Most Farcical Tour Ever?

[sniper]

But they're not doing a fraction of what led the Tour the past 4 years. This is what we've come to expect in the Bio-passport era, with few exceptions, and Froome was holding back. A lot of riders have declined from that level, but the british duo are still up there, or should I say, leapt up there. Half their Tour squad have improved majorly at the same time. It's not just that many competitors fell off, they improved. A lot. At the same time. And one of them is a 32-year old, ex-Ferrari client, pushing some of his best numbers ever.

That's not believable.

And that's not even going into the whole no-hiring-dopers-or-people-facilitating-doping-and-let's-be-super-transparent thing, that turned into let's-hire-a-bunch-of-dopers-and-dirty-staff-members-and-let's-not-be-anymore-transparent-than-Johan's-team.

It has all the signs of systematic doping.

sorry i missed this:
who's the ex-ferrari client?

 

[thehog]

But they're not doing a fraction of what led the Tour the past 4 years. This is what we've come to expect in the Bio-passport era, with few exceptions, and Froome was holding back. A lot of riders have declined from that level, but the british duo are still up there, or should I say, leapt up there. Half their Tour squad have improved majorly at the same time. It's not just that many competitors fell off, they improved. A lot. At the same time. And one of them is a 32-year old, ex-Ferrari client, pushing some of his best numbers ever.

That's not believable.

And that's not even going into the whole no-hiring-dopers-or-people-facilitating-doping-and-let's-be-super-transparent thing, that turned into let's-hire-a-bunch-of-dopers-and-dirty-staff-members-and-let's-not-be-anymore-transparent-than-Johan's-team.

It has all the signs of systematic doping.

Yes it some coincidence isn't it....

Good to Sky back on the front today. I think they could just keep riding all the way through to the Vuelta. They don't even look like getting fatigued.

 

[sittingbison]

sorry i missed this:
who's the ex-ferrari client?

Rogers %)

10 char

 

[frenchfry]

sorry i missed this:
who's the ex-ferrari client?

That would be Michael Rodgers, ex Ferrari client and ex Freiburg clinic client.

Never tested positive.

 

[Ripper]

Dear oh dear!: Here is an opinion stated as fact. Up to you, me old chum, but In my opinion we are looking at a great Tour and a great winner. Clean??? Yeah, you bet! With Wiggo there is not a sniff of dope anywhere. That's why I am so happy. As for you and those of your ilk, you can wallow in your misery, drown in your suspicions and be inspired by your own insults. That's up to you. The vast majority of us can cheer a great win achieved through sheer hard work by a clean rider with a clean team. I certainly don't care what you think because, you know what? You are wrong.

No, you are wrong

There, see how easy that was? You seem to think folks talking about suspicions in a forum are in some form of misery. Not sure why ... many seem pretty happy to me

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Yes it some coincidence isn't it....

Good to Sky back on the front today. I think they could just keep riding all the way through to the Vuelta. They don't even look like getting fatigued.

Yep so strong that the strong man Ivan Basso has to take a pull.

 

[sniper]

That would be Michael Rodgers, ex Ferrari client and ex Freiburg clinic client.

Never tested positive.

thanks frenchfry! and sittingbison!

 

[180mmCrank]

He meant winners of the tour. Which is what he is.now. He has absolutely no problem attacking them, didn't care who it hurt. didn't care if it would hurt sastre when he said Evans was the only clean tour winner. ( how he knows.this is beyond me). But apply the same.standards to.wiggins as.he applies.to.others and all of a sudden wiggins does care who is or isnt hurt.

1 rule.for accusing others 1 rule for accusing wiggins . Is that honest ?

You are choosing to use quite strong terms like 'attack' and 'accusing' ... I know (now infamously!) Wiggins has used strong terms to push back against media and commentators who seem to question his integrity. not sure he has used quite the same terms against other riders but you may have examples.

We can't really have as our collective logic "all recent winners of the Tour doped" therefore "you can't win the Tour without doping" ... One doesn't follow the other. It is neither honest nor dishonest to point at suspect performances while claiming your own performance is legitimate.

His honesty is surely related simply to if he is doping or not?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

You are choosing to use quite strong terms like 'attack' and 'accusing' ... I know (now infamously!) Wiggins has used strong terms to push back against media and commentators who seem to question his integrity. not sure he has used quite the same terms against other riders but you may have examples.

We can't really have as our collective logic "all recent winners of the Tour doped" therefore "you can't win the Tour without doping" ... One doesn't follow the other. It is neither honest nor dishonest to point at suspect performances while claiming your own performance is legitimate.

His honesty is surely related simply to if he is doping or not?

Wiggins in 2007 - people will have doubts about the next 6 TDF winners and he understands and accepts that, sympathises with it.

Wiggins in 2012 - people who raise suspicions about the winner of the TDF are ****s, ****s and ****ing ******s.

So either Wiggins lied in 2007, because it ISN'T acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out this year, or he lied in 2012, because it IS acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out five years ago.

 

[Froome19]

So either Wiggins lied in 2007, because it ISN'T acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out this year, or he lied in 2012, because it IS acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out five years ago.

Or he was just incredibly aggravated with his current situation.

 

[Maxiton]

Wiggins in 2007 - people will have doubts about the next 6 TDF winners and he understands and accepts that, sympathises with it.

Wiggins in 2012 - people who raise suspicions about the winner of the TDF are ****s, ****s and ****ing ******s.

So either Wiggins lied in 2007, because it ISN'T acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out this year, or he lied in 2012, because it IS acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out five years ago.

He was telling the truth then, because he didn't think he'd ever win it and was pretty sure that whoever did would be doped; and he was telling the truth recently, because he knew he was going to win and didn't want anyone digging into how he'd done it. That makes him truthful.

But since his antipathy for doping turned out to be as thin as his skinsuit, once he was presented with the opportunity to dope and win; and since his caving to temptation necessitated prevarication now: that makes him a liar.

So he is both truthful and a liar.

But to answer the OP's question, Is this the most farcical Tour ever?, I think the answer is obvious. So farcical I couldn't watch it.

This may turn out to be the Tour that finally murdered pro cycling.

 

[180mmCrank]

Wiggins in 2007 - people will have doubts about the next 6 TDF winners and he understands and accepts that, sympathises with it.

Wiggins in 2012 - people who raise suspicions about the winner of the TDF are ****s, ****s and ****ing ******s.

So either Wiggins lied in 2007, because it ISN'T acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out this year, or he lied in 2012, because it IS acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out five years ago.

It seems more than a question of semantics to describe a statement made in 2007 that proved to be incorrect as lying! BUT it seems that people have made their minds up that this guy is a dishonest doper. Not sure what to say other than I have a different opinion.

Variety is the spice of life

T

 

[oldcrank]

Funny, but none of the respected international experts
seem to agree with the intertwit conspiracy theorists.
I say congratulations to a great rider that has just
won the Tour. Long may he reign!

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Wiggins in 2007 - people will have doubts about the next 6 TDF winners and he understands and accepts that, sympathises with it.

Wiggins in 2012 - people who raise suspicions about the winner of the TDF are ****s, ****s and ****ing ******s.

So either Wiggins lied in 2007, because it ISN'T acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out this year, or he lied in 2012, because it IS acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out five years ago.

As has been mentioned (By you I think) that Davide Rebellin said his victory was a victory for clean cycling. So, there is only so much you can read into an interview. You prod someone enough and they will crack. If he had reiterated what he said in 2007 people would have said he was hypocrite for doping and saying that imo.

Plenty of reasons to think that Sky doped but I would not say this is one of them.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

It seems more than a question of semantics to describe a statement made in 2007 that proved to be incorrect as lying! BUT it seems that people have made their minds up that this guy is a dishonest doper. Not sure what to say other than I have a different opinion.

Variety is the spice of life

T

But the statement didn't turn out to be incorrect. He stated that people would have their suspicions about the next 6 Tour winners... and they do. Maybe at that point he hadn't even considered the possibility that he would be one of them. But his prediction still holds true.

As has been mentioned (By you I think) that Davide Rebellin said his victory was a victory for clean cycling. So, there is only so much you can read into an interview. You prod someone enough and they will crack. If he had reiterated what he said in 2007 people would have said he was hypocrite for doping and saying that imo.

Plenty of reasons to think that Sky doped but I would not say this is one of them.

It was Rebellins' silver medal at the Olympics, and yes it was me that pointed that out. I'm not using that interview as proof Sky doped, but rather as proof that we cannot take Wiggins' words in 2007 as a reason why he definitely didn't, or wouldn't.

 

[taiwan]

Funny, but none of the respected international experts
seem to agree with the intertwit conspiracy theorists.
I say congratulations to a great rider that has just
won the Tour. Long may he reign!

How many people whose wages are paid by cycling are free to air their suspicions? Might be better to watch the non-english media, but IDK if they're 'respected'.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

It was Rebellins' silver medal at the Olympics, and yes it was me that pointed that out. I'm not using that interview as proof Sky doped, but rather as proof that we cannot take Wiggins' words in 2007 as a reason why he definitely didn't, or wouldn't.

I would never say that words would definitely prove anything when it comes to doping. That has been shown time and time again to be worthless. In the end, actions speak louder than words ever will. So regardless of what he said in 2012 if there are suspicions surrounding Sky then that is all you need to think something could be up.

I will be the first to say that I probably give Wiggins more leeway then I would if he were not British and that is my failing. I am trying to give them the benefit of the doubt but there are so many things that can be seen as suspect. One or two of them and you could probably let it go.

So until I hear they have provided Blood profiles for independent examining, explained away why they have a doping doctor(s) and basically come through on their claim of being transparent then I am very concerned.

 

[Dr.Sahl]

Or he was just incredibly aggravated with his current situation.

Yes and maybe he does not hate Geert Leinders and he obviously don't think you should be banned from tour invites anymore if you have a guy like him attached to the team..

I guess he is not aggravated anymore, because now he is doped to the gills and winning the tour...

If not why would he accept dirty team members like GL etc ^^

 

[Franklin]

So until I hear they have provided Blood profiles for independent examining, explained away why they have a doping doctor(s) and basically come through on their claim of being transparent then I am very concerned.

And tbh this is how a true fan should behave if he loves the sport. You can't stop being biased and that's okay with me. But you don't wear blinkers.

Respect.

 

[180mmCrank]

But the statement didn't turn out to be incorrect. He stated that people would have their suspicions about the next 6 Tour winners... and they do. Maybe at that point he hadn't even considered the possibility that he would be one of them. But his prediction still holds true.

It was Rebellins' silver medal at the Olympics, and yes it was me that pointed that out. I'm not using that interview as proof Sky doped, but rather as proof that we cannot take Wiggins' words in 2007 as a reason why he definitely didn't, or wouldn't.

We seem to be going in circles here but it seems a it rich to call him a liar or even dishonest based on this chain of events?

T

 

[Cervelo77]

<snip>

So either Wiggins lied in 2007, because it ISN'T acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out this year, or he lied in 2012, because it IS acceptable to raise suspicions as he pointed out five years ago.

Or maybe he just didn't quite know how to handle press conferences in the yellow jersey yet. I know, too simple an explanation for this forum.

 

[Franklin]

Or maybe he just didn't quite know how to handle press conferences in the yellow jersey yet. I know, too simple an explanation for this forum.

I posted that awhile ago... and yet no damage control whatsoever. Even if true, it's bad form. But the point remains that his words carry no weight either way.

On a sidenote, Brad has been multiple medal winner, the best British GT rider in a long time (best ever now), alledgedly the most interviewed and lauded British athlete this year, yet he can't do a decent pressconference? or at least get some decent handlers?

If I were him I certainly would get a handler to help me with this stuff so I can focus on racing. And if not is own decision, at least management can step in? Seems Sky really is dropping the ball here.

 

[gatete]

Just like Riis didn't come from nowhere in 1996. He had been 3rd in 1995, 14th in 1994 and 5th in 1993. Nevermind that before that, at 29, he had never shown any talent for the GTs.

I think he did climb better than 2008 Wiggins though.

Wiggins came from nowhere (as far as road racing and GTs are concerned) in 2009. Froome came from nowhere in 2011.

Strictly speaking, it would be more believable if Navarro somehow won the Vuelta.

Yes, this for sure, I've heard the arguments abut how Wiggins have been a world class athlete blah blah, but then all Cancellara has to do is to lose some weight to become a GC treath and nobody is going to suspect anything because after all he has won gold medals, world tt competitions and have a huge engine

 

[Dr.Sahl]

Yes, this for sure, I've heard the arguments abut how Wiggins have been a world class athlete blah blah, but then all Cancellara has to do is to lose some weight to become a GC treath and nobody is going to suspect anything because after all he has won gold medals, world tt competitions and have a huge engine

I use Mørkøv as an example alot against these British fanboys, they say if he came next year to win he would be a doper, but the fact is he is just as good on track as wiggins was and thats their main argument that and warm down sessions..

 

[gatete]

I get it - it's difficult to believe.

But the difficult to believe label doesn't do it for me ... because having been involved in high performance sport I have seen people do apparently unbelievable things (without doping), I have done unbelievable things (without doping) ... it's the nature of sport, it's the nature of high performance in sport.

I'm wondering what those are? care to elaborate a bit more about those umbelievable things