Log in:  

Register

GW501516 for performance enhancement.

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

Moderators: Irondan, Eshnar, Red Rick, Valv.Piti, Pricey_sky, Tonton, King Boonen

16 May 2013 00:30

Dear Wiggo wrote:When was the route announced?
Sky's first meeting with ASO was in 2009.


That's my point.

I already mentioned that the first meeting was in 2009. That being the case, you have to ask why not in 2010 and 2011 so? The meeting that every one is mainly referring to is the one leading up to 2012 Tour and happened after the route was announced. The route was announced in October 2011 so that meeting couldn't have influenced that. If you refer to the previous meetings, you have to bring up the 2010 and 2011 routes and why weren't they influenced.
User avatar gooner
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 25 Mar 2013 14:18

16 May 2013 01:07

gooner wrote:That's my point.

I already mentioned that the first meeting was in 2009. That being the case, you have to ask why not in 2010 and 2011 so? The meeting that every one is mainly referring to is the one leading up to 2012 Tour and happened after the route was announced. The route was announced in October 2011 so that meeting couldn't have influenced that. If you refer to the previous meetings, you have to bring up the 2010 and 2011 routes and why weren't they influenced.


Who said they weren't influenced? There are several influencing factors.

Lance for one was still riding in 2010. Also after the luke warm race 2009 ASO openly stated they didn't want a repeat of '09. Hence the cobbles in 2010 which supposedly was meant to derail Contador.

The 2011 Tour was a little light on the fizz but all was laid down for a 2012 Tour with a British winner in an Olympic year in Britian.

Wiggins couldn't have designed an easier course for himself if he tried. All he had to so was turn up. No one was prepared to what was going to happen hense the Sky meeting just before the Tour. They knew they were going to blow the doors off the Tour.

You have to be blind to see that the 2012 course wa specifically designed for Wiggins. Who else could have one that Tour?
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,389
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

16 May 2013 02:44

thehog wrote:Who said they weren't influenced? There are several influencing factors.

Lance for one was still riding in 2010. Also after the luke warm race 2009 ASO openly stated they didn't want a repeat of '09. Hence the cobbles in 2010 which supposedly was meant to derail Contador.

The 2011 Tour was a little light on the fizz but all was laid down for a 2012 Tour with a British winner in an Olympic year in Britian.

Wiggins couldn't have designed an easier course for himself if he tried. All he had to so was turn up. No one was prepared to what was going to happen hense the Sky meeting just before the Tour. They knew they were going to blow the doors off the Tour.

You have to be blind to see that the 2012 course wa specifically designed for Wiggins. Who else could have one that Tour?


I don't disagree about the route suiting Wiggins. Of course ASO knew in high probability that they were going to win. All you had to do was look at the previous 6 months. Who expected anything different taking that evidence? The route was done long before those performances and so you can't say ASO done the parcours by them basing it on that.

Likewise ASO also had meetings in 2009, 2010, and 2011 and you also couldn't say anyone(including ASO) thought Sky were going to dominate the Tour in the previous 2 years when those meetings took place.
User avatar gooner
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 25 Mar 2013 14:18

16 May 2013 03:22

gooner wrote:I don't disagree about the route suiting Wiggins. Of course ASO knew in high probability that they were going to win. All you had to do was look at the previous 6 months. Who expected anything different taking that evidence? The route was done long before those performances and so you can't say ASO done the parcours by them basing it on that.

Likewise ASO also had meetings in 2009, 2010, and 2011 and you also couldn't say anyone(including ASO) thought Sky were going to dominate the Tour in the previous 2 years when those meetings took place.


You have convinced me. It is perfectly normal for the ASO to have status meetings with one team so the team can show off its riders' blood values.
"Listen, my son. Trust no one! You can count on no one but yourself. Improve your skills, son. Harden your body. Become a number one man. Do not ever let anyone beat you!" -- Gekitotsu! Satsujin ken
User avatar BroDeal
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,318
Joined: 18 Mar 2009 00:41
Location: Above 5000 feet

16 May 2013 03:30

BroDeal wrote:You have convinced me. It is perfectly normal for the ASO to have status meetings with one team so the team can show off its riders' blood values.


The topic is whether Sky influenced the Tour route ;)

And you've convinced me with that post they have.:rolleyes:
User avatar gooner
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 25 Mar 2013 14:18

01 Jun 2013 04:30

Race Radio wrote:http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/14331/WADA-states-GW501516-doping-cases-are-ongoing-wont-comment-further.aspx

WADA states GW501516 doping cases are ongoing, won’t comment further


So have we seen the end of these cases?

Interesting to see so many tall chickens fall apart suddenly. Wiggo, Hesjedal, Gesink. One wonders a possible GW link. Ie. new testing announced, stop using, no longer any power with so little muscle mass, no longer competitive.
[SIZE="2"][SIZE="1"][SIZE="2"]
“Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.”

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]
User avatar Tinman
Member
 
Posts: 1,112
Joined: 27 Aug 2012 07:27

01 Jun 2013 04:47

gooner wrote:That's my point.

I already mentioned that the first meeting was in 2009. That being the case, you have to ask why not in 2010 and 2011 so? The meeting that every one is mainly referring to is the one leading up to 2012 Tour and happened after the route was announced. The route was announced in October 2011 so that meeting couldn't have influenced that. If you refer to the previous meetings, you have to bring up the 2010 and 2011 routes and why weren't they influenced.

easy. Wiggins had to prove his worth.

the aim of the route is to increase the value of the race. this can be measured in terms of many aspects, creating a great contest, making sure start and finish host venues can be auctioned off, making sure new markets like the british sport fan becomes a new consumer.

they were not gonna lay out a route for wiggins before he had demonstrated his mettle as a GT winner.
"Hitler … didn't even sink to using chemical weapons."
User avatar blackcat
Veteran
 
Posts: 12,232
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

01 Jun 2013 04:50

gooner wrote:I don't disagree about the route suiting Wiggins. Of course ASO knew in high probability that they were going to win. All you had to do was look at the previous 6 months. Who expected anything different taking that evidence? The route was done long before those performances and so you can't say ASO done the parcours by them basing it on that.

Likewise ASO also had meetings in 2009, 2010, and 2011 and you also couldn't say anyone(including ASO) thought Sky were going to dominate the Tour in the previous 2 years when those meetings took place.

it tossed out the schlecks as any contest with the chronos and descent finishes.

a fit and doped evans was the only contest after contador was not gonna be allowed to ride
"Hitler … didn't even sink to using chemical weapons."
User avatar blackcat
Veteran
 
Posts: 12,232
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

01 Jun 2013 12:57

Tinman wrote:So have we seen the end of these cases?

Interesting to see so many tall chickens fall apart suddenly. Wiggo, Hesjedal, Gesink. One wonders a possible GW link. Ie. new testing announced, stop using, no longer any power with so little muscle mass, no longer competitive.


Well in all fairness to Gesink, he has consistently fallen apart when it comes to GTs :o
JimmyFingers wrote:Look I no way dispute Wiggins ... he is doping, he's at it all the time, and has been for years.
User avatar Ripper
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,518
Joined: 14 Sep 2009 03:41
Location: It's a surprise!

01 Jun 2013 13:06

Ripper wrote:Well in all fairness to Gesink, he has consistently fallen apart when it comes to GTs :o

...and Andy Schleck has been falling apart for a while now too. And Froome certainly isn't falling apart.
Scientific Expert
User avatar taiwan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,621
Joined: 18 Aug 2009 22:05

01 Jun 2013 13:14

taiwan wrote:...and Andy Schleck has been falling apart for a while now too. And Froome certainly isn't falling apart.


Froome's implosion will come. Can see him busting his knee in half.

Exhaustion is another thing that comes to mind.

Question is will he be able to hijack the Tour before then.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,389
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

01 Jun 2013 13:14

taiwan wrote:...and Andy Schleck has been falling apart for a while now too. And Froome certainly isn't falling apart.


The Dauphine may show us a bit more about this new "chicken" effect. Ie. too skinny for some reason doesn't seem to work any more.
[SIZE="2"][SIZE="1"][SIZE="2"]
“Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.”

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]
User avatar Tinman
Member
 
Posts: 1,112
Joined: 27 Aug 2012 07:27

01 Jun 2013 13:15

Tinman wrote:The Dauphine may show us a bit more about this new "chicken" effect. Ie. too skinny for some reason doesn't seem to work any more.


I noticed in Porte's adolescent blog he too said he has been sick,
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,389
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

01 Jun 2013 13:17

thehog wrote:Froome's implosion will come. Can see him busting his knee in half.


Going up steep inclines sideways and in the saddle seems to be bad for the knees. Maybe speedplay ought to sponsor Sky.
[SIZE="2"][SIZE="1"][SIZE="2"]
“Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.”

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]
User avatar Tinman
Member
 
Posts: 1,112
Joined: 27 Aug 2012 07:27

01 Jun 2013 14:22

blackcat wrote:easy. Wiggins had to prove his worth.

the aim of the route is to increase the value of the race. this can be measured in terms of many aspects, creating a great contest, making sure start and finish host venues can be auctioned off, making sure new markets like the british sport fan becomes a new consumer.

they were not gonna lay out a route for wiggins before he had demonstrated his mettle as a GT winner.


This I agree with. It was almost the perfect setup with Sky going for yellow and green, Mr. Mod combined with the world champion Cav - prelude to the Olympics. Perfect to whet the appetite of new British fans.

What I don't get is Froome being the chosen one for 2013. Yes, they want a Sky win. There's money to be made, new broadcasting contracts, ASO taking over Tour of Britain, starts in the UK, etc. But Froome just doesn't seem very marketable.

Wiggins wasn't classically handsome, but he has that whole mod thing going on, plus the humor, the history with British Cycling and winning on the track. He wasn't anonymous, they could play up the quirkiness, and British fans could feel like "he's one of ours."

Froome doesn't really have much to build his "star myth" upon. His historical lack of results raises eyebrows. He looks terrible on a bike - he's not going to inspire most of the guys who know cycling. He spends entire races with his head glued to that damned powermeter. He's from everywhere and nowhere, so he doesn't have a very strong national loyalty element to build his fanbase on. Off the bike, he's physically odd-looking, so he's not likely to attract the legions of fangirls like Contador, Cancellara, etc. He doesn't even have the boyish thing going for him that Andy Schleck has. Where is Froome's great popularity supposed to come from?

I know a lot of this is superficial, but we are talking about building up a sports star, and the superficial helps a lot with myth-making and building a fan base. I just don't see it with Froome. From ASO's perspective, is there a reason for them to care that Froome wins, or will any anglophone Sky rider do? A Porte is as good as a Froome is as good as a Wiggo? Or are we supposed to tie him to South Africa - is that the big market they're after? I really just don't see huge excitement and inspiration coming from a Froome win.
Beech Mtn
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,545
Joined: 06 Oct 2009 16:50

01 Jun 2013 14:37

Beech Mtn wrote:This I agree with. It was almost the perfect setup with Sky going for yellow and green, Mr. Mod combined with the world champion Cav - prelude to the Olympics. Perfect to whet the appetite of new British fans.

What I don't get is Froome being the chosen one for 2013. Yes, they want a Sky win. There's money to be made, new broadcasting contracts, ASO taking over Tour of Britain, starts in the UK, etc. But Froome just doesn't seem very marketable.

Wiggins wasn't classically handsome, but he has that whole mod thing going on, plus the humor, the history with British Cycling and winning on the track. He wasn't anonymous, they could play up the quirkiness, and British fans could feel like "he's one of ours."

Froome doesn't really have much to build his "star myth" upon. His historical lack of results raises eyebrows. He looks terrible on a bike - he's not going to inspire most of the guys who know cycling. He spends entire races with his head glued to that damned powermeter. He's from everywhere and nowhere, so he doesn't have a very strong national loyalty element to build his fanbase on. Off the bike, he's physically odd-looking, so he's not likely to attract the legions of fangirls like Contador, Cancellara, etc. He doesn't even have the boyish thing going for him that Andy Schleck has. Where is Froome's great popularity supposed to come from?

I know a lot of this is superficial, but we are talking about building up a sports star, and the superficial helps a lot with myth-making and building a fan base. I just don't see it with Froome. From ASO's perspective, is there a reason for them to care that Froome wins, or will any anglophone Sky rider do? A Porte is as good as a Froome is as good as a Wiggo? Or are we supposed to tie him to South Africa - is that the big market they're after? I really just don't see huge excitement and inspiration coming from a Froome win.


I agree with all of this. A wiggins podium is a 1000 times more marketable than a Froome win.

A Wiggins TT win is better than a Froome win.

Porte is a far better choice. As think as he is he comes across a lot better than Froome.

Froome is almost apologetic for his success.

McQuaid was saying the other day he expect a 'black' winner of the Tour within '6 years'. Perhaps Froome is that lead in.

McQuaid cited the growth of the sport in Asia and Africa, and predicted a "black African will make the podium of a major tour within the next six years."


http://espn.go.com/sports/endurance/story/_/id/9321099/pat-mcquaid-calls-lance-armstrong-tell-all-uci
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,389
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

01 Jun 2013 14:39

I think it's the South African angle, at a guess. Lots of UCI presidential votes tied up in those little countries, lots.

This is from only a few days ago:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-calls-on-armstrong-to-help-fight-doping
No resignation

Many have called for McQuaid to resign but he refuses to go, insisting he wants to eradicate doping.

"I firmly believe I am making a difference. I want to eradicate doping. I want to see this thing through. I want to finish what I started," he said,

"There is a change in the peloton. Every little thing I am bringing in is making a difference."

McQuaid claimed that professional cycling will recover from arguably the biggest doping scandal in the history of the sport.

"We will go beyond it. Cycling has got new champions and it is getting global. It is growing dramatically. I am very positive about cycling and the future," he said.

"Africa, for example has huge potential. It may not have a commercial potential but it has damned good athletes. There will be a black African athlete on the podium of a major tour within six years."
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog
User avatar Dear Wiggo
Veteran
 
Posts: 8,087
Joined: 29 Sep 2012 10:11
Location: Sunny Australia

01 Jun 2013 14:41

thehog wrote:McQuaid was saying the other day he expect a 'black' winner of the Tour within '6 years'. Perhaps Froome is that lead in.



http://espn.go.com/sports/endurance/story/_/id/9321099/pat-mcquaid-calls-lance-armstrong-tell-all-uci


Good post, thehog.
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog
User avatar Dear Wiggo
Veteran
 
Posts: 8,087
Joined: 29 Sep 2012 10:11
Location: Sunny Australia

01 Jun 2013 15:02

Beech Mtn wrote:This I agree with. It was almost the perfect setup with Sky going for yellow and green, Mr. Mod combined with the world champion Cav - prelude to the Olympics. Perfect to whet the appetite of new British fans.

What I don't get is Froome being the chosen one for 2013. Yes, they want a Sky win. There's money to be made, new broadcasting contracts, ASO taking over Tour of Britain, starts in the UK, etc. But Froome just doesn't seem very marketable.

Wiggins wasn't classically handsome, but he has that whole mod thing going on, plus the humor, the history with British Cycling and winning on the track. He wasn't anonymous, they could play up the quirkiness, and British fans could feel like "he's one of ours."

Froome doesn't really have much to build his "star myth" upon. His historical lack of results raises eyebrows. He looks terrible on a bike - he's not going to inspire most of the guys who know cycling. He spends entire races with his head glued to that damned powermeter. He's from everywhere and nowhere, so he doesn't have a very strong national loyalty element to build his fanbase on. Off the bike, he's physically odd-looking, so he's not likely to attract the legions of fangirls like Contador, Cancellara, etc. He doesn't even have the boyish thing going for him that Andy Schleck has. Where is Froome's great popularity supposed to come from?

I know a lot of this is superficial, but we are talking about building up a sports star, and the superficial helps a lot with myth-making and building a fan base. I just don't see it with Froome. From ASO's perspective, is there a reason for them to care that Froome wins, or will any anglophone Sky rider do? A Porte is as good as a Froome is as good as a Wiggo? Or are we supposed to tie him to South Africa - is that the big market they're after? I really just don't see huge excitement and inspiration coming from a Froome win.

winning is just enough. the spectacle of winning is the apotheosis threshold.
"Hitler … didn't even sink to using chemical weapons."
User avatar blackcat
Veteran
 
Posts: 12,232
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

01 Jun 2013 15:08

Dear Wiggo wrote:I think it's the South African angle, at a guess. Lots of UCI presidential votes tied up in those little countries, lots.

This is from only a few days ago:

no. this is a flawed premise.

winning.
in sky jersey, fulfills the role well enough.

who was hoy? chris? chris who?
who was wiggins? brad, bradley, what?

cycling is not a george best sport for the average punter.

you can transform a homogenous two legged whirling dervish into a cypher for the crowd at home who will buy anything you can sell in that jnigoistic repertoire.
"Hitler … didn't even sink to using chemical weapons."
User avatar blackcat
Veteran
 
Posts: 12,232
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: spalco, Yahoo [Bot] and 10 guests

Back to top