Brits don't dope?

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

The whole British Cycling / Team Sky success story is 25 years old this year. Who would have thought the tireless amount of work Keen did at Bishop Otter College on his research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing and he continued with Boardman from 1987 to 1992 to get that first ever British medal in an Olympic cycling event would then develop into the U23 Road Accademy Brailsford & Ellingworth started in 2004 and just 6 years later would start Team Sky in 2010 and 2 years after that a win in Tour de France with a pursuit rider originally coached by Keen using his methods and research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing? What a waste of 21 years, when all they needed to do was pop a few weight loss pills down Wiggins throat and rock up in a shiny bus and win Tour de France all along!

If cycling is clean how are times the same as the times knocked out in the EPO days? The Tour de France is roughly 2,000 miles a year yet the time it takes is roughly the same, surely in clean cycling it should take longer to complete 2,000 miles than it took in the dark, dirty EPO days?

If we look at a race like Paris Roubaix, in the famous 1999 edition they raced 273km in 6h 44'15'', this year they raced 257km in 5h51'53'' it can't be down to tailwinds, surely?

So what changed in the peloton that's made it clean(ER) but they can still race as fast/faster than the great days of EPO? I don't think it's down to evolution.

PS this isn't a dig at Brits. Just it seems you may believe that cycling is clean/cleaner than it once was. So I'd genuinely like to hear your theory/answer on how that happened.

Now this is what I call actual evidence that definitely makes sit back and think.

I like to think PED's still exist but to a lesser extent, due to pressure from media and more importantly sponsors after the PED crises of the lates 90s/00's. I like to think with social media and mobile phones so prevalent in today's society it is harder to hide these types of secrets. I do believe technology, sport science and training methods have improved the abilities/ speed of modern day cyclist but those numbers are suspicious

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

The whole British Cycling / Team Sky success story is 25 years old this year. Who would have thought the tireless amount of work Keen did at Bishop Otter College on his research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing and he continued with Boardman from 1987 to 1992 to get that first ever British medal in an Olympic cycling event would then develop into the U23 Road Accademy Brailsford & Ellingworth started in 2004 and just 6 years later would start Team Sky in 2010 and 2 years after that a win in Tour de France with a pursuit rider originally coached by Keen using his methods and research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing? What a waste of 21 years, when all they needed to do was pop a few weight loss pills down Wiggins throat and rock up in a shiny bus and win Tour de France all along!

EPO is how old? 25 years.

Shame all those riders caught up in the EPO positives, doping scandals, Festina busts, Fuentes raids, USADA investos, since Keen and 1987 wern't British huh? In 25 years we only have Millar, but stupid idiot went straight to France and St-Quentin and then Cofidis and missed the extra invidible EPO Brailsford keeps in the RangeRover. Bl**dy idiot. Almost as bad as that Tiernan-Locke. At least he tried to get into British Cycling in 2004 with U-23 National team, but then went off to CC Étupes and France like Millar! Should have stayed at BC U23 Accademny like Cav, Stannard, Swift, Kennaugh, Thomas, Dowsett, S.Yates and he would have been immune! Bet Adam Yates brother wishes he followed his Brother through British Cycling too now instead of heading off to France with Dave Raynor. Any British Rider trying to make it on a French amateur team gets busted before their career is over lol!

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

The whole British Cycling / Team Sky success story is 25 years old this year. Who would have thought the tireless amount of work Keen did at Bishop Otter College on his research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing and he continued with Boardman from 1987 to 1992 to get that first ever British medal in an Olympic cycling event would then develop into the U23 Road Accademy Brailsford & Ellingworth started in 2004 and just 6 years later would start Team Sky in 2010 and 2 years after that a win in Tour de France with a pursuit rider originally coached by Keen using his methods and research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing? What a waste of 21 years, when all they needed to do was pop a few weight loss pills down Wiggins throat and rock up in a shiny bus and win Tour de France all along!

If cycling is clean how are times the same as the times knocked out in the EPO days? The Tour de France is roughly 2,000 miles a year yet the time it takes is roughly the same, surely in clean cycling it should take longer to complete 2,000 miles than it took in the dark, dirty EPO days?

If we look at a race like Paris Roubaix, in the famous 1999 edition they raced 273km in 6h 44'15'', this year they raced 257km in 5h51'53'' it can't be down to tailwinds, surely?

So what changed in the peloton that's made it clean(ER) but they can still race as fast/faster than the great days of EPO? I don't think it's down to evolution.

PS this isn't a dig at Brits. Just it seems you may believe that cycling is clean/cleaner than it once was. So I'd genuinely like to hear your theory/answer on how that happened.

Now this is what I call actual evidence that definitely makes sit back and think.

I like to think PED's still exist but to a lesser extent, due to pressure from media and more importantly sponsors after the PED crises of the lates 90s/00's. I like to think with social media and mobile phones so prevalent in today's society it is harder to hide these types of secrets. I do believe technology, sport science and training methods have improved the abilities/ speed of modern day cyclist but those numbers are suspicious

Apart from Kimmage, where has there been any pressure from the media on Sky to answer questions?

Sky have their own social media which fans lap up?

As for cleanER, what makes you think it is? Can you point to where or what made the peloton clean up and be cleanER? Vaughters said the new generation dont dope as it was no longer cool! That was 2006/7? That is 10 years ago! Is it a 'cool' thing to ride clean? because we dont see many riders talking how 'cool' it is to be racing the TdF clean!

Valverde, Scarponi and others are all riding better than before their bans. Riders riding until they were 40, Hincapie, Horner and Voight! How?

The tech, sports science, training have all been debunked! It was being done a long time ago by many. Rasmussen in today's L'Equipe says all sky's claims are not new inventions.

 

[The Hitch]

Britain won its first Olympic medal in cycling just as cycling became infested by drugs.

Oh but it was all the research they did.

Haha. Got to love children and their wild imaginations sometimes.

 

[BYOP88]

Re: Re:

The whole British Cycling / Team Sky success story is 25 years old this year. Who would have thought the tireless amount of work Keen did at Bishop Otter College on his research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing and he continued with Boardman from 1987 to 1992 to get that first ever British medal in an Olympic cycling event would then develop into the U23 Road Accademy Brailsford & Ellingworth started in 2004 and just 6 years later would start Team Sky in 2010 and 2 years after that a win in Tour de France with a pursuit rider originally coached by Keen using his methods and research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing? What a waste of 21 years, when all they needed to do was pop a few weight loss pills down Wiggins throat and rock up in a shiny bus and win Tour de France all along!

If cycling is clean how are times the same as the times knocked out in the EPO days? The Tour de France is roughly 2,000 miles a year yet the time it takes is roughly the same, surely in clean cycling it should take longer to complete 2,000 miles than it took in the dark, dirty EPO days?

If we look at a race like Paris Roubaix, in the famous 1999 edition they raced 273km in 6h 44'15'', this year they raced 257km in 5h51'53'' it can't be down to tailwinds, surely?

So what changed in the peloton that's made it clean(ER) but they can still race as fast/faster than the great days of EPO? I don't think it's down to evolution.

PS this isn't a dig at Brits. Just it seems you may believe that cycling is clean/cleaner than it once was. So I'd genuinely like to hear your theory/answer on how that happened.

Now this is what I call actual evidence that definitely makes sit back and think.

I like to think PED's still exist but to a lesser extent, due to pressure from media and more importantly sponsors after the PED crises of the lates 90s/00's. I like to think with social media and mobile phones so prevalent in today's society it is harder to hide these types of secrets. I do believe technology, sport science and training methods have improved the abilities/ speed of modern day cyclist but those numbers are suspicious

Thanks for taking the time to answer. Appreciated

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

The whole British Cycling / Team Sky success story is 25 years old this year. Who would have thought the tireless amount of work Keen did at Bishop Otter College on his research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing and he continued with Boardman from 1987 to 1992 to get that first ever British medal in an Olympic cycling event would then develop into the U23 Road Accademy Brailsford & Ellingworth started in 2004 and just 6 years later would start Team Sky in 2010 and 2 years after that a win in Tour de France with a pursuit rider originally coached by Keen using his methods and research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing? What a waste of 21 years, when all they needed to do was pop a few weight loss pills down Wiggins throat and rock up in a shiny bus and win Tour de France all along!

If cycling is clean how are times the same as the times knocked out in the EPO days? The Tour de France is roughly 2,000 miles a year yet the time it takes is roughly the same, surely in clean cycling it should take longer to complete 2,000 miles than it took in the dark, dirty EPO days?

If we look at a race like Paris Roubaix, in the famous 1999 edition they raced 273km in 6h 44'15'', this year they raced 257km in 5h51'53'' it can't be down to tailwinds, surely?

So what changed in the peloton that's made it clean(ER) but they can still race as fast/faster than the great days of EPO? I don't think it's down to evolution.

PS this isn't a dig at Brits. Just it seems you may believe that cycling is clean/cleaner than it once was. So I'd genuinely like to hear your theory/answer on how that happened.

Now this is what I call actual evidence that definitely makes sit back and think.

I like to think PED's still exist but to a lesser extent, due to pressure from media and more importantly sponsors after the PED crises of the lates 90s/00's. I like to think with social media and mobile phones so prevalent in today's society it is harder to hide these types of secrets. I do believe technology, sport science and training methods have improved the abilities/ speed of modern day cyclist but those numbers are suspicious

Apart from Kimmage, where has there been any pressure from the media on Sky to answer questions?

Sky have their own social media which fans lap up?

As for cleanER, what makes you think it is? Can you point to where or what made the peloton clean up and be cleanER? Vaughters said the new generation dont dope as it was no longer cool! That was 2006/7? That is 10 years ago! Is it a 'cool' thing to ride clean? because we dont see many riders talking how 'cool' it is to be racing the TdF clean!

Valverde, Scarponi and others are all riding better than before their bans. Riders riding until they were 40, Hincapie, Horner and Voight! How?

The tech, sports science, training have all been debunked! It was being done a long time ago by many. Rasmussen in today's L'Equipe says all sky's claims are not new inventions.

Of course there is media pressure there are questions to the yellow jersey on doping every year and athletes will see the backlash other sports' athletesfaced when caught doping.

What made it cleaner try actually reading the post you quoted where I mention doping crises and sponsor/media pressure. Sport science debunked there has been constant improvements in sport science which athletes from all sports acknowledge have helped improve performance. Some of Sky's stuff isn't new but some is, if it wasn't why was everyone moaning initially about Sky's new approach/marginal gains, then other teams copied suit.

 

[samhocking]

Nobody knows what Sky are doing - even Rasmussen. That's why there's a zillion pages of random guesses what they might be doing, but nothing in 25 years. How long did Rasmussen's career last before getting caught out? Clearly they are doing something different, otherwise they'd get caught like him. Rasmussen needs to think what he's saying before he opens his mouth.

 

[Bronstein]

Re:

Nobody knows what Sky are doing - even Rasmussen. That's why there's a zillion pages of random guesses what they might be doing, but nothing in 25 years. How long did Rasmussen's career last before getting caught out? Clearly they are doing something different, otherwise they'd get caught like him. Rasmussen needs to think what he's saying before he opens his mouth.

Has Horner been caught? Andy Schleck? Cobo?

 

[BullsFan22]

http://www.bbc.com/sport/36761908

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Of course there is media pressure there are questions to the yellow jersey on doping every year and athletes will see the backlash other sports' athletesfaced when caught doping.

What made it cleaner try actually reading the post you quoted where I mention doping crises and sponsor/media pressure. Sport science debunked there has been constant improvements in sport science which athletes from all sports acknowledge have helped improve performance. Some of Sky's stuff isn't new but some is, if it wasn't why was everyone moaning initially about Sky's new approach/marginal gains, then other teams copied suit.

So you cant quote any questions?

Sponsor pressure would mean an increase in doping, the need to win to prove to sponsors the team is worth it!

None of Sky's stuff is new! This is the problem with fans of sky, they believe everything sky say and ignore others. Yet when it gets pointed out where Sky lied, they ignore that and still believe!

Can you point to other teams copying suit?

Time for Anquetil's quote "You can't ride the Tour de France on mineral water."

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

Of course there is media pressure there are questions to the yellow jersey on doping every year and athletes will see the backlash other sports' athletesfaced when caught doping.

What made it cleaner try actually reading the post you quoted where I mention doping crises and sponsor/media pressure. Sport science debunked there has been constant improvements in sport science which athletes from all sports acknowledge have helped improve performance. Some of Sky's stuff isn't new but some is, if it wasn't why was everyone moaning initially about Sky's new approach/marginal gains, then other teams copied suit.

So you cant quote any questions?

Sponsor pressure would mean an increase in doping, the need to win to prove to sponsors the team is worth it!

None of Sky's stuff is new! This is the problem with fans of sky, they believe everything sky say and ignore others. Yet when it gets pointed out where Sky lied, they ignore that and still believe!

Can you point to other teams copying suit?

Time for Anquetil's quote "You can't ride the Tour de France on mineral water."

Dude stop trolling. You make ridiculous claims which are never supported with evidence. Questioning that the yellow jersey is ever asked about doping is stupid, especially as they were asked about motor doping today

 

[Catwhoorg]

Re:

Britain won its first Olympic medal in cycling just as cycling became infested by drugs.

Oh but it was all the research they did.

Haha. Got to love children and their wild imaginations sometimes.

The first Olympic medals in cycling were in 1896, their first gold in 1908.

Even as late as 1976 they beat the East Germans to Bronze in the Team Pursuit. (1972 beating Poland)

The 80's were a low point with zero medals at 3 olympics, same as the 60s but there were medals for team GB before Boardman's one.


Of course cycling in 1896 wasn't exactly "clean", being the year Arthur Linton allegedly died of an overdose of stimulants.

 

[MikeS369]

Re:

I find it extremely unlikely that any GT winners in recent years has been PED-free.

I find it unlikely that anyone that has finished a GT has done so drug free.

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

Of course there is media pressure there are questions to the yellow jersey on doping every year and athletes will see the backlash other sports' athletesfaced when caught doping.

What made it cleaner try actually reading the post you quoted where I mention doping crises and sponsor/media pressure. Sport science debunked there has been constant improvements in sport science which athletes from all sports acknowledge have helped improve performance. Some of Sky's stuff isn't new but some is, if it wasn't why was everyone moaning initially about Sky's new approach/marginal gains, then other teams copied suit.

So you cant quote any questions?

Sponsor pressure would mean an increase in doping, the need to win to prove to sponsors the team is worth it!

None of Sky's stuff is new! This is the problem with fans of sky, they believe everything sky say and ignore others. Yet when it gets pointed out where Sky lied, they ignore that and still believe!

Can you point to other teams copying suit?

Time for Anquetil's quote "You can't ride the Tour de France on mineral water."

Dude stop trolling. You make ridiculous claims which are never supported with evidence. Questioning that the yellow jersey is ever asked about doping is stupid, especially as they were asked about motor doping today

I don't see any ridiculous claims here. Many of it has been discussed and there's plenty of examples out there. So there's really no need to accuse anyone of trolling. Next time please find the report button, or I'll have to take other actions

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

I find it extremely unlikely that any GT winners in recent years has been PED-free.

I find it unlikely that anyone that has finished a GT has done so drug free.

 

[kwikki]

Re: Re:

I find it extremely unlikely that any GT winners in recent years has been PED-free.

I find it unlikely that anyone that has finished a GT has done so drug free.

Little bit of dope and he'd have been 33 seconds faster

 

[Starstruck]

The British are the smartest people in the world and beyond reproach. Though I do sometimes wonder what's being hidden in that warehouse with miles of files. Mau Mau...oops. Call the press secretary. Public relations is dumbfounding.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

The British are the smartest people in the world and beyond reproach. Though I do sometimes wonder what's being hidden in that warehouse with miles of files. Mau Mau...oops. Call the press secretary. Public relations is dumbfounding.

cameron and clegg were the smooth skin boys from brasnoise and st annes oxford. then we have farage and corbyn, but the empire crew will win, they always come out conquering

 

[Starstruck]

Re: Re:

The British are the smartest people in the world and beyond reproach. Though I do sometimes wonder what's being hidden in that warehouse with miles of files. Mau Mau...oops. Call the press secretary. Public relations is dumbfounding.

cameron and clegg were the smooth skin boys from brasnoise and st annes oxford. then we have farage and corbyn, but the empire crew will win, they always come out conquering

connected and organized. gotta' know how the story goes...

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

I find it extremely unlikely that any GT winners in recent years has been PED-free.

I find it unlikely that anyone that has finished a GT has done so drug free.

Little bit of dope and he'd have been 33 seconds faster

I didn't pick him because he won a lanterne rouge.

 

[kwikki]

I know. You picked him because his commentary on Armstrong.

 

[The Hegelian]

Proposition 1: the rat really smells.
Proposition 2: I infer the existence of a rat.

What precisely are people disputing here? My senses or my inferences?

 

[DamianoMachiavelli]

Re:

I think it's more a question of there being a smoking gun, and a body, but nobody has found the bullets yet.

Of course they are employing drugs. Why wouldn't they? Their livelihood depends on it, and as Blackcat demonstrated the odds of it all going horribly wrong are small. Armstrong was only outed because he and Bruyneel made a decision to not employ Landis. They would never have imagined that Landis would turn on them.

When Floyd went looking for a European team, Bruyneel was the only team manager who would talk with him. Guys like Riis would not return phone calls or e-mails. Bruyneel did not doubt Floyd could reach his previous level but said he could not bring Landis on board because he feared complications from the UCI and ASO.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

*Too hot to handle*

Good thing JV and his reformed dopers squad welcomed Landis with open arms though.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

The whole British Cycling / Team Sky success story is 25 years old this year. Who would have thought the tireless amount of work Keen did at Bishop Otter College on his research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing and he continued with Boardman from 1987 to 1992 to get that first ever British medal in an Olympic cycling event would then develop into the U23 Road Accademy Brailsford & Ellingworth started in 2004 and just 6 years later would start Team Sky in 2010 and 2 years after that a win in Tour de France with a pursuit rider originally coached by Keen using his methods and research programme on the physical limitations to pursuit racing? What a waste of 21 years, when all they needed to do was pop a few weight loss pills down Wiggins throat and rock up in a shiny bus and win Tour de France all along!

If cycling is clean how are times the same as the times knocked out in the EPO days? The Tour de France is roughly 2,000 miles a year yet the time it takes is roughly the same, surely in clean cycling it should take longer to complete 2,000 miles than it took in the dark, dirty EPO days?

If we look at a race like Paris Roubaix, in the famous 1999 edition they raced 273km in 6h 44'15'', this year they raced 257km in 5h51'53'' it can't be down to tailwinds, surely?

So what changed in the peloton that's made it clean(ER) but they can still race as fast/faster than the great days of EPO? I don't think it's down to evolution.

PS this isn't a dig at Brits. Just it seems you may believe that cycling is clean/cleaner than it once was. So I'd genuinely like to hear your theory/answer on how that happened.

That's massively misrepresenting things in my opinion. Rik Van Steenbergen won the 1948 race in 5h 35'31" (246km), Marcel Kint in 1943 won in 6h 1'32" (250km), Coppi in 1950 won in 6h 18'48" (247km), Duclos-lassalle in 1992 won in 6h 26'56", Peter Van Petegem in 2003 won in 6h 11'35" then Magnus Backstedt in 2004 won in 6h 40'26".


Times are coming down as you would expect but your example is clearly cherry-picked to give a skewed view of what's actually happening.

Same with the TDF. There has been a drop in overall speed since the fastest edition in 2005 and currently it's pretty consistent. I think it's currently dropped back to about Greg LeMond speeds.

It's worth noting that the length has dropped on average since about 2000 I think, but it's more noticeable since the 80's (the last non-EPO Tours) where 4000km was more common. Throughout the 2000s it was usually about 500km shorter, with 2013 being a large anomaly...


In reality times can give an overall view, and they work better over stage races, but are a very bad way of looking at doping because these are races. It doesn't matter what time you finish in, it matters that you finish first.