Discussion in 'Pro Cycling (Road and Track Racing)' started by Joffey, 15 Sep 2016.
Whay are you chuckling?
Other than you and Lance Armstrong and the great unwashed, lots of people prefer the Classics to GTs
why 'converts from golf' ?................
Seems a common enough theory on here that needs to have any basis in truth.
Cycling is the new golf according to me
Difficult to summon much sympathy for Vegni, given this demonstrates what a bull$h1tter he must be, based on his previous flat denials of start fees or any 'relationship based on economics' with Sky around Froome entering the Giro......... maybe he's been infected by the Sky bull$h1tting machine.
Stop bull$h1tting, you morons!
As @rich p said above, both have a legitimate place in cycling but a hell of a lot of die hard cycling fans put more emphasis on the classics than grand tours .
I was under the influence and failed to write the joke and only wrote the chuckle.
Well I never!
well isn't that jolly good timing
I can’t see how this will really help Froome. Even revising his sample down to 1,429ng/ml, that’s still considerably in excess of the 1,000ng/ml limit. It doesn’t state in the report exactly by how much they exceeded 1,000ng/ml in the simulation but that only leads me to suppose it’s not by that much.
so where has this magical figure of 1,429ng/ml come from , if that's the figure then why not say that from the start , if it isn't the figure then stick with the original , I don't understand how someone came up with a "revised "figure
It means he’s only 42.9% as guilty as f***.
Does anyone know if @Adam4868 works in a lab in Leiden?
Separate names with a comma.