Sky - Page 1323 - 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
  #13221  
Old 02-20-13, 22:53
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 mastersracer View Post
It's easy.

1. Wiggins' performance at the 2012 Tour is consistent with his performances going back to 2004 according to a critical power plot.
Wrong. It starts at 2004 and then leaps to 2009 - the first year that everyone uses the word, "surprise" for Wiggins' performance.

And in 2006 and 2008, 2 then 4 years after 2004 if you're counting, his 4-minute power was EXACTLY THE SAME.

ie no improvement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastersracer View Post
2. Wiggin's 2009 Tour performance was the result of his first year dedicated entirely to the road following his decision to leave the track after the 2008 Olympics. It took place on a team widely regarded to be the best case for clean cycling. If Wiggins' 2012 Tour performance was doped, then one is committed to his 2009 performance as doped as well, which means Garmin would be as dirty as Sky. Maybe, but this is a big leap.
Wrong. 2006 was dedicated to the road.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastersracer View Post
3. Sky's marginal gains approach utilizes plausible incremental advances in training, equipment, and management.
Advances in training? Reverse periodisation? Uh huh.
Advances in equipment? Uh. No.
Advances in management? Read the latest Brailsford BS about how he is responsible for Froome's performance at Oman. What a PR spin master that guy is.

OR did you mean all the "management" that have since been dumped due to doping pasts?


Quote:
Originally Posted by mastersracer View Post
4. Sky is more disciplined and structured. Nibali regrets not going to Sky because he realizes it is the best team. Their approach comes out of British Cycling, which has a proven record of success and has never had a rider implicated in doping.
Except Rob Hayles, who, after 8 years as a track rider, all of a sudden needs a high HCt exemption. Such a short memory you masters blokes seem to have. Or David Millar, how can you forget good old Davey boy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastersracer View Post
5. What is often overlooked. The 10% reduction in power outputs over the last few years means new riders will emerge as previously dominant doped riders are no longer competitive without doping - Basso is a prime example. Under this scenario, it would be predicted that riders such as Froome would emerge.
Except people are still doping. And the "clean" guys are making a mockery of them. They have not drawn even. They have smashed them into the ground.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastersracer View Post
6. No Sky performance has been documented to be physiologically suspicious by sports scientists examining power outputs during the last 2 Tours.
Until you look at the turn around of form - then it looks almost ridiculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastersracer View Post
almost forgot: Wiggins won the Tour because it had over 100km of ITT, few real mountain finishes, and Schleck and Contador did not participate.
Yes, the final TdF TT, where Wiggins hoped he might win one day, but not by 2.5 minutes to 5th place like Vino did to him; the margin so clearly indicative of doping. The exact margin from 2012 TdF.
__________________
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog

Last edited by Dear Wiggo; 02-20-13 at 23:04.
Reply With Quote
  #13222  
Old 02-20-13, 22:57
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
Not now. But yes then.
You think if JV knew about BWs doping in 09 he would have mentioned it? Really?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
Wouldn't have been worth it for Wiggins to go of and do his own doping away from the auspices of Vaughter and therefore jepoardise the whole team.

Unless you say that is the reason Wiggins left after that season which is a possibility.
Is this back to the theory that Garmin would shut down for a positive test?
That's a theory that has never happened - one positive will be put on the individual. Whether true or not.
Reply With Quote
  #13223  
Old 02-20-13, 23:04
Froome19's Avatar
Froome19 Froome19 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 3,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Maserati View Post
Is this back to the theory that Garmin would shut down for a positive test?
That's a theory that has never happened - one positive will be put on the individual. Whether true or not.
And would it stop there?
Garmin's credibility would nevertheless be severely dented.
I don't know if they would shut down but I for one would not take them seriously ever again and I know many who would do likewise.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pistolero View Post
Gratz to Cav.
Reply With Quote
  #13224  
Old 02-20-13, 23:13
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
And would it stop there?
Would what stop where?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
Garmin's credibility would nevertheless be severely dented.
I don't know if they would shut down but I for one would not take them seriously ever again and I know many who would do likewise.
This is what I don't get - you said earlier the team would go "bust", now it's damaged.
Every team runs that risk - and quite frankly it is a real possibility in any team.
Reply With Quote
  #13225  
Old 02-20-13, 23:22
mastersracer mastersracer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 929
Default

[QUOTE=Dear Wiggo;1145903]Wrong. It starts at 2004 and then leaps to 2009 - the first year that everyone uses the word, "surprise" for Wiggins' performance.

There are some apparent misunderstandings regarding the critical power plot. The fact is, his performances from 2009 and later are self-consistent with his 2004 performance. This is what the R2 value shows - the goodness of fit. There's no leap in sustainable power. The 'magical transformation' is a myth, based on the unreliability of using relative performance.
Reply With Quote
  #13226  
Old 02-20-13, 23:27
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastersracer View Post
There are some apparent misunderstandings regarding the critical power plot. The fact is, his performances from 2009 and later are self-consistent with his 2004 performance. This is what the R2 value shows - the goodness of fit. There's no leap in sustainable power. The 'magical transformation' is a myth, based on the unreliability of using relative performance.
Any 'misunderstanding' would be because you claimed this originally:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastersracer View Post
It's easy.

1. Wiggins' performance at the 2012 Tour is consistent with his performances going back to 2004 according to a critical power plot.
.......
Reply With Quote
  #13227  
Old 02-20-13, 23:30
ferryman's Avatar
ferryman ferryman is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LostinFife
Posts: 2,357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
Imagine it like this. Wiggins was a rider who was always capable of riding to that Top 4 place. He was the Thibau Pinot of 2005 or whatever but instead of climbing mountains in France he is focusing on riding in circle in Manchester. He just never had the chance. When would he have had the chance to prove it? When he was practising every day riding prologues on the track?

Or do you expect Wiggins who is riding on the track and weighs a significant amount more than the other GC contenders and is training in an entirely different manner to start actually being capable of climbing in GTs?
You and Mastrer Racer have completely missed the point of my post. Look at the timescales involved that I quoted. Factor in the 2 month, at least, bender, factor in the weight loss, factor in everything else I posted and then come back and tell me why it was always written in the stats that an up until then broomwagon avoider, in the space of months, yes months, can climb with the best climbers in the world.

If he was such a freak of nature, why wasn't he able to switch this phenomenon on and off before then. Or do you really believe Brad woke up hungover on, let's say, being generous again 1 December 2008, grossly overweight (for a pro) and with no road miles in his legs, and certainly no climbing miles at the speed he was about to show, and decided that's enough and turned himself into a Swan. Or did he wake up and think, how the fook do I catch up with these guys and make the big bucks they are on.
Reply With Quote
  #13228  
Old 02-20-13, 23:32
martinvickers martinvickers is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ireland
Posts: 2,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Maserati View Post
Any 'misunderstanding' would be because you claimed this originally:
Where is the inconsistency between the two statements?
Reply With Quote
  #13229  
Old 02-20-13, 23:41
Froome19's Avatar
Froome19 Froome19 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 3,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ferryman View Post
If he was such a freak of nature, why wasn't he able to switch this phenomenon on and off before then. Or do you really believe Brad woke up hungover on, let's say, being generous again 1 December 2008, grossly overweight (for a pro) and with no road miles in his legs, and certainly no climbing miles at the speed he was about to show, and decided that's enough and turned himself into a Swan. Or did he wake up and think, how the fook do I catch up with these guys and make the big bucks they are on.
No he won his Olympic golds on the track and decided that now he had fulfilled that stage of his career he would focus on the road.

Many riders have come back from injury and performed well within a time frame of 8 months. I don't see what is so fishy about that. Those guys would have just about been as much out of shape as Wiggins. It is not like we are teaching Wiggins here to ride up my mountains or anything. It takes proper training to covert from the track to the road but it is not that momentous. Of course you can not compare Geraint Thomas riding up Corkscrew hill to Wiggins riding Ventoux etc but would you be all that surprised if say Thomas was capable of climbing with the big guns that he then goes to the Tour and climbs with the best. He has shown something before, but what difference does that make? He is coming from the shape which Wiggins was in, in 2008. Albeit he has to lose less kgs etc but is it all that much of a leap of faith to extend that Wiggins?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pistolero View Post
Gratz to Cav.
Reply With Quote
  #13230  
Old 02-20-13, 23:45
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by martinvickers View Post
Where is the inconsistency between the two statements?
I didnt say inconsistency - we said 'misunderstanding'.

Masterracer wrote -" Wiggins' performance at the 2012 Tour is consistent with his performances going back to 2004 according to a critical power plot".

Coggan had done some figures on selected events. It was not based on an entire Tour.
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 21:35.


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