Michael Rogers after leaving Sky

[DirtyWorks]

And coincidentally the increase in audience share for the British pretty much replaces the audience drop-off in Germany since the end of the T-Mobile era.

Do you have a link for that? I'm curious. It's not a challenge.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Replaces? More than replaces, because British people are at least 4x as good and wholesome as anyone else in the world.

What does that even mean?

 

[JimmyFingers]

Not going to happen, I think. UCI and ASO won't want Tour 100 won by someone with a public ban on his record - they'll watch Saxo like hawks. For all we know, that's the problem already...

Add in AC can't afford to be caught boosting a second time, and the 'there' 's not there...

This. Think we're finally seing a clean Contador and Rogers...

 

[Netserk]

This. Think we're finally seing a clean Contador and Rogers...

You seriously think Contador is clean now? For how long?

 

[roundabout]

for as long as he keeps losing to sky

 

[LaFlorecita]

You seriously think Contador is clean now? For how long?

It's funny how many people seem to think Alberto stopped doping, I just think he's having an off-year or maybe he is too old, I can't imagine him finishing in the top of GCs among several doped up riders while being completely clean. I also think sky fans use it to explain sky's dominance, "everyone stopped doping so now the real talents surface"

 

[JimmyFingers]

You seriously think Contador is clean now? For how long?

On form. I don't know of course, and whether he stays off it all year is another matter

 

[gatete]

It's funny how many people seem to think Alberto stopped doping, I just think he's having an off-year or maybe he is too old, I can't imagine him finishing in the top of GCs among several doped up riders while being completely clean. I also think sky fans use it to explain sky's dominance, "everyone stopped doping so now the real talents surface"

Tour 99 after Festina, tour 2006 after Puerto argument, is not necessarily to say the peloton stopped doping, but being more careful rather. While a doped to the gills teams reap all the benefits and acollaids, money, and maybe just maybe in 10 years some obscure rider or disgraced rider from such team starts writing a book or something to that nature and ....... Jesus it'll be another fall from grace from either Wiggo or Froome ( after Froome's 5th tour win).

 

[LaFlorecita]

On form. I don't know of course, and whether he stays off it all year is another matter

What does that mean

 

[will10]

This. Think we're finally seing a clean Contador and Rogers...

We saw clean Rogers as a top 8 climber last year.

This year's version is just extra squeeky clean.

 

[Netserk]

On form. I don't know of course, and whether he stays off it all year is another matter

Did he just start racing clean this year, or was it when he returned from the ban, or was it after he tested positive?

Which one do you think?

 

[Winterfold]

While not denying the manner of Rogers departure and apparent poor form subsequently do at least raise an eyebrow, it is interesting to contrast Lovkist's apparent post-Sky rennaisance...

 

[roundabout]

Sure, he won Tour Med. Then came Paris-Nice and he got hammered.

 

[Ferminal]

1) Given the way Lofkvist went backwards at Sky, he's one of the first riders you would say didn't dope.

2) Until he does something outside of February it's nothing better than the previous three years.

 

[martinvickers]

This. Think we're finally seing a clean Contador and Rogers...

Would not go so far to say clean. we can't know that. But certainly either cleaner, or on less effective, but less obvious stuff. That still leaves the Vuelta 2012 issue, and what has happened to Rogers...

 

[Libertine Seguros]

This. Think we're finally seing a clean Contador and Rogers...

So you don't think we were seeing a clean Rogers last year?

 

[jilbiker]

This. Think we're finally seing a clean Contador and Rogers...

I agree. Its a clean Rogers, Contardor and Schleck. Its a juiced Quintana and Henao. ITT is where you see the biggest effect of juice. But it brings to question who is truly a talented rider? What would a clean Pantani have looked like? Is Contardor and Schleck truly talented? Or were they juice generated talent? Its a puzzle. Oh, forget age, Contardor is 30! that is an Athlete's peak years!

I am not sure if Sky has systemic doping like USPS but they may have encourage it in various ways. There is no doubt this is a different Rogers just like it is a different Porte from the one at Astana.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

I agree. Its a clean Rogers, Contardor and Schleck. Its a juiced Quintana and Henao. ITT is where you see the biggest effect of juice. But it brings to question who is truly a talented rider? What would a clean Pantani have looked like? Is Contardor and Schleck truly talented? Or were they juice generated talent? Its a puzzle. Oh, forget age, Contardor is 30! that is an Athlete's peak years!

I am not sure if Sky has systemic doping like USPS but they may have encourage it in various ways. There is no doubt this is a different Rogers just like it is a different Porte from the one at Astana.

This Porte came from Astana? No wonder I don't recognise him as the rider that was at Saxo...

 

[JimmyFingers]

Did he just start racing clean this year, or was it when he returned from the ban, or was it after he tested positive?

Which one do you think?

If I was a betting man I'd say this season, basically post-Armstrong. My theory would be that a) riders have seen cycling's biggest legacy crumble before their eyes. They know samples are being kept for testing at a later stage. Whatever they achieve now could all be taken away from them years down the line. Short term gain orlong term glory? Logically most individuals will choose the latter. v

And b) an edict from on high. How many scandals can the sport survive? Howmany can McQuaid and Verbruggen's jobs survive? How many can the UCI survive? They are beleagured, under seige and only just hanging on. I would theorise that everyone was told toknock it on the head one hundred percent. At the end of the day it's about protecting revenue streams. The women's sport is woefully underfunded, sponsors are leaving the men's side and races are under threat all over the place. The UCI is like a company with a profit warningl, for the sport to rebuild it needs no more scandals. Mainly think they have been facilitators in the past, very possible, just if they acted in that capacity then warning people off will have a big impact: no more protection.

Evans, Gilbert, Basso, Contador, Hushovd, Rogers all look a shadow of previous incarnations. My opinion of course, in fact less than that, just a line of thinking, of theorising.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I agree. Its a clean Rogers, Contardor and Schleck. Its a juiced Quintana and Henao. ITT is where you see the biggest effect of juice. But it brings to question who is truly a talented rider? What would a clean Pantani have looked like? Is Contardor and Schleck truly talented? Or were they juice generated talent? Its a puzzle. Oh, forget age, Contardor is 30! that is an Athlete's peak years!

I am not sure if Sky has systemic doping like USPS but they may have encourage it in various ways. There is no doubt this is a different Rogers just like it is a different Porte from the one at Astana.

A very hilly ITT, would suit both Quintana and Henao, no? And less so Martin? Besides, if Martin is the control, can we be sure of his level or doping, or none at all?

I really enjoyed Pais Vasco, lots of good racing in terrible conditions, terrible. Not sure those conditions give us true indicators of athletic ability, more of mental strength. And compatisons in performance is a kinefield of variables IMO.

 

[thehog]

If I was a betting man I'd say this season, basically post-Armstrong. My theory would be that a) riders have seen cycling's biggest legacy crumble before their eyes. They know samples are being kept for testing at a later stage. Whatever they achieve now could all be taken away from them years down the line. Short term gain orlong term glory? Logically most individuals will choose the latter. v

And b) an edict from on high. How many scandals can the sport survive? Howmany can McQuaid and Verbruggen's jobs survive? How many can the UCI survive? They are beleagured, under seige and only just hanging on. I would theorise that everyone was told toknock it on the head one hundred percent. At the end of the day it's about protecting revenue streams. The women's sport is woefully underfunded, sponsors are leaving the men's side and races are under threat all over the place. The UCI is like a company with a profit warningl, for the sport to rebuild it needs no more scandals. Mainly think they have been facilitators in the past, very possible, just if they acted in that capacity then warning people off will have a big impact: no more protection.

Evans, Gilbert, Basso, Contador, Hushovd, Rogers all look a shadow of previous incarnations. My opinion of course, in fact less than that, just a line of thinking, of theorising.

Oh don't be silly.

McQuaid and Verbruggen are fine. Fully entrenched and going nowhere.

In fact Brian Cookson is in the room and loving up to Pat.

The UCI anwser to no one.

They are fine.

They shutdown the Armstrong commission and no one noticed.

Sky can dope free. They are not testing positive anytime soon.

Fully protected.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Oh don't be silly.

McQuaid and Verbruggen are fine. Fully entrenched and going nowhere.

In fact Brian Cookson is in the room and loving up to Pat.

The UCI anwser to no one.

They are fine.

They shutdown the Armstrong commission and no one noticed.

Sky can dope free. They are not testing positive anytime soon.

Fully protected.

I disagree

 

[SundayRider]

If I was a betting man I'd say this season, basically post-Armstrong. My theory would be that a) riders have seen cycling's biggest legacy crumble before their eyes. They know samples are being kept for testing at a later stage. Whatever they achieve now could all be taken away from them years down the line. Short term gain orlong term glory? Logically most individuals will choose the latter. v

And b) an edict from on high. How many scandals can the sport survive? Howmany can McQuaid and Verbruggen's jobs survive? How many can the UCI survive? They are beleagured, under seige and only just hanging on. I would theorise that everyone was told toknock it on the head one hundred percent. At the end of the day it's about protecting revenue streams. The women's sport is woefully underfunded, sponsors are leaving the men's side and races are under threat all over the place. The UCI is like a company with a profit warningl, for the sport to rebuild it needs no more scandals. Mainly think they have been facilitators in the past, very possible, just if they acted in that capacity then warning people off will have a big impact: no more protection.

Evans, Gilbert, Basso, Contador, Hushovd, Rogers all look a shadow of previous incarnations. My opinion of course, in fact less than that, just a line of thinking, of theorising.

Armstrong is still a very wealthy man, those in the sport are already entrenched and aren't going to suddenly stop because of Armstrong's downfall.

 

[Netserk]

If I was a betting man I'd say this season, basically post-Armstrong. My theory would be that a) riders have seen cycling's biggest legacy crumble before their eyes. They know samples are being kept for testing at a later stage. Whatever they achieve now could all be taken away from them years down the line. Short term gain orlong term glory? Logically most individuals will choose the latter. v

And b) an edict from on high. How many scandals can the sport survive? Howmany can McQuaid and Verbruggen's jobs survive? How many can the UCI survive? They are beleagured, under seige and only just hanging on. I would theorise that everyone was told toknock it on the head one hundred percent. At the end of the day it's about protecting revenue streams. The women's sport is woefully underfunded, sponsors are leaving the men's side and races are under threat all over the place. The UCI is like a company with a profit warningl, for the sport to rebuild it needs no more scandals. Mainly think they have been facilitators in the past, very possible, just if they acted in that capacity then warning people off will have a big impact: no more protection.

Evans, Gilbert, Basso, Contador, Hushovd, Rogers all look a shadow of previous incarnations. My opinion of course, in fact less than that, just a line of thinking, of theorising.

And yet you voted that between 30 and 40 % of the pro peloton are dirty

 

[Dazed and Confused]

If I was a betting man I'd say this season, basically post-Armstrong. My theory would be that a) riders have seen cycling's biggest legacy crumble before their eyes. They know samples are being kept for testing at a later stage. Whatever they achieve now could all be taken away from them years down the line. Short term gain orlong term glory? Logically most individuals will choose the latter. v

And b) an edict from on high. How many scandals can the sport survive? Howmany can McQuaid and Verbruggen's jobs survive? How many can the UCI survive? They are beleagured, under seige and only just hanging on. I would theorise that everyone was told toknock it on the head one hundred percent. At the end of the day it's about protecting revenue streams. The women's sport is woefully underfunded, sponsors are leaving the men's side and races are under threat all over the place. The UCI is like a company with a profit warningl, for the sport to rebuild it needs no more scandals. Mainly think they have been facilitators in the past, very possible, just if they acted in that capacity then warning people off will have a big impact: no more protection.

Evans, Gilbert, Basso, Contador, Hushovd, Rogers all look a shadow of previous incarnations. My opinion of course, in fact less than that, just a line of thinking, of theorising.

The dopers are the ones making money in this sport. Rogers just signed a solid contract with Saxo-Tinkoff based on his doped up performance on Sky. Gilbert signed a pension level deal with BMC after the triple Ardennes success. Contador is making a lot of money, Basso is doing very well and Valverde is a star in Spain. Scarponi may just get onto the Giro podium this year triggering a bonus. Luigi is probably going to destroy everybody in P-R for another double cobble.

Hein and Phat are greedy old men, who really doesn't care too much about the sport, but rather tend to worry a great deal about their personal wealth.

The real clowns are still the clean riders.