Sean Yates

[racyrichuk]

It's clear that Yates is toast, Brailsford hasn't left himself any wiggle room at all on this with his statement. He's saying that whilst people can be rehabilitated it won't be on his team.

Getting rid of Yates is the easy decision for Brailsford, the far more difficult decision is replacing him whilst maintaining this stance.

Where does he find an experienced DS befitting the team's current standing & roster that can be held up as completely clean. No prior history, no implications due to previous teams or other associations etc?

Answers on the back of a postage stamp please

Roger Hammond. Better check when the next UCI DS course starts.

 

[Franklin]

And no I don't think Sky is doing anything illegal mostly because their performances are credible, like Hinault's and Lemond's were (check out how they controlled and crushed the race in 1985 and 1986, even more than Sky did this year), but I understand that when the boss is caught BS'ing, people who had doubts (sometimes irrational) can only feel comforted.

My stance isn't far from yours (I'm not convinced Sky is organizing doping), but that comparison is blatantly ridiculous.

Hinault=Second best cyclist ever. Greg at least top twenty of all time greats.

Another important difference. It's Hinault's final year at 31 years of age. At that time he had won almost everything there was to win on the road, including the WC, all three GT's, P-R, AGR, LBL, FW, I could fill a few pages with his insane exploits.

Wiggins wins his first GT at 32....

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

wiggins winning his first gt at 32 says nothing. the average age of cyclists competitive has rises extremely in recent years, which I in fact address to less doping. makes more sense riders stay on higher level at later age. another great prove of cleaner cycling is youngsters breaking through immediately.

 

[Franklin]

Wiggins winning his first gt at 32 says nothing.

It's certainly no proof either way. But...

the average age of cyclists competitive has rises extremely in recent years, which I in fact address to less doping. makes more sense riders stay on higher level at later age. another great prove of cleaner cycling is youngsters breaking through immediately.

BS.

Rominger, Riis, Indurain, Lance.

The facts clearly show that Epo caused a rise in age in cyclists winning GT's. And we could add Musseeuw and Tchmil for the classics if you want.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Yes clearly Brad Wiggins is a Hinault in disguise who did nothing on the road for 7 years, 12-24 km / year quick on the track, then came 4th at the Tour.

Spitting. Image.

Remind me again what was the first year that he quit the track and focused full-time on the road? And what was the year that he came 4th?

 

[hiero2]

Not being pedantic, but non pro-cycling (junior?) has coaches too. And if Yates (and some other zombies) can "drive the car" their qualifications shouldn't be an issue.

Clean doctors should be no problem, nor clean masseurs etc. Just recruit outside of pro-sport.

True about the zombies to drive a car - although you need to be a little better than that so as not to knock riders all over the road!

But the docs? I'm not so sure. Apparently high-end sports is a real speciality, and just anybody's GP isn't up to heart surgery. I saw an article recently that was a few years old, but talked about how much supplement crap and legal crap the riders took during a GT for recovery. It was "72 pills a day" if I remember. I can't find it tho - maybe somebody knows it?

 

[hiero2]

wiggins winning his first gt at 32 says nothing. the average age of cyclists competitive has rises extremely in recent years, which I in fact address to less doping. . . .

Hmmm. Odd. I always thought it was the other way around. Greater age = more likelihood of doping.

But, probably the biggest factor in the greater age is better pay.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

It's certainly no proof either way. But...




BS.

Rominger, Riis, Indurain, Lance.

The facts clearly show that Epo caused a rise in age in cyclists winning GT's. And we could add Musseeuw and Tchmil for the classics if you want.

lol. riis was 32 when he won and gone when he was 33, indurain was a massive 31 when he won his last tour. evans was 33 for example. rominger had a few good years in his early 30s and was then gone. pls name me some of those guys that in their late 30s were winning monuments or classic stageraces, the likes horner did. in fact you won't find any rider almost in his late 30s being pro in any team in the 90s.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Hmmm. Odd. I always thought it was the other way around. Greater age = more likelihood of doping.

But, probably the biggest factor in the greater age is better pay.

in every sport worldwide you see more and more older people being a dominant factor. yet at least in cycling you see become very young riders also dominant from the get go. this was impossible in the real dopingyears.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

True about the zombies to drive a car - although you need to be a little better than that so as not to knock riders all over the road!

But the docs? I'm not so sure. Apparently high-end sports is a real speciality, and just anybody's GP isn't up to heart surgery. I saw an article recently that was a few years old, but talked about how much supplement crap and legal crap the riders took during a GT for recovery. It was "72 pills a day" if I remember. I can't find it tho - maybe somebody knows it?

riders take enormous amount of pills, but what is crap about that? it's because of no needle policy that his has to happen. or do you think you can just go for 3 weeks like that? you are in serious lack of vitamins for one. and not even pills can cover that because you would have to take too much for your liver

 

[Franklin]

lol. riis was 32 when he won and gone when he was 33, indurain was a massive 31 when he won his last tour. evans was 33 for example. rominger had a few good years in his early 30s and was then gone. pls name me some of those guys that in their late 30s were winning monuments or classic stageraces, the likes horner did. in fact you won't find any rider almost in his late 30s being pro in any team in the 90s.

Oh Ryo, oh Ryo... how you move the goalpost. You should know that in the pre-epo time 31 was actually old (Zoetemelk and van Impe were remarkable execeptions). if we take that as baseline we clearly see the epo problem... and we see that Brad squarely falls in the Lance mold if we compare the speed how his career evolved. Your feeble denials are ludicrous. let me dissect your points:

Rominger: A year before he retired he did a nice third spot

Indurain: had quite a long build up, very unlike earlier stars.

Riis: Gone at 33, but that's hardly the point. The point he was a very late bloom stands clear.

The classics comment is even more hilarious as I already named Musseeuw and Tchmil. I advise you to look up their ages when they were duking it out as obviously you know less about your own classics then I thought

And we have many more:

Ugrumov, Jaskula, Argentin (a special case), Ballerini

Ryo, you are free to compare their progression to the likes of Hinault, Fignon, Raas etc. It will teach you something about cycling as it seems you lack quite a bit of perspective

 

[Franklin]

in every sport worldwide you see more and more older people being a dominant factor. yet at least in cycling you see become very young riders also dominant from the get go. this was impossible in the real dopingyears.

2011 Evans
2012 Wiggins

Are you just trying to play the clown here?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

the reason pre-epo is why riders become old very fast was because, they rode entire years and started doing gt's at age 20. wether it were classics on cobbles or hills, or the tour. they rode almost every race to the fullest. now there is a lot more specilisation and again look at any other sport where athletes are getting older

and if getting older means epo, then wtf is the whole agrument about health? lol then it's actually healthy (which I believe it is btw)

and a very late boom stands for epo? wiggins was already olympian at age 24.

 

[Franklin]

the reason pre-epo is why riders become old very fast was because, they rode entire years and started doing gt's at age 20. wether it were classics on cobbles or hills, or the tour. they rode almost every race to the fullest. now there is a lot more specilisation and again look at any other sport where athletes are getting older

and if getting older means epo, then wtf is the whole agrument about health? lol then it's actually healthy (which I believe it is btw)

and a very late boom stands for epo? wiggins was already olympian at age 24.

So you admit that your complete analogy is absolutely bogus and you are just conjecturing about it all as there are hardly any precedents (Hint, there are two, they follow a few lines below).

Then your fantastic snippet about Wiggins. Just a few years older as another one day specialist, Lance when he hit the ground running. And I'm being generous here as Lance at least showed ability in endurance/long races. The fact that pre-epo every GT winner showed early promise (as did Big Mig). Actually, Lance and Riis are the odd ones out (Sastre, Contador, Schleck, Evans, all had good results early on)..... I guess Wiggo is in good company.

This is in no way proof that Wiggo falls at the wrong end of the divide, but comparing his progression to other riders raises quite a few eyebrows. There is nothing reassuring about it, that's certain.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Ashenden speaks about Yates here.

"Take Sean Yates as an example, who is pertinent because of his prominent links to Armstrong and photos of him arm in arm with 'Motoman' [Armstrong's alleged drugs mule] floating around on the internet. Let me be clear that I don't know if he's doped in the past or not. But if he tells Sky that he hasn't, is that the end of the matter, or do Sky intend to actively investigate what [team leader David] Brailsford calls reputational risks and act on what they find if there are grounds to suspect someone has been associated with doping? It's a really important issue because unless they can qualify their position, their statement isn't worth the paper it's written on. If they intend only to act when a cyclist is sanctioned, they're being disingenuous to their fans."

 

[orbeas]

Sky

PMSL.... I suppose it,l go somat like this :

Brailford " Shane , did you ever dope?".... Shane.. " No boss"

Brailford " You never put a needle in ya bum at a criterium in 88 and passed the needle to another rider who then used it to? "

Shane " No Boss"



Brailord " And you never used your then managers urine in a drinks can to pour into the sample jar in a big race in Ireland? "... Shane.. " No Boss"

Brailford. " Thanks Shane..knew I could depend on ya "

This is called " Due diligence"...the Braiford way .

Pretty specific allegations !!!!!

Been tested 103 times never positive !!! didnt think the old BCF carried out so many tests on the 80's ???

 

[webvan]

JV spells it out for DB : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/vaughters-questions-skys-new-anti-doping-policy

You cannot change history but you can change the direction forward and you can use the people who have encountered that history and probably didn’t really like that history. By just throwing some of them to the side, you are eliminating the knowledge base of how to prevent doping, you are completely pushing it to the side, eliminating all of that experience and the emotion of people who had to live through a doping era.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

JV spells it out for DB : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/vaughters-questions-skys-new-anti-doping-policy

But what do you do about people like Yates, Sutton, Julich etc who clearly have absolutely no intention of promoting anti-doping?

I think JV is being a bit simplistic here in assuming that the majority of those in the peloton support clean racing.

 

[Benotti69]

But what do you do about people like Yates, Sutton, Julich etc who clearly have absolutely no intention of promoting anti-doping?

I think JV is being a bit simplistic here in assuming that the majority of those in the peloton support clean racing.

You need people in the sport that know the score and how to score

When was real anti-doping promoted? Kimmage and Walsh have been the biggest proponents of anti-doping in the lat 20 years. An ex rider turned journalist and a journalist. No one else comes close.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

There have been plenty of people willing to say they are anti-doping while supporting and practicing doping and omerta.

 

[argyllflyer]

There have been plenty of people willing to say they are anti-doping while supporting and practicing doping and omerta.

However, some teams and some riders are more scared of the consequences that come from spooking sponsors than from being honest.

 

[Franklin]

However, some teams and some riders are more scared of the consequences that come from spooking sponsors than from being honest.

That would be the first time. Oh I know... I'm not allowed to point to the history of cycling, as things really have changed

 

[Froome19]

But what do you do about people like Yates, Sutton, Julich etc who clearly have absolutely no intention of promoting anti-doping?

I think JV is being a bit simplistic here in assuming that the majority of those in the peloton support clean racing.

Tbh JV knows the professional peloton better than you do..

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

which makes his claims seem even more implausible given the evidence in front of us.

Needless to say, you've managed to tick off one of the boxes in fanboy bingo, so well done.

 

[Froome19]

which makes his claims seem even more implausible given the evidence in front of us.

Needless to say, you've managed to tick off one of the boxes in fanboy bingo, so well done.

I can not put words into the mouth of JV put possibly he believes that people will be more willing to come forward now.

This is not only talking about the people who have denied it explicitly after the USADA report, they are only a small percentage of the wider former doping community and those may finally realise that it is worth coming forward, something they would be less inclined to do if they have already made a statement (signing) saying they have not doped..

And so this evidence you are talking about, is only evidence for a couple of personalities in the sport. Certainly not the majority who in time may come to accept that they have to come forward.

And wait how am I being a fanboy? I arguing against my supposed fanboy allegiance to Sky if you have not noticed yet..