Chris Froome is Pulling a Floyd Landis Right Now

I Chose D2 wrote:

Big difference between Froome and Landis: Froome is already 4x TdF champ, not a relatively unknown rider. This performance was more like Contador at PN or Dauphine (can't remember which) a few years ago. Also, not sure how doping could help him get a minute+ on the descent.

Uh, no.

Landis was not "unknown." What Landis was, was not liked by the UCI. Rassmussen had the same PR problem. Landis also was viewed as a threat to Armstrong's fraudulent status. Anyone that got bigger aspirations than supporting Armstrong tested positive.

Froome magically appears on a grand tour podium several years into being an "average" international pro. Like so many other dopers, he mystically acquires a God-like aerobic engine as an adult and the UCI seems to unconditionally support him never testing positive. Unlike, say, Jonathan Tiernan Locke who suddenly tests positive and vanishes from international cycling.

Here's just one story of how corrupt the UCI is and why Landis was not favored.

800 dude wrote:

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

You'd also recognize that the British cycling federation has a vested interest in never testing a grand tour winner positive.

Pet peeve of mine, but do you know what "vested" means? It makes no sense in this context.

Vested: secured in the possession of or assigned to a person.

Never testing positive is assigned to British Cycling and the UCI. Just like it was with Armstrong and USA Cycling, and the UCI.

Sadness analysis wrote:

Actually, the big difference between Landis and Froome is that Landis had shown signs of elite performance early in his career, whereas prior to 2011, Chris Froome showed none until he magically became the best climber and time trialist in the world from Fall 2011 onward. Talk about turning a mule into a racehorse.....or motorbike maybe.....

Right answer. Landis was an excellent mountain biker, first. The modern equivalent would be Sagan. Different guys, different strengths, but, same idea.

What Froome did today is more exciting that just about anything in track. Maybe a 100m or 1500m WR could come close. But those are over in minutes. The drama with Froome was hours.

Who cares what he's on. It's entertainment. I remember watching Floyd's stage in 2006 and that was one of the most exciting and impressive things I've ever seen. Nobody in track digs that deep.

How much drama and good racing did the Tour in the Lance years have? A lot is the answer. I'd argue (as I would with MLB, NBA, NFL, etc.) that these guys should be doping. If for no other reason than helping them counteract the extreme demands their sports put on their bodies. I remember reading a quote from a cyclist back in the day. He wishes he doped because not only did the guys who doped perform much better but they're healthier off the bike when they retire.

RELATIVELY! Even with the guys that were suspended, no one in Europe would have had a guy who finished closer to George than Lance in 05 as the winner in 06.

Not an American wrote:

Haha, being an American must really, really suck right now. No wonder you're all angry!

Exactly. Chris Froome is a legend. He overcame kidney failure and severe asthma to win the Vuelta and to now dominate the Giro. This sort of mental fortitude is something that the Americans and other nations cannot understand because the Brits are psychologically the toughest people in the world and they operate on a whole other leveL This is how the Brits by themselves defeated every other nation in two world wars last century and Chris Froome is just an offshoot of this spirit. Now I am going to put on my Union Jack underwear and hammer out a 5 miler ....

I Chose D2 wrote:

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

Uh, no.

Landis was not "unknown." What Landis was, was not liked by the UCI. Rassmussen had the same PR problem. Landis also was viewed as a threat to Armstrong's fraudulent status. Anyone that got bigger aspirations than supporting Armstrong tested positive.

Froome magically appears on a grand tour podium several years into being an "average" international pro. Like so many other dopers, he mystically acquires a God-like aerobic engine as an adult and the UCI seems to unconditionally support him never testing positive. Unlike, say, Jonathan Tiernan Locke who suddenly tests positive and vanishes from international cycling.

RELATIVELY! Even with the guys that were suspended, no one in Europe would have had a guy who finished closer to George than Lance in 05 as the winner in 06.

Yes, relatively unknown except for that whole part where he was pulling Armstrong and the few others who were juiced up enough to hang on over the hardest mountain stages in the 2002-2004 tours. Then finished 9th the following year. So like totally unknown if you weren't following cycling at all.

what now? wrote:

I Chose D2 wrote:

RELATIVELY! Even with the guys that were suspended, no one in Europe would have had a guy who finished closer to George than Lance in 05 as the winner in 06.

Yes, relatively unknown except for that whole part where he was pulling Armstrong and the few others who were juiced up enough to hang on over the hardest mountain stages in the 2002-2004 tours. Then finished 9th the following year. So like totally unknown if you weren't following cycling at all.

Ask the average casual European cycling fan in March 2006 who Landis is. Do the same this March with Froome. How do you think the answers would compare. MAybe I should've worded it differently though so not to distract you from my actual point - Froome is well established as the best Grand Tour rider of his generation (and of the century if you disregard Armstrong). His competition in this Giro has a total of 1 combined Grand Tour victory, and off the top of my head I don't think any of them have ever podiumed at the Tour (though Dumoulin certainly has the class to do so). It is not as if this is Geraint Thomas or Wout Poels or Richie Porte riding away from Quintana/Bardet/Landa/all the other contenders at the Tour.

As far as some other differences -

Today, 2nd place was 3' back, and only 3 other riders finished within 3' of 2nd place.

06 Morzine, 2nd was 6' back, and 20 other riders within 4' of 2nd

Froome got a sizeable margin over a very small group, Landis got a huge margin over a decent-sized group.

HAving actually won a cat 1 race by going solo with 100k to go, I can assure you that what happened today was not that remarkable, and certainly nothing compared to Froome's original rise to prominence. Hopefully Froome is clean, and if not, hopefully he is punished duly. I will be cheering for Tom tomorrow.

Fabio "Where" Aru has also won a GT. To be fair, everyone else forgot that today as well, including him.

As if.

OK, moving the goal posts we are now down to the casual European cycling fan whatever that means.... please. Saying Floyd was relatively unknown is like saying that Richie Porte was relatively unknown in 2012 and that his 2013 season was out of nowhere. It is OK, you can just admit you were wrong.

If you think Froome is clean and what he did today doesn't also raise your eyebrows, I totally understand why you think Floyd was unknown.

Comparing a cat 1 solo break to a uci grand tour is completely ridiculous. Might as well say you ran a 2:20 marathon so you know that running a 26:17 10k can be done without drugs.

Froome's salbutamol positive is a real shame and I'm not really sure what to make of it. But that aside, I have a ton of respect for the guy, and even more so after today. He works really hard in the off-season with all his training on Strava and is as mentally tough as any athlete I know of. He crashed badly before the first stage of this race and got off to a terrible start. It would have been so easy for him to just throw in the towel at any point in the first two weeks and refocus for the Tour de France. But even though he was not racing up to expectations, he stayed mentally tough and just kept plugging away. Then faced with a four minute deficit he didn't just ride conservatively to try and make it onto the podium, he threw down the guantlet, went for broke in Prefontaine-like style, and showed he is a true champion. He is also a stand-up guy with the press. He has continually faced the reporters throughout the salbutamol situation and also during the first two weeks of this Giro when he wasn't doing so well. Contrast that behavior with someone like Rupp who only faces the media when things are going his way.

Froome's problem is that he looks like a total Fred on the bike. He simply does not look like an athlete. Landis on the other hand could wheelie all day just like Sagan can; they are both very athletic.

Given what we know about how Wiggins found his success on the road (corticoids) it's quite obvious that his teammate Froome was/is on the same program. You don't lean out like Froome has without help.

My wish is that Wiggo goes on a bender someday (high probability), says enough is enough and tells us all how Sky did it (low probability).

As I said in my last post, I should have worded it differently. My point was not that nobody knew who Landis was, but that Landis did not have near the pedigree entering the 06 Tour that Froome has entering this Giro.

I have never said that I think Froome is clean - I don't know if he is or isn't, but I doubt he's on any kind of miraculous drug that the rest of the peloton has yet to discover.

I wasn't comparing it to a grand tour, just saying that I understand tactically how these kind of things can happen. Today was an impressive show of tactics and gutsy descending just as much as it was of strength. Once Froome had a minute over the top of Finestre and then bombed the descent while TD waited for Pinot and Reichenbach, the race was over. Every time Tom was pulling he was bringing the gap back, but Reichenbach and Pinot weren't pulling as hard because they just wanted to stay away from Pozzivivo. Unless you think that the gap Froome got up Finestre was unacheivable without the aid of PEDs, it is silly to point at this particular stage as some kind of overwelming evidence that Froome is doping. It ranks far below his magical rise to greatness, his dominating climbing in the '12 , '13, and '15 tour perfomances, his salbutamol cae, and the general shadiness associated with Sky.

For what it's worth, I was watching Stage 19 with a former pro cyclist that most aficionados would easily recognize. As a good friend, he has openly spoken to me about his and others doping. He's ridden all the biggies, and was part of a tdf winning team. He looks over about halfway through the 100k, and he says, "well, that's not normal." He stood up and walked out of the room.

Wow! Sounds like full throttle with a motor!

adfasdf wrote:

Who cares what he's on. It's entertainment. I remember watching Floyd's stage in 2006 and that was one of the most exciting and impressive things I've ever seen.

There's even a highlight video done to music and all on that miraculous stage win. Epic:

I Chose D2 wrote:

I have never said that I think Froome is clean - I don't know if he is or isn't

I hope for your sakes that's a joke.