The Tour de France

I can only hope next years opening stage goes off without a hitch. I will be there taking pics and depending on the route I might not even have to leave my flat!
 
Getting a bus wedged under the finish marker has to be a unique way of messing up a sporting event. Étape deux will be interesting.
 
Chris Froome leads the race and it could end up wearing the yellow jersey when they get to Champs-Elysee, the competition is not all that strong on the time trials and if the Criterium du Dauphine is anything to go by, Froome will all but destroy their rivals. Time will tell (no pun intended).
 
It is definitely Froome's to lose now. And I don't think Valverde will have anything for him in the alps. Saxo, Belkin, and Movistar could make some strong team efforts as they are all scary as a whole team. Froome doesn't have much help except for Porte. Really wondering why Henao or Uran were not included as they are strong climbers. A lot of strong guys here who have lost heaps of time, hoping they put on some fireworks going for the stage wins in the Alps.
 
No, too soon to make the call, too many times the leader or favourite has failed to finish due to injury or mechanical costing lots of time. Sky are a man down, riding with a man with a fractured pelvis, one who took a big tumble on stage 9 and Froome's right hand man got ripped apart by the opposition on stage 8 (I think).
That said, he's in a great place with over 3 mins lead so your money may be in a safe place.
Don't write off Contador or Quintana to take a massive chunk in the Alps.
 
I'd be surprised gethinceri... I know accidents and injuries can happen but Froome is a machine. Ax 3 Domaines was awesome and his defence the next day equally so. Not sure why anyone would kill themselves trying to break him. It doesn't look like it would work, and you'd just end up, you know, dead!
 
Then let us watch on and enjoy, jez101. He is still favourite, but "definitely Froome's to lose"? My money will be placed after Stage 17.
 
I think we have different ideas of "Froome's to lose" here. Cuz its kinda his race to lose on Stage 17. If he wins, everyone will say because of Ax-3-Domaines and the Mont St. Michel ITT, but if not he will have lost it in the Alps. I am by no means handing it to him by saying that, just saying that he is in control of the race (subject to change).
 
Froome, as His Lanceness was so fond of saying, is not normal. For all the caterwauling about cleaning up the sport, this clearly is another TdF that will be won by the rider who dopes best without getting caught.
 
None of us are in any position of accusing riders of doping until actual evidence or allegations come out about that rider. Cant just assume Chris Froome dopes, just like you can't ask him why hes not black (he was born in Africa, and I love a good Mean Girls reference).
 
There's also the chance that the Team Sky members are not doping. Possibly the main reason that they are running successful campaigns two years in a row is because the level of doping has been reduced among the other teams and now it's down to pure ability.

If Froome is so fast how come he was beaten by Wiggins last year?
 
soccerman17 said:
None of us are in any position of accusing riders of doping until actual evidence or allegations come out about that rider....
Click to expand
This attitude is precisely why ASO finally were forced to vacate the results of every TdF from 1999 to 2005.

soccerman17 said:
...Cant just assume Chris Froome dopes, ....
Click to expand
You make the assumption that I am assuming. What evidence have you that I am assuming?


Anyone critically watching the key performance indicators knew before he had reached Paris in 1999 that Phamstrong was performing at a most unnatural level. No syringes or blood bags were necessary to establish that fact to a certainty. Similarly, the entire Sky squad's performance is outside the bounds of what is naturally achievable, and has been for a couple of seasons. Froome reveals himself by injudiciously exploiting his advantage, also further evidence that the biological passport is a farce. But he eventually will be found out. Whatever substances and methods are responsible for his dramatic rise eventually will be detectable.

The dots are all there. You just have to connect them.

Did you never notice that the speeds of the single day classics mostly change only sporadically and in very small increments, while the speeds in the Grand Tours increase by leaps and bounds? In circles of logic and conversation, this is what is known as "a clue."
 
I thought the speed of the tour last year was slower than in the Lance Armstrong era, certainly in terms of average speed.

The amount of money that has been put into the British cycling challenge is huge. Are you saying that Victoria Pendleton, Chris Hoy, Laura Trott, Ed Clancy et al are also doping?

Team Sky got rid of at least one senior member of staff following a revelation of previous doping links, and I would hope that Froome's performance is a mastery of marginal gains and hard work, rather than chemically enhanced.
 
Just becaues youre good doesnt mean you cheat. LeBron James is further ahead then everybody else in basketball than Froome is in cycling. Same can be said for Messi in soccer/football/whatever the hell you call it, and for anybody who follows football same for Adrian Peterson. Did all these men cheat? No. At least I hope not Jesus Christ where would we be if I am wrong.

I hate this about cycling. An exceptionally good athlete can peak and make years and years of intense training come good and instead of oh wow what a human being that man is its oh he must cheat. Same for baseball. Anybody has a breakout year hitting home runs in baseball and they automatically get linked to steroids. Fell bad for em really. Paying for the past's lack of morals.
 
Lionel Messi was given growth hormone treatment as a child. Doe this count as cheating?

It is sad that anyone who achieves exceptional things in sports such as cycling and athletics is immediately labelled a cheat but, let's be honest, both these sports have enough form for anyone to question whether they're clean or not.
 
Blog Zbod said:
....
You make the assumption that I am assuming. What evidence have you that I am assuming?
....
Click to expand

Blog Zbod wrote:

this clearly is another TdF that will be won by the rider who dopes best without getting caught.
Click to expand

And then later on it post 208240:

....Anyone critically watching the key performance indicators knew before he had reached Paris in 1999 that Phamstrong was performing at a most unnatural level. No syringes or blood bags were necessary to establish that fact to a certainty. Similarly, the entire Sky squad's performance is outside the bounds of what is naturally achievable, and has been for a couple of seasons. Froome reveals himself by injudiciously exploiting his advantage, also further evidence that the biological passport is a farce. But he eventually will be found out. Whatever substances and methods are responsible for his dramatic rise eventually will be detectable.

The dots are all there. You just have to connect them.

....
Click to expand
 
Do I have to observe the convention that no mention of the results should be given until the highlights (ITV4?) have been shown?

Today's stage was a cracker, Froome deserves to win the Tour on that showing alone.
 
Back
Top Bottom