Richie Porte - what do we know about him?

[thehog]

There he is! and smiling!

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

This is right by the finish line where the course flattens out (looking at the flag on the barrier), no?

 

[Ripper]

This is right by the finish line where the course flattens out (looking at the flag on the barrier), no?

@DBLP, I'm really just comparing the fresh happy look of the Richster to everyone else (who all look spent; not going to post all the other photos though ). The fact that he is seated does not make a big difference to me. Also, flattens from 20+%, but definitely not flat.

 

[spalco]

Are you saying the rest of the peloton is still doped then? Because that was my point. Sky are standing out like the proverbials coz noone else is doping now.

Clean peloton and hiring the best riders = natural rise to the top of that team.

If it's just that their system is all up and running smoothly now, then the ejection of significant back office staff is having surprisingly little effect on their multi-stage team's results.

Will certainly be interesting to see how (or where) EBH goes now that his coach has to be internally sourced.

What I was saying with that comment is, that assuming the hypothesis that Team Sky is clean, that it's not illogical for them to need a couple years to "rise to the top", even if doping already stopped in 2008. But I was only making that argument specifically in response to the comment I quoted in that post.

In general my opinion is, that the suggestion "doping stopped in 2008" is highly questionable, and yes, I do still think there is significant doping in cycling now. The idea that there isn't simply goes against everything we learned about the sport in the last one and a half decades. I simply can't wrap my head around why people should have stopped doping now, when the controls are not really any better than in the past and the rewards are still so great.

And yeah, I realise that's inconsistent with my somewhat contrarian position in this thread, not being fully in the "pitchfork and torches" camp regarding Sky. I'm just doubtful, that there's organised team-doping at Sky. Certainly it's difficult to defend Froome's cleanliness...

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Nice photo of Porte Borg in the saddle. Looks calm on the 21% incline whilst everyone else is out of e saddle and struggling.

I wonder what Conti was thinking there.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

@DBLP, I'm really just comparing the fresh happy look of the Richster to everyone else (who all look spent; not going to post all the other photos though ). The fact that he is seated does not make a big difference to me. Also, flattens from 20+%, but definitely not flat.

Fair enough. The footage I saw on youtube was a bit grainy so you don't get much detail. Def. looks to get flatter but that might be the camera foreshortening.

Footage here

The rise and rise of Richie Porte is pretty amazing though.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

And yeah, I realise that's inconsistent with my somewhat contrarian position in this thread, not being fully in the "pitchfork and torches" camp regarding Sky. I'm just doubtful, that there's organised team-doping at Sky. Certainly it's difficult to defend Froome's cleanliness...

I don't think it's organised team-doping either.

Was just looking at Wiggins blood values from 2009 Tour and his Hgb reading is higher a week before the finish than it is at the start, even if the overall trend is downwards. Weird as.

 

[Cimber]

Debatable of course: even with a lot of data two different individuals analysing it can and do come to different conclusions, hence not strictly neutral or objective.

Of course it depends how u analyse it. How u do analyse the vast amount of emperical data? What makes u believe that the peloton all of a sudden got their morale straight and stopped doping? It didnt happen after Festina and it didint happen after Puerto. Surely it helps when the ADA's make it more difficult to cheat, but again history seem to suggest that the riders try to find new sources that doesnt get caught in the net.

Your paradigm is that dominant teams of the past have doped while claiming superior training methods, so a dominant team now claiming the same things are doing the same.

Your paradigm seems to be that you cant use any historical patterns, no amtter how similar, to analyse Sky is doing.

Firstly there is an issue with defining dominant, .

Would u define Sky otherwise?

secondly there is clear empirical evidence that point to other reasons why sports team dominate, usually financial. Chuck enough money at any sport and generally you will win. Call it financial doping if you will.

Of course finance playes a role in building a strong team, but finance doesnt explain why decent and mediocre riders turn into monsters who can peek the whole season after joining Sky (unless u wanna go down the "optimised training methods" road)

Surely u can optimise your traning and become, and I do buy that is a part of Sky's success. But, in my opinion, we are somewhat beyong the "marginal gains of optimised training". And yes, that argument does make me smile cynically, since it has been abused alot in the past too.

Now, I am not saying that only Sky is dirty and other teams and other riders arent doping. It isntreally meant as a anti-Sky-campaign. It just sometimes goes down that road since especially when discussing Sky there seem to be alot of Sky fans defending the virginity of the team ferousiously, while it is often easier to have a more openminded debate about other teams and riders, even from fans of said teams and riders

I wonder what Conti was thinking there.

"I want some of that juice!"

 

[JimmyFingers]

I wonder what Conti was thinking there.

Probably thinking about how good Henao is

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Probably thinking about how good Henao is

Or, 'how come little Ritchie is climbing like Jan Ullrich'?

Nice pictures, guess he warmed down well the day before.

 

[Ripper]

Or, 'how come little Ritchie is climbing like Jan Ullrich'?

Nice pictures, guess he warmed down well the day before.

He started to warm down before he got to the finish line

 

[JimmyFingers]

Or, 'how come little Ritchie is climbing like Jan Ullrich'?

Nice pictures, guess he warmed down well the day before.

Or 'that was a pretty short but steep climb'. Plus didn't he puncture? Someone said he punctured. I could be wrong. Often am.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Of course it depends how u analyse it. How u do analyse the vast amount of emperical data? What makes u believe that the peloton all of a sudden got their morale straight and stopped doping? It didnt happen after Festina and it didint happen after Puerto. Surely it helps when the ADA's make it more difficult to cheat, but again history seem to suggest that the riders try to find new sources that doesnt get caught in the net.

Empirical research is coloured by the person researching, their opinion, their beliefs and their experiences.

Your paradigm seems to be that you cant use any historical patterns, no amtter how similar, to analyse Sky is doing.

I haven't actually offered a paradigm, just questioned yours. Of course historical trends offer lessons but stop short of offering us definitive evidence, it is more anecdotal and opinion forming. Nothing wrong with that

Would u define Sky otherwise?

Personally I find the internet warriors lean towards histrionics and exaggerations to make points, so I take the term with a pinch of salt (not that I'm calling you an internet warrior, just that discussions get hysterical quite quickly). A more objective view of 2012 might say that OPQS won as many races, that fifteen of Sky's wins were down to one rider, Cavendish, that Sky won one GT but failed to make much of an impression in the other, that while Sky were the top ranked team, they didn't have the top ranked rider. This season? Beaten in T-A and Catalunya and made to look mediocre in the classics. Dominance? Depends on definition, otherwise totally anecdotal. Certainly not akin to Man U's dominance for example.

Of course finance playes a role in building a strong team, but finance doesnt explain why decent and mediocre riders turn into monsters who can peek the whole season after joining Sky (unless u wanna go down the "optimised training methods" road)

Empirical evidence might tend to say fiscal reasons are more common for periods of dominance in sport. Financial muscle translates into more than just the recruitment of talent: infrastructure and support, research and talent spotting, developing of talent, technical innovation. I'm not saying its the answer, but its very valid. You should be a lot more suspicious of a poor team smashing everyone up.

Now, I am not saying that only Sky is dirty and other teams and other riders arent doping. It isntreally meant as a anti-Sky-campaign. It just sometimes goes down that road since especially when discussing Sky there seem to be alot of Sky fans defending the virginity of the team ferousiously, while it is often easier to have a more openminded debate about other teams and riders, even from fans of said teams and riders

Fairy nuff, I try to keep an open mind at all times. Sometimes I fail of course...

 

[LaFlorecita]

Or 'that was a pretty short but steep climb'. Plus didn't he puncture? Someone said he punctured. I could be wrong. Often am.

So what if he punctured?

 

[JimmyFingers]

So what if he punctured?

Its difficult to ride as fast when you puncture. That's why tyres have air in them

 

[thehog]

Its difficult to ride as fast when you puncture. That's why tyres have air in them

That's how Sky train. They let the air out of their tyres so its harder. That's why they're faster in racing. Air.

He did puncture with 20km to go. He rode through the car and got back in the peloton.

Agree it would have sapped some energy. Not for a not normal Sky rider. But for a mere mortal like Contador, yes.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Must be tough for Bertie to be a mere mortal

You should post a picture of him, just make sure it isn't Rogers

 

[thehog]

Must be tough for Bertie to be a mere mortal

You should post a picture of him, just make sure it isn't Rogers

Or I could post a photo of Rogers at Sky and Rogers at Saxo.

But they'd never be on the same frame as Sky Rogers with 450w power would be 9 minutes up the road.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Or I could post a photo of Rogers at Sky and Rogers at Saxo.

But they'd never be on the same frame as Sky Rogers with 450w power would be 9 minutes up the road.

Yes because Rogers going to Saxo definitely means he's off the juice, finally, after all these years

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Must be tough for Bertie to be a mere mortal

You should post a picture of him, just make sure it isn't Rogers

Just a question, do you think Conti was doping in Giro 2011?

 

[JimmyFingers]

Just a question, do you think Conti was doping in Giro 2011?

I hope not, but I don't know either way for sure.

Same answer I'd give for Wiggins in TdF '12

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I hope not, but I don't know either way for sure.

Same answer I'd give for Wiggins in TdF '12

I mean, he had transfusions in 2009, why would he stop?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Its difficult to ride as fast when you puncture. That's why tyres have air in them

He punctured with 20k to go so I hope he didn't ride with a flat on the climb

 

[LaFlorecita]

Or I could post a photo of Rogers at Sky and Rogers at Saxo.

But they'd never be on the same frame as Sky Rogers with 450w power would be 9 minutes up the road.

Nice

 

[JimmyFingers]

I mean, he had transfusions in 2009, why would he stop?

He found Jesus?