jamesmasters said:
I would say the case against them is overstated, although I wouldn't say there is no case at all.
Since you say you have not read the clinic before and all your comments only concern the - imrprovement part of the story Ill take this chance to tell you that here are more sides to the sky doping case than just the surprising massive improvements of 4 riders all of whom just happen to be at sky when they get the improvement.
If you do believe that was a total coincidence (and even Sky dont seem to want to sell it that way given the vague comments about how training at sky is so good it provides boosts equal to doping- their words) then there are other things to look at,
One is Wiggin's very strange open admiration (for someone allegedly anti doping) for Lance Armstrong which reached far more sycophantic levels than anyone else in the peloton and which included crediting him personally for many of his victories last year (including on the podium at Paris Nice) and attacking his accusers . Obviously tied with Sky openly crowning themselves as successors of Lances team - US postal and calling themselves - UK Postal. Another eybrowraiser at the least.
Theres the total failure of their original anti doping policies and promises. Not only did they fail horribly in their pledge to sign only clean riders and staff - with some very obviously shady people like Yates Barry Rogers signed, they also went back on their promise to to be open about doping. The most notable example being Bailsford saying he had no idea Barry was a doper and that he was shocked to hear Lance Armstrong did it too
Oh and the small matter of what a doctor recently identified as having been a doping mastermind at Rabobank, was doing at Sky last year and why team "we will be honest and open about doping" have decided to take a "dont you dare ask me about that" attitude with regard to him.