What am I learning here ? Sky could be doping ? Are you serious ? really ?
Sorry, but I must admit it's kind of funny to see so much people discussing here of Sky's doping as if they were discovering the "unknown truth".
Wake up, guys, doping has always existed in cycling (and in other sports). Why would you think things have changed and that most of teams could be "clean" nowadays, except the "bad guys" from Sky ? Are you joking or are you just really naïve ?
You really think Evans, Nibali, VDB, Voeckler and the others could be clean guys ? You really think a young guy like Pinot, who just learned few days after the start he'll have to do the Tour de France, and who's still fresh at the end of the 3 weeks, better than Nibali and VDB, him who never made any Grand Tour before and beat Froome at La Toussuire, could be a clean guy ? Because he's only 22 ? And Froome is doped because he has never shown great results before 26 ? Well, ask Ullrich if when you show great potential at 20 or 21, it means you must be clean.
I'm a french guy, but I can't stand all the french subjectivity about "bad guys doped of Sky", and the "clean Europcar guys". What a joke ! I mean, I find Europcar (which is just a continental team) much impressive than Sky these 2 last years. If people would have bet, when he was 28 years old, that Voeckler, at 32 years old, could become one of the greatest classic-man of the whole peloton, and a guy able to follow Evans and F. Schleck like he did last year in the Galibier and all mountain stages (him who didn't really prepare himself for the Tour 2011, and who was still one of the fresher guys at the end of the 3 weeks), we would all found it hilarious !
I don't know what Voeckler take... but I'm sure, when we see how he was and how he became, that it's not less than what Sky's guys take ! (and Kern at the Dauphiné 2011 and Turgot, 2nd at Paris-Roubaix, surely tasted it)
You think things could have changed because of the Festina's scandal ? That's so much naïve... in France, we called 1999 "Tour du renouveau" (i don't know how to say it in english... renewal tour ?) Like if things would change. But it wasn't the first "Tour du Renouveau", we had the same words in 1968 ! Tom Simpson died, it really shocked the media and the public, and they tell us at these times that anti-doping controls would be more efficient etc. So what happened ? Doping continue to increase, everybody was still doped, some much better than others, that's always the case in cycling, nothing never changed.
Coppi, Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault, Fignon, all the guys before EPO were using PED, and not just sometime a little pill. All the "legends" of cycling were great dopers. History of cycling is history of dopers beating other dopers.
In France, runners had an expression for doping. They called it "faire le métier" ("To do the job"). That explains it all, there's no "unknown truth". So it's you to decide... hate them all, or respect them all, because even if they're all doped since the first Tour de France, that's a hard and dangerous sport, and what Sky and Europcar have done on this Tour is not just the result of doping. If Sky guys were "machines", they would have lead the peloton the first week for Cavendish, but they didn't, they had to keep all their strength for the strategic moments to win the Tour, they didn't run like "machines", when they had to lead the chase and control, they never rejoin the groups ahead, except at La Planche des Belles Filles, and we never saw, like it was the case during US Postal's years, 4 guys leading with the leader in their wheel in the last climb of stages. When we saw Knees climbing the Tourmalet 4 minutes slower than Voeckler, sorry, I haven't see "doped machines" annihilating all their rivals.
But Sky surely doped, as most of pro cycling runners. No big deal. You wanna see some clean riding ? Turn off the TV and take your bike !
Sorry, but I must admit it's kind of funny to see so much people discussing here of Sky's doping as if they were discovering the "unknown truth".
Wake up, guys, doping has always existed in cycling (and in other sports). Why would you think things have changed and that most of teams could be "clean" nowadays, except the "bad guys" from Sky ? Are you joking or are you just really naïve ?
You really think Evans, Nibali, VDB, Voeckler and the others could be clean guys ? You really think a young guy like Pinot, who just learned few days after the start he'll have to do the Tour de France, and who's still fresh at the end of the 3 weeks, better than Nibali and VDB, him who never made any Grand Tour before and beat Froome at La Toussuire, could be a clean guy ? Because he's only 22 ? And Froome is doped because he has never shown great results before 26 ? Well, ask Ullrich if when you show great potential at 20 or 21, it means you must be clean.
I'm a french guy, but I can't stand all the french subjectivity about "bad guys doped of Sky", and the "clean Europcar guys". What a joke ! I mean, I find Europcar (which is just a continental team) much impressive than Sky these 2 last years. If people would have bet, when he was 28 years old, that Voeckler, at 32 years old, could become one of the greatest classic-man of the whole peloton, and a guy able to follow Evans and F. Schleck like he did last year in the Galibier and all mountain stages (him who didn't really prepare himself for the Tour 2011, and who was still one of the fresher guys at the end of the 3 weeks), we would all found it hilarious !
I don't know what Voeckler take... but I'm sure, when we see how he was and how he became, that it's not less than what Sky's guys take ! (and Kern at the Dauphiné 2011 and Turgot, 2nd at Paris-Roubaix, surely tasted it)
You think things could have changed because of the Festina's scandal ? That's so much naïve... in France, we called 1999 "Tour du renouveau" (i don't know how to say it in english... renewal tour ?) Like if things would change. But it wasn't the first "Tour du Renouveau", we had the same words in 1968 ! Tom Simpson died, it really shocked the media and the public, and they tell us at these times that anti-doping controls would be more efficient etc. So what happened ? Doping continue to increase, everybody was still doped, some much better than others, that's always the case in cycling, nothing never changed.
Coppi, Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault, Fignon, all the guys before EPO were using PED, and not just sometime a little pill. All the "legends" of cycling were great dopers. History of cycling is history of dopers beating other dopers.
In France, runners had an expression for doping. They called it "faire le métier" ("To do the job"). That explains it all, there's no "unknown truth". So it's you to decide... hate them all, or respect them all, because even if they're all doped since the first Tour de France, that's a hard and dangerous sport, and what Sky and Europcar have done on this Tour is not just the result of doping. If Sky guys were "machines", they would have lead the peloton the first week for Cavendish, but they didn't, they had to keep all their strength for the strategic moments to win the Tour, they didn't run like "machines", when they had to lead the chase and control, they never rejoin the groups ahead, except at La Planche des Belles Filles, and we never saw, like it was the case during US Postal's years, 4 guys leading with the leader in their wheel in the last climb of stages. When we saw Knees climbing the Tourmalet 4 minutes slower than Voeckler, sorry, I haven't see "doped machines" annihilating all their rivals.
But Sky surely doped, as most of pro cycling runners. No big deal. You wanna see some clean riding ? Turn off the TV and take your bike !