Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1135 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
deValtos said:
An issue here is that there is only one brand of winners to make comparisons against.

There have been countless dopers who have made smooth progressions and there have been countless dopers who have made rather erratic progressions.

As for clean winners who do we compare against ? Looking back over the past 50 years I guess you can use Lemond. Evans and Sastre are doubtful. Wiggins if you believe him. There's pretty much no one.

To say Froome's progression shows doping by use of comparison to previous riders makes little sense when all the comparisons are to dopers. Who's to say a clean rider can only progress smoothly ?

Of course the fact that there's hardly any clean comparisons to make is pretty damning.
If you follow that thought... why weren't there any clean winners.

Because only people who doped were able to reach those speeds. Only people who doped were able to finish 10 minutes down on those speeds.

So froome and Wiggins can't be compared to any clean athlete because everyone who achieved what they did, or came close to achieving what they did, was doped. Yes I find that interesting too.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
Froome:
84-36-2 ...

How Froome can be the outlier of outliers isn´t just beyond me, it should be beyond everybody.

I think you "suffer" from a very selective perception...
If you are going to ignore holding on to motorbikes and disqualification you really should not be in here.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
And you shouldn´t, if you ignore the context of my post completely....
Seriously what´s your aim of your post? That I jump the bandwaggon, and thus being welcomed to all the yes-men in here?
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
Was thinking somehow the same. We can´t compare Froome to clean winners. Simply because there are none we could be sure of. Not even Lemond (after his shooting accident at least) ...

Oh. My. Gawd. While it's true that the Sky and USPS comparisons get strained at times, their fans are EXACTLY the same.

So great.
 
del1962 said:
So one person makes a comment about LeMond, and it becomes plural, no wonder you have some problems with your thought process
You may want to check your own processes, as that's far from the only absurd "exactly what Armstrong supporters said" type of comment made by Sky fans on this and many other threads. This discussion of Sky has been going on for quite a while now, and over time the blinders crew really has hit all the high points. The Lemond bit was just priceless though. Really top stuff.

We've apparently moved out of the "They can't be doping" stage to the "If my guys are dirty so is everyone else" stage of denial. Good times.
 
red_flanders said:
You may want to check your own processes, as that's far from the only absurd "exactly what Armstrong supporters said" type of comment made by Sky fans on this and many other threads. This discussion of Sky has been going on for quite a while now, and over time the blinders crew really has hit all the high points. The Lemond bit was just priceless though. Really top stuff.

We've apparently moved out of the "They can't be doping" stage to the "If my guys are dirty so is everyone else" stage of denial. Good times.
I think that is more the pysche of some Mericans on this board, which is why the spend some much effort accusing Sky
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
red_flanders said:
Oh. My. Gawd. While it's true that the Sky and USPS comparisons get strained at times, their fans are EXACTLY the same.

So great.
I mean I gave up on you, but to clarify to others:
I AM NO SKY FAN...

And for you (again)... if you say circumstancial evidence is evidence, it is. But if the clinic hero gets touched, it´s not. I have written about Lemond having also unusal results (crazy up and downs after his accident), different obscure illnesses, and the usual life threatening event that seems to be necessary to come back from deathbed to become the greatest.
I do not doubt about Lemond being a great talent. But i have my doubts after his comeback, especially when I carefully read old articles in DER SPIEGEL (a non yellow press magazine, respected greatly in Germany, at least back then). They are eye opening in hindsight.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
del1962 said:
I think that is more the pysche of some Mericans on this board, which is why the spend some much effort accusing Sky
No it´s worse than that. It´s my doper (CH) rides more beautiful and is more likeable, and yours (to Froome/Sky fans) is the worst, re starting the dope arms race, etc. It´s all so grotesque... Really it happened exactly like this...
 
del1962 said:
I think that is more the pysche of some Mericans on this board, which is why the spend some much effort accusing Sky
You do realize Armstrong fans were saying the exact same thing about the French?

I ask because you just protested that sky fans shouldn't be compared to Armstrong fans. And then you come up with this gem.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
I mean I gave up on you, but to clarify to others:
I AM NO SKY FAN...

...MY ONLY PURPOSE IN THIS THREAD IS TO TROLL Y'ALL
We got it. You're just trying to add 'balance'. It doesn't really matter what you think or what others does, you are just saying the opposite of the majority without an opinion of your own.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
And you shouldn´t, if you ignore the context of my post completely....
Seriously what´s your aim of your post? That I jump the bandwaggon, and thus being welcomed to all the yes-men in here?
You made a post trying to show Froome was not an extreme example of coming from nowhere and others were worse but you left out his DQ for hanging onto motorbikes on Italian mountains which shows how far Froome has come, from hanging onto motorbikes to beating doped times on mountains. That really is some jump in performance. Froome is a doper and Sky are a doping team.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Netserk said:
We got it. You're just trying to add 'balance'. It doesn't really matter what you think or what others does, you are just saying the opposite of the majority without an opinion of your own.
bla... I can´t help you to read or understand, but I made my position clear, more than once.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Benotti69 said:
You made post trying to show Froome was not an extreme example of coming from nowhere and others were worse but you left out his DQ for hanging onto motorbikes on Italian mountains which shows how far Froome has come, from hanging onto motorbikes to beating doped times on mountains.
Yes, and I left out all the WDs of Armstrong, Wiggins, and who else, the incidents when Mauri cheated over the mountains, that Moser should never been up there with Fignon, that the world is round and what else. Sorry, I didn´t want to write a book, just clarify that Froome is not the outlier of the outliers. That´s all: A simple short post to debunk another posts nonsense.
It was no big deal until... well the Sky bashers took their turn.

Benotti69 said:
That really is some jump in performance. Froome is a doper and Sky are a doping team.
I didn´t say otherwise... And that you think Froome and Sky is a team full of dopers is clear. I don´t have a problem with your opinion. Especially since you believe all top GT contenders are. A pretty straight stance.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Netserk said:
We got it. You're just trying to add 'balance'. It doesn't really matter what you think or what others does, you are just saying the opposite of the majority without an opinion of your own.

And I am a big idiot !!!
Cool to manipulate other peoples posts with insults, isn´t it?

"If you're not with us you're against us". I like this simple minds, as long they are not hurting others. And a internet forum is pretty free of getting hurt. So I like you... :p
 
May 26, 2009
4,114
0
0
del1962 said:
I think that is more the pysche of some Mericans on this board, which is why the spend some much effort accusing Sky
Derek, we threw you limeys out over 200 years ago does it still hurt? :D
 

Justinr

BANNED
Feb 18, 2013
806
0
0
Benotti69 said:
You made a post trying to show Froome was not an extreme example of coming from nowhere and others were worse but you left out his DQ for hanging onto motorbikes on Italian mountains which shows how far Froome has come, from hanging onto motorbikes to beating doped times on mountains. That really is some jump in performance. Froome is a doper and Sky are a doping team.
Hmm - well the motorbike incident was when he had knee injury and was going to ditch anyway IIANM, but lets not let the truth get in the way.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
I mean I gave up on you, but to clarify to others:
I AM NO SKY FAN...

And for you (again)... if you say circumstancial evidence is evidence, it is. But if the clinic hero gets touched, it´s not. I have written about Lemond having also unusal results (crazy up and downs after his accident), different obscure illnesses, and the usual life threatening event that seems to be necessary to come back from deathbed to become the greatest.
I do not doubt about Lemond being a great talent. But i have my doubts after his comeback, especially when I carefully read old articles in DER SPIEGEL (a non yellow press magazine, respected greatly in Germany, at least back then). They are eye opening in hindsight.
That you bring Lemond into the discussion at all says it all. By doing so you've created a comparison of Sky and Lemond.

Laughable if not so sad.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
Justinr said:
Hmm - well the motorbike incident was when he had knee injury and was going to ditch anyway IIANM, but lets not let the truth get in the way.
of course he was, that is why he waited for the broom wagon or the team car
 
del1962 said:
I think that is more the pysche of some Mericans on this board, which is why the spend some much effort accusing Sky
Combining a nationalistic attack with a statement comically the opposite of what is actually going on. You must not have joined any of the various online forums when all the "Mericans" were pounding Armstrong for the last 10 years.

Oh, you must be referring to the defenders of Armstrong who now attack Sky. Oh wait, I've never seen one of those. Must have gotten that talking point from the chamois-sniffer Walsh?

In fact precious few Armstrong defenders have actually remained as active posters, let alone attack Sky. I can think of only 1 and of course the particular revisionism there is "I was never defending Armstrong". All strangely familiar.

Top it off with some WAP-text-level spelling and it's the post of the day. Strong stuff for one sentence.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
2
0
I for one am looking forward to see the reactions when Roger The Dodger cranks out 450w and shreds the peloton in the tour this year.

And I must say that Im loving the prospect of Valverde joining in on the fun and going full genius.

If Froome beats 2 dopers who are going full genius and better than they have done in the past, how will skyfans explain that?
 

Justinr

BANNED
Feb 18, 2013
806
0
0
Benotti69 said:
of course he was, that is why he waited for the broom wagon or the team car
You can speculate of course and you are entitled to, but I tend to like to at least start off believing the press reports.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY