Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[Ferminal]

I remember one regular who has posted consistently in this thread say the day before the AX3 Domaines stage that he was so excited and couldn't wait for Froome to go full ***.

Not sure if this is directed at me but I've said similar things. Is there a problem with enjoying such emphatic performances?

 

[del1962]

Interesting that Walsh set up a meeting between Vayer and Brailsford/Kerrison during tour

Is this in the book?

 

[mattghg]

No, if you go back and read his post again you will see it's a load of cr@p. BroDeal is pointing out nationalistic tendencies in all cycling fans. It just happens that the worst offenders ATM are British. You are putting up a strawman argument, assuming the accusations are coming purely from a nationalist POV.

All BroDeal and many others here are pointing out is that the current crop of UK cycling fans are reacting to their countries success and criticism the same way that US fans reacted 10 years ago. That's all, no more.

Nice try. I'm not convinced.

It looks like Walsh decided there is too much money to be made in assuaging a country's inferiority complex with jingoistic claptrap to convince the prols that--yes--they really are superior to the rest of the world.

Apparently this country has an 'inferiority complex'. Oh well, I'm sure this is really just a general point about all cycling fans. Nothing to see here...

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

But the really damaging criticism for Froome is 2), his unprecedented improvement. We might have a better idea of how much he really did improve if Sky would release some power data pre-2011, but to the best of my knowledge Sky hasn’t done that. Why? How can a team that claims they want to be transparent refuse to do this? The argument that the public at large, non-experts, will interpret it wrong doesn’t hold here. They could release the data to some select researcher as they did with the post-2011 data. So what’s the problem here?

Walsh has the answer:

Julich solved the mystery of Chris Froome like a veteran detective working a complex case. Brailsford’s old adage about a £900,000 rider with a coach would be proved true. Froome says that one of the greatest misapprehensions people have about him is that he is naturally skinny, that he could live on a diet of Big Mac meals and not gain a pound. The truth is that he is obsessive about food, snacks on nothing more fattening than bean sprouts, and has to work at his conditioning. His tutelage under Julich coincided with the growing influence of Tim Kerrison’s ideas. Bradley Wiggins, somewhat envious himself of Froome’s build, has noted that when he got serious about road racing his weight fell away. He was between 81-82kg at the Beijing Games in 2008 but weighed 73kg the following summer in France. For Froome it was a similar story as he adopted the regime of no breakfast rides. In the spring of 2011 he weighed 73kg. In September he weighed 68kg. Consider that the UCI imposes a minimum weight limit of 6.8kg for bikes used in the Tour. Froome shed almost the weight of a bike from his 6 foot 1 inch body. Finally he was ready for the road.

But somehow that doesnt explain the gain in power in TT's for instance. Oh wait, the badzillah was cured, as Walsh explains very well:

Finally he was ready for the road. The bilharzia persists. Eggs can get trapped in the liver, the lungs, even the brain, and the difficulty with treatment is that they can’t eradicate eggs trapped within tissues and organs during lengthy infection. Sometimes in rare cases the long-term avoidance of organ damage requires chemotherapy, a detail which has occasionally been seized upon to bolster the accusation that Froome has hugely exaggerated the problems associated with bilharzia.

etc etc

chapter 11 from the Gospel

 

[maltiv]

Apparently you have to be a "veteran detective" to figure out that a climber has to lose weight to improve performance...

 

[MartinGT]

Walsh has the answer:


But somehow that doesnt explain the gain in power in TT's for instance. Oh wait, the badzillah was cured, as Walsh explains very well:

etc etc

chapter 11 from the Gospel

This is confusing me, the Badzillah.

Everywhere I have read, it says its easily treated. So why is a team with a budget of millions and access to world class medical facilities not sorting it out?

 

[sideshadow]

Anybody know which species of Schistisomiasis Froome had. Hematobuim, Japonicum etc. Have they ever mentioned it?

 

[Trudgin]

The reward of being cynical is that you are usually right. Here is a prime example. The naive might have thought Walsh actually cared about doping or exposing corruption as he pursued Armstrong. The cynical saw it as just a way for him to gain prominence so he could get choice assignments, like writing Team Sky wank material.

It is really interesting to watch once again. The same sort of amoral turds who built the Armstrong myth are at work building the Sky myth. These guys know they are lying. No one can be stupid enough not to know, especially when they saw everything that happened during the last fifteen years. They know and they don't care. It is all a scam to line their own pockets. The ones who did not get in on the Armstrong con are determined to get theirs this time around.

This, yes... I thoroughly enjoy my status as a cynic... look at everything with a slightly skewed eye… You must in cycling.

And journalists towards the end of their career… doubly doubtful of their sincerity and their reasons. I agree Walsh doesn’t/didn't care about doping, just threw his toys out the pram when Lance told him to go away. Braidsford knows that and got him onside. Probably figured Kimmage had enough on his plate and would leave them alone. (oops)

I am going to read this book, with a highlighter, basically because I cannot believe the quotes I am seeing, how any publisher allowed this to press.. oh wait Sly would be paying….

 

[Trudgin]

Anybody know which species of Schistisomiasis Froome had. Hematobuim, Japonicum etc. Have they ever mentioned it?

Is it my imagination or are you just naming shrubs now....

Does he have an aphid problem?

 

[Ferminal]

World's best coach Julich had an immediate impact on Froome in 2011, turning him from a borderline professional into an elite GT rider. Seems his detective skills have had very little impact at BMC where no one has improved except Frank (in terms of consistency) and Santaromita.

So were BMC riders getting the most out of their training (like 90% of other professionals) or is Julich just a normal coach no better than any other?

As MI stated, the whole "training superiority" thing is tiresome and at odds with what is expected in a highly competitive environment. It's not really an argument exclusive to Sky although they are probably the heaviest on the PR. Yeh, Gilbert and Evans have been poor (relatively) since 2011 because they suddenly decided to stop training. Contador stopped training because he was sick of it after six months of no racing. Purito and Piti are able to peak for four months across two GTs because they discovered a revolutionary training technique. Horner, in his forties, finally found a coach who could tell him what to do.

It's implausible. I think I've said this before but that's not to say that certain riders who may be happy with their $100k a year and getting dropped on every climb may be bums in terms of training and fitness, so individually changes to training are possibly one explanation for improvement, however, differences in training should never be an explanation for differences between riders competing at the highest level.

 

[martinvickers]

It's in the book hence it's true? Because this book isn't already full of lies?

Wow, calling out your guy really p***ed you off, didn' it!

I entirely accept the book has its share of mistakes and errors, including the specific reason why Contador was banned (but let's not forget, he was caught and banned), and I've set out my lukewarm views on the book a a whole, but "full of lies"? I think your slip is showing...

 

[martinvickers]

Interesting that Walsh set up a meeting between Vayer and Brailsford/Kerrison during tour

Is this in the book?

Yes, it is, though the results of the meeting aren't as far as I recall, mentioned.

 

[martinvickers]

Not sure if this is directed at me but I've said similar things. Is there a problem with enjoying such emphatic performances?

Yes, there's a problem. It's hypocritical. And backs gooner's point that some clinicians WANT specific teams or riders to be doping.

When Hog says it, its pretty clear he's being sarcastic. Not so here.

 

[hrotha]

From an interview with Moreno Argentin after the 1993 Giro:

Back then [when he turned pro] we didn't have coaches to give us advice on training, or doctors to prepare us. All in all, I lost three years of my career... Alas, if I had known Dr Ferrari at the time! Every year working with him has paid off fourfold. My performance has improved when it comes to sprinting and riding on my own. But don't think for a second you can achieve that by using "magic potions". I don't believe in that. It's simply about knowing what your body consumes to give it what it needs. Science is important, but what really makes a difference is the athlete's talent. We cyclists aren't Frankensteins [sic] out of a lab, we're men who have to work very hard to win.

Reading old articles from the early 90s is fascinating, everything was almost in plain view. But even then it was all about the coach and working very hard.

 

[martinvickers]

Intelligent stuff, just as we expect from you, sir.

</sarcasm>

 

[The Hitch]

Walsh has the answer:


But somehow that doesnt explain the gain in power in TT's for instance. Oh wait, the badzillah was cured, as Walsh explains very well:

etc etc

chapter 11 from the Gospel

Ho ho, hold the phone.

Does Walsh say froome requires chemotherapy for bilharzia? That goes against everything sky have ever said. Froome said earlier this year all his treatments involve biltricide and named the effects of his ongoing biltricide treatment

Whatsmore, on velorooms, jsg opened a thread quoting someone saying that froome was getting chemo like treatment, and Michele cound famously joined in the discussion to make clear in no uncertain terms that the treatment froome gets "is nothing like chemotherapy"

 

[Ferminal]

Yes, there's a problem. It's hypocritical. And backs gooner's point that some clinicians WANT specific teams or riders to be doping.

When Hog says it, its pretty clear he's being sarcastic. Not so here.

Please explain how it is hypocritical.

 

[mattghg]

Ho ho, hold the phone.

Does Walsh say froome requires chemotherapy for bilharzia?

It doesn't read like that from the bit that FGL quoted. It sounds like Walsh is saying that 'in rare cases' bilharzia can require chemo, and the fact that Froome hasn't required it has been 'seized upon' by some in order to say that the bilharzia isn't as serious as he/Sky have made out.

That's how I read it, anyway.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

From an interview with Moreno Argentin after the 1993 Giro:

Reading old articles from the early 90s is fascinating, everything was almost in plain view. But even then it was all about the coach and working very hard.

ah right, but lets not forget the additional dimension team Sky added in their quest for domination: detective skills.

 

[Ferminal]

It doesn't read like that from the bit that FGL quoted. It sounds like Walsh is saying that 'in rare cases' bilharzia can require chemo, and the fact that Froome hasn't required it has been 'seized upon' by some in order to say that the bilharzia isn't as serious as he/Sky have made out.

That's how I read it, anyway.

Same, but I'm wondering who has actually been saying that.

The only time I've really seen chemo mentioned was Froome/Cound talking about the "Chemotherapy-like side effects".

 

[The Hitch]

Anybody know which species of Schistisomiasis Froome had. Hematobuim, Japonicum etc. Have they ever mentioned it?

They have never mentioned it, but their description of it fits none of the above

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Yes, it is, though the results of the meeting aren't as far as I recall, mentioned.

Be truthfull martin, there are 3 pages about this subject in the book and then? Nothing.

I think this meeting never took place and Team Sky set up Grappe with 'the 18 X - Files' from Froome after his transformation at the Vuelta 2011.

 

[sniper]

From an interview with Moreno Argentin after the 1993 Giro:

Reading old articles from the early 90s is fascinating, everything was almost in plain view. But even then it was all about the coach and working very hard.

yep. easy to find plenty examples of dopers (avant la positive) saying it's all about hard work and marginal gains.
Coyle on Armstrong, 2004

So what’s Armstrong’s margin of success? In the case of this bike, it was 18 millimeters—about the width of your pinky finger.

etc. Much of that Coyle interview reads like walsh on froome, same type of reasoning, same tone.

funnily though, compared to Walsh, Coyle sounds remarkably frank and honest wrt the doping issue, taking a more or less agnostic stance:

Coyle: Going into the book, I hadn’t hoped or planned on spending much time on the doping question. Doping is part of the shadow-side of bike racing or any sport—facts are often murky, contentious, hard-to-prove, and stories tend to end up in a courtroom or a lab. Plus, I had the sense that I probably wouldn’t find anything new. As a relative outsider to the sport, I thought I knew the routine. People—sneaky French journalists, it seemed—accuse Armstrong, Armstrong denies, there’s no proof. It didn’t exactly increase my interest to know that Armstrong had a well-practiced habit of suing people who questioned his integrity on the subject.

As it turned out, doping was a subplot of the bike-racing season—there was David Walsh’s book, Tyler Hamilton’s shocking positive test result, Armstrong trainer Dr. Michele Ferrari’s guilty verdict, and, as the season ended, a flurry of lawsuits between Armstrong and his former personal assistant, Mike Anderson. But to me, these weren’t just stories—they were people whom I’d gotten to know during the season, people whom I found utterly fascinating. And after two years of research, all I can say for certain is this: the doping issue has been around Armstrong and cycling for a long time, and it’s probably never going to disappear. I found that, as a relative outsider to the sport, there was a lot about cycling that I didn’t know—not all of it pretty. In my book, I try to share that information so that people can come to their own decision.

it's sad and telling that Walsh hasn't been capable of taking such a stance on Sky. If he had, this thread probably wouldn't exist.

 

[mattghg]

Same, but I'm wondering who has actually been saying that.

Me too.

10

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Anybody know which species of Schistisomiasis Froome had. Hematobuim, Japonicum etc. Have they ever mentioned it?

That would require Sky to be transparent; the promise Brailsford gave at the inception of the team, that has not materialised.