Sky - Page 981 - 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
  #9801  
Old 12-12-12, 09:42
Wiggo Warrior Wiggo Warrior is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 77
Default

Hi everyone,

I may be the first card carrying, certified, actual 'new fan' and 'Sky fan who started watching (road) cycling in July' ever to post on this thread from what I have read here (if the legions of vitriolic Sky fans who are moaned about regularly ever existed outside peoples imaginations I can only assume that they had almost all of their posts deleted).

On that point I would like to thank the moderators who have removed literally hundreds of offensive posts from both sides of the argument. I was particularly glad to see the back of the Hitler one.

I have just finished reading this entire thread through for the second time, following all the provided links (where there was no pay-wall involved) and doing my own research into techniques in training and nutrition for endurance athletes because I hate not knowing stuff and trying to base a decision on 'smells'.

I would now like to announce my 'reasoned decision'.

There is absolutely no reason why Sky would have had to dope their riders to perform as they have this season, and my opinion is that they (either team or riders) haven't used any banned substances/techniques.

Note that this doesn't mean they haven't in the past, the only one I would make that claim for with anything like certainty is Brad.

I know that I have several 'strikes' against me being taken seriously in this thread so I am not holding out much hope but if anyone wants to know any specifics behind how I reached my decision I will be around until the season starts, after which you will probably find me in the Road Racing forum

Strike 1: I am a fat, forty-something female who prior to the tour hadn't been on a bike for ten years despite buying a second hand one some months before the race started. Post tour I have started commuting on it intermittently so I suppose I am also an example of the 'Wiggo effect' in action.

Strike 2: I am from the UK and live not a million miles away from BC central. (In my defense I have travelled extensively in Europe and further afield and agree that it is obvious that brits are no more immune from the temptation to dope than anyone else, particularly when there is lots of money involved).

Strike 3: I started watching the tour when the fact that Brad had taken yellow suddenly interrupted my Wimbledon viewing. (Since then I have watched every bit of televised cycling I could find, although 'watched' was a very loose term when it came to Lombardia. That last attack from Rodriguez must have been a belter).

Strike 4: I have been a (Olympics only) Brad fan since Sydney and do think there are potential physiological crossovers between great IP performances and great GC performances. If Bobridge (Current world record holder) is indeed a better IPer than Brad and shares a similar physiology then I would love for him to make the grade in a few years.

Strike 5: I have been a Sky fan since discovering their race tracker and using it during the race to get up to speed with both the race and cycling in general. I particularly liked Scott Mitchell's photographs and the amazing looking food that Soren produces My favourite Sky rider is currently EBH although I also have a soft spot for Bernie. Brad comes in third, just ahead of G.

Strike 6: I did not find the tour boring and not just for the obvious reason that Brad was in the lead. Compared to Formula one which I have been watching since the early nineties even the worst stage was packed with tactics and action (and beautiful scenery). My favourite stage was eighteen, although I found the Champs pretty special too.

Strike 7: I have a science/engineering/data background in a completely non-related field and thus tend to trust logic quite a lot rather than my instinct/gut feelings.

Last edited by Wiggo Warrior; 12-14-12 at 09:35. Reason: Edited strike 7 to clarify
Reply With Quote
  #9802  
Old 12-12-12, 09:55
Dear Wiggo's Avatar
Dear Wiggo Dear Wiggo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sunny Australia
Posts: 5,551
Default

I have a science background and use both science and intuition.

You're wrong. But welcome anyway.

At 1 post a second, you'd be reading non-stop for 3 hours to read all posts in this thread. Let alone reading them properly, or following links. Make it 3 seconds and that's 9 hours reading.

If, on the other hand, you did read all the posts, and still reached your "reasoned" decision, kudos to you. But it changes nothing, for anyone. It reinforces your pals in Sky lovers land, and will be dismissed, as you already realised, by the anti-doping crowd, most of whom have watched cycling since long before Brad managed to ride worth a damn on the road.
__________________
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog

Last edited by Dear Wiggo; 12-12-12 at 10:10.
Reply With Quote
  #9803  
Old 12-12-12, 10:13
Cycle Chic's Avatar
Cycle Chic Cycle Chic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,334
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wirral View Post
If UCI "free passes" do exist and certain teams know they will be "protected" at certain races, I would imagine OPQS has ringfenced the cobbled classics.

Sky and Froome have to look elsewhere.

All pure conjecture of course.
Surely the UCI, Pat and Hein brotherhood are not going to risk giving out anymore free passes ? Surely they are going to be under intense scrutiny in 2013. Having their footprints tracked, business dealings etc.

Thats if they arent booted out or actually produce a conscience.

Surely the riders will now have to dope their own program or the teams risk having their own. The UCI surely wont be helping anymore.
Reply With Quote
  #9804  
Old 12-12-12, 10:22
Avoriaz's Avatar
Avoriaz Avoriaz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 427
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dear Wiggo View Post
and will be dismissed, as you already realised, by the anti-doping crowd, most of whom have watched cycling since long before Brad managed to ride worth a damn on the road.
For the sake of balance, as have many of those refusing to put Sky on the ducking stool just yet
__________________
Rake Rides Again
Reply With Quote
  #9805  
Old 12-12-12, 10:40
Dear Wiggo's Avatar
Dear Wiggo Dear Wiggo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sunny Australia
Posts: 5,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avoriaz View Post
For the sake of balance, as have many of those refusing to put Sky on the ducking stool just yet
For the sake of clarity, I was reinforcing
1. we are anti-doping, not anti-Sky or anti-Brit as is often bandied around by the informed UK intelligentsia et al
2. we are basing our decision on more than half a Grand Tour and 9000 posts in a forum somewhere
3. the complete lack of bias and purely scientific nature of Wiggo Warrior's post is reinforced by their username, clearly.
__________________
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog
Reply With Quote
  #9806  
Old 12-12-12, 10:47
Don't be late Pedro's Avatar
Don't be late Pedro Don't be late Pedro is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,361
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dear Wiggo View Post
I have a science background and use both science and intuition.
Wow, you must be right then.

Quote:
You're wrong. But welcome anyway.
Good to see you are keeping up your track record of reasoned argument.

Quote:
At 1 post a second, you'd be reading non-stop for 3 hours to read all posts in this thread. Let alone reading them properly, or following links. Make it 3 seconds and that's 9 hours reading.
If she put you on ignore and then read the thread that would make it 5 minutes

Quote:
If, on the other hand, you did read all the posts, and still reached your "reasoned" decision, kudos to you. But it changes nothing, for anyone. It reinforces your pals in Sky lovers land, and will be dismissed, as you already realised, by the anti-doping crowd, most of whom have watched cycling since long before Brad managed to ride worth a damn on the road.
Yes, because anyone that follows Sky would not have watched cycling before then.
__________________
Quote:
I was awarded 'Most Aggressive Rider of the Day', generally given to the most spectacular loser of the day.
― David Millar, Racing Through the Dark
Reply With Quote
  #9807  
Old 12-12-12, 10:50
Benotti69's Avatar
Benotti69 Benotti69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggo Warrior View Post

Strike 7: I have a scientific background in a completely non-related field and thus tend to use logic quite a lot rather than instinct/gut feelings.
Better do some research on the sport. To help you it was not invented in Manchester by TeamGB/Sky.

Dopeology.org is a start if you find the clinic a bit difficult to work through.
__________________
"ahaha, ever had the feeling you been cheated?" JL SF Jan'78
Reply With Quote
  #9808  
Old 12-12-12, 10:52
Wallace and Gromit Wallace and Gromit is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dear Wiggo View Post
For the sake of clarity, I was reinforcing
1. we are anti-doping, not anti-Sky or anti-Brit as is often bandied around by the informed UK intelligentsia et al.
I recall you saying that you only really got interested in Sky/Wiggo after he indirectly accused you of being a bone idle w*nker at his infamous Tour press conference.

Whilst this is entirely understandable (Wiggo reaping what he has sown and all that) it does mean that you are somewhat anti-Wiggo on a personal rather than purely doping basis as a result, and your posts need to be interpreted in this light.
Reply With Quote
  #9809  
Old 12-12-12, 10:57
Dear Wiggo's Avatar
Dear Wiggo Dear Wiggo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sunny Australia
Posts: 5,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wallace and Gromit View Post
I recall you saying that you only really got interested in Sky/Wiggo after he indirectly accused you of being a bone idle w*nker at his infamous Tour press conference.

Whilst this is entirely understandable (Wiggo reaping what he has sown and all that) it does mean that you are somewhat anti-Wiggo on a personal rather than purely doping basis as a result, and your posts need to be interpreted in this light.
Need to be interpreted? Or need to be dismissed as soon as possible because your hero is being questioned?

Have you seen me post anywhere else? Have a look in the other famous doper thread, titled, "JV talks, sort of".

I question anything that looks dodgy. I am anti-doping. Funny a Sky lover having a go at me because I question the complete dodginess of Rogers, Wiggins, Porte, Froome.

If Rogers continues to perform in 2013 like he did in 2012, guess what? I will question his dodginess. And he's Aussie, like me. And he will be riding for Saxo.

You are going to slowly run out of ammo to dismiss me as anti-Wiggo.

Despite what you think I said, or interpreted what I said, the intent of this nom de plume is as described in the .sig: Letters to and from the pro peloton.

eg: if Wiggo retires tomorrow, I am still here, still calling the dodginess I see.
__________________
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog

Last edited by Dear Wiggo; 12-12-12 at 11:06.
Reply With Quote
  #9810  
Old 12-12-12, 11:10
del1962 del1962 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dear Wiggo View Post
For the sake of clarity, I was reinforcing
1. we are anti-doping, not anti-Sky or anti-Brit as is often bandied around by the informed UK intelligentsia et al
2. we are basing our decision on more than half a Grand Tour and 9000 posts in a forum somewhere
3. the complete lack of bias and purely scientific nature of Wiggo Warrior's post is reinforced by their username, clearly.
You probably posted this with a complete lack of a sense of irony and self-awareness,
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 22:22.


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.