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

[Benotti69]

Quick clarification. Delgado's positive was in the 1988 Tour de France, which Kimmage didn't ride.

correct, my slip of the fingers..

 

[Benotti69]

Look at that statement again. "Almost everyone". Which means that you are of the opinion that there are in fact a few clean riders. Yet they don't name names and point fingers.

Kimmage called on Nico Roche to call out Contador in his Irish Independent paper column.

 

[Benotti69]

As has been pointed out you are out by a year.

Corrected to L'Arriviste. finger slip.

Wrong again.

The sport wasn't looked at as being dirty then, so there was little reason to pontificate about being clean.
That is why Kimmages book made such a splash - and he was dismissed as bitter or not very good. It was Festina in 98 that showed Kimmage correct.

HTC has said it was not due to doping that they did not get a sponsor - are is Bob lying too?

Right, no teams pontificating as i said.

Bob aint speaking the truth. How can a team that wins so many TdF stages and other GT stages not find a sponsor???? The Schlecks who won nothing can!

 

[Benotti69]

When Sky riders are comparing themselves to former dopers of the EPO era what does that lead one to think?

When I took the lead of the front group three kilometres away from the top, I rode fast despite the head wind. I’m pretty good at guessing when my adversaries aren’t well. For three kilometres, I’ve ridden like Miguel Indurain! I had never done that before.

He could've named no one, Lemond or someone from a bygone era......

 

[Dr. Maserati]

to me it does.




he didn't sit in a press conference with armstrong? I thought he did and that's what most people will remember.



go back and read it.




oh dear...are you reducing it to this level of debate




i suppose the same way Landis knew about Periero. The same way Obree was asked by an Italian pro what he used to break the hour record. It was and no doubt is still talked about in the peloton.




back to english lessons by not answering a question with a question.



they shouldn't be at the pointy end if what we read is true about doping being common practise amongst other teams (BMC/Lotto/Lampre to name 3 recent headlines) and not in Garmin/Sky.



Is he lying i asked?

I'll pick anything that makes my point as i see it. Is that not how it works. Points of view. I see it one way you see it different.



i would not be surprised that they had lots and lots. But as to JV exaggerating, hasn't he always?




I have given up the waiting for years to check the info. That only led to 99% positives anyway.



I dont feel anything. I have yet to read it. My library here in Italy has yet to stock it.



have they written a book? A lot of their story has been told and is known from themselves, but in book form?




they have not had riders test positive but that means nothing not have they had soigneurs caught with PEDs. LA never tested positive and USPS/Discovery never had anyone attached to them caught with PEDS

Rather than going through each point you appear to be settling on a couple of things.

You are in no position to complain about 'the level' of conversation when you refuse to clarify your points and were the one to introduce whining to the mods and giving English lessons.
If you cannot take it then don't give it - at any time you can bring this to a mature level.

Again when you discuss someone - in this case Landis on Piereo - you have an ability to take only what serves your opinion instead of taking from it what it actually says:

You talked to him about it?

Yeah, we talked openly about this in the peloton, that’s why I couldn’t believe no one did this before I did it. We literally just spoke openly; he did a blood transfusion and some artificial haemoglobin.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Corrected to L'Arriviste. finger slip.



Right, no teams pontificating as i said.

Bob aint speaking the truth. How can a team that wins so many TdF stages and other GT stages not find a sponsor???? The Schlecks who won nothing can!

So, Bob is part of the conspiracy too?

Or perhaps you were trying too hard to suggest he said something that he did not say:

.....we generated strong sponsor interest and also a feeding frenzy on our athletes, staff and management. We were actually told by some unhappy agents in the sport that we brought the transfer market to a halt during the last two weeks at the Tour.

What concluded in terms of sponsorship is that we had sponsorship meetings in Grenoble, Paris, Amsterdam, Chicago, Atlanta and New York with a number of international companies…communications, electronics, transport, medical companies. We were also approached by seven different teams to consider mergers.

The net net of all this activity was that we had agreement in principle with a new partner which would have given us the necessary funds to operate our team at the same level we have done for the last four years.

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/9...hock-farewell-announcement.aspx#ixzz1Wiii6mI0

 

[Benotti69]

Again when you discuss someone - in this case Landis on Piereo - you have an ability to take only what serves your opinion instead of taking from it what it actually says:

Kimmage talks about it in his book about being at the back of the peloton and syringes coming out.

 

[Benotti69]

So, Bob is part of the conspiracy too?

Or perhaps you were trying too hard to suggest he said something that he did not say:

ex t-mobile now soon to be defunct HTC is now clean when did that happen? i suppose just like dirty phonak metamorphosed into clean BMC

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Kimmage talks about it in his book about being at the back of the peloton and syringes coming out.

I will do my best Oscar Pereiro impression and say "in 2006?"

Next you are going to be telling us that Garmin and Sky are using the steam trains to get to stage finishes.

ex t-mobile now soon to be defunct HTC is now clean when did that happen? i suppose just like dirty phonak metamorphosed into clean BMC

A desperate strawman, of course T-Mobile and Phonak were dirty.

What has that to do with your point that Bob couldn't get a sponsor, when he clearly said he had an agreement in place?

 

[Benotti69]

I will do my best Oscar Pereiro impression and say "in 2006?"

Next you are going to be telling us that Garmin and Sky are using the steam trains to get to stage finishes.

A desperate strawman, of course T-Mobile and Phonak were dirty.

What has that to do with your point that Bob couldn't get a sponsor, when he clearly said he had an agreement in place?

2006, a vintage year.

I bet Garmin/Sky wouldn't let you test the steam of their píss because they would be worried you would find something.

No straw Doc, Bob was a team manager at a team that was successful and ran a doping program. HTC succesful and no doping, of course not how silly of me. I thought we are talking about pro cycling.

Armstrong said he never tested positive, Landis denied taking HGH, Ricco denies, the sport is full of people
denying.....

....at any time you can bring this to a mature level.

for guy who has Doctor Nick as his avatar you sure should be careful about raising the mature levels or we might think you have no sense of humour.

at least The joker is a crazy comic book anti hero.

 

[mb2612]

So, A lot of people said they were fine with Wiggins+Froome, but would reassess after the steep stuff.

It's looking pretty ridiculous from here.

 

[Benotti69]

So, A lot of people said they were fine with Wiggins+Froome, but would reassess after the steep stuff.

It's looking pretty ridiculous from here.

Yep it is looking super fantastic, unbelievable and incredible according to the commentators and sure have we not heard those superlatives before

 

[LaFlorecita]

No way Sky are clean?

No. Effing. Way.

 

[nevada]

Just a more even playing field.

 

[roundabout]

I'll wait til the power numbers get released.

 

[hrotha]

I'll wait til the power numbers get released.

They'll be believable. If there's a cap on how many watts you can produce before someone raises an eyebrow, that means mid-level riders can catch up to top-level riders with ease and a syringe.

 

[killswitch]

They'll be believable. If there's a cap on how many watts you can produce before someone raises an eyebrow, that means mid-level riders can catch up to top-level riders with ease and a syringe.

And rice cakes.

 

[roundabout]

That's true.

However who knows why some riders were mid-leve 3,4,5 years ago and why there isn't such a gulf in performance between top-level riders and the rest anymore.

I am probably being more optimistic than the events warrant though.

 

[Fergoose]

So, A lot of people said they were fine with Wiggins+Froome, but would reassess after the steep stuff.

It's looking pretty ridiculous from here.

The case against

It looked fairly similar to the earlier Froome & Wiggins double act - good use of repeating the tactic of exposing a vulnerability of the purer climbers on less steep gradients. I'm not sure what people were expecting to be honest. If Rodriguez & Nibali had lost time earlier in the Vuelta on variable gradients of 5-12% why would they suddenly be in prime condition on this climb?

Froome & Wiggins completely failed to get anywhere near Taaramae's break, only taking a couple of minutes out of him during the entire climb (and Taaramae had used a lot of energy by attacking half way up the penultimate climb). They were also unable to respond to the attack of Cobo. Finally, of those they dropped, the only surprise was Nibali who I would argue has not looked particularly brilliant throughout this event. So for me, same old, same old but of course I'd be interested in any power calculations.

Nibali cracking and VdB's botched attack gives Wiggins a chance of a podium now. I fear Cobo & Mollema will have Sky for breakfast tomorrow and you’ll have to find another target to point fingers at!

 

[hfer07]

So, A lot of people said they were fine with Wiggins+Froome, but would reassess after the steep stuff.

It's looking pretty ridiculous from here.

+1000
Agreed- One thing is to pull the trick on 5 to 6% gradients-I'm cool with that-BUT to do the same on the second week & most of all on ramps up to 11-13%?-that's a complete different game Sky is playing-almost like the US postal....

If tomorrow Wiggins pulls something "magic" & finishes ahead of his nearest rivals & close to the stage winner-there won't be any doubt they've gone to the dark side of cycling for sure...

 

[hrotha]

+1000
Agreed- One thing is to pull the trick on 5 to 6% gradients-I'm cool with that-BUT to do the same on the second week & most of all on ramps up to 11-13%?-that's a complete different game Sky is playing-almost like the US postal....

If tomorrow Wiggins pulls something "magic" & finishes ahead of his nearest rivals & close to the stage winner-there won't be any doubt they've gone to the dark side of cycling for sure...

One thing that should be taken into account, though, is that Wiggins' nearest rival came 27th today. Kessiakoff came 21st. Fuglsang came 15th (and he has struggled in every single MTF). If before the Vuelta we were to say Wiggins could be coming in with Poels, Mollema, Froome and Menchov, it wouldn't sound that strange. (Froome would still be a surprise, but more in an "oh look at that, he's coming along" than in an "are you kidding me?" kind of way).

 

[Libertine Seguros]

No way. Froome is in the "are you kidding me?" kind of way. He showed a bit of promise back in 2008, but since then the only thing he's done that's been even half-memorable is planting it on San Luca in the '09 Giro. He's always been able to do a reasonable TT and do a reasonable climb or two, but for him to be where he is and riding the kind of riders he's been riding off the wheel, not just superdomestiquing at the end of week 1, but riding for the GC at the end of week 2, is fishier than a family platter at a sushi restaurant.

 

[mb2612]

The case against

It looked fairly similar to the earlier Froome & Wiggins double act - good use of repeating the tactic of exposing a vulnerability of the purer climbers on less steep gradients. I'm not sure what people were expecting to be honest. If Rodriguez & Nibali had lost time earlier in the Vuelta on variable gradients of 5-12% why would they suddenly be in prime condition on this climb?

Froome & Wiggins completely failed to get anywhere near Taaramae's break, only taking a couple of minutes out of him during the entire climb (and Taaramae had used a lot of energy by attacking half way up the penultimate climb). They were also unable to respond to the attack of Cobo. Finally, of those they dropped, the only surprise was Nibali who I would argue has not looked particularly brilliant throughout this event. So for me, same old, same old but of course I'd be interested in any power calculations.

Nibali cracking and VdB's botched attack gives Wiggins a chance of a podium now. I fear Cobo & Mollema will have Sky for breakfast tomorrow and you’ll have to find another target to point fingers at!

Because earlier it was 5% witha strong crosswind, perfect for Wiggins.

Today it was 12%, where Nibali and Rodriguez have shown talent and Wiggins has shown exactly nothing before today.

 

[pmcg76]

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.

 

[Fergoose]

Because earlier it was 5% witha strong crosswind, perfect for Wiggins.

Today it was 12%, where Nibali and Rodriguez have shown talent and Wiggins has shown exactly nothing before today.

Looking back at the stage profile the last 7kms averaged between 7.2% and 9.1% gradient. But on stage 9 where Sky had similar success, the gradient for the last four kms averaged between 5.2% & 8.1% which I'd argue is not radically different. Of course these are just averages and as you point out, factors like wind play a part.

But still, we shouldn't go painting todays stage as some sort of pure climber's paradise that was radically different from anything that had gone before it in this Vuelta.