Sky/Froome Talk Only (No Way Sky Are Cleans?)

[Benotti69]

This Vuelta is totally weird and raises a lot of questions. Perhaps the so called experts can help.

Why are the guys who done the Giro so crap at the Vuelta, a lot of people were saying these same guys like JRod, Scarponi, Anton etc were doped to the eyeballs at the Giro. If so, why are they doing so bad here?

According to the experts, anyone who rides for RadioShack is an undoubted doper but once again their GC men are failing spectacularly. If they are doped to the gills, why are they doing so bad? No crashes to blame for poor performances at the Vuelta.

Tiago Machado has not really improved much since he moved to RadioShack. Again if he was to get on the Bruyneel super programme, he should have improved immensly or is that programme solely reserved for Levi, Horner.

Some of the guys who have been going well are huge surprises, Froome, Mollema, Poels even the likes of Monfort, Kessiakoff etc. Not the names of riders expected to be seen in a GT Top 10, especially one with a lot of proven riders. Why are they so good here as opposed to the bigger names.

Radioshack are a mystery, but maybe Bruyneel is absolutely paranoid so his riders are below using their normal sized lunch bags instead of super sizes! Remember how Bruyneel ran like a rat out of an aqueduct from the Giro when the Italian police turned up. Radioshack have only perfromed in the USA and TdS where the UCI are based. Nowt strange about that. Kloden's early form is a mystery. But then again Bruyneel is living on borrowed time.

It is only stage 14 wait and see GC sunday week.

 

[pmcg76]

Radioshack are a mystery, but maybe Bruyneel is absolutely paranoid so his riders are below using their normal sized lunch bags instead of super sizes! Remember how Bruyneel ran like a rat out of an aqueduct from the Giro when the Italian police turned up. Radioshack have only perfromed in the USA and TdS where the UCI are based. Nowt strange about that. Kloden's early form is a mystery. But then again Bruyneel is living on borrowed time.

It is only stage 14 wait and see GC sunday week.

Are you even following the Vuelta, their top guy is Brajkovic at over 5 minutes, next guy is Zubeldia at over 20 minutes. Whatever about Brajkovic making the Top 10, the rest have no hope unless through a soft break or something.

Last time I checked RadioShack have also won stage races in France, Belgium, Spain this year and these results have been consistenly been used as proof of the Bruyneel doping system.

What about the other GC contenders who have failed miserably but were doped to the eyeballs at the Giro. Are they dialling it back too?

I think Bruyneel running from Italy had more to do with the FBI investigation than what his team were doing. I mean the Shack had such great results at the Giro so were clearly doping there also.

 

[Benotti69]

Are you even following the Vuelta, their top guy is Brajkovic at over 5 minutes, next guy is Zubeldia at over 20 minutes. Whatever about Brajkovic making the Top 10, the rest have no hope unless through a soft break or something.

Last time I checked RadioShack have also won stage races in France, Belgium, Spain this year and these results have been consistenly been used as proof of the Bruyneel doping system.

What about the other GC contenders who have failed miserably but were doped to the eyeballs at the Giro. Are they dialling it back too?

Yep i am. but when you consider it is Bruyneel and he likes to be number 1 on GC in a GT it is a big comedown.

Radioshack are where in the team standings? 10th.

I have no doubt that Bruyneel's team are doping, but it is nothing compared to what we are used to. Do a search for what USPS/Discovery won apart from the TDF, Lots. 2005 they won the Giro and TdF.

do Sky look like they are dialling it back? Geox today seem juiced to go, but bad tactics cost them the stage.

 

[hrotha]

Zubeldia was caught up in a crash today.

 

[pmcg76]

Yep i am. but when you consider it is Bruyneel and he likes to be number 1 on GC in a GT it is a big comedown.

Radioshack are where in the team standings? 10th.

I have no doubt that Bruyneel's team are doping, but it is nothing compared to what we are used to. Do a search for what USPS/Discovery won apart from the TDF, Lots. 2005 they won the Giro and TdF.

do Sky look like they are dialling it back? Geox today seem juiced to go, but bad tactics cost them the stage.

But that is the question!! Why are SKY and other lesser light doing so well whilst the bigger names are floundering. How is it possible that guys who were doped to the gills at the Giro now be so bad.

So GEOX said, ok guys no full on doping until we are halfway through the Vuelta with one guy left in contention and then we hit the full programme. Wow, makes a lot of sense

Arent you the person posting in another thread that doping in the peloton has not decreased at all yet here you are saying Shack are doping less than US Postal. Logic fail I think.

 

[luckyboy]

According to the experts, anyone who rides for RadioShack is an undoubted doper but once again their GC men are failing spectacularly. If they are doped to the gills, why are they doing so bad? No crashes to blame for poor performances at the Vuelta.

Well there's Kloden with his bad back, Zubeldia + Machad who weren't expected to be challengers, and Brajkovic who people keep insisting is a GC rider for some reason.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Wiggins and Froome, a British Vino and Kash c2006?

 

[Benotti69]

But that is the question!! Why are SKY and other lesser light doing so well whilst the bigger names are floundering.

If i knew that i'd be writing a book about new doping methods now wouldn't I?

How is it possible that guys who were doped to the gills at the Giro now be so bad.

Shack? doped to the gills on the Giro, they did well to hide it from the Italian police then.

So GEOX said, ok guys no full on doping until we are halfway through the Vuelta with one guy left in contention and then we hit the full programme. Wow, makes a lot of sense

Giannetti and Geox have had a shít year and WTF knows why. He likes his performance enhancing so they've got me on that one.

Arent you the person posting in another thread that doping in the peloton has not decreased at all yet here you are saying Shack are doping less than US Postal. Logic fail I think.

I am stating that doping hasn't gone away, whereas others are suggesting it is almost clean! if that is what you mean.

Wiggin's and Froome 1 &2 in a GT, when's the last time that happened midway through a GT?

 

[Big Doopie]

while i have no idea whether wiggins and froome are doping. however, i hardly see how these results should make it clear either way.

who the hell are they beating? no one.

menchov has been "off" ever since it came out he was a 9 on the biopassport.

seriously. even sastre finished ahead of nibali.

and if wiggins was going to win ever it would be by climbing a little like indurain -- no accelerations -- just produce power like we always knew he could and see if the others can pull away.

and to the fool that said this looked like uspostal. you are ignorant. sky hardly had 6 riders storming up the final mountain. they had two left -- who did zero work until the last 3-4 km.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Wiggums and Froome are a combine Armstrong. Froome has had the near fatal illness and Wiggums has discovered the benefits of weight loss.

What I want to know is - is Wiggums training harder than everyone else? Did he ride ever inch of the course before hand and for him to tell us that 'he has never tested positive for drugs' and that 'he is the most tested athlete in the world' then the transformation will be complete.

BTW - can anyone remember Wiggins data that was posted a couple of years back? When teams were being 'transparent'? Was there anything interesting in that data?

 

[Parrulo]

Zubeldia was caught up in a crash today.

and machado stayed behind to help him catch up. ofc they failled because thats when the race pace picked up.

while i have no idea whether wiggins and froome are doping. however, i hardly see how these results should make it clear either way.

who the hell are they beating? no one.

menchov has been "off" ever since it came out he was a 9 on the biopassport.

seriously. even sastre finished ahead of nibali.

and if wiggins was going to win ever it would be by climbing a little like indurain -- no accelerations -- just produce power like we always knew he could and see if the others can pull away.

and to the fool that said this looked like uspostal. you are ignorant. sky hardly had 6 riders storming up the final mountain. they had two left -- who did zero work until the last 3-4 km.

are you serious?

nibali has a few monute top 10's. how many has wiggins?

nibali a few GT podiums. how many has wiggins?

nibali has a GT win. how many has wiggins?

nibali is 26 years old and has his best years ahead of him. how old is wiggins?

 

[Big Doopie]

are you serious?

nibali has a few monute top 10's. how many has wiggins?

nibali a few GT podiums. how many has wiggins?

nibali has a GT win. how many has wiggins?

nibali is 26 years old and has his best years ahead of him. how old is wiggins?

um...r u a little dense?

seriously.

reread my post.

a whole bunch of average riders beat nibali today -- including a way past his prime sastre. so what's so incredible about wiggins dropping him. he was dropped by lots of average gc riders today. big woop. wiggins perf was not so good, as much as nibali's was off.

then again, maybe nibali isn't able to get as much "training help" from an under investigation ferrari as he once did.

man, how slow and dense do u have to be to misread my post?

i mean, seriously.

 

[Anonymous]

So if Sky are doping, how do you explain Lofkvist?

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

also this whole vuelta Mollema is the most consistent climber, if you take the total time from the hill finishes and mountains

That says the level of this vuelta pretty much, as much as I like Mollema.
So Wiggins winning is not a shocker.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

I do not trust Wiggins one bit. Not that long ago he was practically crying when Contador beat him in a short, flat prologue that he thought was perfect for his track experience. Then came The Transformation (tm). He went from the laughing group to the front group in mountain stages. I also do not trust these riders that get injured, take a few weeks off, and suddenly are back in form as though they never took a day off. It just does not make sense.

 

[osborn99]

People can't work and train to get to the top, according to you guys you have to dope, it's a sad world

If you look at athletics and swimming in the uk, investment and new bosses = success. Same at team Sky, £40m investment, the best coaches we get to the top. It's not rocket science

 

[Benotti69]

People can't work and train to get to the top, according to you guys you have to dope, it's a sad world

If you look at athletics and swimming in the uk, investment and new bosses = success. Same at team Sky, £40m investment, the best coaches we get to the top. It's not rocket science

rockets need rocket fuel

 

[daveinzambia]

also this whole vuelta Mollema is the most consistent climber, if you take the total time from the hill finishes and mountains

That says the level of this vuelta pretty much, as much as I like Mollema.
So Wiggins winning is not a shocker.

Agree, at times am wondering if others are watching the same race. I thought wiggins looked in trouble at one point but sky just kept grinding away and seemed like everyone else seemed to implode. Think the fact that liquigas did not put pressure on earlier showed nibali was struggling without.

in fact think the way Wiggins has gone about this vuelta, consistent hard riding, the help of domestic on form, struggling at times but fighting through and minimising loses while other riders have had ups and downs suggests the opposite of what some suggest.

Have to question how many of the riders in the top 10 here, with the form that they are riding with now, would have made the top 10 at the tour

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

People can't work and train to get to the top, according to you guys you have to dope, it's a sad world

When you are competing against other dopers, doping is the only way to get to the top. It may be sad, but that is just the way it is.

 

[zapata]

So if Sky are doping, how do you explain Lofkvist?

He! Good point. I don't know if Lövkvist has been doing a lot of work on the flats, before TV-coverage, but he has certainly been pretty invisible in the mountains. A year ago, I would have bet that he would be better than Kessiakoff, for instance.

 

[Fergoose]

I also do not trust these riders that get injured, take a few weeks off, and suddenly are back in form as though they never took a day off. It just does not make sense.

Wiggins was back on a bike four days after his crash. Please keep on topic.

 

[Big Doopie]

People can't work and train to get to the top, according to you guys you have to dope, it's a sad world

If you look at athletics and swimming in the uk, investment and new bosses = success. Same at team Sky, £40m investment, the best coaches we get to the top. It's not rocket science

and yet what you have just posted smacks of ignorance and innocence.

spending $800000 a year on the most expensive hematologist in the world did wonders for armstrong. investment in the "best coaches" does not convince me of anyone's cleanliness...

no the argument here -- simply based on the results, proves nothing. wiggins' power seems firmly in the realm of possibility and he is beating no great riders here. looking at the race there is no way you can determine he is doping. saying that he isn't however is also impossible.

 

[maltiv]

So if Sky are doping, how do you explain Lofkvist?

They only dope the brits on the team At least one would think so, looking at the UCI suspicion scale from last year!

 

[Mambo95]

If, at this stage, you had seen the names and relative times of the top six without seeing their actual positions, I think many people would say Wiggins is possibly under-performing.

The thing with Sky is that they entered the sport with a lot of fanfare. The people behind it had taken a very scientific approach to the track and dominated in Beijing. They were then taking the same approach to the road. Many observers scoffed at the thought, citing tradition and values and politics. The first year wasn't very good. The critics were proven right.

But the Sky people analyse everything, they learn quickly and they put things right.

Maybe they were right all along and they will change cycling (without doping).

Many laughed at their (for the press) aim of winning the Tour with a British rider in 5 years, but they're now close to winning the Vuelta in just two.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The thing with Sky is that they entered the sport with a lot of fanfare. The people behind it had taken a very scientific approach to the track and dominated in Beijing. They were then taking the same approach to the road. Many observers scoffed at the thought, citing tradition and values and politics. The first year wasn't very good. The critics were proven right.

But the Sky people analyse everything, they learn quickly and they put things right.

Maybe they were right all along and they will change cycling (without doping).

I think the main thing has been compromise. They came into the sport with some fanfare about how they were going to use the scientific approach, but there are far too many variables involved in road cycling. The first year was rocky, but it looks like they've adapted; live by the vagaries of road cycling but add a bit of track nous, rather than try to apply the vagaries of track cycling to the road.

Basically, Sky are not the revolution they claimed to be. They are, ultimately, just a cycling team, and they're not really any different from any others, save for the quasi-national approach which is becoming ever more common (Astana, Katyusha, GreenEdge). However, they have obviously learned from their mistakes very quickly and are now a pretty damn good cycling team.