A question about doping in the UK

[peterst6906]

This is not enough to explain the outstanding performance to the extent we are now witnessing.

Why?

How much of an improvement would be acceptable to you over the last 20 years and based on what factual information?

 

[JimmyFingers]

These times are factual and historical, so they do mean something in context.

They were true amature times, they were done with little or no funding.

Of course you can make a comparison between then and now from an historical perspective. If only to fully explain how those improvements have been made.

All I am getting is personal insults, insiuations that I know nothing about the track, that I am a liar of faulsehoods and that my comparisons are laughable (even though in reality they are objective).

I am still waiting for absolute objective proof as to how these improvements have been made, which have not yet been contrbute to this debate.

Without objective evidence you have no case.

So your questioning how a professional female athlete, one of the finest female track cyclists of all time, with full access to the most advanced equipment money can buy and daily training, at the peak of her powers is able to match an amateur time set by a man 16 years before hand?

Do you know the comparable weight of the bike? The torsional stiffness? The relative drag of the bikes? The relative weight of the cyclists, their power outputs, the weight of their suits and helmets and the relative aerodynamic properties? Do you know the relative air densities of the velodromes, the humidity, the temperature? How about the type of wood used on the tracks? How about the rider's gearing?

I am surprised not at all that Pendleton was able to match a male amateur time set 16 years previously. It proves precisely nothing.

I'll say again, laughable

 

[Semper Fidelis]

This thread is ridiculous.

Bobbies don't even carry guns.

There is no doping in the UK, let alone any kind of crime.

Why would there even be a question about it?

They call it the Old Bailey because they don't need a new one.

Thomas More's Utopia.

That large moat they have around the 'Isles keeps out rabies and rabid dopers.

Utopia:

Track cyclist is the most important job on the island. Women must participate in Track cycling along with men. All adults must also learn another essential trade, such as bicycle mechanic, soigneur, preparator, derny rider, timekeeper, etc. Chaperones are not required, of course, there being no need for testing.

There are no locks on the bicycles, and all wheels and tyres are stored in a common warehouse. Bicycle handlebars, seats and helmets are rotated amongst the citizens every ten years.

Slavery is part of Utopian life, and every cyclist is afforded two Domestiques.

Dave.

I agree with you Dave.

I know you're in Canada and will not agree with what I'm about to say but here goes --- that is why the USA has the 2nd amendment.

 

[horsinabout]

So your questioning how a professional female athlete, one of the finest female track cyclists of all time, with full access to the most advanced equipment money can buy and daily training, at the peak of her powers is able to match an amateur time set by a man 16 years before hand?

Do you know the comparable weight of the bike? The torsional stiffness? The relative drag of the bikes? The relative weight of the cyclists, their power outputs, the weight of their suits and helmets and the relative aerodynamic properties? Do you know the relative air densities of the velodromes, the humidity, the temperature? How about the type of wood used on the tracks? How about the rider's gearing?

I am surprised not at all that Pendleton was able to match a male amateur time set 16 years previously. It proves precisely nothing.

I'll say again, laughable

Go and ask Lance Armstrong, he will tell you. Others will tell you what happened to them when he was question over it with susptions of doping. He bullied every one of them. And talked like you are here.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Go and ask Lance Armstrong, he will tell you. Others will tell you what happened to them when he was question over it with susptions of doping. He bullied every one of them. And talked like you are here.

You got me. I am actually Lance

 

[horsinabout]

You got me. I am actually Lance

Hello Lance, how the devil are? My Hero...

Are they all still scapegoating you? Well you can't say you didn't ask for now can you.....all that lying and bullying, really!
Still you are a very rich man, at least for now. You should start enjoying life again when they let you enter some triathlons in the summer. Good luck with that, but this time do it PED free. OK!

Now off you go and be a good boy. The clinic has spoken

 

[JimmyFingers]

The clinic has spoken? Has it now? Someone who joined last month speaks for the clinic. Sounds to me like you've been here a lot longer.

Your arguments have been thoroughly debunked, run along now

EDIT: Jimmy, the italics is what I am speaking of just below. Please take a breath before making these sockpupet insinuations

cheers
bison

 

[horsinabout]

To generate 9.7s for men and 10.7s for women 200m requires a certain amount of power output over the required duration.

BC elite team marginal gains in other areas, such as bike stiffness, aerodynamics, technology, and any other variable, has not been objectively quantified to the general public, that I am aware.

BC have improved training methods and medical back up, that has improved recovery, well being physically and psycologically. BC elite program has not quantified the total amount of improvement this has made.

BC said improvements are down to marginal gains, which may seem reasonable on face value. The marginal gains have not been quantified to the general public objectively, so cannot be certain whether this has totally accounted for (one whole second in the 200m tt from amateur to elite) and whether this explains the extra power that has materialsed.

My point of comparison was that in 1997 the men's National record was a touch under 10.7 sec and we can consider that this was an amateur era in British track cycling. Yes, there may have been drugs in that era, as proven by one sprinter being caught. British track cycling now is an elite system. The men's 200m National record is now 9.7s. So we have a benchmark of one whole second. This benchmark is further objectified as the amateur record in 1997 was done on a new state of the art indoor wooden 250m velodrome, with double discs used.

I hope I make my point here clearly, where I ask for the 'gains' to objectively add up and to totally explain the improvements. If they do not then I remain sceptical.

 

[peterst6906]

I hope I make my point here clearly, where I ask for the 'gains' to objectively add up and to totally explain the improvements. If they do not then I remain sceptical.

No amount of posting on the internet is going to convince you, so go and look for yourself.

Nowhere have you explained why 1 sec over a nearly 20 year period from amateur to top professional programs doesn't add up, but you ask others to provide you with evidence that this is realistic. Nor have you outlined what objective data will convince you.

Quite frankly, have whatever opinion you want. No one cares. Except of course when you use unsupported opinion to write off the supported opinions of others.

You are just trolling now and this thread should just get back to the original question - as this line of discussion is going nowhere.

 

[ferryman]

...You are just trolling now and this thread should just get back to the original question - as this line of discussion is going nowhere.

Yep, agree with this. Back to the original question please.

 

[hiero2]

No amount of posting on the internet is going to convince you. Get off your fat behind and go and look for yourself.

Nowhere in your drivel have you explained why 1 sec over a nearly 20 year period from amateur to top professional programs doesn't add up, but you ask others to provide you with evidence that this is realistic. Nor have you outlined what objective data will convince you.

Quite frankly, have whatever opinion you want. No one cares. Except of course when you use unsupported drivel to write off the opinions of others.

You are just trolling now and this thread should just get back to the original question - as this line of discussion is going nowhere.

You know, as personal attacks go, this is pretty mild - but it is an attack. For the inclusion of 3 words above, I could delete the post. But I'm not going to. Why? Because, a) it IS pretty mild, and b) I want the people posting in this thread for the past 30 or so posts to understand something.

What we have here is a pattern of harassment. Jimmy Fingers, for one, has violated the rules by implying that horsinabout is a sockpuppet of the hog - repeatedly. You know, horsin has said he is not, and quite frankly, I have physical evidence that he is not. I have also said he is not the hog. If I ever see evidence otherwise, I will be happy to ban him in a heartbeat - but so far the evidence tells me they are over 2,000 miles apart.

Ok, I get it that you think horsin doesn't know what he is talking about - and he apparently thinks he does know something. All of you are continuing a line of discussion that is going nowhere - and not because of horsinabout. Because all the rest of you are continuing to respond, with insults and accusations, to someone's legitimate opinion. If he doesn't prove it, you don't have to believe it, you don't even have to take it seriously.

So tone it down. I think that is sufficient clarity.

 

[sittingbison]

sockpuppets

gentle(wo)men, can we please resist the urge to accuse others of sockpuppetry, especially snide insinuations

cheers
bison

EDIT: haha a good example of our different styles of modding. Cheers Hiero2

 

[ferryman]

[/B]
Yep, agree with this. Back to the original question please.

Fook, I've been our Mod'd x2

 

[JimmyFingers]

His argument was weak, it was debunked. If calling it 'laughable' and him a fool is harassment then its a very gentle form of it, unlike, for example, me being invited to Australia so I could be punched in the face.

I still have suspicions, apparently suspicions count.

[edit] and my references to a sock were because his avatar is one. I'd gently suggest it you don't want us to call him one, you tell him to change his avatar. It's like going around with a T-Shirt on saying *** then being offended when someone calls you a ***

 

[Netserk]

His argument was weak, it was debunked. If calling it 'laughable' and him a fool is harassment then its a very gentle form of it, unlike, for example, me being invited to Australia so I could be punched in the face.

I still have suspicions, apparently suspicions count.

[edit] and my references to a sock were because his avatar is one. I'd gently suggest it you don't want us to call him one, you tell him to change his avatar. It's like going around with a T-Shirt on saying *** then being offended when someone calls you a ***

Hi Jimmy. Whenever you think that some posters break the rules, either report the post(s), or pm a mod. It's not very nice to accuse others of being a suckpuppet, but if you tell a mod about it, then we will investigate. We have already investigated horsinabout/thehog and concluded that it is two different users. Your welcome.

 

[andy1234]

Hi Jimmy. Whenever you think that some posters break the rules, either report the post(s), or pm a mod. It's not very nice to accuse others of being a suckpuppet, but if you tell a mod about it, then we will investigate. We have already investigated horsinabout/thehog and concluded that it is two different users. Your welcome.

When someone's avatar is a freakin sockpuppet, they can have no argument about being called a sockpuppet.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

When someone's avatar is a freakin sockpuppet, they can have no argument about being called a sockpuppet.

FYI: forum rules trump avatar images.

 

[Netserk]

When someone's avatar is a freakin sockpuppet, they can have no argument about being called a sockpuppet.

Maybe that was chosen in jest

I have seen suckpuppet avatars before that was used by non-suckpuppet accounts.

 

[martinvickers]

Maybe that was chosen in jest

I have seen suckpuppet avatars before that was used by non-suckpuppet accounts.

Just a question .. why would a supposedly complete newbie use a sockpuppet avatar - I can see how someone who's been a forum a while might find it funny...but why would a supposedly complete newbie do it?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Just a question .. why would a supposedly complete newbie use a sockpuppet avatar - I can see how someone who's been a forum a while might find it funny...but why would a supposedly complete newbie do it?

There's more than one forum on the Interwebs, MV.

 

[del1962]

I think Hoggie is worse than I can post here, I don't think much better of Horsinabout, but I never found anything to suggest sockpuppetry (at least Hoggie's sockpuppet).

I suspect the reaseon for the avatar is because she (I beleive) was accused of it

 

[martinvickers]

There's more than one forum on the Interwebs, MV.

Fair point i suppose; still seems psychologoically perverse to me, but since I'm not a psychologist that means little enough, i suppose.

 

[Netserk]

Just a question .. why would a supposedly complete newbie use a sockpuppet avatar - I can see how someone who's been a forum a while might find it funny...but why would a supposedly complete newbie do it?

Like del mentioned, I think it was done because so many accused horsinabout of being a suckpuppet.

 

[D-Queued]

Just a question .. why would a supposedly complete newbie use a sockpuppet avatar - I can see how someone who's been a forum a while might find it funny...but why would a supposedly complete newbie do it?

I thought it was funny.

It is highly unlikely that any real sockpuppet would do something like that. (let's not discuss sociopaths...)

Even more than being anonymous, that avatar challenges the member to demonstrate that their comments are worth paying any attention to.

If not, then the sockpuppet image is a white flag of surrender that they could not rise to the appropriate occasion.

Other people have selected avatar's of Novitzky, or Betsy, or whoever. In a similar vein, they are challenging each of us to see that they are not the image in the avatar but that either that the avatar reinforces their viewpoint, or that their viewpoint is worthy of the avatar.

My avatar is a nothing. Thus, my posts only have the value that other forum members deem appropriate. If this adds up to nothing, then I am ok with that.

Dave.

 

[ferryman]

Just a question .. why would a supposedly complete newbie use a sockpuppet avatar - I can see how someone who's been a forum a while might find it funny...but why would a supposedly complete newbie do it?

Hi Martin,

For the record and hopefully to stop future accusations, the mod team have looked into this and have concluded that there is no sockpuppetry going on here. 2 different posters. Obviously we could be wrong, but please all respect this.

Cheers