Kimmage on Wiggins, Sky

Page 7 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
stampedingviking said:
There's no actual evidence listed in your post, just (yet more) supposition.

Not true.
-We know the UCI suppresses positives.
-We know Sky's overlords have no problem breaking laws.

Or, maybe you didn't read this one? http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=962006&postcount=129

stampedingviking said:
Prove that there have been suppressed Sky positives for a start.

That's impossible today. But this is pro cycling after all, so as fortunes and alliances shift, I think we'll see more peripheral evidence and an AAF or three in a few years.

I know you and the other faithful want desperately to leap to the conclusion that Sky did the 2012 TdF clean based on my response. But, you can't. There's no information yet.
 
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
Knutsen said:
Good you confirm you go by feelings not facts.

I guess you think you somehow got one over on the poster, but doping during a grand tour is not the same as pre-Tour doping. The original post suggested something similar.
 
Jul 6, 2010
173
0
0
What a fantastic article. Sums up my feelings exactly. Get's to the heart of my ill feeling toward Brad and Sky. It's not whether he did or didn't dope, it's the change from anti-doping gunmam to bullet dodger. Like mentioned before he's gone all Bernhard Kohl on us. In my opinion, had he kept his opinionated hole shut 6 years ago, his outburst could've been fully justified. However, attacking all dopers without prejudice isn't a wise move if your going to follow it by blowing smoke up LAs @ss, having a tenfold increase in performance and then stomping out of the room and refusing to answer questions on doping.

I once slated skinny jeans and denounced all wearers of them. Now they're all I wear (maybe with a T-shirt now and then). Difference is, I can admit I like them.
 
Apr 16, 2009
17,600
6,854
28,180
JMBeaushrimp said:
The *** part is that everyone is buying the angle that the entire peloton of pro riders must be "bone-idle w*nkers" that never figured out how to train properly.

Cummon! Teams with multi-million euro budgets are hiring choads out of club level, and haven't spent their investment dollars making sure they can perform?

These are racers. They want to do as well as they can. They aren't trying to ditch training for whatever fills our time. They are trying to KILL IT!

Christ! Even at 17 years old I was only taking two weeks off the bike in the off season, and that was decades ago.

The sad part is that sketchy pros can spout this trash, and people actually believe it. It's like Lim with his "rice cake and beet juice" answer, LA with his "cadence" answer, and Sky with their "weight loss" answer.

They're not working harder or smarter, that road has been ridden down. By trying to say they're doing something different they're denigrating the whole value and history of cycling.

They're trying to say everyone else is a soft-assed lay-about, and should be working harder.

They are sticking their finger in the eye of the peloton, and I hope the peloton comes out fighting.
+111111111111.

We should make some sticky about new methods from cyclists that have not been implemented in the past. Something like:

- High cadence
- Road reconnaissance
- New Supplements
- Weight loss that will make ride in the lead group from the gruppeto.
- Use of Swim doctors who know more about cycling than everybody else.
- New food regime.
- New training regimes
- Team work. Team work activities during winter time (Saxo Bank)
- Good training sites like Tenerife Island. It is really better than everywhere else.
- etc.
- etc.
 
May 26, 2009
3,688
7
13,485
Knutsen said:
Good you confirm you go by feelings not facts.

Well, the thing is... you seem to think that riders dope during the event and that his absence is a good sign :D

Clearly this indicates that you are absolutely clueless about doping in the offseason, blood transfusions, detection windows etc.

*Hint* Above is part of the reason the Schleck case is so curious and why the Clinic, even though we think he is a doper is sceptical about that one.
 
May 26, 2009
3,688
7
13,485
To the Sky suporters... if all this sounds alien and outrageous to you: this happened a few years ago and those same people are still in charge at the UCI.

That said, the reasons for suspicion are thick without going full (US) Postal :p

If we look at the simple facts there is reason enough for stark scepticism.

- There is no transparency at all (something which they promised)
- They hired suspicious riders (something they wouldn't do)
- They hired a suspicious team doc and let him handle the medical team in big races. This is something Wiggins swore he hated and something Sky never would do.

Add a performance that is slower than in the darkest era, but which is incomparbly dominant. This would be surprising in the pre-epo era... yet only the biggest optimist in the world would believe everyone is clean*

*Good old blood doping is neigh on undetectable if you don't use "additives", microdosing epo is already been proven to be undetectable etc.

And even if we handwave this with a lofty gesture, we have the cold hard fact overarching it all: Cycling is a dirty sport and it's participants have been and still are* playing fast and loose with the public.

*There are still riders caught, which shows here is still a problem.

If you love this sport you have the responsibility to be critical and to question all. The old incrowd needs to be eradicated. Otherwise it never gets better.
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Escarabajo said:
+111111111111.

We should make some sticky about new methods from cyclists that have not been implemented in the past. Something like:

- High cadence
- Road reconnaissance
- New Supplements
- Weight loss that will make ride in the lead group from the gruppeto.
- Use of Swim doctors who know more about cycling than everybody else.
- New food regime.
- New training regimes
- Team work. Team work activities during winter time (Saxo Bank)
- Good training sites like Tenerife Island. It is really better than everywhere else.
- etc.
- etc.

plenty of those can be found in

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=17351
 
Mar 22, 2011
368
0
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
See post 4088 on the Sky thread. here is the article translated by D_T:


It's Schleck who is right, the poison still works
Fränk Schleck, the excluded doper, is right : le Tour is "poisoned". It has been for a long time, but the poison still works. To get convinced, comparing the power outputs of riders, in Watts, is enough. We noticed four of them that are particularly shocking this year. The first one kills more than it wounds. It's about the crowds' pet, Thomas Voeckler, who, as his clone, the Virenque of the greatest Festina years, holds the king of mountains polka dots jersey up, and the French hearts. Saint Thomas, in his own admittance, neglecting the will of his almost fleshless calves that seem so thin that they look like they're reduced to (the size of) his shin bones, is capable, like Richard once was, to perform mountain raids, maintaining over four mountains an engine power of "375-390" Watts, without weakening, accelerating whenever he wishes. He was first to cross the line atop Aubisque, Tourmalet, Aspin, Peyresourde, in 5 h 32 min 2 s, victorious concluding, fresh as a daisy, the 197 km at an average of 35,59 km/h.

This Pau - Bagnères-de-Luchon is a classical Tour de France stage (1980, 1983, 1998). In 1998 - always the Festina affair -, Marco Pantani let Massi win in 5 h 49 minutes 40 s on 196,5 km at 33,72 km/h : almost 2 km/h slower. Another reference got broken the next day by Thomas Voeckler : Menté, 9,3 km at 9,1 %. In 28'20", with an alien power of 442 Watts, he's carving his name on the tables, on the biggest chain ring in the last 300 m, on an 8 % slope. There, he is rather looking like the Rasmussen-Contador duo of the Great Years. It's the second important comparison : it knocks down more than it scares.

With an average of 430 W, the favourites swallowed, like during the great days, Peyresourde in 26 min 45 sec. From Saint-Aventin, they only conceded 34 seconds to the unreal time of Contador and Rasmussen in 2007 (23 minutes and 26 seconds), who were trying to drop each other with many sprints, just like as many injections. From there on, Froome and Wiggins then accelerated in the last climb, Peyragudes. They produced 470 Watts during 7'03" (2,95 km at 7,93 %). Froome waited for Wiggins, but was capable of getting near 500 Watts. If he doesn't restrict his engine any more to wait for his leader, he could enter the caste of world record owners, the best "performers" of all times : Pantani, Armstrong, Contador.

The third comparison, which makes smile more than it surprises, is to be credited to a suspended rider "Stronger Than Before", title of a book by Virenque. Alejandro Valverde won in Peyragudes, achieving a performance equal to Vinokourov's in 2007. The two riders, with a 5 years interval, climbed the Port de Balès and Peyresourde at the same level of power output, managing 285 then 405 Watts on both these ascents. Vinokourov, who had left the peloton with the morning break, won it solo in Loudenvielle. The Kazakhi was then excluded because of a blood transfusion.

The last comparison is more thrilling than bluffing. In 2011, after 16 years of scrambling for heavy doping products, we were at last cheering, in these columns, for the absence of riders performing above an average of 410 Watts on the last ascents of mountain stages : the detection threshold of poison. Alas ! There is again four of them, this year who crossed that bar : Wiggins, Froome, Nibali and Van den Broecke, with 415 Watts for the first three of the classification, and 410 Watts for the fourth one. We are now longing for 2013 and the return of Contador and his tainted meat ! Until then, it's doubtful a cure will have been found.

Former coach of Team Festina, Antoine Vayer is a performance specialist.

The Vayer article unfortunately contains no references to where he obtained those values from (likely back calculated from time to VAM to W/kg to reference 70kg athlete). As such it is missing a lot of information. The actual power files from athletes (which scienceofsports referenced) tell a different story.
 

mastersracer

BANNED
Jun 8, 2010
1,298
0
0
Franklin said:
To the Sky suporters... if all this sounds alien and outrageous to you: this happened a few years ago and those same people are still in charge at the UCI.

That said, the reasons for suspicion are thick without going full (US) Postal :p

If we look at the simple facts there is reason enough for stark scepticism.

- There is no transparency at all (something which they promised)
- They hired suspicious riders (something they wouldn't do)
- They hired a suspicious team doc and let him handle the medical team in big races. This is something Wiggins swore he hated and something Sky never would do.

Add a performance that is slower than in the darkest era, but which is incomparbly dominant. This would be surprising in the pre-epo era... yet only the biggest optimist in the world would believe everyone is clean*

*Good old blood doping is neigh on undetectable if you don't use "additives", microdosing epo is already been proven to be undetectable etc.

And even if we handwave this with a lofty gesture, we have the cold hard fact overarching it all: Cycling is a dirty sport and it's participants have been and still are* playing fast and loose with the public.

*There are still riders caught, which shows here is still a problem.

If you love this sport you have the responsibility to be critical and to question all. The old incrowd needs to be eradicated. Otherwise it never gets better.

Yes, we get it. However, why point out Sky? Consider Garmin, for example. Most of these points are true of them as well. For example,

They hired Allen Lim after Phonak/Landis affair.
They hire suspicious riders - admitted dopers and ones involved in Armstrong investigation.
Equal lack of transparency.
Won Giro - far tougher route - with a Canadian for crying out loud.

Garmin is supposed to be the new model. The accusations can be made far worse against most other teams. There is an unproportional hatred of Sky, which is seated in an irrational, visceral, and emotional reaction to the team. The doping stuff is largely a post hoc rationalization of that reaction...
 
Oct 30, 2011
2,639
0
0
gooner said:
We have used various legit points in discussing Sky in numerous threads in the clinic much of which Kimmage mentioned in his article and his interview in Velonation.

No one denies what happenned with Contador and Armstrong but you can't then use them situations as a sling shot at Sky and say the same thing might be happenning with them. I am not saying you are doing it but that is 100% speculating for the sake of it. Kimmage does'nt do any of this when talking and writing on the issue and rightly does'nt stoop to that level of journalism.

Kimmage is a proper journalist, with a repuation to look after, and a risk of being sued. Yes this is speculation for the sake of it, but asking people to prove it is oxymoronic.

I would say that Sky are the team who look most likely to be able to suppress positives. They are clearly favoured by ASO and the UCI, and the team itself is pretty much the commercial arm of the national federation.

I am not sure one can dismiss rumours because there are no positives and dismiss the chance of there being suppressed positives. That is having your cake and eating it, in my opinion.
 
Feb 18, 2011
188
0
8,830
Franklin said:
Well, the thing is... you seem to think that riders dope during the event and that his absence is a good sign :D

Clearly this indicates that you are absolutely clueless about doping in the offseason, blood transfusions, detection windows etc.

*Hint* Above is part of the reason the Schleck case is so curious and why the Clinic, even though we think he is a doper is sceptical about that one.

You seem to be the man in the know so please enlight me. I'm specially interested in the lack of drop in hematokrit values seen in blood profiles for some suspected dopers during a 3 week tour. How does that actually happen? That's because the february-doping I guess?

And I must say your very good with those smileys! Always find the right one!
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,644
81
22,580
function said:
The Vayer article unfortunately contains no references to where he obtained those values from (likely back calculated from time to VAM to W/kg to reference 70kg athlete). As such it is missing a lot of information. The actual power files from athletes (which scienceofsports referenced) tell a different story.

As long as Vayer is using the same calculations he has used in the past then the comparison between years would be meaningful, even if the numbers are not.
 
May 26, 2009
3,688
7
13,485
mastersracer said:
Yes, we get it. However, why point out Sky?

Masterracer, will you for once stop putting up strawmen? :mad:

You fully know well that Sky is just a small portion of this forum, it's just the hottest right now.

Are you suggesting we give Sky a pass because Dr. menuet is still practicing?

Are you actually hinting that indeed there is reason to question Sky but that we are raining on your parade?

Sucks that I call you out every time huh? As you constantly have to resort to strawmen it shows that you have absolutely no coherent story why we need to give Sky a pass.
 
May 26, 2009
3,688
7
13,485
Knutsen said:
You seem to be the man in the know so please enlight me. I'm specially interested in the lack of drop in hematokrit values seen in blood profiles for some suspected dopers during a 3 week tour. How does that actually happen? That's because the february-doping I guess?

And I must say your very good with those smileys! Always find the right one!

The temptation to use the most epic facepalm ever is huge :)

Dear Knudsen, when do you think they tap off the blood they use in the TdF?

Is it:

A. During the TdF?
B. During the preliminary period?

Would you build up with anabolics during

A. The TdF where the yellow jersey gets tested every day?
B. During the offseason where with some decent microdosage and good halftimes the window of detection is minute?

Would you use Aicar to lose weight:

A. During the TdF so the weight goes during the race?
B. In the offseason so you get your ripped weight before the season starts?
 
Mar 22, 2011
368
0
0
BroDeal said:
As long as Vayer is using the same calculations he has used in the past then the comparison between years would be meaningful, even if the numbers are not.

The problem for me is that i don't know what he's calculating as he makes no attempt at showing how he came to those figures and hence the basis of his conclusions. There is a bit more discussion regarding it in the power calculation thread.
 

mastersracer

BANNED
Jun 8, 2010
1,298
0
0
Franklin said:
Masterracer, will you for once stop putting up strawmen? :mad:

You fully know well that Sky is just a small portion of this forum, it's just the hottest right now.

Are you suggesting we give Sky a pass because Dr. menuet is still practicing?

Are you actually hinting that indeed there is reason to question Sky but that we are raining on your parade?

Sucks that I call you out every time huh? As you constantly have to resort to strawmen it shows that you have absolutely no coherent story why we need to give Sky a pass.

I never said give Sky a pass, and my claims are not strawmen (which refers to a sort of argument, but that's beside the point). The suppsedly incriminating list of points you made are generic and apply to virtually all teams. The real reasons for suspicion are base rates - Kimmage himself admits this in his article. It's not about Sky. Its about cycling in general. What I am claiming is that Sky is getting extra hatred for reasons unrelated to doping and the doping charges are rationalizations of that hatred. I have no interest in doing a systematic study, but it seems pretty clear that Sky and Wiggins have received far more negative posts than other teams. Where's the outrage re Garmin and the Giro? Landis testified that Lim helped inject him and Levi. After Garmin hire him as their "dr everything." They hire Millar, DZ, CVV, etc.

What about the fact that OCLAESP opened an investigation of Europcar just before the Tour and that TV had the most suspicious power numbers so far?

What about the fact that RSNT won the team classification, had a rider test positive, and have the hall of fame of old dopers on the team? I could go on and on...

You're the one giving other teams the pass.
 
Feb 18, 2011
188
0
8,830
Franklin said:
The temptation to use the most epic facepalm ever is huge :)

Dear Knudsen, when do you think they tap off the blood they use in the TdF?

Is it:

A. During the TdF?
B. During the preliminary period?

Would you build up with anabolics during

A. The TdF where the yellow jersey gets tested every day?
B. During the offseason where with some decent microdosage and good halftimes the window of detection is minute?

Ah, I get you, Leiders is the guy who taps the blood! And then there is a other guy filling it at the tour. That must be the other doctor on the tour roster then. Maybe a tread on him? There also is the possibility that Leiders does a Ferrari and is at the site in a camper van?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
mastersracer said:
I never said give Sky a pass, and my claims are not strawmen (which refers to a sort of argument, but that's beside the point). The suppsedly incriminating list of points you made are generic and apply to virtually all teams. The real reasons for suspicion are base rates - Kimmage himself admits this in his article. It's not about Sky. Its about cycling in general. What I am claiming is that Sky is getting extra hatred for reasons unrelated to doping and the doping charges are rationalizations of that hatred. I have no interest in doing a systematic study, but it seems pretty clear that Sky and Wiggins have received far more negative posts than other teams. Where's the outrage re Garmin and the Giro? Landis testified that Lim helped inject him and Levi. After Garmin hire him as their "dr everything." They hire Millar, DZ, CVV, etc.

What about the fact that OCLAESP opened an investigation of Europcar just before the Tour and that TV had the most suspicious power numbers so far?

What about the fact that RSNT won the team classification, had a rider test positive, and have the hall of fame of old dopers on the team? I could go on and on...

You're the one giving other teams the pass.

Your claims aren't strawman - but the above argument is.
Plenty of other threads here if you want to discuss other teams - just do a search. Schelk, Garmin, RSNT, they're all there.

This thread is about SKY because that is who Kimmage was talking about.
 
Oct 30, 2011
2,639
0
0
There was quite a big thread about Garmin, Hesjedal and Christian Vande Velde's comments right after the Giro. Vaughters even stopped by.

That is irrelevant though, Sky invite more attention onto themselves by loudly shouting about being anti-doping, and doing all this in the name of anti-doping. When most other teams win, they don't talk about "victories for clean cycling". That invites the questions.
 

mastersracer

BANNED
Jun 8, 2010
1,298
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Your claims aren't strawman - but the above argument is.
Plenty of other threads here if you want to discuss other teams - just do a search. Schelk, Garmin, RSNT, they're all there.

This thread is about SKY because that is who Kimmage was talking about.

That doesn't appear to be true. There are about 15 separate threads in the clinic right now about Sky, Wiggins, and Froome. I did a search with Garmin, Ryder, and Hesjedal as search terms (for words in thread title) and there are no corresponding threads after the Giro in the clinic but I'll look more for the one mentioned (that's 1 vs. 15). There are no threads in the clinic that contain Hesjedal or Ryder in the title.

Kimmage's article is also generic - he uses base rates, nothing specific about Sky other than Leinders, which could be found with most other teams (e.g., Garmin's hiring of Lim post Phonak), RSNT, etc. Two non-Sky teams had positives in the Tour or a rider arrested, another team is being investigated (europcar), and nothing specific has been alleged against Sky - even Kimmage says it.

It is selective attention due to dislike of the team. hopeful schadenfreude.

"Some 86 per cent of Tour de France winners since Tommy Simpson’s death have been tarnished or implicated by doping. There is nothing to suggest that Bradley Wiggins achieved yesterday’s historic victory through anything other than talent and hard work. But at this time of glory, why does Team Sky leave itself open to insinuation by employing Leinders?" -Kimmage
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
mastersracer said:
That doesn't appear to be true. There are about 15 separate threads in the clinic right now about Sky, Wiggins, and Froome. I did a search with Garmin, Ryder, and Hesjedal as search terms (for words in thread title) and there are no corresponding threads after the Giro in the clinic but I'll look more for the one mentioned (that's 1 vs. 15). There are no threads in the clinic that contain Hesjedal or Ryder in the title.
Good for you - pity you wasted all that time to do a search on your new strawman of thread titles.

mastersracer said:
Kimmage's article is also generic - he uses base rates, nothing specific about Sky other than Leinders, which could be found with most other teams (e.g., Garmin's hiring of Lim post Phonak), RSNT, etc. Two non-Sky teams had positives in the Tour or a rider arrested, another team is being investigated (europcar), and nothing specific has been alleged against Sky - even Kimmage says it.

It is selective attention due to dislike of the team. hopeful schadenfreude.

"Some 86 per cent of Tour de France winners since Tommy Simpson’s death have been tarnished or implicated by doping. There is nothing to suggest that Bradley Wiggins achieved yesterday’s historic victory through anything other than talent and hard work. But at this time of glory, why does Team Sky leave itself open to insinuation by employing Leinders?" -Kimmage

Listen - if you have nothing to offer this thread (where Paul Kimmage wrote about Team Sky, how they hired a doping Doc although they said they would not etc) then thats quite alright, just do not visit.

If you feel compelled to bring up all the other things that appear to cause you stress and you feel have not been covered to your satisfaction, then start a new thread.
 
Jun 2, 2011
155
0
8,830
knutsen said:
ah, i get you, leiders is the guy who taps the blood! And then there is a other guy filling it at the tour. That must be the other doctor on the tour roster then. Maybe a tread on him? There also is the possibility that leiders does a ferrari and is at the site in a camper van?

lmfao!!!..
 
Sep 23, 2009
409
0
0
noddy69 said:
D Avoid said:
Being a recovering alcoholic I do have some insight into why alcoholics drink. The insanity is due to the addiction you reason with yourself that you must drink, you reason why you are drinking, you use excuses of pain stress, feelings of inadequacy but the real reason you are drinking is because you are an alcoholic. It increases any adverse emotion you feel, its a depressent, so when you here an alcoholic talk about depression, the only real way to see is it the alcohol or real depression is for him/her to stop drinking first...I have first hand knowledge and have and continue to hear excuses about why people drink. It is insane but feelings of inadequacy dont make you an alcoholic, they dont make you drink, the addiction does and the sooner people including those still drinking understand that the better.......now back to topic.


No no no, maybe, possibly and yes,the order is arbitrary. It is a pain killer and that is why it gets used by many and overused by some, I read what you said but there is something about your insistence that stopped it registering, I may read it again tomorrow but I'm quite clear about how it works. Being a recovering alcoholic doesn't in any way guarantee insight, although if you are aware of that then you may have some!!
 
May 27, 2010
6,333
3
17,485
mastersracer said:
Yes, we get it. However, why point out Sky?
...

There is an unproportional hatred of Sky, which is seated in an irrational, visceral, and emotional reaction to the team. The doping stuff is largely a post hoc rationalization of that reaction...

I cannot speak for anyone but myself, but I have no irrational, visceral or emotional reaction to the team.

Sure, they have some riders with questionable backgrounds, and sure the sponsor has had some ethical issues. But neither of these is all that important here.

They got my attention not because of their doping stance, but because their performance is the same as arguing 1+1 = 7.

As hard as I try, I cannot make it add up.

mastersracer said:
That doesn't appear to be true. There are about 15 separate threads in the clinic right now about Sky, Wiggins, and Froome. I did a search with Garmin, Ryder, and Hesjedal as search terms (for words in thread title) and there are no corresponding threads after the Giro in the clinic but I'll look more for the one mentioned (that's 1 vs. 15). There are no threads in the clinic that contain Hesjedal or Ryder in the title.

...

Don't worry. Some of us have the memory of an elephant on this situation. Watching, waiting and assessing.

Any explanation that someone's performance is due to lungs bigger than Indurain's is a stupifying self-incrimination. Next we will hear about a resting pulse below stasis.

:rolleyes:

Dave.
 

Latest posts