Tenerife - Page 4 - 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
  #31  
Old 11-11-12, 16:18
thehog thehog is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cineteq View Post
theHog's gonna be sad to find out that the Volcano is the real source of power for Wiggins & Sky. His theory has been debunked.
Not at all. It proves the point.

I rest my case.

Tenerife alone is suspect but not proof of doping. In combination with all of the elements I mention its proof of a year long doping program.

Sorry to disappoint.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-11-12, 16:46
Froome19's Avatar
Froome19 Froome19 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 3,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehog View Post
Not at all. It proves the point.

I rest my case.

Tenerife alone is suspect but not proof of doping. In combination with all of the elements I mention its proof of a year long doping program.

Sorry to disappoint.
Just all your other "elements" are not all that great as proofs themselves.
Ok, the only one which is, is the superiority of Sky but the fact is that using that proof as a basis and then working around that we see that what is left is merely that suspicion derived from their performances throughout this year and at the Tour in general. Everything else is a possibility but unlikely.. that for it to even contribute to damn a team as doping is rather wishful and ludicrous.

If we have proof such as eyewitnesses or definite links to Ferrari then you will have the proof you so desperately crave, until then... you have a suspicion which is certainly suspicious but in fact all you have is a suspicion which is valid, but certainly not proof of doping as it can be explained away.

There is always going to be factors such as Tenerife and former dopers which are going to link Sky or in fact any other team with doping, that is what the legacy of Lance and the previous generation have left us with. These proofs are never hard proof and do not show anything even if they are not in isolation. Indeed they could be used as proofs, but they are so tenuous due to the fact that there are so many links to the Lance era still within the peloton, that even considered alongside that valid suspicion of yours they really do not contribute. In effect all they are, are conspiracy theories.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pistolero View Post
Gratz to Cav.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-11-12, 16:47
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs John Murphy View Post
All change has a starting point and a pioneer, and normally the success of that pioneer is what encourages others to follow in their footsteps. Almost all innovations/developments in cycling are associated with a particular rider or team or event, and very rarely do they ever seem to start with those at the lower reaches of the sport.
Certainly true - but that change could be for a variety of reason.
I am happy to be corrected on this, but generally speaking riders trained (very little) at home, some teams then met in warmer climates within their own country in Jan/Feb. (ie French teams went to Cote d'Azur)
It is difficult to pinpoint when a change came - but I believe it was the advent of big budget properly structured teams like PDM that brought cycling out of the dark ages.
However, IIRC the first person I remember going somewhere exotic was Rominger. He went to places like the US and IIRC even South Africa.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs John Murphy View Post
Thanks - although I seem to recall that teams have gone out of their way in recent years post 2006 - Astana, RS, Sky etc to invite the press along to their Tenerife/Etna training camps - almost as a PR move to state 'we have nothing to hide'. (I think the press invite came after LL was shown to have booked himself into the same hotel 'accidentally' as Ferrari).

The emergence of Reynolds and Spanish cycling maybe circa early 1980s?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-11-12, 16:56
thehog thehog is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
Just all your other "elements" are not all that great as proofs themselves.
Ok, the only one which is, is the superiority of Sky but the fact is that using that proof as a basis and then working around that we see that what is left is merely that suspicion derived from their performances throughout this year and at the Tour in general. Everything else is a possibility but unlikely.. that for it to even contribute to damn a team as doping is rather wishful and ludicrous.

If we have proof such as eyewitnesses or definite links to Ferrari then you will have the proof you so desperately crave, until then... you have a suspicion which is certainly suspicious but in fact all you have is a suspicion which is valid, but certainly not proof of doping as it can be explained away.

There is always going to be factors such as Tenerife and former dopers which are going to link Sky or in fact any other team with doping, that is what the legacy of Lance and the previous generation have left us with. These proofs are never hard proof and do not show anything even if they are not in isolation. Indeed they could be used as proofs, but they are so tenuous due to the fact that there are so many links to the Lance era still within the peloton, that even considered alongside that valid suspicion of yours they really do not contribute. In effect all they are, are conspiracy theories.
You need to watch more court room TV.

Do you think the law looks for "absolute proof" in isolation?

Not at all. A case is built on several facts and portions of evidence.

You hold the position that Sky is clean so anything you look at you bend it as fact that Sky are clean. You wouldn't be selected for a jury because you're biased.

Besides you're trying to disprove the Ferrari connect not that Sky don't dope.

You've lost sight of what you want out of this.

I'll restate. This is not about me. Its about Sky and doping.

If you think they're clean then good. I'm not going to burst your bubble its ok. Sky are clean. No positives.

I'm entitled to my opinion. I will not be censored.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-11-12, 17:19
Froome19's Avatar
Froome19 Froome19 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 3,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thehog View Post
You need to watch more court room TV.


Do you think the law looks for "absolute proof" in isolation?

Not at all. A case is built on several facts and portions of evidence.
I do not know where I claimed such a thing...

Quote:
You hold the position that Sky is clean so anything you look at you bend it as fact that Sky are clean. You wouldn't be selected for a jury because you're biased.

Besides you're trying to disprove the Ferrari connect not that Sky don't dope.

You've lost sight of what you want out of this.

I'll restate. This is not about me. Its about Sky and doping.
What we are attempting is trying to figure out is whether there is substantial proof to condemn them with as little bias as possible when debating it. So far you have not attempted to prove whatsoever that you have proof to back up your claims. You go through the same claims time and time again and the defining factor is that they are suspicious, but if I claimed that everything I found suspicious was proof of doping then.. You say that you have peripheral proofs which along with your main suspicion highlight Sky are doping, we have proven that these proofs are very flimsy when push comes to shove..

Yes I support Sky, as they were a dream come true for British cycling when they first burst on to the scene and so yes I am biased towards them. But personally I would like to think that if I saw good proof that Sky are doping I would believe it. I have been very critical of Sky in the past, they certainly say a lot of garbage. Wiggins imo is arrogant, not a great guy and pretty strange. Their PR is awful. Their style is awfully boring.. but I just do not see the proof when it comes to them doping.
Quote:
If you think they're clean then good. I'm not going to burst your bubble its ok. Sky are clean. No positives.
Seriously can you really stop reffering back to these points when they are totally irelevant to the point you are trying to make? You attempt to be disparaging by bringing up this positive thing, but no one here has ever claimed that a lack of positives would ensure that teams are not considering to having doped.
Quote:
I'm entitled to my opinion. I will not be censored.
What is this about your view being censored. This is a debate, people are allowed to have their opposing opinions, no one has ever claimed otherwise.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pistolero View Post
Gratz to Cav.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-11-12, 17:55
mountainrman mountainrman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 375
Default

I saw groups of good riders training there in the mid nineties, but like lanzarote the roads were not good and suffer damage frim heat and wear.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-11-12, 17:59
Mrs John Murphy's Avatar
Mrs John Murphy Mrs John Murphy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Stamping on Cadel's dog
Posts: 2,167
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainrman View Post
I saw groups of good riders training there in the mid nineties, but like lanzarote the roads were not good and suffer damage frim heat and wear.
Was that before or after you got cancer, or before or after Eddy Merckx introduced you to Ferrari?
__________________
Justcycling

...girls and ****ed 'em at school. All I know is that there were rumours he was into field hockey players

"the only thing worse than reading Cycling News is talking to them" Paul Kimmage

"The four most beautiful words in our common language: I told you so." Gore Vidal
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-11-12, 18:52
Velodude Velodude is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,210
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cineteq View Post
theHog's gonna be sad to find out that the Volcano is the real source of power for Wiggins & Sky. His theory has been debunked.
If some Italian teams use active volcano Mt. Etna (also the Giro) there are grounds for suspicion that volcanoes may provide some magic elixir.

BTW, the volcano on Tenerife is the cause of concern for the eastern seaboard of the USA.

Geologists predict if there is a volcano flank collapse it will cause a massive landslide westwards to the sea creating a huge tsunami.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-11-12, 19:18
Mellow Velo's Avatar
Mellow Velo Mellow Velo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9,273
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs John Murphy View Post
There you go. To be honest I was more interested in the history of Tenerife and I didn't remember it being discussed before.
Me too, that's why I asked about viable alternatives.

The thing for me is why go to Tenerife, when Fuentes and almost all the dodgy doctors inhabit Gran Canaria?
Gran Canaria ticks all the same boxes, plus that extra special one.
The only thing it lacks is a plateau, (Teide) above 2000 metres.
Plenty of mountainous roads though.

The EPO-altitude theory is interesting, but then you have the German track sprint team being sent to Colorado, just prior to the Olympics.
GB have also consider Colorado for Summer training.

The Hog now advocating Tenerife as a cheap training destination made me smile.
Yesterday, it was why go there when there are all those snowbound European mountain ranges.
__________________
They use thought only to justify their injustices, and speech only to disguise their thoughts. Voltaire
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-11-12, 19:27
Descender's Avatar
Descender Descender is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arnout View Post
What exactly was wrong with the previous Tenerife thread?
That would be my question as well.
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 12:50.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.