Log in:  

Register

being on the record...manifesto baby

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, Tonton, Pricey_sky, King Boonen

Re: Re:

25 Jul 2015 00:27

Dear Wiggo wrote:
argel wrote:In terms of evidence, I fundamentally disagree with the idea that we can compare the doped era with today's cyclists. The professionalism on a team like SKY or the other big teams far outstrips that of Festina, Banesto, even USP to a degree. I think back then, so much went into doping that riders didn't push themselves like teams are now.


Given that this echoes almost verbatim a Sky press release, you have lost significant respect from me for the rest of the post. Unless you were embedded with USPS and Sky for a comparison, you cannot know this.


Funnily enough I've just read your blog. It does sound similar to the Brailsford quote, but tough. It's not. It's my opinion based on watching the 100m, 200m, 10,000m etc records fall consistently over decades, even when doping is difficult as it is in many track sports. I think it's undeniable that in the space of a decade, 20 seconds is a plausible gain over doped riders.

And please, get off your high horse. I am a new poster but I'm not a new reader. There's too much of this 'I'm sorry but you said one thing therefore I'm ignoring everything you say' in here. I think you make valid points about Wiggins, for example, but when you say things I fundamentally disagree with, it doesn't change how I read the rest of your posts.
argel
Junior Member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: 24 Jul 2015 20:52

Re: Re:

25 Jul 2015 00:33

argel wrote:And please, get off your high horse. I am a new poster but I'm not a new reader. There's too much of this 'I'm sorry but you said one thing therefore I'm ignoring everything you say' in here.


I try to be very clear with my words.

If I was going to ignore everything you say, I would ignore you using the ignore function, not respond to your post. What I said was: I have lost a lot of respect for the rest of your post.

I had 2 points wrt your claim of improvements in training:
1. DB said the same thing, therefore we can almost guarantee it is a lie / false
2. the paragraph I posted on training with dope vs training clean

Point #2 is undeniable.

The only way times can improve is through training harder or more often.
Doping allows you to train harder and more often.
No clean training intervention will ever allow you to train harder or more often than a doped training intervention.

The fact that you walked into the other talking point of doping comparisons being a generation ago when they were still ongoing less than a decade ago. Well. Whatever dude.
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

Re: Re:

25 Jul 2015 00:57

Dear Wiggo wrote:
I had 2 points wrt your claim of improvements in training:
1. DB said the same thing, therefore we can almost guarantee it is a lie / false
2. the paragraph I posted on training with dope vs training clean

Point #2 is undeniable.


The bold bits highlight the problem for me. You don't trust Brailsford - fair enough - but you therefore assume everything he says is a lie. More to the point, you then use that entirely subjective opinion as incontravenable evidence that your opinion is correct. It might be, but presenting it as 'fact' or everything Brailsford says as a 'lie' is a flaw in your argument. It is neither.

As for point 2 being 'undeniable'... same thing. You know as well as I do that the science is not undeniable. As an example:

Dear Wiggo wrote:The only way times can improve is through training harder or more often.
Doping allows you to train harder and more often.
No clean training intervention will ever allow you to train harder or more often than a doped training intervention.

The fact that you walked into the other talking point of doping comparisons being a generation ago when they were still ongoing less than a decade ago. Well. Whatever dude.


Is it? So if a rider changed their diet, would that help? If a rider changed where they trained, or the frequency that they trained certain climbs? What if the weather was better? What if a rider changed X Y or Z... again, you are presenting your opinion as fact when it is pseudoscientific at best. There are dozens of factors that can help a rider ride faster, as well you know, however to acknowledge this, I suppose that would point out a pretty fundamental flaw in your theory.

And as an example, you use that fundamentally flawed viewpoint to then stack it up with a good point t create the impression that your whole point is sound - 'No clean training intervention will ever allow you to train harder or more often than a doped training intervention.' - that is correct, but nobody is suggesting that. They're suggesting that over a period of a decade, it is possible that the next generation of athletes will emerge that have different or better natural and nurtured ability (ie: talent identified and nurtured in a more refined way, or people from certain areas being funnelled towards professional sports when traits are identified). Note the word POSSIBLE. I don't necessarily say it is what has happened here, but if you deny it is possible, that is equally flawed.

As for the 9-10 years argument... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathon_world_record_progression as an example. You think all of those were doped performances? It's not an argument I want to get bogged down in because they are not like-for-like (nothing is) sports, but for a century we have watched times in all sporting arenas improve, we have seen people get stronger, leaner, fitter, refine their training to a quite amazing degree. To deny that any of that can help is to deny some pretty fundamental stuff...

Anyway look, you've got me sitting here talking myself into believing the 'marginal gains' argument and that's A) not something I'm convinced of in SKY's case, over such a short time and B) not what I wish to do. I am not in any way some Sky shill. I hate sky, I hate Rupert Murdoch, I hate the Times, and I really hate that they have effectively bought the yellow jersey 3 times, even if it does one day turn out to have been clean.
argel
Junior Member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: 24 Jul 2015 20:52

Re: Re:

25 Jul 2015 01:07

argel wrote:
Dear Wiggo wrote:
I had 2 points wrt your claim of improvements in training:
1. DB said the same thing, therefore we can almost guarantee it is a lie / false
2. the paragraph I posted on training with dope vs training clean

Point #2 is undeniable.


The bold bits highlight the problem for me. You don't trust Brailsford - fair enough - but you therefore assume everything he says is a lie.


For the last time: I try to be very clear with my words. I won't respond to you again, having now seen you twist my words yet again, but for those who come afterwards, please note:

I wrote: we can almost guarantee it is a lie / false. Almost.

This is completely and irrefutably different to: "everything he says is a lie" -- an absolute, and nothing to do with what I wrote.
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

25 Jul 2015 01:10

So what percentage of statements that he makes are a lie? Almost guaranteeing is akin to what, 95%? It's disingenuous to sit and pretend that you aren't presenting his information as what you consider to be a lie, without - from what I can see - any evidence to the contrary.

I'm sure you'll also note that there was plenty more in that post that you didn't respond to...
argel
Junior Member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: 24 Jul 2015 20:52

Re:

25 Jul 2015 01:12

argel wrote:I'm sure you'll also note that there was plenty more in that post that you didn't respond to...


There's no need. You clearly do not know a thing about training.
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

Re: Re:

25 Jul 2015 01:15

Dear Wiggo wrote:
argel wrote:I'm sure you'll also note that there was plenty more in that post that you didn't respond to...


There's no need. You clearly do not know a thing about training.


So educate me as to why I am wrong? How training methodology, diet, technology and conditions play no part in times reducing over a period of years? Please. Because you know you're on unstable ground there...
argel
Junior Member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: 24 Jul 2015 20:52

Re:

25 Jul 2015 09:59

argel wrote:Even so, the most ridiculous thing I've seen on here is a conspiracy involving Universities helping teams to dope. You have no idea how hard pressed universities are to stay viable. The idea that this would get past the multiple layers of ethics-based protocols that exist to prevent the uni being splashed all over the Daily Mail - and believe me, they'd LOVE that - is farcical.
You SHOULD read the Freiburg rapport then...
il Mito wrote:“I’m in pension, I don’t give a **** about training,” Ferrari said. “They are all strong without me. Did you see the Tour de France?”
User avatar Fearless Greg Lemond
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,202
Joined: 20 Apr 2012 15:07
Location: Netherlands

Re: being on the record...manifesto baby

03 Aug 2015 09:11

I found this on facebook from cyclingnews story on Danielson
. Nicholas Vicari
Like many other fans of the sport, I too have been struggling with the issue of whether or not the guys are doping and how I feel about it. I think I am slowly coming to the conclusion that I don't really care anymore. I've loved this sport for over 30 years now and will love it till I die. Pro cyclists did not invent cycling nor in my opinion do they represent what cycling is really all about. The business of cycle racing is a multi billion dollar industry, which basically means that some people stand to get very rich from it - ex. Lance and his private planes and hundreds of millions. Christ for the chance at those sorts of rewards I would probably dope too. Sport (not just cycling) and doping are like husband and wife. They will always be together, it has always been this way and always will. The sports people and their doctors will just find another drug or way to administer it to hopefully stay 1 step ahead of the controls.
I guess what I mean about this is if you love your sport, love it, enjoy it and do it, don't let the actions of the "pros" who are only doping for money and fame kill it for you.
Like · Reply · Report · 15 minutes ago
Testing the bounds of reality.
User avatar Zam_Olyas
Veteran
 
Posts: 8,159
Joined: 30 Sep 2011 10:17
Location: Rubber Plantation.

Re: Re:

23 Aug 2015 20:53

argel wrote:
Dear Wiggo wrote:
argel wrote:I'm sure you'll also note that there was plenty more in that post that you didn't respond to...


There's no need. You clearly do not know a thing about training.


So educate me as to why I am wrong? How training methodology, diet, technology and conditions play no part in times reducing over a period of years? Please. Because you know you're on unstable ground there...


Training methodology, diet and technology are done by all the teams with a big dollop of doping on top.

Training methodology, diet and technology can only improve things in tiny increments. Doping is a huge increment.
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,766
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re: Re:

27 Sep 2015 00:40

Benotti69 wrote:
argel wrote:
Dear Wiggo wrote:
argel wrote:I'm sure you'll also note that there was plenty more in that post that you didn't respond to...


There's no need. You clearly do not know a thing about training.


So educate me as to why I am wrong? How training methodology, diet, technology and conditions play no part in times reducing over a period of years? Please. Because you know you're on unstable ground there...


Training methodology, diet and technology are done by all the teams with a big dollop of doping on top.

Training methodology, diet and technology can only improve things in tiny increments. Doping is a huge increment.


From being amateur, to becoming professional outfits, there would have been a jump in regards to nutrition etc. But these days, any gains would be made in grey areas between legal means and non legal.

There are only so many ways a person can eat, hydrate, train, race, monitor, live, rest etc. All of these and any combination of them all have been tried and tested by sports with much bigger budgets than cycling teams.

All cycling teams would do is apply "best practice" at the time. And you'd be kidding yourself if you think even a team on a relatively small budget can't do this. I can do it with no budget by using google.

Equipment is also a moot point. It's regulated and any sort of perceived gain is purely for marketing purposes now.

In another thread it was mentioned that the PR machine is just as much about controlling the doping narrative as it is about selling crap to people, I agree with that.
observer
Member
 
Posts: 324
Joined: 06 Jul 2012 07:23

Re: being on the record...manifesto baby

19 Oct 2015 07:02

I am a Sky fan since their beginnings. I liked Flecha's 2010 Omloop win, that was ok. like ok, good job. on with next race.
I did not like Uran, cheered for Barguil when he won that Vuelta stage against him. If that stage was raced today I would cheer for Uran.
before winter 2013/2014 I would have cheered 100% for Zubeldia against Roche during last Vuelta stage, even if Roche already rode for Sky.
not now. Roche (while riding for Sky) comes first.
If Roche rode for any other team (bar Lotto-Jumbo) I would have cheered for Zubeldia.
I am a different different Sky fans since the winter 2013/14. the clinic made me different. that Omloop 2014 (Stan/GVA) was when I began to root like mad for them. Omloop 2015 was incredible, their greatest win. for the sake of it. for their bashers.
pastronef
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,786
Joined: 19 Aug 2011 08:25
Location: Italia

25 Oct 2015 17:05

Picking Sky as a team to root for seems like an odd choice.

Not only do they have the best doping product, they also have UCI protection, the most money and they are owned by a media company.

Not sure how it can possibly get any more rigged than that.
User avatar the sceptic
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,664
Joined: 21 Jul 2012 20:17

25 Oct 2015 18:20

...........picking to cheer for team sky could come from the heart rather than the head.........

i recall cheering like mad for stannard at san remo...................................

........don't think team sky have the biggest budget........i'm all ears to find out

the secret best doping product and it's unproven that team sky receive protection

ahead of other world tour teams....................

Mark L
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,918
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

Re:

26 Oct 2015 17:16

the sceptic wrote:Picking Sky as a team to root for seems like an odd choice.

Not only do they have the best doping product, they also have UCI protection, the most money and they are owned by a media company.

Not sure how it can possibly get any more rigged than that.


I liked them before too, but I was not a fan like these last 2 years after I began to follow the clinic and the twitter bashers.
I am fully aware they dope, I am even blocked by Froome.

it´s a competition among who likes his favourite doper: Quintana, Contador, Froome, Aru, Nibali, TD (the one from the lowlands) etc
rigged or not, there´s no holier than thou.
so when other riders´ fans behave holier than me, that´s where I root like mad for Sky

at the end it´s fun *, and one must not take himself or the others too seriously, and must try not to get angry for some bike races among juiced up athletes.

(*I am aware few riders have been singled out and blackmailed, they have every right to be angry, that´s not fun for them seeing their former fellow racers still continuing their career)
pastronef
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,786
Joined: 19 Aug 2011 08:25
Location: Italia

heeedless

26 Oct 2015 17:22

........despite personally having zero clinic status i must confess i

really cheered on alberto flying up the motirolo..................


heart trumps................head...............

Mark L
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,918
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

Re: being on the record...manifesto baby

26 Oct 2015 21:24

pastronef wrote:I am a different different Sky fans since the winter 2013/14. the clinic made me different. that Omloop 2014 (Stan/GVA) was when I began to root like mad for them. Omloop 2015 was incredible, their greatest win. for the sake of it. for their bashers.


The actions of others do not determine my attitude nor actions.

I remain true to myself.

I find the attitude of "Oh I do this coz it will annoy others" or "I do this because other people disagree with it" ... interesting, but not something I personally could ever do without feeling entirely dishonest.
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

Re: being on the record...manifesto baby

26 Oct 2015 23:35

Dear Wiggo wrote:
pastronef wrote:I am a different different Sky fans since the winter 2013/14. the clinic made me different. that Omloop 2014 (Stan/GVA) was when I began to root like mad for them. Omloop 2015 was incredible, their greatest win. for the sake of it. for their bashers.


The actions of others do not determine my attitude nor actions.

I remain true to myself.

I find the attitude of "Oh I do this coz it will annoy others" or "I do this because other people disagree with it" ... interesting, but not something I personally could ever do without feeling entirely dishonest.


the action of others can also show me some sides of the matter I was not aware about before.

after some twitter guy tweeted a pic of a bunch of dollars to Mikel Nieve after he re-upped with Sky, I will enjoy MORE Nieve's performances and win next years (because I know that that guy would have welcomed Mikel with open arms had he signed for Tinkoff)
If he signed elsewhere I would have enjoyed him anyway, without the need to break his balls coz he left my fav team.
that's the attitude that makes me root MORE for them
pastronef
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,786
Joined: 19 Aug 2011 08:25
Location: Italia

Re: being on the record...manifesto baby

14 Jan 2016 21:40

I admit I have no clue about what´s happening with Coe, Pound, and athletics.
pastronef
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,786
Joined: 19 Aug 2011 08:25
Location: Italia

Re: being on the record...manifesto baby

11 Feb 2016 11:03

MIllar will work with British cycling.

he admitted doing EPO, got 2 years and came back. and yes, made a career on doping, and got benefits after his comeback, I know.

Alberto made a better career than Millar, on doping too, didn´t admit the positive, never confessed, got suspended.

all hail Alberto while Millar is shyt?

mind, I like both riders, nothing against them.
pastronef
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,786
Joined: 19 Aug 2011 08:25
Location: Italia

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

Back to top