Parker said:
Ah, the Clinic at it's uninformed best.
So what has Kristoff actually done this year?
He came 2nd in Milan-San Remo which he won last year
He won De Panne which he came second in 2013.
He won Flanders which has been 4th and 5th in, in the last two years.
What it so surprising? People who actually watch cycling for more than who they can accuse next have been tipping him as a classics star for a few years now.
I'm struggling to see your point here.
Ostensibly it's a post saying - Kristoffs improvement doesn't =doping, with a bait or two aimed at clinic members thrown in, though you haven't put much effort into them.
But baring in mind the wider views you claim to hold, it's strange.
First of all you challenge the notion that Kristoff improvement has been extreme and thereby dodgy. Ignoring for a sec the fact that few people have said the improvement is on it's own reason to believe he is doping, it's a stupid argument for you to take up because by doing so you are tacitly legitimizing the idea that dodgy performances can be grounds for suspecting other riders.
Which considering the raison detre of the parker account is to defend sky and insult those who doubt them, it's a strange position to take. And you've repeatedly argued that it's (insert every insult imaginable) of people to doubt riders based on performance.
May have been short sighted of you to abandon your alleged principle of - performance can never be suspicious, defense to defend ak from this angle.
Secondly you totally ignore the main point against Kristoff, one that has been made on every page of this thread, -the team he rides for.
So your entering into a losing battle.
The "he won Msr last year" bit is also so weak it's pathetic. It's litterally the equivalent of saying- Armstrong can't have been doping in 2005 because he also won the tour in 2004, therefore 2005 wasn't an improvement on 2004
As if anyone was saying Kristoff didn't dope last year but started this year.
The real highlight though is the last bit where you both try to pass yourself off as an expert while simultaneously deriding clinic posters for being obsessed only with doping.
Not a great argument if it comes from the guy who posts exclusively in the clinic.
And btw, do you actually have a link to yourself predicting Kristoff would be a classics great, or did you just make that up right now in an attempt to pass yourself off as knowledgeable.