Sunweb

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
pmcg76 said:
>Then when Janssen joned Vacansoleil, his successor at Skil(who?) approached Janssen to check the French riders Blood values as they were suspicious of his performances, Janssen said they were out of whack and L'Hotellerie was gone at the end of the season.
Janssen's successor was Edwin Achterberg, who later left to join Plugge's team and remained there until quite recently.
 
DanielSong39 said:
The point of internal testing is to lessen the chance of your rider being nabbed by external testing.

That means making sure that your riders are not macro-dosing on drugs that are years out of date.
This, and also a team will want assurances any out of competition medical treatment for injury, illness, recovery etc doesn't trip them up in competition either with UCI or MPCC. As long as there is list of substances you can use legally out of competition, but not in competition, you have to assume teams need to test those riders they know are taking substances banned if tested at the end of the race and pull them accordingly as you say. The grey area.
End of the day if a team has medical staff and doctors you have to assume they are not there to slice bread and pour glasses of water. That doesn't mean they step over the line, but it does mean riders will be treated with substances only allowed on one side of the line and not the other just like your tax return.
 
"We're happy to finalise our 2018 roster and are already looking forward to the year ahead," said Sunweb head of coaching Rudi Kamna. "With the new signings to the team we can make another step in our growth, alongside laying the foundations for the future with the addition of some huge talents. Talent development remains to be one of the core pillars of our elite sport approach. The focus this winter will be to make a smart, multi-year plan for each individual rider and offer them the scientific support structure to grow. It is a demanding approach and requires a lot of dedication and interaction between riders, movement scientists, coaches and scientific experts, in order for us to be able to optimise the ingredients for success across training, nutrition, data and equipment. After one of our most successful seasons to date, we're motivated to continue this momentum into the 2018 racing season."

Team Sunweb for 2018: Søren Kragh Andersen, Nikias Arndt, Phil Bauhaus, Roy Curvers, Laurens ten Dam, Tom Dumoulin, Johannes Fröhlinger, Simon Geschke, Chad Haga, Chris Hamilton, Jai Hindley, Lennard Hofstede, Wilco Kelderman, Lennard Kämna, Michael Matthews, Sam Oomen, Tom Stamsnijder, Michael Storer, Mike Teunissen, Edward Theuns, Albert Timmer, Martijn Tusveld, Louis Vervaeke, Max Walscheid

Transfers this year:

In: Martijn Tusveld (Roompot–Nederlandse Loterij), Edward Theuns (Trek-Segafredo), Louis Vervaeke (Lotto Soudal), Jai Hindley (Mitchelton Scott), Michael Storer (Mitchelton Scott)
Out: Ramon Sinkeldam (FDJ), Georg Preidler (FDJ), Warren Barguil (Fortuneo-Oscaro), Bert de Backer (Vital Concept), Zico Waeytens (Veranda's Willems - Crelan), Sindre Lunke (Fortuneo-Oscaro)
Extended: Tom Dumoulin, Laurens ten Dam,Søren Kragh Andersen, Sam Oomen, Nikias Arndt, Max Walscheid, Johannes Fröhlinger, Chad Haga, Roy Curvers

There are no new big names, but the team is very strong nevertheless with many interesting young talents.
I wonder what GT will Dumoulin target and if he goes to the Tour what team will Sunweb send?
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Re:

Dekker_Tifosi said:
Could just be a good year. I'll await the next years to see if there's something Sky'something going on.
If we have TDF train consisting of Kamna, Hofstede, Oomen, Kelderman and finally Dumoulin destroying the rest of the field like nothing, then it's something entirely different
What the hell is wrong with you? I understand Nationalistic Orange Goggles is our national disease, but how many top years do you have to see before you get a little bit suspicious.

Left or right, anyone destroying competitors on the level of GT winners is almost certainly doping(as in winning the jackpot 8 times in a row). You know it, I know it, so why do you dress up with an orange wig and go all appologetic? It's moronic.
 
At least they are giving us something to look forward to in the Tour de France. Seeing a train race against bikes is boring but seeing two trains race against each other at least has some potential.

I still think Sky still has more juice but Sunweb is surely catching up.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Re:

Benotti69 said:
Sunweb ride Giant frames. I would not trust Giant are not part of the 'motor revolution' in the sport.
Agreed. In fact, they may have been pioneers.

Mike Burrows’s contribution to the design of the modern road bike cannot be overstated. If the British engineer hadn’t come up with the Total Compact Road — aka TCR — for Giant in the mid-1990s we might still be measuring ourselves up for a frame by straddling the crossbar and yanking it upwards.

Burrows, having spent years in cycle design’s hinterlands with his monoblade forks, micro lo-pros and blobby monocoque frames, all regarded as too eccentric for the conservative world of road cycling, finally received mainstream recognition after Chris Boardman won the individual pursuit at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 on the Lotus bike that Burrows had originally created.
Then in 1997:
The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) initially objected to the Giant’s geometry but Hein Verbruggen and fellow Dutchman Jan Derksen, the boss of Giant Europe, sat down together and from that point on every new road bike design was influenced by the TCR.

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/icons-of-cycling-giant-tcr-206346#2uo27tLLTzf3VCSU.99
At present Giant bikes are (co)designed by former F1 technician Simon Smart, who seems to have his finger in a lot of pies (triathlon, UK TT-ing, proteams such as Movistar, Sunweb)
In the motorthread Tienus raised the question why Dumoulin's bike is so heavy:
viewtopic.php?p=2059714#p2059714
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
Re: Re:

sniper said:
Benotti69 said:
Sunweb ride Giant frames. I would not trust Giant are not part of the 'motor revolution' in the sport.
Agreed. In fact, they may have been pioneers.

Mike Burrows’s contribution to the design of the modern road bike cannot be overstated. If the British engineer hadn’t come up with the Total Compact Road — aka TCR — for Giant in the mid-1990s we might still be measuring ourselves up for a frame by straddling the crossbar and yanking it upwards.

Burrows, having spent years in cycle design’s hinterlands with his monoblade forks, micro lo-pros and blobby monocoque frames, all regarded as too eccentric for the conservative world of road cycling, finally received mainstream recognition after Chris Boardman won the individual pursuit at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 on the Lotus bike that Burrows had originally created.
Then in 1997:
The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) initially objected to the Giant’s geometry but Hein Verbruggen and fellow Dutchman Jan Derksen, the boss of Giant Europe, sat down together and from that point on every new road bike design was influenced by the TCR.

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/icons-of-cycling-giant-tcr-206346#2uo27tLLTzf3VCSU.99
At present Giant bikes are (co)designed by former F1 technician Simon Smart, who seems to have his finger in a lot of pies (triathlon, UK TT-ing, proteams such as Movistar, Sunweb)
In the motorthread Tienus raised the question why Dumoulin's bike is so heavy:
viewtopic.php?p=2059714#p2059714
Are you saying that Mike Burrows is a pioneer of the "motor revolution" because the frames he designs is atypical to other manufacturers frames? That's what I believe you guys are insinuating and the only "proof" or "evidence" is the fact that Giants frames are large enough to house a motor, which is weird because not just Giant has produced "different" frame designs over the years and almost all frames can house a motor.

This line of discussion is thin.... very thin...
 
Re: Re:

Irondan said:
sniper said:
Benotti69 said:
Sunweb ride Giant frames. I would not trust Giant are not part of the 'motor revolution' in the sport.
Agreed. In fact, they may have been pioneers.

Mike Burrows’s contribution to the design of the modern road bike cannot be overstated. If the British engineer hadn’t come up with the Total Compact Road — aka TCR — for Giant in the mid-1990s we might still be measuring ourselves up for a frame by straddling the crossbar and yanking it upwards.

Burrows, having spent years in cycle design’s hinterlands with his monoblade forks, micro lo-pros and blobby monocoque frames, all regarded as too eccentric for the conservative world of road cycling, finally received mainstream recognition after Chris Boardman won the individual pursuit at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 on the Lotus bike that Burrows had originally created.
Then in 1997:
The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) initially objected to the Giant’s geometry but Hein Verbruggen and fellow Dutchman Jan Derksen, the boss of Giant Europe, sat down together and from that point on every new road bike design was influenced by the TCR.

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/icons-of-cycling-giant-tcr-206346#2uo27tLLTzf3VCSU.99
At present Giant bikes are (co)designed by former F1 technician Simon Smart, who seems to have his finger in a lot of pies (triathlon, UK TT-ing, proteams such as Movistar, Sunweb)
In the motorthread Tienus raised the question why Dumoulin's bike is so heavy:
viewtopic.php?p=2059714#p2059714
Are you saying that Mike Burrows is a pioneer of the "motor revolution" because the frames he designs is atypical to other manufacturers frames? That's what I believe you guys are insinuating and the only "proof" or "evidence" is the fact that Giants frames are large enough to house a motor, which is weird because not just Giant has produced "different" frame designs over the years and almost all frames can house a motor.

This line of discussion is thin.... very thin...
Drink the Kool-Aid Irondan. Burrows equals the Lotus bike. And he had a thing with Aston Martin too. It's pretty clear he plays a major role in all of this.

Also, there's the Hour bike be built with the drive hidden, so no one would see the motor...
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Irondan said:
sniper said:
Benotti69 said:
Sunweb ride Giant frames. I would not trust Giant are not part of the 'motor revolution' in the sport.
Agreed. In fact, they may have been pioneers.

Mike Burrows’s contribution to the design of the modern road bike cannot be overstated. If the British engineer hadn’t come up with the Total Compact Road — aka TCR — for Giant in the mid-1990s we might still be measuring ourselves up for a frame by straddling the crossbar and yanking it upwards.

Burrows, having spent years in cycle design’s hinterlands with his monoblade forks, micro lo-pros and blobby monocoque frames, all regarded as too eccentric for the conservative world of road cycling, finally received mainstream recognition after Chris Boardman won the individual pursuit at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 on the Lotus bike that Burrows had originally created.
Then in 1997:
The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) initially objected to the Giant’s geometry but Hein Verbruggen and fellow Dutchman Jan Derksen, the boss of Giant Europe, sat down together and from that point on every new road bike design was influenced by the TCR.

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/icons-of-cycling-giant-tcr-206346#2uo27tLLTzf3VCSU.99
At present Giant bikes are (co)designed by former F1 technician Simon Smart, who seems to have his finger in a lot of pies (triathlon, UK TT-ing, proteams such as Movistar, Sunweb)
In the motorthread Tienus raised the question why Dumoulin's bike is so heavy:
viewtopic.php?p=2059714#p2059714
Are you saying that Mike Burrows is a pioneer of the "motor revolution" because the frames he designs is atypical to other manufacturers frames? That's what I believe you guys are insinuating and the only "proof" or "evidence" is the fact that Giants frames are large enough to house a motor, which is weird because not just Giant has produced "different" frame designs over the years and almost all frames can house a motor.

This line of discussion is thin.... very thin...
Drink the Kool-Aid Irondan. Burrows equals the Lotus bike. And he had a thing with Aston Martin too. It's pretty clear he plays a major role in all of this.

Also, there's the Hour bike be built with the drive hidden, so no one would see the motor...
I'm not "drinking the koolaid", but I could be missing something.

What "hour" bike had a motor designed around the frame?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Such a lack of curiosity, fmk.

Irondan, much of it comes down to whether you believe Boardman was dabbling in motors in the early 90s, something we've looked at in the Boardman and Millar threads and the general motor thread (all overlapping), so nothing Sunweb related but feel free to PM me about it and I'll expand. Looking at results obtained by Giant bikes in the late 90s and early 2000s is rather informative, too. And then looking at bikeswitching patterns within those races. Etc. Again nothing I should elaborate on here but what it leads to is a sum of evidence that allows for informed speculation, in my humble view.

To keep it concise, I would ask those who think Burrows/Giant were not meddling with motors in the mid-90s a very simple question:
Why the hell not?
I'll settle for one reason.
No hyperbole responses please.

On a side, I think the involvement of Verbruggen is rather salient.
 
Re:

sniper said:
As I thought. Just hyperbole deflection. No surprises there.
It is your logic I am using. If there's an error in the tools, well, what can I say.

As for Sunweb. They have team vehicles by Mini, don't they? Mini, they make things small, don't they? <lightbulb> Mini make small motors to fit in the Giant bikes, don't they!

This logic thing, it's sooo easy...
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Re:

kingjr said:
That must be why Ullrich had his worst TdF-result ever the first year his team switched to Giant bikes.
You're fighting windmills here.
Why did Riis suck in 1997. Why did Indurain suck in 1996. We simply don't know yet you'll agree that "Because they decided not to cheat" isn't the answer.

As if Ulrich having a motor would automatically mean nothing else could go wrong in his preparation or execution of the race. Of course not. Regular PEDs need to be taken into account for instance, too, and shiploads could go wrong on that front.
Ow, and I dont see anybody claiming Ulrich was the only rider using a motor that year, either.

Bottom line, why Ulrich had a crap TdF that year is an interesting question but one that bears little if any relevance to the Giant motor issue. Rather, ask yourself why his team switched to Giant in the first place ;)
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
kingjr said:
That must be why Ullrich had his worst TdF-result ever the first year his team switched to Giant bikes.
You're fighting windmills here.
Why did Riis suck in 1997. Why did Indurain suck in 1996. We simply don't know yet you'll agree that "Because they decided not to cheat" isn't the answer.

As if Ulrich having a motor would automatically mean nothing else could go wrong in his preparation or execution of the race. Of course not. Regular PEDs need to be taken into account for instance, too, and shiploads could go wrong on that front.
Ow, and I dont see anybody claiming Ulrich was the only rider using a motor that year, either.

Bottom line, why Ulrich had a crap TdF that year is an interesting question but one that bears little if any relevance to the Giant motor issue. Rather, ask yourself why his team switched to Giant in the first place
I'm just adding 2 and 2 together. The first part of your post doesn't make sense. The last part, well, if that question is not relevant, then neither is the bolded.
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
kingjr said:
That must be why Ullrich had his worst TdF-result ever the first year his team switched to Giant bikes.
You're fighting windmills here.
Why did Riis suck in 1997. Why did Indurain suck in 1996. We simply don't know yet you'll agree that "Because they decided not to cheat" isn't the answer.

As if Ulrich having a motor would automatically mean nothing else could go wrong in his preparation or execution of the race. Of course not. Regular PEDs need to be taken into account for instance, too, and shiploads could go wrong on that front.
Ow, and I dont see anybody claiming Ulrich was the only rider using a motor that year, either.

Bottom line, why Ulrich had a crap TdF that year is an interesting question but one that bears little if any relevance to the Giant motor issue. Rather, ask yourself why his team switched to Giant in the first place ;)
Giant paid more than Pinarello
Pinarello with Petacchi and Fassa Bortolo won 9 stages at the Giro that year, and 4 at the Vuelta.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Interesting. I'm not surprised by that at all. You guessed it, Pinarello are very high on the list of suspicious brands, already in th 90s in fact, for reasons i wont go into here but feel free to pm me.

Anyhow I should specify what I meant when I said Giant may have been "pioneers". What it does NOT mean is that I think they were the first to use motors. We'll never know who was the first, much like with EPO, although for a variety of reasons I think experimentation goes back to the 80s, and first efficient race models go back to the early 90s.

I think GIANT and Pinarello may have been pioneers in the sense that they were among the first brands to provide motorized bikes (and/or frames that were designed to fit a motor) to proteams. So while before it was kind of an individual thing organized at rider/team-level, those brands really changed the game. Trek and Cervelo are very dodgy too in that sense. Although by the time Cervelo join in I think it's already a widespread issue.
 
Re:

fmk_RoI said:
A couple of posts here, there's something odd: if you take out the words Giant and motors and insert the words LeMond and doping, you know what? You've got the exact same BS. Try it and see for yourself.
I can't say that surprises me. Were you surprised?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
Vroomen was very vocal about being against doping and wrote about it constantly. https://gerard.cc/?s=doping With that in mind, I don't think Cervelo was active in bringing motors to the sport.

John Swanson
Off topic, but Jonathan Vaughters was/is/has been very vocal against doping too.
I'm not sure why you'd attach much value to that, even less so in the context of motors. That said, I can see how maybe they may have thought or hoped the advent of motors would make doping redundant :cool: (which of course never happened)
In fact, seeing how vocally antidoping both have been, their silence on motors is all the more deafening.

Another one who allegedly was kind of antidoping is a certain Luigi Cecchini (or at least he allegedly turned antidoping ever since the Italian police found drugs in his apartment). Hamilton, Cancellara, Jaksche, Dekker, Millar, Riis, all on the record saying Cecchini dont do no drugs. If not PEDs, I wonder what he had to offer :eek:
In this context, give Lucca and Schoberer some thought, too. All fwiw.
 
Tom Dumoulin now favored to win the 2018 Tour de France due to Froome's legal troubles.

The Sky Train will now have to make way for the Sunweb Express. I am expecting a first class performance.

Michael Matthews may be going Green once again but that might be a bridge too far.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY