Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Dalakhani]

You missed Siutsou with 8/10

Funny, after I posted, I was thinking about the different ratings for Sky riders, and realised I only had 8 riders. Took me a minute to remember why.

I suppose that, if 6 or 7 mean the evidence is "overwhelming", 8 would mean it's "effing overwhelming".

 

[Forunculo]

To be fair, weren't those rider positions Cycle Sports estimates, rather than something from Brailsford?

(Or did they ask DB about each rider and then place that rider according to DB's comments?)

What's the point to ask DB then?

 

[Fidolix]

What is that?
Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No it´s the SKY traiiiin!!

Imaging Contador riding for SKY but on 100%...
Even the space shuttle would get smoked!

 

[Krebs cycle]

lol I ask if anyone could explain why a world class pursuit rider cannot become a world class road racer and NOBODY was able to answer that question. But instead people pointed to examples of track riders that didn't make it. Good effort, but that doesn't even come close to answering the question.

Seems like there are lot of people in this forum that follow cycling and know the results of many pro riders, but have next to zero understanding of human physiology and limits to human performance.

 

[Cerberus]

lol I ask if anyone could explain why a world class pursuit rider cannot become a world class road racer and NOBODY was able to answer that question. But instead people pointed to examples of track riders that didn't make it. Good effort, but that doesn't even come close to answering the question.

Seems like there are lot of people in this forum that follow cycling and know the results of many pro riders, but have next to zero understanding of human physiology and limits to human performance.

You know declaring victory doesn't make it so, but if believing Wiggo is clean help you sleep at night, then who am I to take away your comfort pillow.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I prefer the graph cyclesportmag did about Brailsford's rider analysis in May 2011

It's interesting to see where "CF" is

Huh. According to that graph the average peak is between 27 and 30..? People always tell me that the peak years of a rider are the early thirties, like 30-33. Looks like I was right all along.

 

[Cerberus]

Huh. According to that graph the average peak is between 27 and 30..? People always tell me that the peak years of a rider are the early thirties, like 30-33. Looks like I was right all along.

Personally I think the graph should be much flatter, there's ample evidence that people in their early thirties, while not better than those in their late 20 can be competitive, as can sometimes people in their earlyish 20's. Of cause doping makes it really hard to tell what's up and down with such things.

 

[Forunculo]

Huh. According to that graph the average peak is between 27 and 30..? People always tell me that the peak years of a rider are the early thirties, like 30-33. Looks like I was right all along.

Doesn't fit with Wiggo or Cadel performances then. But the interesting thing is where "CF" (Chris Froome) was on the inner ranking of Sky in May 2011

 

[PedalPusher]

Can't seem to find out who the owner of the team is. BSkyB (the parent company of Sky) are the sponsor, is the team owned by Brailsford, British Cycling or someone else?

To understand the delicate relationship, it's important to understand that Team Sky is owned by a company called Tour Racing Limited, which holds the team's UCI ProTour licence. TRL is a holding company owned by BSkyB and on the board of TRL are two senior Sky executives and Ian Drake and Brian Cookson, the chief executive and president of British Cycling. There is a service-level agreement between Tour Racing Limited and British Cycling that means Team Sky can purchase services from the national federation.

Brailsford describes British Cycling as the team's 'ethical partner' and says his role as team principal is a salaried and contracted position. "I have no interest in it, no options, no shares, nothing related to money at all. I have a contract and I get paid for it. If I do a good job I'll stay, and if I don't I'll get fired," Brailsford said.


http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/438764/who-owns-team-sky.html

 

[taiwan]

lol I ask if anyone could explain why a world class pursuit rider cannot become a world class road racer and NOBODY was able to answer that question. But instead people pointed to examples of track riders that didn't make it. Good effort, but that doesn't even come close to answering the question.

Seems like there are lot of people in this forum that follow cycling and know the results of many pro riders, but have next to zero understanding of human physiology and limits to human performance.

I'm not a physiologist, and don't claim to be so.

Wiggins track medals have been brought up to legitimise his GC results though, and the two disciplines are not the same. What are you saying the relationship is between world class pursuit rider, road domestique, and world class GC rider? IMO those saying pursuit gold = yellow jersey potential are not saying so out of understanding of the physiological principles either.

 

[Square-pedaller]

To be fair, weren't those rider positions Cycle Sports estimates, rather than something from Brailsford?

(Or did they ask DB about each rider and then place that rider according to DB's comments?)

I'm not going back to check (think it must have been the article that the graph appeared in), but the points are Brailsford's data based on a speadsheet of results. Riders got points for getting onto the podium, or being in support of a rider that got onto the podium. These points do nothing more than put numbers on what people have been saying about Froome having done very little before the Vuelta last year.

 

[Square-pedaller]

Personally I think the graph should be much flatter, there's ample evidence that people in their early thirties, while not better than those in their late 20 can be competitive, as can sometimes people in their earlyish 20's. Of cause doping makes it really hard to tell what's up and down with such things.

As far as I can remember, there's nothing in the article about where the curve comes from. It's clearly not a good fit to the data points, because the last 9 or 10 points are all above the curve. Whether it's a curve fitted mathematically to other points, a curve fitted by eye to other points (notoriously difficult to do), or just Brailsford's idea of what the curve looks like isn't clear.

 

[sniper]

I pay less attention to what's going on outside my bubble because I'm not coming second to riders who dope.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2012/jul/13/bradley-wiggins-dope-drugs

What utter BS. No word on LA. And why did he refuse to have Kimmage on board?

Hypocrisy.

 

[taiwan]

Old 2009 threads for interest.

Walsh's evidence would be welcome

A disspointed fan, who feels the same way and can console

Wiggins speaks about drugs

 

[Dalakhani]

I'm not going back to check (think it must have been the article that the graph appeared in), but the points are Brailsford's data based on a speadsheet of results. Riders got points for getting onto the podium, or being in support of a rider that got onto the podium. These points do nothing more than put numbers on what people have been saying about Froome having done very little before the Vuelta last year.

That's the conclusion I drew from it, too. However, skipping through the article, there didn't appear to be a clear explanation of who placed the riders in these positions.

I suppose it could have been Brailsford - or based on his rider-by-rider comments to the journalist. After all, we know Brailsford wasn't falling over himself to give Froome a contract prior to the Vuelta. That would tally with the CF position on the graph.

PS I'm glad someone posted that graph. I'd never seen it before.

 

[blackcat]

results dont tell a story.

CQ rating does not tell the story of the roles riders are required to play.

CQ rating will never recognise a Levi Leipheimer styler rider who is fourth in the 17th stage of the Tour, then crashes before finishing.

arguably, besides the Giro winner, LL is the fourth best rider in the peloton. And unrated.

Pull ya heads outta ya @rse

 

[Dalakhani]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2012/jul/13/bradley-wiggins-dope-drugs

That is such a puff piece.

I was following the comments on it yesterday. There were people raising fair questions about Froome etc., pointing out that Wiggins was just saying what every rider says (including the dopers) etc. - nothing libellous - now almost all these comments are gone.

What's left is, "Brad, you're great. How dare they question you? It's just the French being jealous".

I wonder if, to get Wiggins to write for them, the Guardian have to agree to delete anything that Sky don't like?

 

[Caruut]

That is such a puff piece.

I was following the comments on it yesterday. There were people raising fair questions about Froome etc., pointing out that Wiggins was just saying what every rider says (including the dopers) etc. - nothing libellous - now almost all these comments are gone.

What's left is, "Brad, you're great. How dare they question you? It's just the French being jealous".

I wonder if, to get Wiggins to write for them, the Guardian have to agree to delete anything that Sky don't like?

I had 3 out of 5 taken down. Was less blunt than I would be on this board, too, more suggesting that we maintain scepticism because that is what we should do than an outright accusation.

The two that stuck were more critical of the UCI/WADA than of Sky specifically, so I think it likely that they have agreed to this. Stupid, in my view, but that's life, isn't it?

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

Why has nobody mentioned Eisel's incredible effort yesterday? After losing many minutes on the climbs he rode back to the peleton and led them for many kilometres! Just giving you all something else to use as evidence against Sky as I don't think any of you picked up on it.

 

[Nocontest]

That is such a puff piece.

I was following the comments on it yesterday. There were people raising fair questions about Froome etc., pointing out that Wiggins was just saying what every rider says (including the dopers) etc. - nothing libellous - now almost all these comments are gone.

What's left is, "Brad, you're great. How dare they question you? It's just the French being jealous".

I wonder if, to get Wiggins to write for them, the Guardian have to agree to delete anything that Sky don't like?

Its only a puff piece if you start from the stance that he must be doping. objectively it is a pretty outspoken and honest articulation about how he feels. The thing I can't reconcile is that if they are dirty, why would they make it so obvious? 'Hey guys we are all doped to the gills so lets go out and smash everyone and put ourselvves firmly in the cross hairs of every anti doping zealot out there' Why would they do that? they are not stupid. If they were doped it would be far more likely that they would be much more circumspect, why raise suspicion?

 

[Caruut]

Why has nobody mentioned Eisel's incredible effort yesterday? After losing many minutes on the climbs he rode back to the peleton and led them for many kilometres! Just giving you all something else to use as evidence against Sky as I don't think any of you picked up on it.

A long break that threatened nobody was kept at about a 12-minute gap for ages, with no attacks coming from the peloton. That's not that impressive.

 

[Dalakhani]

Stupid, in my view, but that's life, isn't it?

The Guardian's new slogan: "All the news that's fit to censor".

 

[Dalakhani]

Its only a puff piece if you start from the stance that he must be doping

What about, if you start from the stance that what Sky are doing is remarkable and, therefore - in a sport with duping problems - worth raising questions about?

I don't think Wiggins "must" be doping. I don't think Froome "must" be doping.

But I do want to know how, when Sky had Froome's pre-Vuelta training data (I assume), they didn't have him signed up prior to that race.

That, to me, is a fair question. (But, apparently, not to the Guardian.)

If they were doped it would be far more likely that they would be much more circumspect, why raise suspicion?

So the more extraordinary (and hard to explain) the performance, the more likely it is to be clean?

I think we're getting a bit double, triple, quadruple bluff here.

 

[Euskaltel!]

Numbers Numbers Numbers.

Remember that Sagan's numbers weren't good enough earlier in his career for one team - see how that turned out. It's not all about watts!

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Numbers Numbers Numbers.

Remember that Sagan's numbers weren't good enough earlier in his career for one team - see how that turned out. It's not all about watts!

I think P&P mentioned that he was at Quick Step but they decided he was not good enough.