If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   After passing hundreds of drug tests, Chris Froome's Tour de France stage win means he must be on drugs   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 44
    More: Obvious, Tour de France, drug tests, World Anti-Doping Agency  
•       •       •

719 clicks; posted to Sports » on 15 Jul 2013 at 11:28 AM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-15 10:16:16 AM
Didn't the Uniballer pass hundreds of drug tests?
 
2013-07-15 10:34:29 AM

dittybopper: Didn't the Uniballer pass hundreds of drug tests?


They re-tested old samples using new technology unavailable when the original samples were taken.  Which does nothing to help the sport.  All it means is we won't know for several years whether anyone won this year's Tour.
 
2013-07-15 10:35:55 AM
If you're going to win like Lance, you may as well use the same excuses to cover up your doping.
 
2013-07-15 11:22:49 AM
They should just let them ride with a frikkin IV rack on their handlebars and be done with it
 
2013-07-15 11:30:37 AM
Poor dude, instead of talking drugs they should be asking him how he's so fast with such a horrible cycling pedaling and upper body technique.

Impressive stage win yesterday.
 
2013-07-15 11:32:41 AM
The watts/kg he's generating on some stages this year are unheard of in clean cyclists. It's no surprise he's generating suspicion.
 
2013-07-15 11:48:22 AM
Well, unless he has a second heart, his times all but guarantee that he's cheating.

/They always get too greedy
 
2013-07-15 11:51:50 AM
that can't be true.  He's just the best time trialist.  And the best climber.  and the best sprinter.
 
2013-07-15 11:56:01 AM

acronym: that can't be true.  He's just the best time trialist.  And the best climber.  and the best sprinter.


He is in no way the best in the TT. Nor is he the best sprinter. He is on the best team.

So, is this how it works here? Threads only on rest days and only on doping. Great.
 
2013-07-15 11:57:44 AM
Newsflash:  They all dope.

Those are small guys, consuming close to 10,000 calories per day, and they still manage to lose weight during the tour.

Each day is between 100 and 200 miles, through some really steep mountains, at speeds that an amatour cyclist couldn't reach even for a few seconds.  Then the next day they do it again, and again, and again, for 27 days straight.  And people are outraged when one of them fails a PED test.
 
2013-07-15 11:59:55 AM
if he is doping, they need to give some to the rest of his teammates, they can't keep up with anyone.  froome was doing it last year too,  he looked to be the better rider in a few of the mountain stages but was waiting around helping wiggins
 
2013-07-15 12:00:28 PM
Cut the bullshiat and get on with it.  The Tour de France finish line might as well be the edge of a cliff with rabid bears at the bottom.
 
2013-07-15 12:10:22 PM
"Rather than asking us to come up with some way to prove we're innocent, why don't you collectively have a meeting and tell me what would prove it to you?" he said

whar birth certificate, whar?

he's ineligible to win, he's a secret kenyan pretending to be british

/oh he really is from kenya?
 
2013-07-15 12:22:23 PM

crotchgrabber: acronym: that can't be true.  He's just the best time trialist.  And the best climber.  and the best sprinter.

He is in no way the best in the TT. Nor is he the best sprinter. He is on the best team.

So, is this how it works here? Threads only on rest days and only on doping. Great.


He was second in the TT, just a few seconds behind the world champ.  When you're that good on TTs and you can drop proven climbers like they are sprinters, you're probably doping.

By the way, except for Porte (who is likely doping too) and maybe Kennaugh, his team sucks.
 
2013-07-15 12:23:20 PM

Joe Peanut: Newsflash:  They all dope.

Those are small guys, consuming close to 10,000 calories per day, and they still manage to lose weight during the tour.

Each day is between 100 and 200 miles, through some really steep mountains, at speeds that an amatour cyclist couldn't reach even for a few seconds.  Then the next day they do it again, and again, and again, for 27 days straight.  And people are outraged when one of them fails a PED test.


Not me.  I am outraged when people get outraged about drugs.  Drugs are good.  All cyclists should take as many as they like.

/seriously
 
2013-07-15 12:26:12 PM
I always wanted someone to puch lance in the face when he would say, "I never failed a test"...f**king POS cheat.
 
2013-07-15 12:31:33 PM
Maybe the Tour should just disqualify all times under a certain minimum because you simply can't pedal that fast without drugs.
 
2013-07-15 12:32:51 PM

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: The watts/kg he's generating on some stages this year are unheard of in clean cyclists. It's no surprise he's generating suspicion.



You have Froome's power data? Please post it. Otherwise [citation needed]
 
2013-07-15 12:35:16 PM
Or, just maybe, he is a freak of nature and is ideally suited to cycling?

/Did chuckle when he dropped Contador on the final climb...
 
2013-07-15 12:36:20 PM

srhp29: I always wanted someone to puch lance in the face when he would say, "I never failed a test"...f**king POS cheat.


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-07-15 12:41:23 PM

dittybopper: Didn't the Uniballer pass hundreds of drug tests?


So did Marion Jones (see 3 threads below this one), and she ended up doing time in Federal prison.
 
2013-07-15 12:42:32 PM
I actually agree with John Rocker on the whole doping in sports thing.  Does make it interesting.  How far the bobblehead can be made to hit a ball a bunch of times; how fast a cyclist/sprinter can get; how far a Dback can make a QB's head pop off in a game of handegg; how it all affects the physiology.  Just be open about it, so it can researched properly and all that want the chance to make their heart explode get that chance.
 
2013-07-15 12:51:56 PM

gwowen: SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: The watts/kg he's generating on some stages this year are unheard of in clean cyclists. It's no surprise he's generating suspicion.


You have Froome's power data? Please post it. Otherwise [citation needed]


shiat, I swear I read somewhere that he was putting out some ridiculous numbers, but after searching, I can't find it anywhere. I'm assuming I got it mixed up with this

http://www.outsideonline.com/fitness/biking/Analysing-Froomes-Perform a nce.html

So I was wrong on the wattage thing (unless someone else can find it)
 
2013-07-15 01:07:11 PM

puckrock2000: dittybopper: Didn't the Uniballer pass hundreds of drug tests?

So did Marion Jones (see 3 threads below this one), and she ended up doing time in Federal prison.


That was kind of my point:  The fact that Froomes passed drug tests doesn't mean he isn't doping.
 
2013-07-15 02:09:55 PM
What a surprise. Every single one of them should be assumed to be doping. Note that I didn't say cheating, because that would imply that one of them is getting a competitive advantage, but since they are all on the juice there isn't one.

Athletes who want to have a respected career should avoid cycling like the plague.
 
2013-07-15 02:12:21 PM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: What a surprise. Every single one of them should be assumed to be doping. Note that I didn't say cheating, because that would imply that one of them is getting a competitive advantage, but since they are all on the juice there isn't one.

Athletes who want to have a respected career should avoid cycling like the plague.


I assume the same about track & field and baseball.
 
2013-07-15 02:22:43 PM

PowerSlacker: I assume the same about track & field and baseball.


I'd say doping is more prevalent in football than baseball, it's just talked about A LOT more in baseball.
 
2013-07-15 02:38:27 PM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: What a surprise. Every single one of them should be assumed to be doping. Note that I didn't say cheating, because that would imply that one of them is getting a competitive advantage, but since they are all on the juice there isn't one.

Athletes who want to have a respected career should avoid cycling like the plague.


Sort of agree, but not totally. Yeah, they were all trying to dope to the limit without getting busted - that's even and fair. But many of the allegations against Lance are that he was tipped off ahead of time  from the inside and thus able to avoid tests he knew he would fail. That and the whole making a six figure "donation" to the organization that did the testing is how he sets him self apart as THE cheat in a peleton full of them.
 
2013-07-15 02:44:09 PM

The Bestest: PowerSlacker: I assume the same about track & field and baseball.

I'd say doping is more prevalent in football than baseball, it's just talked about A LOT more in baseball.


Fair point.  Doping in football doesn't affect the hallowed records like it does in baseball.
 
2013-07-15 04:12:41 PM

PowerSlacker: The Bestest: PowerSlacker: I assume the same about track & field and baseball.

I'd say doping is more prevalent in football than baseball, it's just talked about A LOT more in baseball.

Fair point.  Doping in football doesn't affect the hallowed records like it does in baseball.


Also, doping seems to provide a greater edge in individual sports than in team sports.  I know, you're going to say that baseball is a team sport... but if you look at how the ball is put into play, most of baseball is one on one endeavour.
 
2013-07-15 04:14:21 PM

PowerSlacker: The Bestest: PowerSlacker: I assume the same about track & field and baseball.

I'd say doping is more prevalent in football than baseball, it's just talked about A LOT more in baseball.

Fair point.  Doping in football doesn't affect the hallowed records like it does in baseball.


It darn near almost broke the single-season rushing record. It's not quite "hallowed", but it is a pretty big one due to the degree of difficulty.
 
2013-07-15 04:14:51 PM

PowerSlacker: The Bestest: PowerSlacker: I assume the same about track & field and baseball.

I'd say doping is more prevalent in football than baseball, it's just talked about A LOT more in baseball.

Fair point.  Doping in football doesn't affect the hallowed records like it does in baseball.


The fact that the player with the most hits and the player with the most home runs are both missing from the Hall of Fame says it all.
 
2013-07-15 04:36:46 PM

Marcus Aurelius: PowerSlacker: The Bestest: PowerSlacker: I assume the same about track & field and baseball.

I'd say doping is more prevalent in football than baseball, it's just talked about A LOT more in baseball.

Fair point.  Doping in football doesn't affect the hallowed records like it does in baseball.

The fact that the player with the most hits and the player with the most home runs are both missing from the Hall of Fame says it all.


The fact that the player with the most hits is not in the Hall of Fame has nothing to do with doping.
 
2013-07-15 04:58:18 PM

puckrock2000: Marcus Aurelius: PowerSlacker: The Bestest: PowerSlacker: I assume the same about track & field and baseball.

I'd say doping is more prevalent in football than baseball, it's just talked about A LOT more in baseball.

Fair point.  Doping in football doesn't affect the hallowed records like it does in baseball.

The fact that the player with the most hits and the player with the most home runs are both missing from the Hall of Fame says it all.

The fact that the player with the most hits is not in the Hall of Fame has nothing to do with doping.


I think he was referring more to the sanctimony of the Baseball Writers Association in comparison to other sports' HoF gatekeepers. Or whomever it is that votes on HoF for baseball.
 
2013-07-15 05:21:30 PM
Well DON'T BET ON BASEBALL has been a hard and fast rule for decades but the BBWAA is a bunch of hedging weenies when it comes to "cheating" and the line is basically whatever each writer feels like
 
2013-07-15 05:31:12 PM
The BBWAA isn't even allowed to vote for Pete Rose.
 
2013-07-15 06:03:59 PM

PowerSlacker: The BBWAA isn't even allowed to vote for Pete Rose.


AND the HOF changed the rules about Rose's eligibility between the time he agreed to his ban, and the time where a vote would have come up.
 
2013-07-15 06:08:56 PM
Brailsford wouldn't be subject to doping speculation if everything he touches in cycling didn't turn to gold. Britain basically swept the 2008 Olympic track cycling, every discipline.  Only Mark Cavendish failed to medal.

Then he turns his hand to the road and suddenly he is training the top cyclists.  Either he is way out in front in training techniques beating admitted dopers or he is running a massive doping program which has went undetected. As this is cycling it isn't hard to work out the more likely scenario.
 
2013-07-15 06:50:54 PM
Has anyone mentioned the times in the Tour for particular stages are up over what hey were a decade ago? Climbs that used to take 45 minutes now take almost an hour. And that's for the top riders. Given that the conditioning of the riders is no worse than it used to be, there's really not many valid explanations for what's up except they ain't taking what they used to take.
 
2013-07-15 07:02:34 PM

WhyteRaven74: Has anyone mentioned the times in the Tour for particular stages are up over what hey were a decade ago? Climbs that used to take 45 minutes now take almost an hour. And that's for the top riders. Given that the conditioning of the riders is no worse than it used to be, there's really not many valid explanations for what's up except they ain't taking what they used to take.


[citation needed]
 
2013-07-16 09:20:13 AM
Tour de France? What is that? Some kind of weird race where every body gets a German tank and races towards Paris.
 
2013-07-16 12:58:30 PM

ukexpat: Or, just maybe, he is a freak of nature and is ideally suited to cycling?

/Did chuckle when he dropped Contador on the final climb...


Like Lance, right?
 
2013-07-16 03:01:46 PM

machoprogrammer: ukexpat: Or, just maybe, he is a freak of nature and is ideally suited to cycling?

/Did chuckle when he dropped Contador on the final climb...

Like Lance, right?


Heh. He was right though - with all the shiat he was taking he could have won on an old schwinn with a banana seat so it really wasn't about the bike.
 
2013-07-16 08:00:12 PM

puckrock2000: Marcus Aurelius: PowerSlacker: The Bestest: PowerSlacker: I assume the same about track & field and baseball.

I'd say doping is more prevalent in football than baseball, it's just talked about A LOT more in baseball.

Fair point.  Doping in football doesn't affect the hallowed records like it does in baseball.

The fact that the player with the most hits and the player with the most home runs are both missing from the Hall of Fame says it all.

The fact that the player with the most hits is not in the Hall of Fame has nothing to do with doping.


I say the same dopamine receptors may be involved.  And Pete never bet against his own team, as far as I know.  Being a pariah for betting on your own team seems to me a biatchurlish, reeking of double standards.
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report