Vroom, vroom, Froome!

July 12, 2013 § 44 Comments

Newsflash! Chris Froome is on drugs!

Newsflash! Yawn!

Newsflash! So am I! (Beer’s a drug, right?)

Several different methodologies have pointed out the obvious: When the Froomster’s time on Ax3 beats Lance and others in their doping heyday … it’s pretty plain he’s doping! This story in Outside confirms what everyone knows and no one cares about. The Tour de France is athletic bike porn.

It’s not real. The performances are not real. Everything is staged. It is as comparable to the sex you have with your wife as the stuff they show on http://www.superpornstaraction.com.

The problem with the Outside.com analysis is that it involves numbers. I hate numbers. I still don’t know who got to the town faster, the man driving x miles per hour at y velocity, or the train that left the station at time z going speed f divided by the number of apples in a bushel.

What I do know is that the dude who took the most drugs clandestinely is winning the Tour. How do I know? I know because of Wiggins.

The Wiggo factor

Was I the only one who noticed that the defending Tour champ abdicated shortly after winning? And that’s like, the only time that’s ever happened? And, it’s, like, incomprehensible? And what’s more bizarre, he didn’t even retire, he just said that next year it would be the Froomster?

What the fucking fuck?

Then I thought about it, and now I can explain it, especially since Wiggo has vanished from the scene. Here’s what happened.

Wiggins was put on Brailsford’s plan of “marginal gains.” This means microdosing and evading detection by training in Mallorca, where the testers can’t surprise you. Wiggins, who is an alcoholic nutcase, was driven to the brink of insanity because he had to go from a track rider/stage race flailer to Tour contender. The insanity was caused by his fear of getting busted; Wiggins has shown in his autobiography and elsewhere that he is a very fragile mental case.

Froome, who was an absolute nobody before Brailsford got him on the drug program, could have won the Tour in 2012. This would have been uncool, because Wiggins was winning sprint finishes, destroying all preparatory stage races, and on track to win the Tour in Britain’s Olympic year.

Brailsford therefore cut a deal with Froome. Wiggins would win in 2012 and the Froomster would win in 2013. The parties essentially agreed to this in public when Wiggins said that he wouldn’t defend his Tour title but would focus on the Giro. This is like someone saying they weren’t going to defend their NCAA baskeball title but would instead focus on the NIT.

Man of his word

Wiggins went from being unbeatable in 2012 to Mr. Nobody in 2013. He flailed and bailed in the Giro, and distinguished himself in the build-up races by being completely indistinct. He faded from the scene, and, trust me, you will never hear from him again. He is a fragile crazypants who cannot cope with the cheating and lying required by the Brailsford doping program. His pro career is over, and we should thank him for contributing “bone idle wankers” to our lexicon. 

Froome, on the other hand, has all the qualities of a top-tier level doper. He boldly proclaims his cleanness. He destroys his rivals by massive margins. He throws out wattage — 6.3 w/kg and more — that are impossible in an undoped state. Best of all, he is backed by the drug enabling quotes of Brailsford, who tosses off bizzaricisms like “At some point in time, clean performances will surpass the doped performances in the past.”

What?

That’s like saying, “At some point, Formula 1 cars with no aerodynamic fairings and design will go as fast as those that are wholly aerodynamic.”

It makes no fucking sense at all, based as it is on neither data nor science, but merely on the assertions of someone trying to defend an obviously doped stable of athletes.

Thankfully, VeloNews and other lickspittle cycling magazines have accepted this at face value because their advertising depends on the deluded and jaded readers who either don’t know or don’t care that everything produced by Team Sky flies in the face of reality and fairness. The pedestrian, non-superhuman times turned in by those who are racing against the Froomster show that although the peloton is cleaner, top honors still go to the cheater who goes biggest and who dares anyone to bust him.

At least with Lance, the winner had a cool name, attractive wristbands, and a series of good looking women permanently attached to his arm.

Tagged:

§ 44 Responses to Vroom, vroom, Froome!

  • A biased Brit writes:

    Watch out for Wiggo winning the World Time Trial Champs later this year – and then marvel again as the wheels fall off this argument.

    Carry on old chap.

    • Admin says:

      “Biased Brit?” That’s like “Ignorant American.” Wholly redundant, dude.

      Your comment got wedged in the spam filter, no idea why.

      If the wheels fall off this argument, they will immediately go on eBay, along with all of my others.

  • Erik says:

    Just got done reading the Bicycling Mag article, then came here for analysis. Ask and ye shall receive!

    • Admin says:

      But when you come here, ye shall not necessarily receive that for which ye asked!

      • Erik says:

        I meant Outside magazine. It seemed odd to me that an industry rag like Bicycling would print a doping expose. Now I know why. They didn’t.

      • Admin says:

        Rule One of Bicycling Magazines: Say Good Things
        Rule Two of Bicycling Magazines: Repeat Rule One

  • Joe Camacho says:

    NCAA vs NIT comparison, are you trying to attract non -cycling audience? Might be the equivalent of cycling-blog doping.

  • Liz says:

    Do you think Lance would have still been awesome if he’d kept his last name of Mooneyham? Me either.

  • Jon Trimble says:

    How dare you accuse Wiggly of cheating w/o proof? I know for a FACT that it was not his choice to not defend his tour title. Instead it was French television that insisted that he not ride in the tour. You see last year you had legions of French girls vomiting every time Wiggly’s mug was shown on TV, as he is without a doubt the ugliest human being ever to throw a leg over a bicycle. And those mutton chops just exacerbated his homeliness

    • Admin says:

      In blind taste tests, French women actually preferred the taste of Wiggins’s face to that of Froome’s.

      Also, mutton chops adhere to the Rule of Eddy: If Eddy did it, it is beyond reproach, no matter how awful they look.

      I’m working on a pair of mutton chops myself. Well, okay, they’re more like chicken chops … but I’m trying.

  • dan martun says:

    Aerodynamics of a F1 car is more about downforce creation and reduction. Therefore a F1 car with no aero downforce would technically be faster in a straight line. That being said how do I get on this microdosing program?

  • JP says:

    Totally agree. Froome needs a wristband…..

  • DpCandND..FBBC says:

    Hew WM, wassup?…Once, in 1987, on a curb, beside the mini-POS car in the lttle POS town of Tielt, Belgium, I watched two Flemish dudes with hot girlfriends “prepare” for the kermesse we were doing that afternoon…they were ugly, had muttonchops, but were fast (hence the hotties) and they had the right juice. See, it all werks.

  • Toronto says:

    Dopers ROCK!

  • it’s probably the extra long shorts that LA also sported that make Froome so fast… Man that looks bad on anyone

  • Skip Barrett says:

    “lickspittle cycling magazines” …HAR!

    Another awesome read!

  • velocodger says:

    In “other news”, Tour TV viewership just spiked due to a huge increase in British Commonwealth countries. No coincidence here folks, just move along.

  • Hwy. 39 says:

    What does Turdy France “winner” and convicted doper Al Counter say about Broome?

    “There is no reason to doubt Broome, He is a professional rider who has been performing at a really high level all year, and I think that his results are the fruits of the work he puts in and nothing else.”

    “I fully believe that he is clean. That is why the doping controls are there, isn’t it?”

    But we all know that Al Counter’s English is not the best, so allow me to say what he meant to say, but was lost in translation:

    “Hat’s off to Broome. Like everyone else in the Peloton, he worked his ass off this year. And on top of that, he has the best dope that beat the doping controls. Can you get me the burner cell number of his supplier?”

  • ache says:

    words can’t describe your stupidity

    • Admin says:

      You’ve made a good first attempt. However, it will be improved with proper capitalization and punctuation.

      • Erik says:

        By the way, who are these fucking people that get so upset when somebody calls a pro cyclist a doper? Are professional cycling fans predisposed to sycophancy or something? I can’t imagine somebody getting this upset over a blog-post accusing a baseball player of doping, but then again, maybe I’m naive. Maybe most people are sycophants.

      • fsethd says:

        They are the sad sacks who think that popularity and success = morality and decency. In other words, they are idiots.

  • velocodger says:

    I got flamed by a guy once for calling Hinault a jerk. He listed all the races Hinault had won as a response. I guess I had forgotten that if ya win a lot of races, you can’t possibly be a jerk.

Donate a few seconds of your life that you'll never get back

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Vroom, vroom, Froome! at Cycling in the South Bay.

meta

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 809 other followers

%d bloggers like this: