Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[sniper]

why indeed would one refuse to answer questions about V02 max, let alone get agitated when asked about it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtIhzY16iy0

 

[veganrob]

He certainly changes his demeanor and gets defensive when asked about VO2

 

[ebandit]

why indeed would one refuse to answer questions about V02 max, let alone get agitated when asked about it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtIhzY16iy0

Maybe you should listen to the answer he gave....it's very clear why the question ****ed him off

Mark L

 

[Digger]

Maybe you should listen to the answer he gave....it's very clear why the question ****ed him off

Mark L

no - he got defensive immediately - got annoyed when it was asked to back up his claims of being transparent - two things he got annoyed with - pre 2011 blood and power results and vo2 test - the power and blood profiles post vuelta 2011 are more or less worthless without the pre vuelta results....


secondly, he said next time in the lab - 18 months later, still not been in a lab.

 

[sniper]

no - he got defensive immediately - got annoyed when it was asked to back up his claims of being transparent - two things he got annoyed with - pre 2011 blood and power results and vo2 test - the power and blood profiles post vuelta 2011 are more or less worthless without the pre vuelta results....


secondly, he said next time in the lab - 18 months later, still not been in a lab.

this very much.
It's so the opposite attitude of what you'd expect if these guys are clean/honest.

These guys are not interested in providing transparency. They're interesting in muddying the waters and keeping skeptics at bay.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
Sir Dave Brailsford says hello.

 

[thehog]

no - he got defensive immediately - got annoyed when it was asked to back up his claims of being transparent - two things he got annoyed with - pre 2011 blood and power results and vo2 test - the power and blood profiles post vuelta 2011 are more or less worthless without the pre vuelta results....


secondly, he said next time in the lab - 18 months later, still not been in a lab.

Maybe David Walsh can ask Brailsford? Nicely of course.

David said he'd like to know

 

[The Hitch]

I'm loving the classic Walsh here:



http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/walsh-hits-out-at-uci-over-passport

Astonishing. Absolutely astonishing. But of course we the sky doubters are the ones who changed

Walsh has no arguments. He would not last 30 seconds in an actual debate that focused on actual facts.

 

[The Hitch]

If Walsh was posting in the clinic, he would have been banned for trolling a long time ago. .

Ha. I think you may be right on that.

 

[thehog]

Astonishing. Absolutely astonishing. But of course we the sky doubters are the ones who changed

Walsh has no arguments. He would not last 30 seconds in an actual debate that focused on actual facts.

Just makes Walsh look foolish but I don’t think he cares. He’s cleaning up now and he could write stupid Sky books for the rest of his life. Well at least until the time the Dawg finally gets caught and goes down.

 

[ebandit]

Astonishing. Absolutely astonishing. But of course we the sky doubters are the ones who changed

Walsh has no arguments. He would not last 30 seconds in an actual debate that focused on actual facts.

Not that he'd find one of those here

Mark L

 

[sniper]

Not that he'd find one of those here

Mark L

another great doping-related contribution.
good thing you assured us you're not trolling, otherwise the thought might have crossed my mind.

 

[Granville57]

If Walsh was posting in the clinic, he would have been banned for trolling a long time ago.

So that's who that was.

 

[The Hitch]

Not that he'd find one of those here

Mark L

I certainly agree with you that a number of the posters who doubt cycling's current cleanliness play below the belt. But you can't seriously be suggesting that the likes of Libertine Seguros, hrotha, Merckx Index, Patswana come here to troll and fight and don't offer extremely thorough and well laid out arguments?

 

[ebandit]

I certainly agree with you that a number of the posters who doubt cycling's current cleanliness play below the belt. But you can't seriously be suggesting that the likes of Libertine Seguros, hrotha, Merckx Index, Patswana come here to troll and fight and don't offer extremely thorough and well laid out arguments?

I'm not suggesting that.....its just a shame that those that come to troll and fight seem to be the most prolific posters........I wish they'd **** off somewhere else......I don't mind what people's opinions are as long as they put up a cogent argument and not just contorted sounbites

Mark L

 

[Dear Wiggo]

no - he got defensive immediately - got annoyed when it was asked to back up his claims of being transparent - two things he got annoyed with - pre 2011 blood and power results and vo2 test - the power and blood profiles post vuelta 2011 are more or less worthless without the pre vuelta results....


secondly, he said next time in the lab - 18 months later, still not been in a lab.

That someone would defend that video of David "Pitbull" Brailsford is very, very telling. Why you would continue to engage is beyond me.

 

[ebandit]

That someone would defend that video of David "Pitbull" Brailsford is very, very telling. Why you would continue to engage is beyond me.

Trying to shut down debate that doesn't go the way you want it to Dear Wiggo?....sounds like it to me.....very,very telling....

......Brailsfords 'defensive' reaction is entirely understandable given the ridiculous and incessant nature of the attacks (verbal and physical) towards the team during the 2013 TdF.........the reaction itself was not generated by Froome's performance but by being in the wake of the Armstrong saga.....I'm not surprised Brailsford got p!ssed off with the interviewer and he was right to challenge the false information and false premise to the interviewers question


Mark L

 

[Benotti69]

Trying to shut down debate that doesn't go the way you want it to Dear Wiggo?....sounds like it to me.....very,very telling....

......Brailsfords 'defensive' reaction is entirely understandable given the ridiculous and incessant nature of the attacks (verbal and physical) towards the team during the 2013 TdF.........the reaction itself was not generated by Froome's performance but by being in the wake of the Armstrong saga.....I'm not surprised Brailsford got p!ssed off with the interviewer and he was right to challenge the false information and false premise to the interviewers question



Mark L

When you set your stall out as clean, new way, transparent and then fail to deliver you can expect a negative reaction. For Brailsford to then get his knickers in a twist over being caught out as the fraud most with an iota of intelligence know is tough.

Sky and their fans crying over criticism is very funny. Defending the indefensible in this sport where the only change has been the name plate on the presidents door.

 

[ebandit]

Crying? I couldn't see Brailsford crying

Mark L

 

[sniper]

it must not be easy being a bot, having to pretend to be stupid all the time.

 

[rick james]

Ah the old Sky bot kidney jab

 

[ebandit]

it must not be easy being a bot, having to pretend to be stupid all the time.

Why get personal? Why throw insults?

Mark L

 

[neineinei]

Ah the old Sky bot kidney jab

Ah, the old Sky bot kidney jab jab from a junior member with a month old account.

 

[ebandit]

Ah the old sock puppets accusation deflection attack

 

[red_flanders]

Trying to shut down debate that doesn't go the way you want it to Dear Wiggo?....sounds like it to me.....very,very telling....

......Brailsfords 'defensive' reaction is entirely understandable given the ridiculous and incessant nature of the attacks (verbal and physical) towards the team during the 2013 TdF.........the reaction itself was not generated by Froome's performance but by being in the wake of the Armstrong saga.....I'm not surprised Brailsford got p!ssed off with the interviewer and he was right to challenge the false information and false premise to the interviewers question

....I realise you disapprove of anything that challenges your fixated view and that you will try to silence it.

Mark L

I think it's safe to say the questions about Froome were wholly generated by his performance and Sky's claims of cleanliness and transparency. That they came after Armstrong means little.

That's like saying the questions Armstrong faced in '99 were because of Festina. No, they were because the performance was unbelievable. Less so than Froome's, but you get the point...

 

[ebandit]

I think it's safe to say the questions about Froome were wholly generated by his performance and Sky's claims of cleanliness and transparency. That they came after Armstrong means little.

That's like saying the questions Armstrong faced in '99 were because of Festina. No, they were because the performance was unbelievable. Less so than Froome's, but you get the point...

Couldn't disagree more.....and the fact that this year Nibali and Contador faced so few questions in comparison is down to Armstrong-fatigue more than their performances being more believable/less unbelievable than Froome's

With regards to your Festina point.......Festina didn't win 7 consecutive tours....you are sharp enough to work out the significance of that for yourself but happy to expand if needs be

Mark L