Kimmage on Wiggins, Sky

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
Markyboyzx6r said:
Proof. You know, proof proofy proof type proof. The stuff they use in courts as evidence. Something like that, yeah. Otherwise, it's just people talking out their hoop.

You do realize doping is not a crime in most countries? So, none of the words used on crime show dramas apply. No criminal processes or standards apply in most countries in the world.

I asked for specifics. I'll help you by rephrasing the question, what facts are required for you to believe that Sky is running a doping program that won them a TdF? Be specific.
 
Oct 30, 2010
177
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Courts use lots of methods for deciding what is proof.

Contador was 'convicted' on a tiny amount of evidence.

Working with a doping doctor could easily be considered evidence of doping by a court in a similar vein working with a mafia family could be considered as working for the mafia.

I take your point, and Sky's choice of personnel reflects badly on them. However, if we are saying that Sky have reached the position they have achieved from doping then you would have to make the association that GBcycling did the same thing to reach the same elevated status on the track, and I simply do not believe that to be the case.

GBcycling have been at the top for a number of years and I cannot recall any suspicions or innuendo about them. Maybe SKY have followed the same template, and have been successful. Finishing 1 and 2 in the TdF is NOT evidence. The w/kg are within ballpark (I'm happy to be contradicted on this point) and BW was not a nag-turned-racehorse.

They also look like a team at ease with themselves. Not like a group with a deep, dark secret they need to protect. Is it impossible to accept that they could have won clean? If Evans was clean last year, why not Wiggins this year?
 
Oct 30, 2010
177
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
You do realize doping is not a crime in most countries? So, none of the words used on crime show dramas apply. No criminal processes or standards apply in most countries in the world.

I asked for specifics. I'll help you by rephrasing the question, what facts are required for you to believe that Sky is running a doping program that won them a TdF? Be specific.

A positive drugs test.
Previous riders 'blowing the whistle'.
Outlandish W/kg.

Oh, and doping IS a crime in GB. If SKY were running a doping-fueled regime one would presume their senior management would know about such things, and its not as if their parent company isn't already in a spot of bother in this country now, is it?
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Markyboyzx6r said:
I take your point, and Sky's choice of personnel reflects badly on them. However, if we are saying that Sky have reached the position they have achieved from doping then you would have to make the association that GBcycling did the same thing to reach the same elevated status on the track, and I simply do not believe that to be the case.

GBcycling have been at the top for a number of years and I cannot recall any suspicions or innuendo about them. Maybe SKY have followed the same template, and have been successful. Finishing 1 and 2 in the TdF is NOT evidence. The w/kg are within ballpark (I'm happy to be contradicted on this point) and BW was not a nag-turned-racehorse.

They also look like a team at ease with themselves. Not like a group with a deep, dark secret they need to protect. Is it impossible to accept that they could have won clean? If Evans was clean last year, why not Wiggins this year?

I doubt their Track team are doing it on bread and water, beating the opposition for so long.

Chris Hoy's legs are not natural that's for sure.
 
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
Markyboyzx6r said:
A positive drugs test.
You mean like the ones the UCI has supressed? You should look into that failed attempt the UCI made to suppress Contador's positive. Armstrong had a few too. Check that USADA letter out.

Markyboyzx6r said:
Previous riders 'blowing the whistle'.
That's not going to happen soon. The honeymoon is in full effect. Let's wait a few years.

Markyboyzx6r said:
Outlandish W/kg.
Good news! That's already been established!

Markyboyzx6r said:
Oh, and doping IS a crime in GB.
What kinds of crimes? Is it enforced? How clean is UK football?

Markyboyzx6r said:
and its not as if their parent company isn't already in a spot of bother in this country now, is it?

Sky's parent corporation a den of thieves? So a bunch of lying cheats are going to fund a cycling team that is a paragon of virtue? For virtue's sake? Let them ride clean and any result is okay... Really?

I'm going to go easy on you since at least two of your specifics have already been shown to be true. When the positives roll in from former Sky riders, I think you and others will be forced to acknowledge what happened in 2012 was at minimum doping.
 
Jul 13, 2012
263
0
0
Markyboyzx6r said:
He has Royal approval because what he has achieved is something quite remarkable. There is no slur on Wiggins. He is innocent until proven outerwise. PROVEN. That's the key word here.

I had my suspicions about Team Sky. They weren't advertising the 'clean' angle enough for lots of people who read the Clinic pages. But until someone produces the numbers (the W/kg) that point to doping, I'm just going to have to take it that they won by fair means.

Can the TdF be won clean? Actually, I now believe it can, and has been for the last 2 years.

I was actually being a little tongue in cheek here, I like, many others hope its true that Sky are clean, if they are then some of their recent actions (Leinders, not allowing Kimmage to stay with them on the Tour etc) aren't at the best, helping their cause. :)
 
Jul 6, 2012
133
0
0
This British don't cheat stuff always gets a laugh out of me. I'm guessing that a few folks on here follow Formula 1 in addition to cycling. Put the words "Benetton traction control 1994" or "McLaren Stepneygate" into Google if you're unfamiliar.
 
Jun 12, 2010
1,234
0
0
Square-pedaller said:
Which criminal law does doping break? Which dopers have been taken to court (I'm talking criminal court)?

To the best of my knowledge there is no "sporting fraud" law in the uk.
However use of , supply and administration of prescribed medicines without a licence is a crime and a doctor doing so without legitimate medical reason is not something the BMA would be happy about.
 
Apr 8, 2010
329
0
0
Darryl Webster said:
To the best of my knowledge there is no "sporting fraud" law in the uk.
However use of , supply and administration of prescribed medicines without a licence is a crime and a doctor doing so without legitimate medical reason is not something the BMA would be happy about.

Thta's what I thought: that doping (ie being the athlete who dopes) is nor a crime. I've never heard of any athlete taken to a criminal UK court in UK. I was replying to someone who seemed very sure that doping was a crime.
 
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
function said:
Do you have a link to the outrageous W/kg?

If you are too lazy to dig, I won't do it right now.

How about the suppressed positives?

How about the crooks that own Sky running a clean team?

What happens when the former Sky riders get their AAF's?

This is probably troubling for your world view, but evidence you seem to approve of (reality) is like that sometimes.
 
Mar 22, 2011
368
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
If you are too lazy to dig, I won't do it right now.

How about the suppressed positives?

How about the crooks that own Sky running a clean team?

What happens when the former Sky riders get their AAF's?

This is probably troubling for your world view, but evidence you seem to approve of (reality) is like that sometimes.

I'm not lazy, i just haven't seen any data that is outrageous.

I'm not sure where you're going with the rest of your post as i never brought up any of those. But i'll leave you to speculate about my world view and anything else you may want to avoid answering a basic question.
 
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
function said:
I'm not sure where you're going with the rest of your post as i never brought up any of those.

Here we go, AGAIN.
You demanded proof: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=961945&postcount=122

I requested specifics and you gave me some: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=961989&postcount=127

I replied with some observations and some facts that suggest Sky is very likely doping http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=962006&postcount=129

Of those items you requested PROOF I supplied said proof and at least two have been satisfied. I was hoping you would address those before moving onto the wattage issue.
Further onto these details, how many of the factual items have to come true before you admit Sky's win was dope-fueled?

But, it seems to me you, like the other Sky Faithful just want to believe and not let any facts get in the way. Cycling is a dirty, dirty sport. I'm sorry you had to find out the hard way.
 
Mar 22, 2011
368
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
Here we go, AGAIN.
You demanded proof: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=961945&postcount=122

I requested specifics and you gave me some: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=961989&postcount=127

I replied with some observations and some facts that suggest Sky is very likely doping http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=962006&postcount=129

Of those items you requested PROOF I supplied said proof and at least two have been satisfied. I was hoping you would address those before moving onto the wattage issue.
Further onto these details, how many of the factual items have to come true before you admit Sky's win was dope-fueled?

But, it seems to me you, like the other Sky Faithful just want to believe and not let any facts get in the way. Cycling is a dirty, dirty sport. I'm sorry you had to find out the hard way.

I am not Markyboyzx6r
 
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
function said:
I am not Markyboyzx6r

Sorry! What proof do you need? Be specific.

Any discussion of Watts needs to be prefaced by accepting the simple fact that you can't directly compare go-go 90's power to 2012 power.
 
Mar 22, 2011
368
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
Sorry! What proof do you need? Be specific.

Any discussion of Watts needs to be prefaced by accepting the simple fact that you can't directly compare go-go 90's power to 2012 power.

I was only asking for a reference to outrageous W/kg numbers.
 
function said:
I was only asking for a reference to outrageous W/kg numbers.

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.
 
Jul 8, 2012
105
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
If you are too lazy to dig, I won't do it right now.

How about the suppressed positives?

How about the crooks that own Sky running a clean team?

What happens when the former Sky riders get their AAF's?

This is probably troubling for your world view, but evidence you seem to approve of (reality) is like that sometimes.
There's no actual evidence listed in your post, just (yet more) supposition.

Prove that there have been suppressed Sky positives for a start.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
Racelap said:
This British don't cheat stuff always gets a laugh out of me. I'm guessing that a few folks on here follow Formula 1 in addition to cycling. Put the words "Benetton traction control 1994" or "McLaren Stepneygate" into Google if you're unfamiliar.

Yeah, McLaren was an interesting development - pure traction...

Lot's of fans here for the "Senna" movie, and they touch on that really well in the film.

Still not happy about Prost's d*uchebaggery...