interested in sprint stages, as opposed to GC, then I think the sprints are there to stay.  What has happened is the sprinters hanging in for the final stages whereas previously they might have abandoned, like Cipollini used to rather than put himself through the mountains.  I doubt whether we will ever see the wearer of the maillot jaune winning in Paris again like Hinault did in 1979.  GTs today are decided in the mountains or TTs and those that excel at those events are not contesting the sprints.  Times have changed.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 01, 2018, 08:44:22 pm
I'll still watch it and most likely enjoy it, even if Froome rides and wins, just as I enjoyed the Giro.

 It's funny to mention Armstrong again, because it was the way Sky and their leaders rode from 2011 onwards that seemed remarkably reminiscent of USPS. People reacted at the time, howls of laughter in the media tent whilst watching the race apparently. They'd seen it all before.   

The ensuing relevations of TUE abuse, Tramadol, employment of doping doctors, jiffy bags, spurious excuses to account for unlikely performances, government investigations, testosterone patches, failed drug tests, lies, 'lost' medical records and so on came as no surprise.

It's strange they don't talk about marginal gains anymore. Apparently this accounted for their early successes, but surely with movement of teams staff and riders to other teams these gains have been adopted by all.

Last Friday they claimed it was 'nutrition strategy'.

Failed drugs test?  Who are you referring to?

Last Friday: what they probably wanted to say was "Thanks Tom" but that would have seemed a bit rude!  After all, he did completely mess his tactics up and it would have been a really interesting Saturday if he had not waited for someone who descended "like an old lady" and realised sooner that others were not going to work with him when it was only him who had something to gain.  As it was, Saturday was something of an anti-climax.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 01, 2018, 08:52:38 pm
As the thread rumbles on I was considering why the vilification of Sky and Froome continues.  Perhaps Sky, because of their money and resources, have become the cycling equivalent of Chelski and more recently Man City.  Or perhaps the equivalent of Mercedes in F1, although having Hamilton drive for Mercedes does help reduce the negative comments.  Sky have far more resources compared to other teams as witnessed by their vehicle support and the ‘Death Star’ revealed last year, along with complaints from other teams they take too much space on the car parks.  A recent article by one rider said whereas on other teams the laundry would be taken care of by someone as an additional duty, at Sky they have someone dedicated to laundry, such are the resources available.  The style of riding is also criticised as they have the resources to recruit a good squad with plenty of firepower.  They get on the front, set an almighty pace and control the race, after which they blow-up and leave it to their leader.  That is not liked by other teams or some fans.  They were criticised for the clothing they wore during TTs last year at the TdF as it was said to give an unfair advantage, even though the clothing was approved and had been worn previously at the Giro.  This goes on and on.  People will hark back to Wiggins, unethical behaviour, credibility etc.  Even though the DCMS stated they had broken no rules.  Meanwhile, Dan Martin uses an inhaler, Simon Yates has also received medication to treat asthma and no barbs at them. Both their teams are not members of MPCC and according to the MPCC website only 38% of World Tour Teams are members in 2018.  Perhaps it is because they are not winning and are seen to embody a Corinthian spirit rather than the organised and extremely well resourced Sky.  Eventually, it all rests with the rider and Froome pulled an amazing performance out of the bag to win the Giro and probably surprised himself, while others imploded or got the tactics wrong.  Nobody appears to be seriously questioning whether his performance was clean in that race.  Questions arise as to whether he should have been there, which is a different debate, and one that is likely to continue for some time.  It will be interesting to see how history will judge Team Sky.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Samuel D on June 01, 2018, 09:39:39 pm
As the thread rumbles on I was considering why the vilification of Sky and Froome continues.  Perhaps Sky, because of their money and resources, have become the cycling equivalent of Chelski and more recently Man City.

There’s undoubtedly an element of that.

The Velonews podcast (http://www.velonews.com/2018/05/podcast/vn-podcast-ep-96-making-sense-froomes-giro-win_467825) made some interesting points on the hatred of Froome specifically from about the 30 minute mark. (Don’t be put off listening to this by the mischaracterisation of its content earlier.)

Another factor is that Froome had the misfortune of becoming the first dominant champion after Armstrong, and into the bargain he spoke English (albeit also French and Italian at a level rarely seen in Anglos). The media that Armstrong had taken for a ride were burnt and wary and raring to have another go. Froome stood in for the departed Armstrong and the media barely noticed the swap.

Sky’s success annoys some people as success does in all domains, but the wild accusations in the press – as opposed to the pub in the past – are enabled by the new media environment. Gone is informed and nuanced journalism; in is manufactured scandal and shouty self-promotion of the Ross Tucker variant. People fall for this or at least click on it. That’s all that counts for ads. Look at the decline of Cyclingnews from a respectable information site to clickbait and tabloid dog-whistling. This sad transformation has happened across the board, not just in cycling or sport. It’s why the press is in crisis, and on a broader scale, it’s why democracy is in crisis.

If Sky turns out to be doping, all the innuendo-shovellers will say I told you so. If not, they’ll maintain Froome fell in the cauldron in 2011. In the post-truth era, no conspiracy theory is too embarrassing to share.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on June 01, 2018, 10:42:36 pm
Even though the DCMS stated they had broken no rules. 
The DCMS gave a rather confused message. They said that they had broken no rules, then they said that the TUEs Wiggins used were probably not justified on medical grounds and that they thought the jiffy bag contained kenacort. Both of which accusations would constitute breaking the rules.
Quote
It will be interesting to see how history will judge Team Sky.
On that, I think everyone will agree. ;)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 01, 2018, 11:01:37 pm
Even though the DCMS stated they had broken no rules. 
The DCMS gave a rather confused message. They said that they had broken no rules, then they said that the TUEs Wiggins used were probably not justified on medical grounds and that they thought the jiffy bag contained kenacort. Both of which accusations would constitute breaking the rules.

And that is why the questions about ethical behaviour was raised and why Sky continue to be viewed as a blight on cycling by some.  However, DCMS noted that WADA had confirmed that Sky had not broken any rules.  What DCMS thought is their opinion and opinion, from anyone, does not always constitute fact.  It was suggested it was deliberately confusing as they were frustrated at not being able to provide the evidence they sought.  But all this is about matters that occurred some time back and does not seem to be relevant to the performance of Sky or Froome in Giro 2018 which this thread is about.

I look forward to the Dauphine with Thomas and Kwiatkowski and wonder what comments will be aimed at them if they start riding well.  I also note their latest recruitment, Egan Bernal, has won the Tour of California and no comments appear to have been made about that.  Everything appears to be directed at Froome.

Samuel D makes some very good comments above.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Jaded on June 01, 2018, 11:31:14 pm
As the thread rumbles on I was considering why the vilification of Sky and Froome continues.  Perhaps Sky, because of their money and resources, have become the cycling equivalent of Chelski and more recently Man City.  Or perhaps the equivalent of Mercedes in F1, although having Hamilton drive for Mercedes does help reduce the negative comments.  Sky have far more resources compared to other teams as witnessed by their vehicle support and the ‘Death Star’ revealed last year, along with complaints from other teams they take too much space on the car parks.  A recent article by one rider said whereas on other teams the laundry would be taken care of by someone as an additional duty, at Sky they have someone dedicated to laundry, such are the resources available.  The style of riding is also criticised as they have the resources to recruit a good squad with plenty of firepower.  They get on the front, set an almighty pace and control the race, after which they blow-up and leave it to their leader.  That is not liked by other teams or some fans.  They were criticised for the clothing they wore during TTs last year at the TdF as it was said to give an unfair advantage, even though the clothing was approved and had been worn previously at the Giro.  This goes on and on.  People will hark back to Wiggins, unethical behaviour, credibility etc.  Even though the DCMS stated they had broken no rules.  Meanwhile, Dan Martin uses an inhaler, Simon Yates has also received medication to treat asthma and no barbs at them. Both their teams are not members of MPCC and according to the MPCC website only 38% of World Tour Teams are members in 2018.  Perhaps it is because they are not winning and are seen to embody a Corinthian spirit rather than the organised and extremely well resourced Sky.  Eventually, it all rests with the rider and Froome pulled an amazing performance out of the bag to win the Giro and probably surprised himself, while others imploded or got the tactics wrong.  Nobody appears to be seriously questioning whether his performance was clean in that race.  Questions arise as to whether he should have been there, which is a different debate, and one that is likely to continue for some time.  It will be interesting to see how history will judge Team Sky.

I saw this post and failed to read it.

I’m sorry.

Are there any drugs that I could have taken to help me read it?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 02, 2018, 07:29:25 am
Looks like Veloman has lost control of his sockpuppet. It's got a mind of its own and is posting all by itself :o

Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Karla on June 02, 2018, 08:58:47 am
Admittedly, since I've been camping my socks have started to take on a life of their own.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 02, 2018, 02:13:05 pm
https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/ewan-mackenna-so-how-is-it-then-that-you-explain-a-freak-like-chris-froome-36968940.html#click=https://t.co/M5OXVoIStG

There's a detail in here I'd forgotten that makes it all the more ridiculous.

In 2011, Team Sky had such massive faith in the innate talent of Chris Froome that he hadn't even been selected to be part of the Team Sky line-up for the Vuelta. He was a last minute substitute because another rider was ill.

3 weeks before the start of the Vuelta Chris Froome had given us all a hint of the amazing talent  that was to earn him a 2nd place podium (just 13 seconds behind the winner, the smallest margin in history)...

...by coming 94th in the Tour of Poland.

 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on June 03, 2018, 08:21:33 am
I look forward to the Dauphine with Thomas and Kwiatkowski and wonder what comments will be aimed at them if they start riding well.  I also note their latest recruitment, Egan Bernal, has won the Tour of California and no comments appear to have been made about that.  Everything appears to be directed at Froome.
Kwiatkowski was world champion when joining Sky and has been consistently one of the best 1 day riders in the world. At the Tour Sky will probably use him as a domestique again - I don't know if he has ambitions to lead a team for GC, but it's unlikely at Sky. G is cut from the same cloth as Wiggins (palmares from youth up as a big power trackie/roadie, lost a lot of weight but still not a natural climber), and IMO should have aimed at the classics - I don't think he can cut it in the high mountains.
Egan Bernal is 21. The only thing I know about him is that he's Columbian. Latin American racing has had an embarrassing number of in competition positives in recent years, but that's generally been confined to the domestic scene, so hopefully their international level riders are as clean as everyone else.
None of that has a bearing in this Giro. Froome won it, so his past seems in context to me.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Karla on June 03, 2018, 04:11:54 pm
Thomas?  The drugs only help him until he crashes.

Oh wait, the Dauphine is less than a day old and he's crashed already?  Get 'em in early I suppose.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on June 03, 2018, 07:23:57 pm
Thomas?  The drugs only help him until he crashes.

Oh wait, the Dauphine is less than a day old and he's crashed already?  Get 'em in early I suppose.

But he's only a pursuiter, not a madison acrobat like Cav (and, errr Brad) so we really can't expect the same bike handling skills, even when he isn't being barged out of the descents by Warren B. (Come to think of it Cav is a bit accident prone as well, as was a certain Mr Froome when he came out of Africa, if the stories of his early days by teammates are to be believed - wait, wasn't the descending speed in the Giro credited to bike-handling skills learnt on Kenyan dirt roads? Something not quite right there!)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 03, 2018, 07:33:35 pm
I knew Froome was just about to start a run of 6 GT wins and 4 GT podiums when he came 94th in The Tour of Poland.

From 94th in a minor race to 2nd in a GT in only three weeks shows what class he has.

Who else has ever pulled off such an achievement?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: toontra on June 03, 2018, 07:54:37 pm
I knew Froome was just about to start a run of 6 GT wins and 4 GT podiums when he came 94th in The Tour of Poland.

From 94th in a minor race to 2nd in a GT in only three weeks shows what class he has.

Who else has ever pulled off such an achievement?

Just spit it out, Flatus - you think Froome is doping, don't you   ;D
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: David Martin on June 03, 2018, 08:12:58 pm
Who was the team leader in that tour of Poland?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on June 03, 2018, 08:33:49 pm
But he's only a pursuiter, not a madison acrobat like Cav (and, errr Brad) so we really can't expect the same bike handling skills, even when he isn't being barged out of the descents by Warren B. (Come to think of it Cav is a bit accident prone as well, as was a certain Mr Froome when he came out of Africa, if the stories of his early days by teammates are to be believed - wait, wasn't the descending speed in the Giro credited to bike-handling skills learnt on Kenyan dirt roads? Something not quite right there!)
He's won junior Roubaix, as well as E3.
However, the people in the peleton regarded as the best bike handlers tend to have been top level off-road cyclists (cross or MTB) - I'm not sure madison is the gold standard...
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 11:33:05 am
As the thread rumbles on .........

I saw this post and failed to read it.

I’m sorry.

Are there any drugs that I could have taken to help me read it?

Ask Flatus as he seems to be the expert when it comes to drugs.

Or perhaps not as he has yet to provide more information on failed drug tests.  Oh well.

The ensuing relevations of TUE abuse, Tramadol, employment of doping doctors, jiffy bags, spurious excuses to account for unlikely performances, government investigations, testosterone patches, failed drug tests, lies, 'lost' medical records and so on came as no surprise.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 11:38:35 am
https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/ewan-mackenna-so-how-is-it-then-that-you-explain-a-freak-like-chris-froome-36968940.html#click=https://t.co/M5OXVoIStG

Very shabby journalism.  Simple explanation to explain a freak life Froome is radiation.  Obvious really and plenty of evidence to support the hypothesis.  Surprised he spent so much time going on about motors in cycles; or might that explain the performance of Yates and Pinot.  Perhaps Sky hacked into the remote control system and disabled the motor.  The motor theory might explain why Froome pedals so fast as he is clearly not in control of the pedalling and it must be remote controlled.  Being 'clipped-in' he has no choice but to go with it.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 11:41:17 am
...by coming 94th in the Tour of Poland.

 :facepalm:

Perhaps Flatus should consider becoming a teacher of history as he seems fascinated with the past.  I'm sure his pupils would love to hear about the Battle of Hastings in 1075.  Quite a result apparently and one in the eye for someone.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: fimm on June 04, 2018, 11:49:24 am
How tall is Pozzovivo? I mean, I know tall guys have an advantage in the TT because of (something physics-y related to leg length) but Quintana or Yates don't look like they borrowed thier big brother's TT bike to have a go on like Pozzovivo does.  If he's actually going to be a serious GT contender then surely his team can put a bit more effort into sorting his set up?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 12:05:03 pm
Pity his team did not ride Tour of Yorkshire as he could have popped in for a bike fit.

https://www.planetx.co.uk/pro-bike-fit
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 12:09:11 pm
How tall is Pozzovivo?

164cm tall and weighs 57kg

teambahrainmerida.com/domenico-pozzovivo/
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on June 04, 2018, 12:28:21 pm
Can someone please explain to me the difference between a ‘failed drugs test’ and an ‘adverse analytical finding’? There seems to be an awful lot of specious bullshit claiming that the latter is not an example of the former and I’d really like to know what semantic contortions you need to go through to convince yourself of that.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 12:38:00 pm
A failed drugs test, or positive test, is normally used to refer to finding something that is banned.  Examples are the minute traces of a banned substance (drug) with Contador or the rather more well known cases of EPO with Armstrong.

Adverse analytical finding (AAF) is when a substance that is permitted exceeds the permitted amount.  In the case of Froome the AAF refers to a level of salbutamol in excess of the permitted amount.  No argument as to whether Froome is allowed the product, just a debate and legal argument about he level.

The comments by Hinault highlighted the general looseness in terminology and talk with the rebuttal from Sky on his comments:

A Team Sky Spokesperson said: ‘It is disappointing that Bernard is so outspoken given he has his facts wrong. Chris has not had a positive test, rather an adverse analytical finding for a prescribed asthma medication. As an ex-rider himself, Bernard will appreciate the need for fairness for each and every athlete.

“And at the current time, Chris is entitled to race. This process would normally be confidential to protect the athlete and establish the facts. Unfortunately, it was leaked.

“However, both Chris and the team are following the process that has been put in place by the UCI.”
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Peter on June 04, 2018, 01:19:56 pm
...by coming 94th in the Tour of Poland.

 :facepalm:

Perhaps Flatus should consider becoming a teacher of history as he seems fascinated with the past.  I'm sure his pupils would love to hear about the Battle of Hastings in 1075.  Quite a result apparently and one in the eye for someone.

I do hope you're not a history teacher!
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on June 04, 2018, 01:24:25 pm
An AAF (also called a positive test) is the lab result, irrespective of the type of substance involved. It could be the presence of a prohibited substance or a specified substance above it's permitted level.

An AAF becomes an ADRV (Anti Doping Rule Violation) once the process is complete at CADF. Not all AAF's lead to ADRV's, for instance you could have an AAF for triamcinolone acetonide but not get an ADRV because you've got a TUE.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: fimm on June 04, 2018, 01:41:12 pm
How tall is Pozzovivo?

164cm tall and weighs 57kg

teambahrainmerida.com/domenico-pozzovivo/
About 5' 4". That really is small (for a man). Mr fimm is 5' 5" and had enough problems getting a decent TT sent up (meaning, he didn't...)  I wonder if Pozzovivo falls foul of UCI reglations about bike set up? I remember reading Emma Pooley saying that she had to have a special dispensation from the regs in order to get a decent TT set up (obviously she's a small woman, so even shorter than Pozzovivo, I assume).
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 01:51:06 pm
An AAF (also sometimes incorrectly called a positive test) is the lab result of a permitted substance, irrespective of the type of substance involved. It could be the presence of a prohibited substance or a specified substance above it's permitted level.

Some correction to the statement and couldn't be bothered to correct the rest.  We can only assume that terminology in the Sky rebuttal was incorrect based on what you have posted.  Sneaky feeling that Sky would have passed rebuttal to lawyers first to check they were correct in stating the AAF was not a positive test.

Might be worth considering the original statement from UCI on this matter:

www.uci.ch/pressreleases/uci-statement-christopher-froome (http://www.uci.ch/pressreleases/uci-statement-christopher-froome)

Clearly no mention of positive test.

Useful information here for general information;

http://www.uci.ch/clean-sport/ (http://www.uci.ch/clean-sport/)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on June 04, 2018, 02:01:30 pm
Quote
An AAF (also sometimes incorrectly called a positive test) is the lab result of a permitted substance,


So all the substances in this link that reference an AAF are permitted?  http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/CleanSport/17/32/52/20170823SanctionADRVENG2.0_English.pdf

You can see AAF's listed for EPO, anabolics etc
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 02:14:28 pm
That is correct and they are all for banned substances that result in a ban as the test was positive regarding the substance.  In other words, there is no acceptable limit as highlighted in the Contador case.  This is unlike salbutamol where the substance is accepted and the only debate is whether the level exceeds what is permitted.  Every test that identifies salbutamol could be considered as positive as it has identified the substance, but within limits it results in no further action.  If outside the limit than action is generated in accordance with protocol for an AAF.  Statement from UCI also includes comment:

"...... the presence of a Specified Substance such as Salbutamol in a sample does not result in the imposition of such mandatory provisional suspension against the rider"

Unlike the smallest of traces of a banned substance.

Hence why Sky rebutted the reference to a "positive test".  Subtle difference, but one that becomes important in a legal sense.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on June 04, 2018, 03:07:26 pm
That is correct and they are all for banned substances that result in a ban as the test was positive regarding the substance.  In other words, there is no acceptable limit as highlighted in the Contador case.  This is unlike salbutamol where the substance is accepted and the only debate is whether the level exceeds what is permitted.  Every test that identifies salbutamol could be considered as positive as it has identified the substance, but within limits it results in no further action.  If outside the limit than action is generated in accordance with protocol for an AAF. 

According to WADA themselves: 'An Adverse Analytical Finding indicates the presence of prohibited substances or methods in a particular sample.'
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/questions-answers/ado-testing-statistics#item-431

In the case of salbutamol, it is only permitted if taken via an inhaler. As has already been stated upthread, the limit on salbutamol is set such that an AAF indicates that it has been administered by a prohibited method (oral or injection). Froome's case seems to hang on whether or not that limit is based on sound reasoning.

Quote
Hence why Sky rebutted the reference to a "positive test".  Subtle difference, but one that becomes important in a legal sense.

Quote
We can only assume that terminology in the Sky rebuttal was incorrect based on what you have posted.  Sneaky feeling that Sky would have passed rebuttal to lawyers first to check they were correct in stating the AAF was not a positive test.

It's pure spin. 'Failed drugs test' is a layman's term and has no 'legal sense'. It has been widely reported as a failed drugs test and that is exactly what it is, according to common understanding. Sky can claim it means something else if they like. It's up to the listener to decide if they are being reasonable or deliberately obfuscating.

Ask yourself why Sky are putting out a press release rather than going after Hinault for slander.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on June 04, 2018, 03:19:28 pm
The AAF is the lab report. It's the result, the finding, yes for prohibited substances the level that triggers an AAF is any value greater than the Limit of Detection, for a specified substance there's a set threshold, but both result in an AAF. I really aren't sure why this is difficult to comprehend.

Sky can rebut the 'positive test' simply because there is no definition. There is only AAF and ADRV.

x-post with citoyen
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 04, 2018, 03:37:22 pm
Not wanting to encourage Veloman's sockpuppet but I agree with part of his criticism of Hinault. It is a failed test (a passed test would have been under the limit) but it isn't the same as say an EPO positive. It isnt finalised which is why Froome has the opportunity to explain how he came to have over the limit in his urine. Hinault was treating the case as if it was done and dusted.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 04:01:02 pm
Ask yourself why Sky are putting out a press release rather than going after Hinault for slander.

Probably for the same reason as Sky can't be bothered to take action against all those making false statements, just isn't worth the paperwork.  Much easier to issue a rebuttal that does nothing to enhance the reputation of Hinault.  Pity, as Hinault was a great rider.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on June 04, 2018, 04:16:46 pm
All Hinault said was that Froome shouldn't have been at the Giro, and that's a view shared by many of us. He is entitled to express his disappointment over the fact that Froome's continued participation in major races pending the outcome of the case is damaging the image of the sport.

Otoh, yes, Froome has the right to defend himself and suspending him pending the outcome of the case would be problematic for all the reasons that have previously been discussed.

I love the idea that Sky issuing a press release could damage his reputation. He must be quaking with fear.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 04:30:40 pm
From the original article following the interview with Hinault:

Chris Froome komt nu in hun buurt, maar daarmee is ‘de Das’, nog altijd even grimmig als in zijn topdagen, het niet eens. “Froome hoort niet in die lijst”, zegt Hinault. “Hij heeft een positieve test afgelegd in de Vuelta en nadien bleek ook zijn B-staal positief, dus heeft hij doping gebruikt en moet hij geschorst worden.”

https://www.hln.be/sport/wielrennen/giro/gepikeerde-hinault-froome-maakt-geen-deel-uit-van-de-legende-van-deze-sport-het-is-een-schandaal~a3674700/ (https://www.hln.be/sport/wielrennen/giro/gepikeerde-hinault-froome-maakt-geen-deel-uit-van-de-legende-van-deze-sport-het-is-een-schandaal~a3674700/)

Notice the reference to 'positive test'?

Guardian and others summarised the original interview/article.  Rebuttal from Sky was referring to original interview.  Sky must do their homework rather than rely on summaries from other sources.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sojournermike on June 04, 2018, 04:39:56 pm
From the original article following the interview with Hinault:

Chris Froome komt nu in hun buurt, maar daarmee is ‘de Das’, nog altijd even grimmig als in zijn topdagen, het niet eens. “Froome hoort niet in die lijst”, zegt Hinault. “Hij heeft een positieve test afgelegd in de Vuelta en nadien bleek ook zijn B-staal positief, dus heeft hij doping gebruikt en moet hij geschorst worden.”

https://www.hln.be/sport/wielrennen/giro/gepikeerde-hinault-froome-maakt-geen-deel-uit-van-de-legende-van-deze-sport-het-is-een-schandaal~a3674700/ (https://www.hln.be/sport/wielrennen/giro/gepikeerde-hinault-froome-maakt-geen-deel-uit-van-de-legende-van-deze-sport-het-is-een-schandaal~a3674700/)

Notice the reference to 'positive test'?

Guardian and others summarised the original interview/article.  Rebuttal from Sky was referring to original interview.  Sky must do their homework rather than rely on summaries from other sources.


Seems an unusually thorough approach for Sky to take. They’ll be keeping records next.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 04:40:50 pm
I love the idea that Sky issuing a press release could damage his reputation. He must be quaking with fear.

Posting did not state the press release could damage his reputation.  Posting stated comments would not enhance Hinault's reputation.  1+1=3 perhaps?  Hinualt has a great reputation and was a real rouleur of the peloton.  It does look like sour grapes on his behalf.  Merckx did not react in that way and quite happy. 
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: citoyen on June 04, 2018, 04:46:57 pm
A Cyclist, in my earlier post where I talked about layman's terms, was there something in that you need me to clarify?

There might be a good reason why Merckx is a bit more circumspect than Hinault when it comes to commenting on other cyclists doping.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 04:47:39 pm
Seems an unusually thorough approach for Sky to take. They’ll be keeping records next.

Excellent comment!

No doubt Simon Yates will also ensure the paperwork has been all OK after his TUE moment.  Dragging-up old stuff serves no real purpose as we should be judging on contemporary matters rather than historical detail.  Yes it was a PR disaster, but as WADA noted, and DCMS, no rules were broken and Sky gave a response.

https://www.teamsky.com/article/team-sky-response-to-dcms-committee-combatting-doping-in-sport-report (https://www.teamsky.com/article/team-sky-response-to-dcms-committee-combatting-doping-in-sport-report)

Meanwhile, racing is happening in the Dauphine.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: A Cyclist on June 04, 2018, 04:54:41 pm
A Cyclist, in my earlier post where I talked about layman's terms, was there something in that you need me to clarify?

There might be a good reason why Merckx is a bit more circumspect than Hinault when it comes to commenting on other cyclists doping.

Merckx took what can be called PEDs.  No argument there.  Nothing concrete with Hinault but quite a lot of suspicion.  Fignon had a good tale to tell about fixing of races in his wonderful book 'We were young and carefree' but not at GTs.

Layman's terms are great until they need to be legally tested and some layman's terms are not acceptable in a court of law.  Layman's terms and slang are an interesting area in terms of legal debate.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on June 04, 2018, 05:00:56 pm
But he's only a pursuiter, not a madison acrobat like Cav (and, errr Brad) so we really can't expect the same bike handling skills, even when he isn't being barged out of the descents by Warren B. (Come to think of it Cav is a bit accident prone as well, as was a certain Mr Froome when he came out of Africa, if the stories of his early days by teammates are to be believed - wait, wasn't the descending speed in the Giro credited to bike-handling skills learnt on Kenyan dirt roads? Something not quite right there!)
He's won junior Roubaix, as well as E3.
However, the people in the peleton regarded as the best bike handlers tend to have been top level off-road cyclists (cross or MTB) - I'm not sure madison is the gold standard...

Completely off topic of course

Yes like Cadel Evans, Peter Sagan and any number more that I am not educated enough to remember. Perhaps there is an arguement for pro riders (and  amateurs also, of course), to ride cross in the winter as was once the custom, rather than doing training camps in warm climates like Majorca.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on June 04, 2018, 05:09:20 pm
Seems an unusually thorough approach for Sky to take. They’ll be keeping records next.

Excellent comment!

No doubt Simon Yates will also ensure the paperwork has been all OK after his TUE moment.  Dragging-up old stuff serves no real purpose as we should be judging on contemporary matters rather than historical detail.  Yes it was a PR disaster, but as WADA noted, and DCMS, no rules were broken and Sky gave a response.

https://www.teamsky.com/article/team-sky-response-to-dcms-committee-combatting-doping-in-sport-report (https://www.teamsky.com/article/team-sky-response-to-dcms-committee-combatting-doping-in-sport-report)

Meanwhile, racing is happening in the Dauphine.

Why does Froome get looked after by the whole team set-up while Simon Yates is entirely responsable for all his paperwork in your eyes. Try to be consistent at least please.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 04, 2018, 05:27:33 pm
Why has Veloman created a sockpuppet?

The only plausible reason is that he has little faith in what he is posting and actually believes he will be proven wrong in the future about Froome and Sky. Therefore he has created a sockpuppet that he thought would not ruin the credibility (such as it is) of his Veloman identity. He just forgot to alter his trademarktediousposting style.

It would be far better if he was just honest and upfront.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Jaded on June 04, 2018, 07:03:31 pm
I'm reminded of a quote from a play we did for 'O' Level English

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 04, 2018, 07:17:10 pm
<snorts and inhales  tea up nose>
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: αdαmsκι on June 06, 2018, 06:45:09 am
I'll find out once I've listened to this BBC podcast if it says anything I don't already know about that stage.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0697rbs

Oh, there's also a written version here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/44372328
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 06, 2018, 06:56:43 am
I doubt they'll be admitting to the doping  ;)

EDIT:Just read the transcript. They wouldn't dope because it wouldn't make winning fun.

No SDB, maybe not, but it has made you a millionaire  ;)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mzjo on June 06, 2018, 11:31:23 am
I doubt they'll be admitting to the doping  ;)

EDIT:Just read the transcript. They wouldn't dope because it wouldn't make winning fun.

No SDB, maybe not, but it has made you a millionaire  ;)

I too read the transcript and was impressed/disappointed with the absence of any real refutal (is that the word I want; still thinking in french!) of doping, just saying that they had people passing up continuous small doses of energy carbs and bottles all the way up the climbs (which made me wonder if that was legal outside designated feeding zones but I suppose it must be otherwise they wouldn't be so ready to brag about their planning - and indeed what's the difference between being handed a bottle by a bloke running or by a bloke driving a car, other than that it is slightly more sporting).
On the whole I don't think that this takes the arguement forward. Froome's mental attitude  still makes me think of Armstrong and Sir DB seems to be accepting that that is the case, no matter what he says. All this piece made me think was "micro-dosing". Sad really.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Exit Stage Left on June 06, 2018, 11:37:01 am
'Doing a Landis', is exactly what is described. Dropping the other contenders and thereby giving your team a clear space for close, and meticulously planned' support. The chaos in the chasing group means they can't be as well supported.

I've recently formed an opinion on one contributor to this thread, based on their opinion of PBP terrain, derived from riding the first 300km. I'm now questioning the ratio of evidence to prejudice in their posts.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: mattc on June 06, 2018, 12:08:55 pm
Going back to the Salbutamol case and its impact:

Comments on the TCP (that I've only just caught up with  :facepalm: ) from quite informed people are making me think that Froome will almost certainly keep his Giro title, but lose the Vuelta (and possibly some additional punishment, such as ban starting at the verdict?) if he is judged guilty of a doping offence.

Which I think is a good thing. (although I'd have preferred Dumoulin to win this race!)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 06, 2018, 12:10:42 pm
'Doing a Landis', is exactly what is described. Dropping the other contenders and thereby giving your team a clear space for close, and meticulously planned' support. The chaos in the chasing group means they can't be as well supported.

I've recently formed an opinion on one contributor to this thread, based on their opinion of PBP terrain, derived from riding the first 300km. I'm now questioning the ratio of evidence to prejudice in their posts.

Why don't you go back and read my post.

I said I rode 300k. It's an out and back route. Therefore I saw 50% of it. I made no claims whatsoever about the other 50%.
That 300k was boring. Very boring. Boredom is a state of mind. My mind. Not your mind. I wouldn't know what goes on in your mind and I wouldn't claim that I do.

Think what you want about my posts. Post what you want about them.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on June 06, 2018, 01:31:11 pm
Going back to the Salbutamol case and its impact:

Comments on the TCP (that I've only just caught up with  :facepalm: ) from quite informed people are making me think that Froome will almost certainly keep his Giro title, but lose the Vuelta (and possibly some additional punishment, such as ban starting at the verdict?) if he is judged guilty of a doping offence.

Which I think is a good thing. (although I'd have preferred Dumoulin to win this race!)

There's no reason to strip him of his Giro title, he's clear to race, which makes backdating any potential ban tricky, especially when you consider backdated bans have only been issued up to now in very particular circumstances, IIRC they are limited to when historic samples have been re-tested with improved methods. Contador's case isn't really comparable due to the way he was banned/acquitted/banned.

What would be really interesting to know is what deal Froome was offered under the acceptance of consequences rules since if he's judged guilty any punishment will have to be more severe than that.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 06, 2018, 06:12:23 pm
I doubt they'll be admitting to the doping  ;)

EDIT:Just read the transcript. They wouldn't dope because it wouldn't make winning fun.

No SDB, maybe not, but it has made you a millionaire  ;)

I too read the transcript and was impressed/disappointed with the absence of any real refutal (is that the word I want; still thinking in french!) of doping, just saying that they had people passing up continuous small doses of energy carbs and bottles all the way up the climbs (which made me wonder if that was legal outside designated feeding zones but I suppose it must be otherwise they wouldn't be so ready to brag about their planning - and indeed what's the difference between being handed a bottle by a bloke running or by a bloke driving a car, other than that it is slightly more sporting).
On the whole I don't think that this takes the arguement forward. Froome's mental attitude  still makes me think of Armstrong and Sir DB seems to be accepting that that is the case, no matter what he says. All this piece made me think was "micro-dosing". Sad really.

I quite enjoyed the article. It made for exciting reading thinking about planning and calculations for the attack.

As for the refutation of doping...just makes them look more dodgy, as "Why would we do that" type excuses always look. They do it because it helps them win, and winning has made them rich. They aren't doing it for fun.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Jakob on June 07, 2018, 01:46:52 am

There's no reason to strip him of his Giro title, he's clear to race, which makes backdating any potential ban tricky,

He shouldn't have been competing!. (If the AAF is upheld). I can see no reason why he should keep it.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sg37409 on June 12, 2018, 10:52:02 pm

Poor Lizzie poor chris (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lizzie-deignan-chris-froome-hasnt-had-a-fair-process/)
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sojournermike on June 12, 2018, 11:44:46 pm

Poor Lizzie poor chris (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lizzie-deignan-chris-froome-hasnt-had-a-fair-process/)

There’s a bit of a glow about Lizzie, don’t you think?

Not sure Froome needs that support though.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: DuncanM on June 13, 2018, 09:04:17 am
She has a point. Both cases are where the decision is supposed to be confidential until they are resolved, and yet they have been leaked to the media. If they were then cleared of any offence (as Deignan was), then normally the public shouldn't know, and their reputation shouldn't have been tarnished. It's reasonable to ask how many others have had this sort of stuff but it's been kept confidential and so we don't know about it?
I find her bleating about being tested the following day enormously disingenuous though.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 13, 2018, 09:17:50 am
Yes to both points, although it is worth remembering that Contador's dope positive was buried by the UCI, and they would have  been successful had it not leaked.

With regards to being tested the day after missed tests....Yes, all well and good, especially as the drugs could have cleared by then
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Jakob on June 14, 2018, 12:16:35 am
"Twenty-plus-year career, 500 drug controls worldwide, in and out of competition. Never a failed test. I rest my case."
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: sg37409 on June 14, 2018, 03:39:25 pm
"Twenty-plus-year career, 500 drug controls worldwide, in and out of competition. Never a failed test. I rest my case."

Who/where is this quote from please ?
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Si S on June 14, 2018, 03:44:43 pm
"Twenty-plus-year career, 500 drug controls worldwide, in and out of competition. Never a failed test. I rest my case."

Who/where is this quote from please ?

Lance / twitter, in response to Tyler.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: hubner on June 16, 2018, 06:21:38 pm
Armstrong did fail a dope test, in his first Tour win, but the UCI colluded with his team to cover it up.
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Baron Brymbo von Pickelhaube on June 17, 2018, 10:58:43 am
Armstrong did fail a dope test, in his first Tour win, but the UCI colluded with his team to cover it up.
Hold on.  Are you saying Armstrong's a liar?  ;D
Title: Re: Giro 2018
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 17, 2018, 12:09:25 pm
https://cyclingtips.com/2018/06/casting-a-critical-eye-on-corruption-in-sport-qa-with-anti-doping-expert-robin-parisotto/

An interesting interview with Robin Parisotto, concerning cycling and sport as a whole