That depends on the team. I have mentioned reading some scary articles from BMC riders about their training regimes and the laid back nature of it. David Millar has also spoken about it. However, Movistar have been much better and most other teams are fast jumping on the bandwagon, including now also BMC considering the interviews they have done this season. Nevertheless one thing which can't be disputed is that Sky were first to monitor and scrutinise their rider's training intensely.Graham_S said:Wow, thanks for all the responses. A lot there to digest. Everything I had previously read suggested cyclists were left to themselves for too much of their training.
Sky's results (in stage races) improved dramatically after they brought in Dr. Leinders.Froome19 said:It will be interesting to see how the arms race now evolves with other team's catching on, but what is for sure is that Sky have a significant head start.
They were a young team that improved quickly over just a couple of years, fairly reasponable time scale to get over teething problems. Bit desperate to try to pin it all on Leinders.peloton said:Sky's results (in stage races) improved dramatically after they brought in Dr. Leinders.
Now riddle me that.
And that is indisputable? Really? It never, ever happened before Sky?Froome19 said:Nevertheless one thing which can't be disputed is that Sky were first to monitor and scrutinise their rider's training intensely.
Can just imagine him saying this 'Christoper/Bradley you are a great rider, you have the potential to be a champion you just have to be more healthy and professional'peloton said:Sky's results (in stage races) improved dramatically after they brought in Dr. Leinders.
Now riddle me that.
Yes. Back with a dominant team that is innocent until proven guilty. But with a lot more people looking for mud to sling but not finding anything beyond a handfull of employees with dodgey pasts.SundayRider said:Is this 2001?? Change Sky to USPS and Froome to Armstrong and we are right back thirteen years!
Thank you, I was very pleased with myself for that.romnom said:As much as I enjoy the comparison to the new earth nonsense
Sadly true, but I didn't have some faith in the current generation I riders I wouldn't be able watch pro cycling.romnom said:And there's no guarantees that we'll ever find out one way or the other.
Wiggins breakout performance in 2009 Tour de France, look at all the riders who finished either just in front or behind him, how can you possibly believe that was done squeaky clean? Especially since prior to that Wiggins had never ever shown any ability (beyond riding in the gruppetto) at challenging at Grand tour level.Wiggins was 29 years old in 2009 also.Graham_S said:Yes. Back with a dominant team that is innocent until proven guilty. But with a lot more people looking for mud to sling but not finding anything beyond a handfull of employees with dodgey pasts.
what do olympic gold medals mean to anyone anyway.........completelySundayRider said:Especially since prior to that Wiggins had never ever shown any ability (beyond riding in the gruppetto) at challenging at Grand tour level.Wiggins was 29 years old in 2009 also.
2009 was the year he lost a load of weight, previously he still looked like a track rider. If he had just been competing on the road for 10 years and came good at 29 you would have a point, but I think you are deliberately ignoring the obvious (although I am sure you think it is me ignoring the obvious!).SundayRider said:Wiggins breakout performance in 2009 Tour de France, look at all the riders who finished either just in front or behind him, how can you possibly believe that was done squeaky clean? Especially since prior to that Wiggins had never ever shown any ability (beyond riding in the gruppetto) at challenging at Grand tour level.Wiggins was 29 years old in 2009 also.
Wow, your first full sentence and youve already discredited yourself. That's a record, I think.Graham_S said:New here. Sky seem to have mainly been convicted on this board solely down to their performances .
Damn it, why didnt anyone tell Riis and Armstrong about this? If only they knew that losing weight can make one of the worst climbers in the peloton into one of the best in 1 year they could have won clean too.Graham_S said:2009 was the year he lost a load of weight, previously he still looked like a track rider. If he had just been competing on the road for 10 years and came good at 29 you would have a point, but I think you are deliberately ignoring the obvious (although I am sure you think it is me ignoring the obvious!).
Really, ya think? Honestly, the same is true of most of the peloton.Graham_S said:was being toungue in cheek about Quintana, his performance at such a young age was if anything more impressive than Froome's.
They may be 'innocent' as regards sanctions- but that does not mean they do not dope.Graham_S said:Yes. Back with a dominant team that is innocent until proven guilty. But with a lot more people looking for mud to sling but not finding anything beyond a handfull of employees with dodgey pasts.
Wait, did you really try to point to the words of millar as evidence of something?? The **** is this, redundant argument day?Froome19 said:David Millar has also spoken about it
You're right. What are the odds on Michael Phelps to win the Tour de France ?ebandit said:what do olympic gold medals mean to anyone anyway.........completely
overated!
Mark L
Armstrong and Ullrich looked like track riders all of their careers didn't do them much harm. Even at their racing weights they were arguably bigger built than Wiggins was during his track years.Graham_S said:2009 was the year he lost a load of weight, previously he still looked like a track rider. If he had just been competing on the road for 10 years and came good at 29 you would have a point, but I think you are deliberately ignoring the obvious (although I am sure you think it is me ignoring the obvious!).
Yep, good place to start. But it is getting old now and hasn't really turned up anything substantial to suggest these guys were up to their old tricks.Dr. Maserati said:The handful of employees with a dodgy past is actually a very good place to start - particularly when Team Sky said they had no plans on ever hiring such people.
Not sure if your being sarcastic or not but track medals don't mean a lot in terms of road performance. Wiggins was hardly winning road time trials left right and centre was he.ebandit said:what do olympic gold medals mean to anyone anyway.........completely
overated!
Mark L
Think we can rule out A Schleck being clean also.The Hitch said:Wiggins became good because the peloton became clean.
2009 tour de France
1 Contador - doping
2
3 Lance Armstrong doping
4 Wiggins
5 Frank Schleck - doping
6 Andreas Kloeden - doping
7
8 Kreuziger - doping
KOM Delfino - doping
Crashed out contenders
Levi Leipheimer - doping
Denis Menchov - doping.
How long does it normally take?Graham_S said:Yep, good place to start. But it is getting old now and hasn't really turned up anything substantial to suggest these guys were up to their old tricks.
I think it is clear that the sponsors believe in the recruitment policy more than the team do. Team seem more focused on the now than the past.