Brits don't dope?

Page 130 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

Benotti69 said:
Chris Hoy asked on the BBC what's the biggest thing that's changed over the years in track cycling. He said not the kit or equipment. But the analysis.. Hoy trolling. :D
This makes me question the logic behind a lot of your posts.
Kit or equipment would have a marginal effect compared to the effect of pacing properly, technique at critical points such as accelerating or holding a pace on a big chainring etc

Doped or not, it's really not surprising that analysis is a critical part of the improvements made
 
Jun 12, 2010
1,234
0
0
As a Brit and former Olympian myself ( 84 ) I,m finding it bloody embarrassing....
my fellow Brit cycling fans would be screaming blue murder if any other country was as dominant as GB are being on the track...
nothing seams to blind peeps as much as patriotism does it ! :(
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
Benotti69 said:
Chris Hoy asked on the BBC what's the biggest thing that's changed over the years in track cycling. He said not the kit or equipment. But the analysis.. Hoy trolling. :D
This makes me question the logic behind a lot of your posts.
Kit or equipment would have a marginal effect compared to the effect of pacing properly, technique at critical points such as accelerating or holding a pace on a big chainring etc

Doped or not, it's really not surprising that analysis is a critical part of the improvements made
Analysis was always done. Analysis has got better and better alongside equipment and kit.

Merely pointing to Hoy's stupidity in making such a statement.

Chris Boardman's answer?

"There's plenty more marginal gains to be discovered" :D
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
PremierAndrew said:
Benotti69 said:
Chris Hoy asked on the BBC what's the biggest thing that's changed over the years in track cycling. He said not the kit or equipment. But the analysis.. Hoy trolling. :D
This makes me question the logic behind a lot of your posts.
Kit or equipment would have a marginal effect compared to the effect of pacing properly, technique at critical points such as accelerating or holding a pace on a big chainring etc

Doped or not, it's really not surprising that analysis is a critical part of the improvements made
Analysis was always done. Analysis has got better and better alongside equipment and kit.

Merely pointing to Hoy's stupidity in making such a statement.

Chris Boardman's answer?

"There's plenty more marginal gains to be discovered" :D
It's one thing to be able to time different segments of a ride, it's another to be able to see second-by-second power outputs etc...
Kit and equipment can only improve so much, while an improvement in the cyclist themself is much more likely to be significant
 
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
rehy90 said:
PremierAndrew said:
Cavendish 11 seconds faster in the IP than in the worlds

Nothing to see here
there is no way you improve this much at this level in just a few months...crazy
Well, you certainly can. But the problem is, Cav was under pressure to perform to get a place on the GB team for the Olympics, so he must have had to peak. To improve 11 seconds on supposedly a peak...

Then again, I don't think being beaten by Nizzolo in Slovenia is his peak, so I'll continue to hold on to that 1% chance that he might be clean
Nizzolo was holding onto a peak though at the time so he could win the Italian nationals.

'Holding onto a peak' sorry for that, it makes very little sense. I meant he was in very good shape at the time.
 
Re:

Eyeballs Out said:
Marginal gains is dead. Peaking is the new marginal gains. GB peak for the big events. Everyone else peaked sometime around last xmas
I did snigger just now when the commentators said, the Worlds don't matter, the rest of the world needs to realise it's all about the Olympics (some minor parsphrasing).

God I don't know whether to suspend disbelief or not. The scale of UK dominance is unbelievable, and to some extent uncredible.

But a bigger part of me finds it hard to believe that in this day and age any organised programme could be operated on this scale without someone spilling the beans big style. Let's face it, the British media has bigged up doping is bad over a long long period. I can't believe at least some nice kids from middle class homes wouldn't blab if they knew it was bent.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
Benotti69 said:
PremierAndrew said:
Benotti69 said:
Chris Hoy asked on the BBC what's the biggest thing that's changed over the years in track cycling. He said not the kit or equipment. But the analysis.. Hoy trolling. :D
This makes me question the logic behind a lot of your posts.
Kit or equipment would have a marginal effect compared to the effect of pacing properly, technique at critical points such as accelerating or holding a pace on a big chainring etc

Doped or not, it's really not surprising that analysis is a critical part of the improvements made
Analysis was always done. Analysis has got better and better alongside equipment and kit.

Merely pointing to Hoy's stupidity in making such a statement.

Chris Boardman's answer?

"There's plenty more marginal gains to be discovered" :D
It's one thing to be able to time different segments of a ride, it's another to be able to see second-by-second power outputs etc...
Kit and equipment can only improve so much, while an improvement in the cyclist themself is much more likely to be significant
an improvement in the cyclist themselves(sic) is much more likely to be significant ; that's where the doping comes in. ;)
 
You're missing the point. When Hoy answered, were you expecting him to say 'doping'? Because it's not a surprise that the evolution of the analysis techniques and technology is more important, than kit and stuff, an answer which you chose to single out for stupidity
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re:

PremierAndrew said:
You're missing the point. When Hoy answered, were you expecting him to say 'doping'? Because it's not a surprise that the evolution of the analysis techniques and technology is more important, than kit and stuff, an answer which you chose to single out for stupidity
Of course Sir Hoy is going to say live on the BBC at the Olympic games, doping is the single most important factor :D

GB made a huge deal over their frames and wheels 4 years ago. Now riding Cervelo's and Campy wheels.

Just pointing out the changing story lines we keep getting from TeamGB.
 
Re:

Rollthedice said:
Basically UK is the new GDR only clean. Maybe even better.
That's correct and they have Heiko Salzwedel to assist from the GDR. I love the Orwellian sounding name of the department he heads up funded by lottery money: "Monitoring and Evaluation".
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Re: Re:

in the 90s Heiko brought the Aussies to his native Cottbus. In the 70s and 80s Cottbus was one of the hotspots of GDR doping. Heiko is a huge facilitator behind the scenes, with contacts into the UCI. Was quick to jump ship shortly before Rusvelo went down in 2013.
He's also a visionary. Is on the record in 2005 already claiming that what we are seeing is a new clean cycling generation.
 
Re:

sniper said:
Lol at the medal table, btw. UK really are the big dopers of the moment.
One factor that should be taken into account is the Russian ban, with Russians being good in similar events to UK and not as good in the Chinese medal hopes.

But that factor isn't big enough to account for UK doing so well, especially when you consider UK are doing better than their home olympics four years earlier, which is practically unprecedented
 
Jun 4, 2015
499
0
0
Re:

fmk_RoI said:
In the spirit of general Brit-bashing (and unsure where the proper thread for this is), ex-BC coach Shane Sutton's showing that doping really does mess with your head:
You’re dealing with big personalities so it’s not always going to be a bed of roses. It was a fantastic culture and you look at someone like Jason Kenny who has been there ten years…if the culture was wrong he wouldn’t have lasted that long. He’s probably going to go on and be our greatest Olympian. The lad has Tokyo in him and who knows what he can achieve, not just at these Games and given the form he has. So the culture can’t be as bad as everyone has made out and it will be interesting to hear the findings of the panel.

I believe, and I’ve said it all along, it’s not one of fear. It’s one of excellence and the only people in fear, in the system, are the ones that have failed to deliver.

It will be interesting to see how those ahem 'independent' enquiries pan out? Shane's made noises that he thinks he'll be cleared. Even if he is, he doesn't seem to be missed trackside if recent results are anything to go by. Seeing as he stepped down in the light of the allegations, will he be let back in if he's cleared?
 
Re: Re:

The Carrot said:
fmk_RoI said:
In the spirit of general Brit-bashing (and unsure where the proper thread for this is), ex-BC coach Shane Sutton's showing that doping really does mess with your head:
You’re dealing with big personalities so it’s not always going to be a bed of roses. It was a fantastic culture and you look at someone like Jason Kenny who has been there ten years…if the culture was wrong he wouldn’t have lasted that long. He’s probably going to go on and be our greatest Olympian. The lad has Tokyo in him and who knows what he can achieve, not just at these Games and given the form he has. So the culture can’t be as bad as everyone has made out and it will be interesting to hear the findings of the panel.

I believe, and I’ve said it all along, it’s not one of fear. It’s one of excellence and the only people in fear, in the system, are the ones that have failed to deliver.

It will be interesting to see how those ahem 'independent' enquiries pan out? Shane's made noises that he thinks he'll be cleared. Even if he is, he doesn't seem to be missed trackside if recent results are anything to go by. Seeing as he stepped down in the light of the allegations, will he be let back in if he's cleared?
He'll likely return to Sky as a coach/deputy team principal.
 
Re: Re:

MatParker117 said:
The Carrot said:
fmk_RoI said:
In the spirit of general Brit-bashing (and unsure where the proper thread for this is), ex-BC coach Shane Sutton's showing that doping really does mess with your head:
You’re dealing with big personalities so it’s not always going to be a bed of roses. It was a fantastic culture and you look at someone like Jason Kenny who has been there ten years…if the culture was wrong he wouldn’t have lasted that long. He’s probably going to go on and be our greatest Olympian. The lad has Tokyo in him and who knows what he can achieve, not just at these Games and given the form he has. So the culture can’t be as bad as everyone has made out and it will be interesting to hear the findings of the panel.

I believe, and I’ve said it all along, it’s not one of fear. It’s one of excellence and the only people in fear, in the system, are the ones that have failed to deliver.

It will be interesting to see how those ahem 'independent' enquiries pan out? Shane's made noises that he thinks he'll be cleared. Even if he is, he doesn't seem to be missed trackside if recent results are anything to go by. Seeing as he stepped down in the light of the allegations, will he be let back in if he's cleared?
He'll likely return to Sky as a coach/deputy team principal.
Few women and disabled people there so it's a possibility.
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
Re:

Darryl Webster said:
As a Brit and former Olympian myself ( 84 ) I,m finding it bloody embarrassing....
my fellow Brit cycling fans would be screaming blue murder if any other country was as dominant as GB are being on the track...
nothing seams to blind peeps as much as patriotism does it ! :(
Great quote, especially coming from someone that had been on the 'inside' at some point in time.

Edit: I'm going to use that quote in my tagline if you don't mind... :D
 

Singer01

BANNED
Nov 18, 2013
2,043
2
5,485
BullsFan22 said:
So now the Brits are medaling in hammer throwing and gymnastics. Not many lottery winners this past year in Britain?
to be fair the gymnastics has been a very slow build to this level of success.
very anecdotally as well, when i was growing up i didn't know anybody who did gymnastics, now all of my friends children are doing it.
 
Aug 15, 2016
86
0
0
I feel like I need to get some stuff off my chest for a moment. I've been lurking on this forum on and off for a couple of years. It's always interesting reading, mainly because it explores a lot of areas the mainstream media in Britain daren't touch. As such, people don't take it seriously. I've been dismissed by friends and family as a miserable cynic and "sad" for pointing out things that have actually happened and there are good accounts of - I can point to books, articles, academics, and any amount of circumstantial evidence, and none of it will be enough to convince them

Maybe it's because I'm Welsh which gives me that bit of distance from the main English narratives (and that's what it basically is - there's little room allowed for Welsh and Scottish narratives, even with people like Geraint Thomas or Laura Muir, with Murray the only notable exception because it's a running joke), but I've been quite sceptical for a long time over the way the media portrays British success. The Olympics is the one great example of how even during the greatest international festival in the world, the national broadcaster turns inward. And I'm certain that those running the sports in Britain know that and are aware of the power of getting on the media's side, mainly by winning. Most people who watch only really care about Britain's medal count - they're not really bothered what events they come in or who gets them. And it's always that use of "we" to describe it - "we've won another medal" - as if everyone feels part-ownership of that success

Ultimately, it's chicken-or-egg to determine which came first - does the media concentrating on British success create the public's blinkers, or is it the public's blinkers that lead to the media concentrating more on British success? Either way, each feed off each other. The London games was a turbocharger, because it allowed the likes of the BBC to be extra indulgent. As a result, lots of really intelligent and otherwise quite unpatriotic people end up becoming hyper-nationalist - myself included in the past. When you spend a lot of time watching the coverage, it acts like a funnel because of the way they focus on specific events and sportspeople. You get sucked into a vortex very quickly because the BBC will be telling you how great Athlete X is and what a tough road they've had to go on, so even if you don't want to go in wanting Britain to win, you still end up wanting Athlete X to win. Heck, I even started liking Wiggins again until I saw his comments today on the Sutton case, and I only watched the final of the team pursuit. You can't call any of it journalism - it's just cheerleading, and it quickly becomes nauseating when you don't buy it

Either way, Britain is a conservative, nationalist country. I mean we kind of knew this anyway, especially after the EU referendum, but it's been noticeable for a while. And of course the way that reflects on the issues of doping and scepticism means that all reason gets thrown out of the window. I'm sure this happens elsewhere too (especially the US) but I can only speak for Britain. I just imagine this is what it's also like in Russia, or was like in East Germany in the 80s

You can provide decent circumstantial evidence for Farah being dodgy and it'll be dismissed simply on the basis of him never testing positive, and yet it's fine for people like Steve Cram to essentially accuse the likes of Gatlin, Makhloufi and Ayana of doping live on air. Even today, Steve Backley pointed at the Moldovan hammer thrower's positive tests as if to insinuate she's still cheating. God knows what it'll be like when the Russians come back. And yet I totally remember the media's reaction to Linford Christie's positive test being one of total denial and paranoia - proof that what people want isn't a positive test, because even if they had one for someone like Farah, there would be excuses aplenty as to why it's not legitimate. They just want an excuse to believe it's clean

Once you get that moment of doubt, the whole thing collapses and it just becomes unbearable. So I can understand why people on here are going to spend a lot of time "bashing Brits" - I imagine quite a few are actually British and are just sick to death of the constant sycophancy and the expectation of hyper-nationalism. And there are very few places you can go to actually express this, because the vast majority of people will immediately dismiss any degree of scepticism and it's impossible to engage a reasonable, nuanced conversation about it. It's very frustrating and I don't see a way out unless there's a mass unveiling of the whole thing - even if it's just one or two individuals that get caught, they will be written off as bad eggs and the circus will carry on as before
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
Re:

Bwlch y Groes said:
I feel like I need to get some stuff off my chest for a moment. I've been lurking on this forum on and off for a couple of years. It's always interesting reading, mainly because it explores a lot of areas the mainstream media in Britain daren't touch. As such, people don't take it seriously. I've been dismissed by friends and family as a miserable cynic and "sad" for pointing out things that have actually happened and there are good accounts of - I can point to books, articles, academics, and any amount of circumstantial evidence, and none of it will be enough to convince them

Maybe it's because I'm Welsh which gives me that bit of distance from the main English narratives (and that's what it basically is - there's little room allowed for Welsh and Scottish narratives, even with people like Geraint Thomas or Laura Muir, with Murray the only notable exception because it's a running joke), but I've been quite sceptical for a long time over the way the media portrays British success. The Olympics is the one great example of how even during the greatest international festival in the world, the national broadcaster turns inward. And I'm certain that those running the sports in Britain know that and are aware of the power of getting on the media's side, mainly by winning. Most people who watch only really care about Britain's medal count - they're not really bothered what events they come in or who gets them. And it's always that use of "we" to describe it - "we've won another medal" - as if everyone feels part-ownership of that success

Ultimately, it's chicken-or-egg to determine which came first - does the media concentrating on British success create the public's blinkers, or is it the public's blinkers that lead to the media concentrating more on British success? Either way, each feed off each other. The London games was a turbocharger, because it allowed the likes of the BBC to be extra indulgent. As a result, lots of really intelligent and otherwise quite unpatriotic people end up becoming hyper-nationalist - myself included in the past. When you spend a lot of time watching the coverage, it acts like a funnel because of the way they focus on specific events and sportspeople. You get sucked into a vortex very quickly because the BBC will be telling you how great Athlete X is and what a tough road they've had to go on, so even if you don't want to go in wanting Britain to win, you still end up wanting Athlete X to win. Heck, I even started liking Wiggins again until I saw his comments today on the Sutton case, and I only watched the final of the team pursuit. You can't call any of it journalism - it's just cheerleading, and it quickly becomes nauseating when you don't buy it

Either way, Britain is a conservative, nationalist country. I mean we kind of knew this anyway, especially after the EU referendum, but it's been noticeable for a while. And of course the way that reflects on the issues of doping and scepticism means that all reason gets thrown out of the window. I'm sure this happens elsewhere too (especially the US) but I can only speak for Britain. I just imagine this is what it's also like in Russia, or was like in East Germany in the 80s

You can provide decent circumstantial evidence for Farah being dodgy and it'll be dismissed simply on the basis of him never testing positive, and yet it's fine for people like Steve Cram to essentially accuse the likes of Gatlin, Makhloufi and Ayana of doping live on air. Even today, Steve Backley pointed at the Moldovan hammer thrower's positive tests as if to insinuate she's still cheating. God knows what it'll be like when the Russians come back. And yet I totally remember the media's reaction to Linford Christie's positive test being one of total denial and paranoia - proof that what people want isn't a positive test, because even if they had one for someone like Farah, there would be excuses aplenty as to why it's not legitimate. They just want an excuse to believe it's clean

Once you get that moment of doubt, the whole thing collapses and it just becomes unbearable. So I can understand why people on here are going to spend a lot of time "bashing Brits" - I imagine quite a few are actually British and are just sick to death of the constant sycophancy and the expectation of hyper-nationalism. And there are very few places you can go to actually express this, because the vast majority of people will immediately dismiss any degree of scepticism and it's impossible to engage a reasonable, nuanced conversation about it. It's very frustrating and I don't see a way out unless there's a mass unveiling of the whole thing - even if it's just one or two individuals that get caught, they will be written off as bad eggs and the circus will carry on as before
Great comment!

Welcome to the CN Forums! :)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts