The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
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.Ferminal said:Don't listen to them Dave... keep running a clean team.
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.![]()
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.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.
“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.”
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.
On the contrary.Martin318is said:That was gold!
smaryka said: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
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.
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.
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.![]()
No I understood it, sorry my sarcasm didn't come through very well.Ferminal said:I agree re: some of the nonsense he talks
You misinterpreted my assertions of Garmin.
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.
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.
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.