Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[RownhamHill]

They could just be better than everyone else.

Even so their performance is still better explained through the use of some performance drugs than no performance drugs.

You are suggesting that if those who say sky are full doping are wrong then the next logical answer must be that they are clean. It isnt. The next logical answer is that they are using slightly less doping. Then slightly less doping. And it continues that way along the probability line until you get to the end. Only then so you reach clean. The least probable explanation.

Actually on re-reading, maybe my bemusement at your post is unwarranted. I guess I've just dismissed the idea that they're just better than everyone else, due to the transformative nature of Froome's progress - probably been reading the Clinic too long. But if the difference is that they're just better/more talented, then as Stutue (sp?) points out you need to know what everyone else is doing - if everyone is still partying like it's 2006 then yeah, being better than them means doping, but I don't think that's necessarily a given!

 

[RownhamHill]

"We have zero tolerance towards doping, except if its not on the banned list yet"

I think even most skyfans would have to admit that skys ZTP isnt actually a real thing. Not to go into an ethical debate here, but if sky have no problems with using "legal doping", then what is going to stop them from using real doping?

Because it's, erm, illegal?

 

[doolols]

To me, Sky are only doping if they're doing something illegal. There's no grey area, no gradual analog scale of legality. If it's banned, and they're doing it, then it's illegal, and they're doping.

However, if they're doing something (warm downs, own pillows, a few more PSI in the tyres, or whatever ) which isn't illegal, using substances which aren't on the banned list (like Tramadol and other things), then they aren't illegal, and they aren't doping.

If you consider doping an analog, is using gels doping? How about electrolyte drinks? Caffeine? Where's the line between OK and not OK?

 

[red_flanders]

To me, Sky are only doping if they're doing something illegal. There's no grey area, no gradual analog scale of legality. If it's banned, and they're doing it, then it's illegal, and they're doping.

However, if they're doing something (warm downs, own pillows, a few more PSI in the tyres, or whatever ) which isn't illegal, using substances which aren't on the banned list (like Tramadol and other things), then they aren't illegal, and they aren't doping.

If you consider doping an analog, is using gels doping? How about electrolyte drinks? Caffeine? Where's the line between OK and not OK?

If it ain't illegal it's legal IMO. Tramadol is a pretty whack thing to be ingesting without a serious problem, and I'd not do it, but until they make it illegal it's not doping.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

WADA code covers doping they dont know about yet.

I would say that pretty much covers the grey area. Isn´t it?
Sky may use things that are legal or not. It first has to be decided trou the ways of law.
You say the use of opiates fall under the WADA code, thus being illegal.
OTOH, teams use opiates. Thus they think it´s legal.
It´s as grey as it can get. And there might be 50 shades of grey. Opiates are just one of them.

 

[red_flanders]

"We have zero tolerance towards doping, except if its not on the banned list yet"

I think even most skyfans would have to admit that skys ZTP isnt actually a real thing. Not to go into an ethical debate here, but if sky have no problems with using "legal doping", then what is going to stop them from using real doping?

I think one could easily justify one and not the other. I don't see a particularly slippery slope. Whether or not they use some sketchy products doesn't influence my view on whether they dope. I prefer to stick to the obvious, like impossible (if clean) performances and impossible (if clean) transformations.

But yeah, the quote above is yet another lie and ZTP is clearly nonsense meant to cover for the reality of their rather obvious doping.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Where's the line between OK and not OK?

Legally ? The WADA code.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

gray area is the new cleans.

You mean grey area is the new clean?
BTW, since you love to have dopers in your avatar (firstly Horner, now AC), when will you change to Froome? Since in your opinion Froome is the master doper of them all. Wouldn´t it be fair to give him some respect too? Thx in advance...

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Where's the line between OK and not OK?

The line is fluid (as everywhere else in society). That´s why WADA lists change. That´s why WADA includes methods/products "they don´t even know yet" (quote Benotti).
For me that is the grey area.
Otherwise I am pretty much with you. Great reasoning.

 

[the sceptic]

You mean grey area is the new clean?
BTW, since you love to have dopers in your avatar (firstly Horner, now AC), when will you change to Froome? Since in your opinion Froome is the master doper of them all. Wouldn´t it be fair to give him some respect too? Thx in advance...

Horner is a doper? I like to think he operates in a gray area, since there is no evidence he is doping.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Horner is a doper? I like to think he operates in a gray area, since there is no evidence he is doping.

Thats new. So you changed your mind? Only to avoid a answer... Weak.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Horner is a doper? I like to think he operates in a gray area, since there is no evidence he is doping.

If he had hair, that would be a grey area.

 

[the sceptic]

Thats new. So you changed your mind? Only to avoid a answer... Weak.

Im not sure what my avatars have got to do with this thread, but I like some dopers and dislike others.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Im not sure what my avatars have got to do with this thread ...

I just had a thread related Q for you, and combined that post with a request. No big deal isn´t it?

... but I like some dopers and dislike others.

You could have also answered straight forward. Anyway, your true intentions were clear to me before. That just confirms it: Personal agendas, but definitely not against doping. Thx for enlighten me and others who might not have known that already.

 

[the sceptic]

I just had a thread related Q for you, and combined that post with a request. No big deal isn´t it?



You could have also answered straight forward. Anyway, your true intentions were clear to me before. That just confirms it: Personal agendas, but definitely not against doping. Thx for enlighten me and others who might not have known that already.

Good work detective.

 

[TailWindHome]

So the legal painkiller Tramadol was the worst that Barry could reveal about his time at Sky?

Let's hope it's just a trailer and there's more in the book.

 

[TailWindHome]

If it ain't illegal it's legal IMO. Tramadol is a pretty whack thing to be ingesting without a serious problem, and I'd not do it, but until they make it illegal it's not doping.

This.

Tramadol is a rider welfare/ ethical issue, not a doping/cheating issue.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Horner is a doper? I like to think he operates in a gray area, since there is no evidence he is doping.

The evidence: a WADA-employed expert proclaiming the profiles suspicious and being quoted as wondering why Horner's profile did not register anything above non-positive in the APMU. Similarly, Armstrong's grand tour scores during "the comeback" were remarkably non-positive positive with the UCI saying there was a misconfiguration in the APMU software. An APMU correctly configured would flag non-positive positive cyclists like Horner, but didn't/doesn't.

There's no case and there's not going to be a case as long as the UCI is in charge of opening cases.

If July comes and goes without a ridiculous Sky show, we know their ticket to dope and win has been punched.

 

[SundayRider]

The evidence: a WADA-employed expert proclaiming the profiles suspicious and being quoted as wondering why Horner's profile did not register anything above non-positive in the APMU. Similarly, Armstrong's grand tour scores during "the comeback" were remarkably non-positive positive with the UCI saying there was a misconfiguration in the APMU software. An APMU correctly configured would flag non-positive positive cyclists like Horner, but didn't/doesn't.

There's no case and there's not going to be a case as long as the UCI is in charge of opening cases.

If July comes and goes without a ridiculous Sky show, we know their ticket to dope and win has been punched.

If that happens I can just see the Walsh article now. 'A clean team can't produce brilliant performances year after year unlike previous generations'.

 

[NaturalClen]

So the legal painkiller Tramadol was the worst that Barry could reveal about his time at Sky?

Let's hope it's just a trailer and there's more in the book.

this

but i have a hunch that this is all there is in the book re: Sky

 

[red_flanders]

If that happens I can just see the Walsh article now. 'A clean team can't produce brilliant performances year after year unlike previous generations'.

He can't. Froome says the more he wins the more it proves he's cleans.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

If that happens I can just see the Walsh article now. 'A clean team can't produce brilliant performances year after year unlike previous generations'.

LOL. I like it.

Good work detective.

Thank you my dear. I really appreciate that. Now if you could do me just another favour. Please change your avatar to my liking...

 

[gooner]

A Team Sky spokesperson said: "None of our riders should ride whilst using Tramadol - that's the policy of this team.

"Team Sky do not give it to riders whilst racing or training, either as a pre-emptive measure or to manage existing pain.

"We believe that its side effects, such as dizziness and drowsiness, could cause issues for the safety of all riders.

"We also feel that if a rider has the level of severe pain for its appropriate use they should not be riding.

"Tramadol is not prohibited by WADA, but this has been our firm position for the last two seasons and all medical staff and riders are aware of this.

"Our view is that it should be on the WADA list and any appropriate clinical use could be managed through the regulated TUE, or Therapeutic Use Exemption, system."

Barry is concerned that there is a desire to push sporting boundaries and that leads, for example, to the use of cortisone injections to numb pain or athletes playing on despite head injuries in a range of sports, not just cycling.

"There are drugs that are used that would never be given out if that rider walked into a clinic and asked a doctor for them," Barry added.

"In a sporting environment, everybody's paycheck is reliant on that rider's performance. Everybody involved is biased and the rider's health is secondary to their performance.

"Athletes are very much commodities. It's not something unique to cycling; it's something you see in American football, hockey, gymnastics."

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/othersport/472890/Team-Sky-call-for-WADA-intervention?

 

[Miburo]

I hope sky don't get caught, cycling is getting boring. Seeing Froome go full *** is always good for a lol.

 

[NaturalClen]

I hope sky don't get caught, cycling is getting boring. Seeing Froome go full *** is always good for a lol.

Don't worry, Bertie will come to the rescue in 2014 in case Sky get caught.