The Sky-Con-O-Meter. Predictions on how much more ridiculous they can get - Page 89 - 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
  #881  
Old 01-06-13, 22:30
The Hitch's Avatar
The Hitch The Hitch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London.
Posts: 22,772
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggo Warrior View Post
I agree (as seems to be common with your posts), but do you personally think, as presumably one of these cynics who took his words personally that you have to be doped up to win the Tour? That Cadel and Sastre were?
I think that its possible to win the TDF clean. Ironically id look to some of the guys who have doped as the best able to do it. I think Contador could win the Tour clean if the Tour is cleaner. I think Basso could have done it. but these are once in a generation talents who achieved amazing results when doped (so even if you took away a big layer for doping you might - and i use the word might, be left with something)

Then there are people who were fighting for previous Tours, so Sastre or Evans, who in theory stay the same while others decline, due to doping becoming less of a force. But that is of course making the assumption that they are clean (and i dont think either Evans nor Sastre were).

Its a bit harder to make a case for someone who struggled greatly with climbing and stage races, that they could accomplish the astonishing achievement of not just winning the Tour but winning it clean.

So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)
__________________
The Hitch: Winner 2013 Vuelta cq game. Winner, Velorooms prediction game 2012, 2013 (still undefeated). Currently 2nd all time cq rankings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pre 2009 wiggins
If there's a 1% suspicion or doubt that a team is working with certain doctors, then they shouldn't be invited to the Tour de France - as simple as that.
journalist with integrity.
Reply With Quote
  #882  
Old 01-06-13, 22:40
Froome19's Avatar
Froome19 Froome19 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 3,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hitch View Post
So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)
And if Contador was marginal gaining he would be winning Giro, Tour, Vuelta. And carrying out Fuent De's in his sleep
And then Lance.. now if Lance had been marginal gaining
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pistolero View Post
Gratz to Cav.
Reply With Quote
  #883  
Old 01-06-13, 22:50
The Hitch's Avatar
The Hitch The Hitch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London.
Posts: 22,772
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
And if Contador was marginal gaining he would be winning Giro, Tour, Vuelta. And carrying out Fuent De's in his sleep
And then Lance.. now if Lance had been marginal gaining
Contador under Brunyeel was imo actually better than Lance under Brunyeel.
__________________
The Hitch: Winner 2013 Vuelta cq game. Winner, Velorooms prediction game 2012, 2013 (still undefeated). Currently 2nd all time cq rankings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pre 2009 wiggins
If there's a 1% suspicion or doubt that a team is working with certain doctors, then they shouldn't be invited to the Tour de France - as simple as that.
journalist with integrity.
Reply With Quote
  #884  
Old 01-06-13, 23:06
the sceptic the sceptic is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,003
Default

Quote:
So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)
Not to mention Froome would be even better! at least on the climbs. If Sir Wiggins can beat Contador comfortably then imagine what Froome could do.
Reply With Quote
  #885  
Old 01-06-13, 23:39
Wiggo Warrior Wiggo Warrior is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 77
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hitch View Post
I think that its possible to win the TDF clean. Ironically id look to some of the guys who have doped as the best able to do it. I think Contador could win the Tour clean if the Tour is cleaner. I think Basso could have done it. but these are once in a generation talents who achieved amazing results when doped (so even if you took away a big layer for doping you might - and i use the word might, be left with something)

Then there are people who were fighting for previous Tours, so Sastre or Evans, who in theory stay the same while others decline, due to doping becoming less of a force. But that is of course making the assumption that they are clean (and i dont think either Evans nor Sastre were).

Its a bit harder to make a case for someone who struggled greatly with climbing and stage races, that they could accomplish the astonishing achievement of not just winning the Tour but winning it clean.

So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)
Thanks for the response.

Regarding the bolded bit above, I agree of course from the point of view of Wiggo's pre-2009 road career it is a lot to swallow, which is why I am not trying to change anyone's mind here. I may personally believe he is clean and have made that quite clear in my earlier posts on the proper Sky thread but that was not the point of my post in this thread. Virtually everyone in this forum has far more experience in road racing than me even if I have been trying to read and watch loads to try to catch up since catching the bug. I was simply trying to clarify what I believed Brad was responding to in his interview, in other words the actual question.

I do take issue with the people who seem to believe it can never be done however. What about Pinot then? No track/road confusion there and a top ten in the Tour in his early twenties. If in three or four years time he hits the top step of the podium would anyone then automatically suspect he'd sold out to the dark side?
Reply With Quote
  #886  
Old 01-06-13, 23:42
Dear Wiggo's Avatar
Dear Wiggo Dear Wiggo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sunny Australia
Posts: 5,317
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hitch View Post
So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)
Certainly a very different perspective - I have not seen this angle of hypothesis before, and it makes you sit up and think.

I concur with the poster above who asked how well Froome would go if 2012 TdF Froome was in fact clean, and added a layer of 10% Hgb increase as proven possible by Dr Ashenden. Ai carumba!
__________________
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog
Reply With Quote
  #887  
Old 01-06-13, 23:45
Dear Wiggo's Avatar
Dear Wiggo Dear Wiggo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sunny Australia
Posts: 5,317
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SundayRider View Post
Ever heard the expression 'those who protest too much'. For example someone challenges you on something if you really in your heart of hearts know you are right then your unlikely to react with anger and spite in that way.
I find it curious that Sky spent 1M GBP on PR in 2011, and noone thought to coach Brad in how to handle press conferences.

Or did they?

We have often seen here the reuse of the "idle w*nker" moniker being applied to anyone who questions Sky or their performances, whether individually or as a group.

What if it was a setup? Get the question out there and, given their target market is NEW fans, set up a hook for those new fans to hang any nay sayers on.

PR furphy or PR brilliance?
__________________
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog
Reply With Quote
  #888  
Old 01-07-13, 00:08
taiwan's Avatar
taiwan taiwan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,477
Default

Good posting, Hitch.
__________________
Scientific Expert
Reply With Quote
  #889  
Old 01-07-13, 00:11
Libertine Seguros's Avatar
Libertine Seguros Libertine Seguros is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Land of Saz
Posts: 13,763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggo Warrior View Post
I do take issue with the people who seem to believe it can never be done however. What about Pinot then? No track/road confusion there and a top ten in the Tour in his early twenties. If in three or four years time he hits the top step of the podium would anyone then automatically suspect he'd sold out to the dark side?
When a guy breaks out at 21, you assume that the guy is a top talent and therefore if in three or four years time he wins the race, it's because he was that damn good. Whether he doped or not. That's part of Hitch's call on Contador or Basso as being guys who doped who might have contended clean.

With Wiggins, however, he broke out at a very late age (29, 31 even if we take the 2009 result as a sign of things to come and factor in 2010). Therefore, we have years of data to deal with where he was on the pro scene but not achieving what we would expect a guy of the talent level required to win the Tour to be achieving. The fact that he was a track specialist might account for most of that, but we can't un-see that this was a guy who came from struggling to stay with the grupetto to breathing through his nose behind 3 teammates while GT winners suffer like animals a minute down the road. That's going to look suspicious any time it happens, let alone when it comes from a guy who, at age 28, supposedly the start of peak age for a cyclist, hadn't shown even the remotest sign that it was a possibility on a hill in any race, let alone the Tour de France.

Comparing Wiggins to Pinot is therefore unfair. Pinot is a young prospect who has been talked up as having climbing potential from the word go. If he goes on to win GTs, that's just part of what people thought he might be capable of. Show me somebody who, at the time of the Beijing Olympics, thought that Bradley Wiggins would win the Tour within four years, and I'll show you a liar. Or maybe Pat McQuaid. Oh wait: tautology.
__________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrFiUlhAPes

Forever tte de la course.
Reply With Quote
  #890  
Old 01-07-13, 00:21
Wiggo Warrior Wiggo Warrior is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 77
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine Seguros View Post
When a guy breaks out at 21, you assume that the guy is a top talent and therefore if in three or four years time he wins the race, it's because he was that damn good. Whether he doped or not. That's part of Hitch's call on Contador or Basso as being guys who doped who might have contended clean.

With Wiggins, however, he broke out at a very late age (29, 31 even if we take the 2009 result as a sign of things to come and factor in 2010). Therefore, we have years of data to deal with where he was on the pro scene but not achieving what we would expect a guy of the talent level required to win the Tour to be achieving. The fact that he was a track specialist might account for most of that, but we can't un-see that this was a guy who came from struggling to stay with the grupetto to breathing through his nose behind 3 teammates while GT winners suffer like animals a minute down the road. That's going to look suspicious any time it happens, let alone when it comes from a guy who, at age 28, supposedly the start of peak age for a cyclist, hadn't shown even the remotest sign that it was a possibility on a hill in any race, let alone the Tour de France.

Comparing Wiggins to Pinot is therefore unfair. Pinot is a young prospect who has been talked up as having climbing potential from the word go. If he goes on to win GTs, that's just part of what people thought he might be capable of. Show me somebody who, at the time of the Beijing Olympics, thought that Bradley Wiggins would win the Tour within four years, and I'll show you a liar. Or maybe Pat McQuaid. Oh wait: tautology.
At the time of the Beijing Olympics I didn't even expect him to win a gold in Athens in four years, I just rather liked the odd looking skinny ginger kid who looked out of place in an older team

I wasn't comparing Wiggins with Pinot per se, I think he's a great talent and would like to see him one day on that top step but not if he's going to get the sort of hard time that some people seem to be dishing out to all winners.
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 03:06.


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.