Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[taiwan]

Interestingly, there were a few seconds of Wiggins on the radio news today. He was saying that he hadn't had this much attention since Cofidis got pulled because of a positive. Sort of brought up doping spontaneously which had me on the wrong foot. Obv. it was edited to a few seconds so we don't know the context.

 

[wattage]

I can't wait to see what outrageous perfomances Sky will put in at this years TdF. Everyone at The Clinic will cream their pants.

 

[T_S_A_R]

wiggins in the guardian

The numbers we have been working by this year on the road are not power output or speed, but VAM: Vertical Altitude Metres, or how quickly you gain height on a climb. That way it doesn't matter about power output, windspeed, the steepness of the climb or your speed: it's simply a matter of how fast you gain height vertically, as if you were in a lift, measured in metres per hour. The average VAM for a big climb on the Tour last year was 1,400m or 1,500m. When Alberto Contador attacked at Verbier in 2009 he was going at about 1,800m, which is similar to the figures Marco Pantani used to reach.

In the Dauphiné, on the Col du Joux-Plane on the penultimate day, we were climbing at about 1,700 VAM. There aren't many riders out there who can go that fast, and there weren't many able to stay with us on that stage. So that gives me confidence that physically I'm in the right place at the moment. The catch, however, is that the Tour is not just about the numbers. We've got to take those numbers, the physical ability they represent, and perform day after day after day.

surely trolling?

 

[2008885]

surely trolling?

Him or you?

 

[noddy69]

A couple of thoughts. One, if they are all riders capable of doing this, why have they never done that before, send that many guys over the top on a climb like that? Certainly after the amount of work they'd done all week it's fairly...surprising, let's say. Second, I think the real question is that if Sky are keeping their riders at 90% for extended periods of time, and that's a pretty open debate, how are they able to do this when no other team is doing it?

I would need a better explanation that those we've seen from Sky so far to even consider such performances to be legitimate. We've all seen it all before.

They are able to do it because they have the money to do it. Other teams dont keep their riders at that level because its not how things have been done before. Riders and fitness regimes prime their riders for races, the training reflects that . That part really isnt that hard to grasp or understand.

 

[sartoris]

They are able to do it because they have the money to do it. Other teams dont keep their riders at that level because its not how things have been done before. Riders and fitness regimes prime their riders for races, the training reflects that . That part really isnt that hard to grasp or understand.

 

[Ripper]

They are able to do it because they have the money to do it. Other teams dont keep their riders at that level because its not how things have been done before. Riders and fitness regimes prime their riders for races, the training reflects that . That part really isnt that hard to grasp or understand.

Does that apply to the products or services they are purchasing?

I think you are missing some details. Good on ya for drinking the kool aide. Living in your world feels good

 

[Benotti69]

They are able to do it because they have the money to do it. Other teams dont keep their riders at that level because its not how things have been done before. Riders and fitness regimes prime their riders for races, the training reflects that . That part really isnt that hard to grasp or understand.

It isn't hard to grasp yet it was not how things were done before?

This is pro cycling. If it rides like a doped cyclist, talks like a doped cyclist and looks like a doped cyclist, good chance it is a doped cyclist!

 

[Normandy]

It isn't hard to grasp yet it was not how things were done before?

This is pro cycling. If it rides like a doped cyclist, talks like a doped cyclist and looks like a doped cyclist, good chance it is a doped cyclist!

Its interesting how on this forum, if any team other than sky win consistently they must be doping and get the honour of their own threads. The same is true for all non British riders.

To use a to use a phrase from one of the other threads, 'how long before Brad and sky break the trip wire?.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

wiggins in the guardian

[...] VAM [...]

surely trolling?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_ascent_velocity reports:

Mean ascent velocity (i.e. average ascent speed) is the English equivalent for the Italian term velocità ascensionale media, often shortened VAM. The term, which been coined by Italian physician and cycling coach Michele Ferrari, is the speed of elevation gain, usually stated in units of meters per hour.

 

[Runitout]

Its interesting how on this forum, if any team other than sky win consistently they must be doping and get the honour of their own threads. The same is true for all non British riders.

To use a to use a phrase from one of the other threads, 'how long before Brad and sky break the trip wire?.

I give it six months.

One of them is like a champagne cork. He's just bursting to talk. All it takes is the right person.

 

[samerics]

I give it six months.

One of them is like a champagne cork. He's just bursting to talk. All it takes is the right person.

Really? You know this for fact? Wow, impressive

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Its interesting how on this forum, if any team other than sky win consistently they must be doping and get the honour of their own threads.

Yeah, you are right. Someone should start a 'Sky' thread in The Clinic.

 

[hrotha]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_ascent_velocity reports:

Ferrari invented it, but AFAIK it's a widely used figure. Don't forget that Ferrari is probably the best doping doctor *because* he actually likes and knows a lot about cycling. He's not like those gynecologists who happen to work with cyclists. Ferrari is an expert.

The trolling part in that quote, IMO, is admitting they were very, very fast, close to the climbs Pantani would do in his time. All four of them Sky riders.

 

[Frosty]

Was a bit surprised that Sky hired an 8, two 7s and a 6 from this list.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011...ng-suspicions-from-2010-tour-de-france_172784

 

[Caruut]

Was a bit surprised that Sky hired an 8, two 7s and a 6 from this list.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011...ng-suspicions-from-2010-tour-de-france_172784

The list is an odd one though. For example, Frank Schleck (known to have made payments to Fuentes) is a 2 and Chris Horner (having the best season of his life, aged 40) is a 0, while Daniel Oss gets an 8.

Other odd match-ups see the pretty anonymous Jeremy Hunt with a 7 while Contador and Kolobnev (both banned since the list was released) both got given 5.

 

[Frosty]

Its a list drawn up on how dodgy people's blood passports are though, plus a few other factors. Just because someone tests positive it doesnt mean that previous blood tests were incredibly suspect. Also, having made payments 4 years ago (list is from 2010) may not count for much if there has been nothing suspect since then.

Chris Horner was having a very good season before the Tour which at his age is suspicious, but if his blood tests looked normal then there may be no reason to raise his suspicion level. As for people who have an 8 but arent that good, well people can dope and still not be as good. Then again, there could be some suspicious readings that can be innocently explained.

 

[richtea]

Lance Armstrong was 4 on that list, but USADA report his blood passport showed substantial irregularities over the same period.

 

[Frosty]

Lance Armstrong was 4 on that list, but USADA report his blood passport showed substantial irregularities over the same period.

'As explained by the newspaper, only the scores of zero and one meant that the riders had a very clean record. Ratings from two to four were based on stable passports which nevertheless showed a rare abnormality at a precise time. From five upwards, the comments associated to the rider files started to become much more precise, "even affirmative" according to L'Equipe.'

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ucis-suspicious-list-leaked-from-2010-tour-de-france

The USADA claim has intrigued me too, was the rating of 4 wrong? Do the USADA believe they can prove blood doping at a level that the UCI doesnt think can? Or is there information about timing of doping that concurs with dodgy blood passport information?

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

We've all seen Lance's self-published values. We all know the blood doping is blatant. The guys at 5-10 must have hilarious passports. Unless Lance's 4 was generous of the UCI.

The list is an odd one though. For example... Chris Horner (having the best season of his life, aged 40) is a 0

No bio-passport tests @ the ToC.

 

[Caruut]

We've all seen Lance's self-published values. We all know the blood doping is blatant. The guys at 5-10 must have hilarious passports. Unless Lance's 4 was generous of the UCI.



No bio-passport tests @ the ToC.

Shocking claim.

Anyway, this is about Sky, not that list. Was just trying to say that I don't really set too much store by the list. I'm sure lots of them are doping - the fact that so many lower down the list have been popped with neither 10 has shows that the UCI are, in one way or another, inept.

 

[joe_papp]

Lance Armstrong was 4 on that list, but USADA report his blood passport showed substantial irregularities over the same period.

Just to clarify, iirc, it's not so much that the values were shockingly irregular, but rather, than they were w/in the acceptable parameters but likely still indicative of doping once the corrective methods revealed by Landis to Ashenden were taken into account.

Does that make sense?

 

[thehog]

Just to clarify, iirc, it's not so much that the values were shockingly irregular, but rather, than they were w/in the acceptable parameters but likely still indicative of doping once the corrective methods revealed by Landis to Ashenden were taken into account.

Does that make sense?

Ressiot also stated that some of the UCI experts were "surprised by certain much too 'normal' blood parameters" and advocated to prohibit the riders from accessing their blood passport data for the last three months, so that they cannot align their blood parameters to the values recorded previously.

 

[hrotha]

Just to clarify, iirc, it's not so much that the values were shockingly irregular, but rather, than they were w/in the acceptable parameters but likely still indicative of doping once the corrective methods revealed by Landis to Ashenden were taken into account.

Does that make sense?

It was the same with Contador. Some irregularities in the blood passport that weren't enough to press a case against them with any sort of confidence (remember that the 9's and 10's haven't been suspended either), but which are consistent with doping, and which could complement other evidence if it exists.

 

[cineteq]

I dropped by this thread to read about Sky let me know when you're back on topic.