Most Farcical Tour Ever?

Page 12 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
BroDeal said:
It is interesting that going by estimates, people are claiming that the power outputs are low, showing that the Tour has cleaned up. But going by what the riders have said, they are pushing out some really high Watts.
Strangely enough Ferrari said the same thing.
 
They rode high tempo until attacked by a threat like Nibali and Evans. Then they accelerated and shelled the yellow jersey group of everyone but them and a couple of usual suspects. After the catch they slowed down substantially, usually the slow coaches managed to re-establish.

The attacks just could not escape, as both Basso and Wiggo suggest.
 
BroDeal said:
It is interesting that going by estimates, people are claiming that the power outputs are low, showing that the Tour has cleaned up. But going by what the riders have said, they are pushing out some really high Watts.
True, but these guys are only pushing that power up 20-25 minute climbs, not the entire way up 1 hour HC climbs like the 90's and 00's.

It probably isn't possible clean but these aren't Riis/Pantani/Armstrong/Rasmussen/Ricco performances either.
 
Sep 25, 2010
82
0
0
to some extent i can rationalize the performances. obviously froome and wiggins have the highest threshold powers of anyone on sky. they allow rogers and porte to do sections of the climb above their own threshold to keep the pace high and to keep froome and wiggins below threshold, until rogers and porte crack. then it's up to froome and wiggins to stay at threshold.

relative to past performances, both froome and wiggins were a step above nibali and van den broeck, just like they were in the 2011 vuelta and just like wiggins was at the 2009 tdf. as for basso, he was getting dropped in the giro by hesjedal and jrod and even scarponi, it isn't like 2005 basso is suddenly being blown out of the group.

i'm not saying that alone is indicative of clean racing, but when you combine those elements with lower overall watts (nothing exceeding 6 watts/kg for extended climbs), and considering that porte has always shown this potential since his first giro, it isn't unbelievable. suspicious and eyebrow raising, yes, but not unbelievable.

i'll admit that i'm biased though. while i rooted against wiggins, i root even more strongly for clean cycling, and confirmation bias is a powerful thing.
 
thehog said:
We're talking juniors very early 90s here. In saying that I saw some stuff at state and national facilities. Never EPO. We were'nt being tested in those days.

I wont name names but 3 guys I rode with once they hit seniors and were tested got busted.

We were all from the Charlie Walsh school. He was a swim coach too! :rolleyes:
I thought you were a Brit Mr Hog, did I get that wrong?
 

ianfra

BANNED
Mar 10, 2009
313
0
0
BroDeal said:
Now to make the troll complete you need to again send me a series of PMs outlining your crackpot theories for Sky's magical and giant step up in performance.
WHY have you not yet been banned for insulting fellow posters? What is all this troll rubbish about? It means nothing to me and even more interesting when I make salient points that you guys find awkward to answer, you simply revert to insults.
 
Jan 18, 2010
3,059
0
0
will10 said:
My post was not meant to be hostile. I genuinely want you to show me the previous performances that suggest Froome could be a potential GT podium finisher, because I haven't found any yet. Or does 3rd on Mont Faron ahead of Jussi Veikkanen suffice?
You have to start somewhere. That Giro performance as a 23 year old coming mid thirties on GC is under the radar considering he was more than likely doing domestique duties. it was a reasonable performance.

Yeah no wins but to suggest he's come from nowhere like a cat 4 rider suddenly on the podium is just ridiculous.

David Brailsford saw something in him so maybe you should put that question to him not me because I'm just observing and not being a smart ****.
 
Jul 3, 2012
682
0
0
I will grant that their number-crunching is somewhat impressive, in the way that an accountant winning the Tour de France is impressive.

If they're clean, that just makes them more boring, because they have it down to a science. It's assembly-line GT riding.
 
sublimit said:
You have to start somewhere. That Giro performance as a 23 year old coming mid thirties on GC is under the radar considering he was more than likely doing domestique duties. it was a reasonable performance.

Yeah no wins but to suggest he's come from nowhere like a cat 4 rider suddenly on the podium is just ridiculous.

David Brailsford saw something in him so maybe you should put that question to him not me because I'm just observing and not being a smart ****.
Well, he came from nowhere. I am not expecting wins, but I a expecting something. If not in GT-s, then in smaller stage races, if not GC results, then at least some top performances in single stages. Froome had nothing. He was not able to TT, he was not able to climb. Yes, he came from nowhere.

I would even say that from these two (Wiggins/Froome), Froome is more suspicious.
 
ianfra said:
WHY have you not yet been banned for insulting fellow posters? What is all this troll rubbish about? It means nothing to me and even more interesting when I make salient points that you guys find awkward to answer, you simply revert to insults.
What salient points have you made? I don't see any.
 
May 23, 2010
516
0
0
ianfra said:
An honest poster would understand: “Start knowing what you really know, and stop believing what you really don’t know. Somebody asks you. “Is there a God?” and you say, “Yes, God is.........” Remember: Do you really know?
No we don't. But that's why I'm an atheist. So I guess I am above this nonsense that apparently 'everyone' is want to do according to your good self.

ianfra said:
Sometimes you know things without being able to explain. That's OK.
Is it? I thought you just said it isn't.

Aren't you the guy that was proclaiming Wiggins is definitely clean? So I guess you are holding yourself to your second little tidbit of wisdom while holding everyone else to the first. Interesting.

No one said Wiggins is definitely doping. People are just very suspicious based on what we know from past experiences of doped riders. I suppose though that we can't trust prior experience either Professor Hume?
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Warhawk said:
I will grant that their number-crunching is somewhat impressive, in the way that an accountant winning the Tour de France is impressive.

If they're clean, that just makes them more boring, because they have it down to a science. It's assembly-line GT riding.
Well, that's the spirit! Doped or boffin toys. Where are the good old times when the races were rode by ordinary guys from a barn riding on pasta and water... oops, errr, NOT.
 
Jan 20, 2010
713
0
0
BroDeal said:
Thehog made a good point that even in the Postal years, the leaders of other teams were able to stick with Armstrong until near the end. <snip>

Has any Tour been a bigger farce than this one?
Tough race but i give the highest farceometer reading to the posties, purely on the basis of the results still being decided 10-12 years later.

This year close second (or eighth), however you want to count.
 
Franklin said:
I'm terribly sorry, but the notion that rowing in those year was squeaky clean is ridiculous. Heck, even if the kids were cean and cleanly trained by their own coach, others used an east German coach.

The Hog has a good point here that students at the rowing club were far, far ahead with the doping game. And yes, that's anecdotical evidence, which seems to be okay in this particular case.

Very important here is that Rowers (used to be) are much higher educated as it's a university sport, whereas cycling was a working man's sport and relatively uneducated. Your "we wouldn't know where to start" is also ridiculous. Not only did they only have to open a newspaper to see which drugs were used (Johnson, east germany), they certainly were close in proximity to the medical colleges (traditionally strong contenders here in the Netherlands^^).

And finally; yes, I question the notion that clean hardworking britons kept up with hardworking dopes up East germans. There's no evidence about this particular case, but the curve of doping (especially in that wild-west era), the characteristic of the sport (high response) and the strong indication that top-countries as the Ntherlands were using as well makes me incredibly sceptical.
So what follows is not an attempt to persuade anyone of anything it's simply that I can't let the above post go with out a response.

AND Just to be clear. You are talking about me and my friends. I was one of those rowers ... I was on the National team from 1985 - 1993 ... and yes I was coached by for part of that time by a former East German coach 1990 - 1992.

Some facts...

I rowed on the Nationa Team from 1985 - 1993 competed at two OG and numerous WCs. I was consistently in boats ranked 3rd / 4th at that level.

I never doped. In fact in 1989 I refused to take pain medication at the WC. It was ibuprofen for a dislocated rib ... this was a personal ethics thing not anything to do with doping ... Ibuprofen isn't banned ;) ... Look back now at this as more than a bit naive but its how I felt at the time at the time.

I was in crews that beat East German crews without the need for doping - in 1988 We beat their 8 prior to the Olympics and as a result they were not selected to go to the Games. We beat their 4'in 1989 at the WC in Bled thye were 4 th we were 3 rd. I know they were all part of systematic doping programs. It was not easy to beat these guys but it was not impossible.

When The East German coach came to the UK after the Wall came down he could not believe that we didn't have a doping program in the UK. I believe he was both surprised and relieved. He instigated no doping program while I the UK. I know this for a fact ... I was in the program I was one of the top 6 ranked athletes. This is one of the reasons I know that people can change!

People will make of all of this what they want and believe what they want to believe. I can't and will not try to change people's beliefs but I will continue to share my experience and struggle to read people's generalized and sweeping statements about performance and doping.

Not sure what else to say :)
 
180mmCrank said:
...

AND Just to be clear. You are talking about me and my friends. I was one of those rowers ... I was on the National team from 1985 - 1993 ... and yes I was coached by for part of that time by a former East German coach 1990 - 1992.

Some facts...

...

Not sure what else to say :)
I do. You are younger than me!

And, the East German program, at least in terms of performance, was already in decline by the late 80's.

Dave.
 
42x16ss said:
True, but these guys are only pushing that power up 20-25 minute climbs, not the entire way up 1 hour HC climbs like the 90's and 00's.

It probably isn't possible clean but these aren't Riis/Pantani/Armstrong/Rasmussen/Ricco performances either.
None of those guys did it day in day out for 2 weeks solid. Not even Armstrong. Sky were phenomenal. Way beyond what I've seen ever in the entire history of cycling.

Jack-a-Rama.
 
D-Queued said:
I do. You are younger than me!

And, the East German program, at least in terms of performance, was already in decline by the late 80's.

Dave.
My Opinion again but I think somewhat informed...

I would suggest that two factors influenced the "decline" in East German dominance one was that other nations caught up ... And this catching up might have included some doping but was in large part due to way more sophisticated and professional approach to training and performance... This was true of many nations Australians, Italians, French, British to name a few... Many athletes in these countries were still training part time until after the mid 1980s

... And the real decline was post 1989 once the wall actually came down. The whole thing fell apart within a matter of months.
 
sublimit said:
...David Brailsford saw something in him...
One of the problems is that Sky did NOT see something in him. Brailsford seems to have rated him as wayyyy below average, and he was not offered a contract in 2011 until after the Veulta and his "out of the blue" performance
 
D-Queued said:
...the East German program, at least in terms of performance...
The East German program also seems to have benefited women far more than men. The EG female sprinters and swimmers obliterated all before them, but I can't remember the men being so dominant. Happy to be proved wrong :)

Perhaps it was the drugs they used? They seem to have been largely hormonal types, many of the women developed male attributes.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
sittingbison said:
The East German program also seems to have benefited women far more than men. The EG female sprinters and swimmers obliterated all before them, but I can't remember the men being so dominant. Happy to be proved wrong :)

Perhaps it was the drugs they used? They seem to have been largely hormonal types, many of the women developed male attributes.
1. They certainly did not decline in the 80ies.

1972 Munich 20 23 23 66
1976 Montreal 40 25 25 90
1980 Moscow 47 37 42 126 (Inflated)
1988 Seoul 37 35 30 102

*Caveat, the amount of disciplines has risen with 5% on avg those years. That said, the GDR pipped the USA for second place in the medal count.

2. They sure could row:

Rowing 33 7 8 48 (Total GDR)
East Germany (GDR) 8 1 1 10 (Seoul)

3. The men certainly were on top of their game:

East Germany (GDR) 3 1 1 10 (Seoul) => 5 golds for women, but certainly the GDR was by far the most succesful at Seoul.


But if we fast forward to 1992 we see that the German team for the double wihout Cox is West German. The time set by the UK couple in 1992 seems to be the fastest olympic times until 2004, but the data I dredged up is lacking, nor do I have any idea of any conditions of all those years.

Toward 180mmCrank:

All in all a miracle. I will not contest this particular case as I do not know enough about rowing, it's way in the past and (most importantly) you clearly have the better data and thus certainly have my ear.

But I am adamant that your statement "we wouldn't know where to start if we even wanted to dope" is hyperbole. You might not have known, but I do know enough about (university) rowing (especially in those years) that this simply is nonsense. Rowers are very well educated people and smart enough to figure it out ;)
 
ianfra said:
WHY have you not yet been banned for insulting fellow posters? What is all this troll rubbish about? It means nothing to me and even more interesting when I make salient points that you guys find awkward to answer, you simply revert to insults.
T - T - T - Trollin'!

Actually, the substance of your messages as you drop in and make random comments is a form of trolling and not one of making "salient points". What is so awkward to answer? Some folks have suspicions. You seem to find that much more upsetting.

Quite frankly, if I had a mythical "truth meter" and was able to magically know if someone had or had not doped, and it turned out no one at Sky had doped, that would suit me fine. However, given what I've had the pleasure of seeing in my time and all the little bits and pieces, I do not find that likely. Sorry if that offends you or stresses you out Ianfra. But hey, what do you expect, it is only professional sports.
 
Franklin said:
1. They certainly did not decline in the 80ies.

...snip...

But if we fast forward to 1992 we see that the German team for the double wihout Cox is West German. The time set by the UK couple in 1992 seems to be the fastest olympic times until 2004, but the data I dredged up is lacking, nor do I have any idea of any conditions of all those years.

Toward 180mmCrank:

All in all a miracle. I will not contest this particular case as I do not know enough about rowing, it's way in the past and (most importantly) you clearly have the better data and thus certainly have my ear.

But I am adamant that your statement "we wouldn't know where to start if we even wanted to dope" is hyperbole. You might not have known, but I do know enough about (university) rowing (especially in those years) that this simply is nonsense. Rowers are very well educated people and smart enough to figure it out ;)
The West Germans were a couple of young students... the UK Pair was Pinsent and Regrave ... two of the greatest Olympians in history of the Olympics ... Redgrave won Gold at 5 consecutive Games (1984 -2000) and Pinsent at 4 consecutive Games (1992 - 2004) neither of these two doped ... nor believed in unicorns ;)

Yes as rowers some of us were 'smart and well educated' not all (Redgrave left school at 16) but non of us were interested in finding out about doping because the nature of our involvement in our sport would never have been compatible with competing in that way. People can choose to believe this or not but that is how it was for all of us and still is to this day.

This experience is the basis of how I make sense of what I see in the World of sport - I don't believe in miracles - but I do believe in extraordinary performances. I have seen many that were not enhanced by chemistry.

All good :)

T
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS