Geert Leinders

Page 20 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Dec 30, 2011
3,547
0
0
sniper said:
we're speculating about the possibility his infection had to do with doping.
alarm code red at sky-bot-camp.
I guess with you everything should be taken down a notch before being taken seriously. You speculating = daydreaming. You stating = speculating.

And sorry but surely the possibility of his infection having to do with doping is so low it is really not worth wasting your time over? We are just trying to help you move on to more fruitful topics.. Like say how about Leinders..now he is one fishy doctor..

Also DW's point was a possibility, but once again it is a theory. He has no way of proving anything and therefore that is where it will remain. I for one am not too concerned that the post meant Sky were doping. It was all as you say speculation.

Wiggins's rise in 2009 I have always as being due to his first time proper focus on the road after Beijing. I have always thought that makes a lot of sense.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
martinvickers said:
He didn't 'argue it' exactly,
backtrack noted :cool:

... and started lashing out when it was rebutted.
where? crickets.

you know, it occasionally bears remembering, some people in here (and I don't include intelligent sceptics like Dear Wiggo in this) don't just THINK sky dope, or even KNOW sky dope...they WANT sky to have doped; they're emotionally invested in it to justify a personal dislike.
never go full genius, martin, never.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
The Hitch said:
That's why i said if.

And judging by subsequent posts it does seem to be a theory you are entertaining.

I don't hate you. I don't know you. But some of your wack conspiracy theories are ridiculous.

what conspiracies? you're attributing a whole lot of conspiracies to me.
the contador goes Israel thing was just me being skeptic. don't make it bigger than it was.
no conspiracy. just me being skeptic.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Nice to see Joachim again has known to derail a SKY - thread.

Why are y guys even discussing something that was 'debunked' by the 'newsdropper' Dear Wiggo?
 
meat puppet said:
Thanks. From my memory I would have suggested that the avgs were rather high in 2009.

Then again, apart from Ventoux, the efforts were sub 30min apiece. Lance's numbers are in Wiggo's ballpark, more or less, no?
You could probably put Romme and Columbiere together for the time.
 
meat puppet said:
Thanks. From my memory I would have suggested that the avgs were rather high in 2009.

Then again, apart from Ventoux, the efforts were sub 30min apiece. Lance's numbers are in Wiggo's ballpark, more or less, no?
Wiggins was faster on Verbier but slower on Colombiere and Ventoux.
 
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Nice to see Joachim again has known to derail a SKY - thread.

Why are y guys even discussing something that was 'debunked' by the 'newsdropper' Dear Wiggo?
Is this a Sky thread, in light of recent revelations the Leinders affair strikes at the heart of the scandal that is Dutch Cycling.
 
Joachim said:
The cremation thing, from DW...
No. For casual/new readers y crackpot theory is reposted at the end of the Sky thread. Since this is a Lienders thread that Joachim has tried to derail, I won't add to Joachim's chaos.

No cremation claims. Ever. Please do not ever falsely attribute really stupid minutia to me again. PM me if there is a question. But, I don't think that's going to happen, eh Joachim?

Martin, thank you for your comment. I'm glad to see the process to prove/deny my crackpot theory is recognized.
 
del1962 said:
You could probably put Romme and Columbiere together for the time.
Depends, really. There was a downhill in between, so they got some recovery time, drinks, gels etc. in between. Moreover, 2x 25min @ FTP is easier than 50min straight.

Also, aggregating the numbers puts AC and the Schelcks in the 6+ territory. I have no problem with the implication - no pass in my sniffing test either way, aggregated or not. LA values we have seen. Wiggo? Well, I'm not willing to buy it.

Ferminal: indeed, but the grand total is something like 30s, no?

Sorry for the slight OT.
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
sniper said:
backtrack noted :cool:
No backtrack - I was quite specific in the word i originally used for you - you 'pushed' the madcap theory - you didn't initate it, and nothing you psted could be considered an argument (and that's not a good thing) - but you rowed in behind it very quickly

never go full genius, martin, never.
Ball not man, sniper. Ball not man.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
del1962 said:
Is this a Sky thread, in light of recent revelations the Leinders affair strikes at the heart of the scandal that is Dutch Cycling.
I consider Leinders as a SKY subject as his past at RABO was not an object for Brailsford cum suis.

If u want to talk RABO, please, come to that thread and see what I think of those cheats.

But to answer, Dutch don't dope ;):eek:
[that was sarcasm]
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
No. For casual/new readers y crackpot theory is reposted at the end of the Sky thread. Since this is a Lienders thread that Joachim has tried to derail, I won't add to Joachim's chaos.

No cremation claims. Ever. Please do not ever falsely attribute really stupid minutia to me again. PM me if there is a question. But, I don't think that's going to happen, eh Joachim?

Martin, thank you for your comment. I'm glad to see the process to prove/deny my crackpot theory is recognized.
I think Joachim mean Dear Wiggo, dirtyWorks...
 
Do none of you guys go out on your bikes on Sundays? Or watch the tennis??

What a lot of rubbish has been spewed on this thread.

Hopefully (from what his lawyer is saying) Leinders is willing to co-operate and give full accounts of what has been going on: maybe we should wait for that?

(I am still waiting for Brailsfords account of his review into Leinders practice whist he was at Sky, mind you.)

And then be willing to admit we were wrong if we were (well done Dear Wiggo & JimmyFingers)?

Otherwise, its just the same old arguments going back and forth.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
I consider Leinders as a SKY subject as his past at RABO was not an object for Brailsford cum suis.

If u want to talk RABO, please, come to that thread and see what I think of those cheats.

But to answer, Dutch don't dope ;):eek:
[that was sarcasm]
at least our nr 1 national sport, speedskating, is nice 'n clean. no doping there. just one against one, fair contest.
oh wait.
http://nos.nl/artikel/466594-ook-dopinggebruik-in-schaatsen.html
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
coinneach said:
And then be willing to admit we were wrong if we were (well done Dear Wiggo & JimmyFingers)?
Never. They are wrong quite simply because they don't want to ask the questions at all. They don't seem to be interested in the answer, their mind is already made up.

They can''t be right as even if Sky is clean and Wiggo is a true Paladin the questions are valid.

The handwaving and missdirection of these questions is one of the reasons why this keeps going on. As long as fanboys are blinkered and refuse to be critical the media will protect the stars. The media are in it for the money, so they report on what the public wants.
 

Joachim

BANNED
Dec 22, 2012
934
0
0
Franklin said:
Never. They are wrong quite simply because they don't want to ask the questions at all. They don't seem to be interested in the answer, their mind is already made up.

They can''t be right as even if Sky is clean and Wiggo is a true Paladin the questions are valid.

The handwaving and missdirection of these questions is one of the reasons why this keeps going on. As long as fanboys are blinkered and refuse to be critical the media will protect the stars. The media are in it for the money, so they report on what the public wants.
This is what is so funny

Can you point me to anybody,and I mean anybody that is stating definitively that Sky are clean?

Go on, go and find somebody.

Now ask me if I can find somebody who has stated definitively that Sky are dirty....

Get the picture yet? Now who is looking like they are closed minded and have made their minds up?
 
Dec 30, 2011
3,547
0
0
Franklin said:
Never. They are wrong quite simply because they don't want to ask the questions at all. They don't seem to be interested in the answer, their mind is already made up.

They can''t be right as even if Sky is clean and Wiggo is a true Paladin the questions are valid.

The handwaving and missdirection of these questions is one of the reasons why this keeps going on. As long as fanboys are blinkered and refuse to be critical the media will protect the stars. The media are in it for the money, so they report on what the public wants.
This is the problem. The Sky defenders are defending Sky. But not excusing them. I argue that there is nothing going on at Sky but I do not deny the proof, just what it is used for. I ask the same questions as you do and probably a couple more seeing as I follow Sky more closely (just I do not air those out loud in this forum). The only theories and ideas I mock and reject totally out of hand are the ones from guys like Sniper, Hog and recently cc which are generally quite crackpot and you do not seriously expect me to take those seriously? Also deriding Sky fans for being single minded is a bit hypocritical when the other side do exactly the same thing with not looking for any loopholes for Sky. What I get most aggravated about here is the certainty by some posters that Sky are doping. There is no other way about it, I would suspect it is some innate, immense arrogance that they are better than all others and are capable of working out that Sky are definitely dirty.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Froome19 said:
What I get most aggravated about here is the certainty by some posters that Sky are doping. There is no other way about it, I would suspect it is some innate, immense arrogance that they are better than all others and are capable of working out that Sky are definitely dirty.
I don't support their position... but in this they do have a HUGE thing on their side:

Statistics. Chances of a GT winner being clean are extremely rare.

The position that a GT winner is probably clean and we should go from there is absolutely belied by the historic facts. I certainly would say justice needs to work that way, but for the educated onlooker it's the other way around.

So it's not jealousy, it's simply that they take the pragmatical approach.That approach hasn't been wrong in almost 25 years.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Joachim said:
This is what is so funny

Can you point me to anybody,and I mean anybody that is stating definitively that Sky are clean?

Go on, go and find somebody.
Go to the Sky thread. Not only there are plenty of people who KNEW wiggins was clean, thereis also a constant handwaving the Leinders evidence.

And guess what Joachim... Leinders is probably indeed as dirty as people said.

Another example, the fact that people keep on saying Leinders was a "Honest misstake" while it's extremely unlikely this is true.

We have people defending the lies of Dave Brailford.

It's a long stream of people denying facts.

Anyone defending DB is simply not arguing in good faith. Someone poohpoohing Leinders is not arguing in good faith. The evidence on those things is indeed undeniable.
 

Joachim

BANNED
Dec 22, 2012
934
0
0
I asked you to go and find somebody who has said Sky are definitively clean.

You haven't been able to have you...
 
Jul 13, 2009
504
0
0
Cycle Chic said:
Why would he have been cremated....assuming he is of the 70.1% in the catholicism faith.??
It has been some time since Catholics were allowed to be cremated I think the ban was lifted in 1963
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY