Sky - Page 821 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8201  
Old 11-08-12, 09:47
JimmyFingers's Avatar
JimmyFingers JimmyFingers is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,874
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine Seguros View Post
The justification for a thread as lengthy as this is that there are people who do believe, and who want to believe. When everybody agrees there is doping going on, the threads don't grow to this size because there's no disagreement and argument.

Also, the justification for a thread as lengthy as this is that all those other dodgy teams you point out... they got spanked to all six corners of l'Hexagone in July by this team. And in July you have the most people watching, the most people contributing to the forum, and the discussion grows fastest. And because of smashing the péloton all over France, they've had lots of opportunities to have interviews and features on them which has placed them under scrutiny, especially bearing in mind as you said, they couldn't have looked more suspicious if they tried. After, of course, promising transparency and access. If it weren't a team people wanted to believe in, this thread would have stalled early.
Ah so its the defenders of Sky that make this such a long thread, gotcha.

I understand that the success of the team garners attention, both good and bad. And I understand you're not going to get a lot of debate on a team that everyone agrees are doping, but the sheer number and length of threads, given that there's nothing but hearsay, conjecture and circumstancial evidence on Sky shows they do get a disproportionate amount of attention here. Yes they have been dominant but it's also because people simply don't like them, because of the newness of the team, the money they have, their sponsors, the association with BC etc etc. Their is an agenda against Sky that goes beyond the factors you list.

And if you want evidence just look at the fact their have been five or six pages on this thread recently discussing Wiggins' postcode, or previously the jacket he wears, or a picture of him on holiday smoking.

None are remotely relevant to this debate, something which I have said time and time again, yet this trivia is continually discussed ad infinitum in an effort to demonise certain characters.

If you want to go after Sky and find the truth then do it, and I'll applaud you. What I loathe is the moronic characters who use the clinic to get attention, say things to deliberately confront and antagonise and make accusation and insinuation about Sky staff and riders.

I get a lecture from you for saying what I just did, but I see a blind eye turned to this behaviour by and large in the clinic. I don't, I go after them and try to expose their motives and hypocrisies.

Such a lengthy thread but if you removed all the irrelevant posts you would halve it over-night. remove the endless repetitions of certain points and you'll halve it again. This thread is not challenging, or incisive, it is bloated and meandering.

Last edited by JimmyFingers; 11-08-12 at 09:49.
Reply With Quote
  #8202  
Old 11-08-12, 10:30
Libertine Seguros's Avatar
Libertine Seguros Libertine Seguros is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Land of Saíz
Posts: 14,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyFingers View Post
Ah so its the defenders of Sky that make this such a long thread, gotcha.

I understand that the success of the team garners attention, both good and bad. And I understand you're not going to get a lot of debate on a team that everyone agrees are doping, but the sheer number and length of threads, given that there's nothing but hearsay, conjecture and circumstancial evidence on Sky shows they do get a disproportionate amount of attention here. Yes they have been dominant but it's also because people simply don't like them, because of the newness of the team, the money they have, their sponsors, the association with BC etc etc. Their is an agenda against Sky that goes beyond the factors you list.
Yes, but without the circular arguments in the Clinic that stuff would be in the Professional Road Racing forum, and this thread would be much shorter. Most of this thread is Betonköpfe on both sides of the debate. If it was just pro-Sky Betonköpfe the thread wouldn't even exist, or would only exist in the Professional Road Racing forum. If it was just anti-Sky Betonköpfe it would exist but would have petered out like the Cobo and Menchov threads.

Quote:
I get a lecture from you for saying what I just did, but I see a blind eye turned to this behaviour by and large in the clinic. I don't, I go after them and try to expose their motives and hypocrisies.
That's because this is the only place to discuss doping in the forum. There are lots of threads about Sky, but for the sake of making the rest of the forum readable it makes more sense to put that which is not legitimately new information into the ongoing megathread. And then anything that IS legitimately new gets posted in here anyway. Easy to see how the thread has swelled to thousands of posts.
__________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrFiUlhAPes

Forever tête de la course.
Reply With Quote
  #8203  
Old 11-08-12, 11:03
Snafu352 Snafu352 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 73
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehog View Post
Wayne Rooney doesn't even have 3 books!

Anyway that was quick end to our debate.

I'm a proven liar. There you go. Lucky you don't hold the same standards to Wiggo. You know "Lance I love him, never raced against him - myth - raced him in 2009" interchangeable stories.

Come back another time when you toughen up and can stand the heat of the Clinic. Now on ya bike!
Where is all the proof re doping on Sky you constantly make insinuations of?

thehog = a walt
Reply With Quote
  #8204  
Old 11-08-12, 11:11
Wallace and Gromit Wallace and Gromit is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,213
Default

Libertine Seguros - You truly are on a different level to most (if not all) other posters here. Chapeau, +1 etc. Marvellous, thought-provoking stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #8205  
Old 11-08-12, 11:22
RownhamHill RownhamHill is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sittingbison View Post
I'll jump in at this point and remind Sky supporters that it is ludicrous to demand proof or evidence of doping. . .
Thanks for the reminder. Let me click my heels together and repeat the mantra.

It's ludicrous to demand evidence of doping
It's ludicrous to demand evidence of doping
It's ludicrous to demand evidence of doping
There's no place like home
There's no place like home. . .
Reply With Quote
  #8206  
Old 11-08-12, 11:23
thehog's Avatar
thehog thehog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15,185
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wallace and Gromit View Post
Libertine Seguros - You truly are on a different level to most (if not all) other posters here. Chapeau, +1 etc. Marvellous, thought-provoking stuff.
I would agree. His analysis and critical reasoning is first rate.

Back to the topic at hand...

I can buy the Wiggins story. It does follow a logical path. But in combination with Rogers, Porte and the the absolute absurdity of Froome the story is "not normal"

Even if Froome was this massively under discovered talent struck down by a bizarre blood virus his 2012 is weird a55.

At Romandie he was 10 minutes off the back on each stage. He couldn't keep up with the peloton! But somehow not only managed to come back to a good fitness level 6 weeks later but to a Tour crushing climbing and TT level!

Romandie to the Tour - that just defies "not normal normal!"

Marginal gains don't give a turn around like Froome's. Not in 2 years and certainly not in 6 weeks.
Reply With Quote
  #8207  
Old 11-08-12, 11:29
Wallace and Gromit Wallace and Gromit is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,213
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmcg76 View Post
Wait, I thought it was Ellingworth who was coaching Wiggin's in 2009 whilst at Garmin. So are you saying that even Ellingworth viewed Froome as a bigger GC potential than Wiggin's. Was Wiggins's own coach caught by surprise by his own protege. Something doesn't quite add up here.
From what I know, Sky set their Tour victory target year as 2014 as they were banking on one of the guys in the Academy at the time. That is, someone in his teens at the time who would be bid 20s by 2014. Pete Kennaugh has always been spoken of as "the man" in this respect.

Despite training with Ellingworth in early 2009, Wiggo played no part in Sky's masterplan, which was always to sign Cav to bag lots of wins in 2010-2012 before launching Kennaugh (or whoever "the man" was) on the GT trail in a serious fashion.

For whatever reason, Cav didn't sign for Sky initially and Wiggo surprised everyone with his 2009 Tour performance. It must have surprised Sky, as presumably had they known his potential in early 2009, they'd have signed him for a much lower salary and much lower payoff to Garmin than they had to shell out when they signed him in late 2009.

Wiggo training with Ellingworth in early 2009 appears more like him wanting to stick with what he was comfortable with - i.e. the GB squad setup - rather than some masterplan by Sky to prepare him for future GT success once they'd lured him away from Garmin.

I don't think Froome registered on Sky's radar as a serious rider until the Vuelta in 2011, as otherwise, as others have stated, he would not have been consigned to the "out of contract" scrap heap.
Reply With Quote
  #8208  
Old 11-08-12, 11:41
Wallace and Gromit Wallace and Gromit is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,213
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehog View Post
I can buy the Wiggins story. It does follow a logical path. But in combination with Rogers, Porte and the the absolute absurdity of Froome the story is "not normal"
It was when Froome came from nowhere in the 2011 Vuelta that I was reminded of my Father In Law's saying about investments: "If something seems too good to be true, then it most likely is."

After this, one has to be suspicious of Sky, although this obviously doesn't mean that every argument put forward against them is valid!
Reply With Quote
  #8209  
Old 11-08-12, 11:55
Dear Wiggo's Avatar
Dear Wiggo Dear Wiggo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sunny Australia
Posts: 5,849
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wallace and Gromit View Post
Despite training with Ellingworth in early 2009, Wiggo played no part in Sky's masterplan, which was always to sign Cav to bag lots of wins in 2010-2012 before launching Kennaugh (or whoever "the man" was) on the GT trail in a serious fashion.

For whatever reason, Cav didn't sign for Sky initially and Wiggo surprised everyone with his 2009 Tour performance. It must have surprised Sky, as presumably had they known his potential in early 2009, they'd have signed him for a much lower salary and much lower payoff to Garmin than they had to shell out when they signed him in late 2009.

Wiggo training with Ellingworth in early 2009 appears more like him wanting to stick with what he was comfortable with - i.e. the GB squad setup - rather than some masterplan by Sky to prepare him for future GT success once they'd lured him away from Garmin.
And it is this exact same thing that has me completely stumped.

Krebs Cycle and acoggan both carry on about Brad's awesome MAOD and how it points to his potential for GT (or road I don't remember exactly) success.

But Brailsford, who had literally held Brad's hand for all those World champ and Olympic medals: clueless about Brad's GT potential.

All the BC scientists and video analysis experts and masseurs and Dr Steven Peters. Rod Ellingworth, who, as you point out, was Brad's comfort zone. Jonathon Vaughters, even though here he mentions Brad's MAOD (and you'd wonder how the heck he'd know but I digress) had CVV as team leader for Garmin.

All of them: completely and utterly clueless about Brad's potential.

And out of the blue: 4th place.

Just a complete surprise to everyone.

Only now, after the fact, do we get PhDs and Garmin team manager saying "Meh, of course he could do that. Always knew he had it in him.".

Krebs even goes so far as to cite short TT examples vs Cancellara or a hilly stage at l"Avenir. None of it backs up the 2009 result though.
__________________
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog

Last edited by Dear Wiggo; 11-08-12 at 11:57.
Reply With Quote
  #8210  
Old 11-08-12, 11:58
Snafu352 Snafu352 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 73
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sittingbison View Post
...And ALL of it at Sky and OGRE is because of people like us putting them to the test....
I doubt very very much that any of the recent events in cycling have got anything to do with the clinic, however much certain of it's members would like to think so!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:02.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.