• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Brailsford rethinking his hiring standards

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Ferminal said:
Don't listen to them Dave... keep running a clean team.
Ha ha that's a good one. Keep to your moral high ground Dave, keep believing that nobody on your team has ever had anything to do with doping! Keep shoving that down Millar's throat when he's probably the cleanest UK rider these days. :rolleyes:
 
smaryka said:
Ha ha that's a good one. Keep to your moral high ground Dave, keep believing that nobody on your team has ever had anything to do with doping! Keep shoving that down Millar's throat when he's probably the cleanest UK rider these days. :rolleyes:

ah, yet Wiggins has a terrible TdF the year he moves from "Clean Garmin" to "Dirty Brailsford"... most other things being equal. OK.

Allen Lim says hello.
 
Ferminal said:
ah, yet Wiggins has a terrible TdF the year he moves from "Clean Garmin" to "Dirty Brailsford"... most other things being equal. OK.

Allen Lim says hello.
My point is that Brailsford swore up and down he would not take on dirty riders. Hence Millar would never be allowed on. Meanwhile Wiggins was apparently clean for Garmin and still clean now? Please. One of those two assumptions is wrong.

from
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/more_sport/cycling/article6926944.ece

“All I can say is ... if there is any doubt or suspicion [of doping] on our team, I’ll expose it. And if I get to the point where I think it can’t be done, I’m walking away. You ask me why I am doing this. I’m doing it for the likes of Brad Wiggins, because Brad in my mind is clean. I don’t think Brad Wiggins dopes — I could be horribly wrong but I don’t think I am — and that proves to me that nowadays — and maybe not before, but nowadays — you can run in the top four in the Tour without doping. And that’s what makes me think it’s worth doing.”
 
Jul 28, 2010
139
0
0
Visit site
Realist said:
The meteorological advice may have led to an unfortunate outcome, but it is not wrong just because the most probably outcome did not eventuate. I don't get how people don't get this. If it was a smart decision beforehand, it is still a smart decision after. And for mine, relying on the best advice available is a smart decision. If it had rained on Cancellara but not Wiggo, Wiggo might have had a shot. If they both got the same conditions, probably not. This means even if rain was more probable for Wiggo's start, they payoffs are still better for him starting early. That the rain was less likely then only made it even more in his favour.

Now someone will try to point out that the rain was not less likely when Wiggo started because it rained. And I will try to IP trace them so I can find them and play poker with them. Probabilistic reasoning, people.

Martin318is said:
That was gold!
On the contrary.
The sport of sailing is all about risk management based on the unpredictability of the weather - hundreds of such decisions per race. A sport that the English excel at, being arguably the best in the world at the moment. Any sailing coach in England down to the club level would have pointed out that Sky's tactics that day were the equivalent of "banging a corner" in sailing. A tactical laughing stock. There may come a time in a series to take such risks, but this was not one of them.

The less certain you are of the outcome, the more you would hedge your decision. The more confident you are in your abilities, the more you would try to even the playing field - in this case by starting reasonably near your main opponents. That is the whole point of your years of preparation. Sky proved with this opening move that they had no confidence in their man, or that he had no confidence in himself. On the other hand, everyone has made this rookie error at some point, so no worries, live and learn. But in my opinion, it points to lack of experience on the part of team management.

If they really wanted to pull a stunt like this, with their budget they should have done it right, by hiring one of the America's Cup meteorologists for a micro-weather prediction. England has a lot of depth in this area.

But the optics for this are terrible. First of all paying that amount for Wiggins on a flyer. Then gambling his whole tour psychologically on the weather. It's quite possible that this single decision killed his tour. Yikes, are these guys dilettantes?

Contrast this with the brilliant tactical duel between Contador and Schleck, a fascinating study of risk and energy management.

Well, here's to 20/20 hindsight. Cheers :)
 
Apr 8, 2010
329
0
0
Visit site
Realist said:
The meteorological advice may have led to an unfortunate outcome, but it is not wrong just because the most probably outcome did not eventuate. I don't get how people don't get this. If it was a smart decision beforehand, it is still a smart decision after. And for mine, relying on the best advice available is a smart decision. If it had rained on Cancellara but not Wiggo, Wiggo might have had a shot. If they both got the same conditions, probably not. This means even if rain was more probable for Wiggo's start, they payoffs are still better for him starting early. That the rain was less likely then only made it even more in his favour.

Now someone will try to point out that the rain was not less likely when Wiggo started because it rained. And I will try to IP trace them so I can find them and play poker with them. Probabilistic reasoning, people.

Nice to know there are some people who are interested in game theory on here...
The L'Equipe article doesn't go into enough detail of exactly what they mean ... so this is a personal argument:
If indeed application of 'scientific methodology' is 'costless' then Realist's argument is correct (ignoring arguments about risk sensitivity). But if application of the 'scientific methodology' has some cost in terms of resources (time, effort, money, commitment to a less flexible strategy (which I think is what the L'Equipe article may be tending towards), etc) then benefits of the 'scientific method' trade-off against loss of benefits elsewhere, and the scientific method may not give the best (expected) result. It's difficult to see that this would be true for the weather forecasting, but it might be true for other strategic decisions.
 
Aug 27, 2009
42
0
0
Visit site
Je ne sais quoi said:
If they really wanted to pull a stunt like this, with their budget they should have done it right, by hiring one of the America's Cup meteorologists for a micro-weather prediction. England has a lot of depth in this area.

They did. They didn't just check wunderground.com
 
Apr 8, 2010
329
0
0
Visit site
Je ne sais quoi said:
On the contrary.
The sport of sailing is all about risk management based on the unpredictability of the weather - hundreds of such decisions per race. A sport that the English excel at, being arguably the best in the world at the moment. Any sailing coach in England down to the club level would have pointed out that Sky's tactics that day were the equivalent of "banging a corner" in sailing. A tactical laughing stock. There may come a time in a series to take such risks, but this was not one of them.

The more confident you are in your abilities, the more you try to even the playing field - in this case by starting reasonably near your main opponents. That is the whole point of your years of preparation. Sky proved with this opening move that they had no confidence in their man, or that he had no confidence in himself. On the other hand, everyone has made this rookie error at some point, so no worries, live and learn. But in my opinion, it points to lack of experience on the part of team management.

If they really wanted to pull a stunt like this, with their budget they should have done it right, by hiring one of the America's Cup meteorologists for a micro-weather prediction. England has a lot of depth in this area.

But the optics for this are terrible. First of all paying that amount for Wiggins on a flyer. Then gambling his whole tour psychologically on the weather. It's quite possible that this single decision killed his tour. Yikes, are these guys dilettantes?

Contrast this with the brilliant tactical duel between Contador and Schleck, a fascinating study of risk and energy management.

Here's to 20/20 hindsight. :)

My post crossed with this. Interesting stuff :)
 
Ferminal said:
I agree re: some of the nonsense he talks

You misinterpreted my assertions of Garmin.
No I understood it, sorry my sarcasm didn't come through very well.

I feel for Brailsford in that he's in a hard place, it's virtually impossible to run a team with no doping, no past links to doping, etc. and still have a winner.

But all this holier-than-thou crap is just too much. I'd respect and trust him a lot more if he just called it like it is. But instead he comes off like a spin doctor and like he's hiding something.
 
smaryka said:
No I understood it, sorry my sarcasm didn't come through very well.

I feel for Brailsford in that he's in a hard place, it's virtually impossible to run a team with no doping, no past links to doping, etc. and still have a winner.

But all this holier-than-thou crap is just too much. I'd respect and trust him a lot more if he just called it like it is. But instead he comes off like a spin doctor and like he's hiding something.

I thought it was all a big cover for his elaborate doping setup.

If it really is... well time to find a new doctor!
 
May 6, 2009
126
0
0
Visit site
Surely saying that they overpaid for wiggins, suggests that they haven't had value. I would disagree with that. He was a real tour contender, a prologue contender and a final tt contender. The camera men and television directors knew this, the papers knew this, the websites new this.
So in terms of column inches in the major SKY terratoriy, they needed a British competitor we could shout for. They got it.
Without him, team Sky would have looked totally different. They knew this and it is why the paid the money for him that they did.
Obviously the final result disappointed, and post-tour column inches are much reduced from expectations, but I don't think it's possible to view the Sky sponsor investment as being poor value.
 
May 6, 2009
126
0
0
Visit site
This comment by Brailsford about hiring management from a wider net, is interesting. Brad has said a few times that his preperation this year was based directly on what he did last year. That, to me shows that there was a lack of confidence in the trainers at the Grand Tour level.
I don't think it's right to point fingers at Wiggo - especially as nobody within the team seems to be doing that. They just need to surround him with the right support.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
thingswelike said:
This comment by Brailsford about hiring management from a wider net, is interesting. Brad has said a few times that his preperation this year was based directly on what he did last year. That, to me shows that there was a lack of confidence in the trainers at the Grand Tour level.
I don't think it's right to point fingers at Wiggo - especially as nobody within the team seems to be doing that. They just need to surround him with the right support.

I am not sure Wiggins can make the podium in the TdF, i imagine ASO don't want a Brit winner, especially when they have not had a French winner for years and will design the course to prevent this. Bit of a conspiracy i know, but i reckon this years was designed to suit Contador and hamper Armstrong, why? LA's behaviour last year showed him to be something of a loose cannon.

Last years course was perfect and whatever happened it clicked for Wiggins. This year was gonna be near impossible, heat, route and expectation were against him.

I reckon DB knew he was not in the right form for this TdF and the gamble with the prologue was trying to get him up there and give the confidence and hope he found some form.

DB's plan to get a Brit on the podium in five years looks nigh on impossible.
 
New announcement:

"Some changes to your Sky subscription

At Sky we're always looking to bring you the best choice, value and service. That commitment to investing in new programmes, channels and technology means that sometimes we need to make an increase to your monthly subscription. So from your September bill, your Sky TV subscription will go up by £2-50 a month".

:eek:




:p
 
Jul 17, 2009
4,316
2
0
Visit site
mortailcoil said:
Like most things British. Glossy cover and kit (packaging), less substance.

But I do not feel they did too badly - what more were they expecting? That is arrogance. They should be glad they got their face out there.

Top of the Pops


Brainsford actually wanted Wiggo to change his image to sell hipster look and go with the Oasis haircut