Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[JimmyFingers]

Haha bias lol


http://i.imgur.com/pkaKsSF.png

So when q rider says he's isn't the strongest, he isn't the strongest, mmkay, right? He crashed, he recovered, was in group 2 and attacked and caught the leading group, then managed to attack and solo to the win from 7k out? Magnificent ride, deserved win. Powerful, strong win, after he put in the ride of the day in MSR.

But I'm biased.

 

[the sceptic]

Re:

That there's more to getting to the sharp end of a race in such unholy conditions than how much EPO you've taken. And from a personal point to view to try to inject some positivity into this dour, joyless place when discussing an amazing race.

fans romanticizing sporting events and creating heroes is exactly why it is so easy to get away with doping. Personally I prefer to think of it as a freak show or a circus.

You know you could discuss this amazing race just one click away without having to deal with people calling sky dopers all the time?

 

[JimmyFingers]

I post where I choose to post and no romanticising, that was an insane race in terrible conditions. You even ride a bike bro? You ever ride in conditions like that?

 

[SkyTears]

is there any way to see post count by user in a thread?

 

[sniper]

Re:

I post where I choose to post and no romanticising, that was an insane race in terrible conditions. You even ride a bike bro? You ever ride in conditions like that?

we got the troll, Jimmy, time to move on.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

Haha bias lol


http://i.imgur.com/pkaKsSF.png

So when q rider says he's isn't the strongest, he isn't the strongest, mmkay, right? He crashed, he recovered, was in group 2 and attacked and caught the leading group, then managed to attack and solo to the win from 7k out? Magnificent ride, deserved win. Powerful, strong win, after he put in the ride of the day in MSR.

But I'm biased.

What do you want Jimmy? I doubt anyone thinks Paolini is clean, but then neither is Sky. Only 39 riders finished GW and the strongest was GT who was 3rd. No way he did that clean.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

is there any way to see post count by user in a thread?

Why what do want to know?

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

Haha bias lol


http://i.imgur.com/pkaKsSF.png

So when q rider says he's isn't the strongest, he isn't the strongest, mmkay, right? He crashed, he recovered, was in group 2 and attacked and caught the leading group, then managed to attack and solo to the win from 7k out? Magnificent ride, deserved win. Powerful, strong win, after he put in the ride of the day in MSR.

But I'm biased.

Instead of nonsensical answers, why not just admit you are completely and utterly wrong. At least then people might take you seriously at some point.

Just unbelievable.

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

Haha bias lol


http://i.imgur.com/pkaKsSF.png

So when q rider says he's isn't the strongest, he isn't the strongest, mmkay, right? He crashed, he recovered, was in group 2 and attacked and caught the leading group, then managed to attack and solo to the win from 7k out? Magnificent ride, deserved win. Powerful, strong win, after he put in the ride of the day in MSR.

But I'm biased.

Instead of nonsensical answers, why not just admit you are completely and utterly wrong. At least then people might take you seriously at some point.

Just unbelievable.

I must be missing something because that made sense to me.

 

[the sceptic]

Re:

I post where I choose to post and no romanticising, that was an insane race in terrible conditions. You even ride a bike bro? You ever ride in conditions like that?

I only wanted to inform you that since you seem to have such a strong dislike for the clinic it would be quite easy to talk about how awesome that race was in another part of the forum.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

I post where I choose to post and no romanticising, that was an insane race in terrible conditions. You even ride a bike bro? You ever ride in conditions like that?

I only wanted to inform you that since you seem to have such a strong dislike for the clinic it would be quite easy to talk about how awesome that race was in another part of the forum.

But you won't get attention in other parts of the forum. Who's going to reply to your post when you post something on topic and obvious in the race discussion threads?

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

I must be missing something because that made sense to me.

It made sense to you that when someone says "Paolini might disagree who was the strongest" and the answer is a direct quote from Paolini that "I don't think I was the strongest" that there is more to say on the topic?

Really?

Do people think that the strongest rider always wins races like this? They don't. Paolini barely hung on and grabbed an excellent, opportunistic win. Tremendous ride. Thomas chased down every attack for an hour in the finale. Literally. Do you realize how unbelievable that is? No one else would chase because no one was going to tow him up to the lead. It was obvious that everyone in that group knew Thomas was the strongest, by a ridiculous margin. And to everyone watching the race.

I don't quite understand how a photo of Paolini wrecked is an answer to the simple, obvious fact that Paolini not only was obviously not the strongest but outright said he wasn't. In direct contradiction to the post quoted.

Just blather and deflection instead of simply admitting when one is wrong.

 

[robertmooreheadlane]

Re:

I post where I choose to post and no romanticising, that was an insane race in terrible conditions. You even ride a bike bro? You ever ride in conditions like that?

Yes I do and yes I have in Belgium and other places and with riders who were professional athletes and pro riders in the peloton at one time.

And I can tell you that there is absolutely a complete correlation to the strength of a rider and his ability to hold the bike on the road and put down power which will keep them straight and moving forward and the amount of drugs and doping they have done.

Doping makes you stronger and able to ride harder for longer, now in a normal race that means you can go on the attack and ride off the front or attack in the mountains and keep that effort up for longer.

On a day like GW it simply means the ability to ride harder into the wind and get up and do it again if you have a crash or chase people down with your nose into the wind when no-one else can get anywhere near the break.

So I would ask you - Have you ever ridden a bike seriously or ever ridden on the cobbles of France or Belgium or climbed the alps and the Pyrenees or done anything except sit at a keyboard and talk tosh.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

I must be missing something because that made sense to me.

It made sense to you that when someone says "Paolini might disagree who was the strongest" and the answer is a direct quote from Paolini that "I don't think I was the strongest" that there is more to say on the topic?

So the clinic now believes everything riders say..?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I must be missing something because that made sense to me.

It made sense to you that when someone says "Paolini might disagree who was the strongest" and the answer is a direct quote from Paolini that "I don't think I was the strongest" that there is more to say on the topic?

So the clinic now believes everything riders say..?

No but Paolini wasn't lying. For those who watched the race and understand the sport, Paolini wasn't the strongest rider in the race.

Sean Kelly won a lot but also experienced many podiums (2nd and 3rd) because he was the strongest rider and marked and it also meant others could get away for the win while the rest watched Kelly.

By way when 1 or 2 post something, when does it become the clinic? That is just stupid to whitewash it!

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

No but Paolini wasn't lying. For those who watched the race and understand the sport, Paolini wasn't the strongest rider in the race.

Sean Kelly won a lot but also experienced many podiums (2nd and 3rd) because he was the strongest rider and marked and it also meant others could get away for the win while the rest watched Kelly.

By way when 1 or 2 post something, when does it become the clinic? That is just stupid to whitewash it!

So only 2 members of the clinic believe it and the rest agree with Jimmy?

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

I must be missing something because that made sense to me.

It made sense to you that when someone says "Paolini might disagree who was the strongest" and the answer is a direct quote from Paolini that "I don't think I was the strongest" that there is more to say on the topic?

So the clinic now believes everything riders say..?

Brilliant stuff. I (one person) point out a specific statement by a specific rider in a specific context. The response is to ask if the Clinic (hundreds of people) believe millions of non-specific statements by hundreds (or thousands, historically) riders.

Not surprising some people can't read a race with that kind of thinking in evidence.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

I must be missing something because that made sense to me.

It made sense to you that when someone says "Paolini might disagree who was the strongest" and the answer is a direct quote from Paolini that "I don't think I was the strongest" that there is more to say on the topic?

So the clinic now believes everything riders say..?

Brilliant stuff. I (one person) point out a specific statement by a specific rider in a specific context. The response is to ask if the Clinic (hundreds of people) believe millions of non-specific statements by hundreds (or thousands, historically) riders.

Not surprising some people can't read a race with that kind of thinking in evidence.

It's more pointing out that posters will choose to believe a riders' statement, or use it to back up their position, or not purely based on confirmation bias. Read the race and make your decisions based on that, picking and choosing when to believe riders and when not to doesn't do any argument any good when the logic that most of them are lying b*stards is so consistently pushed by the large majority of regular posters in the clinic (Is that sufficiently qualified Benotti? ).

 

[JimmyFingers]

Re: Re:

Haha bias lol


http://i.imgur.com/pkaKsSF.png

So when q rider says he's isn't the strongest, he isn't the strongest, mmkay, right? He crashed, he recovered, was in group 2 and attacked and caught the leading group, then managed to attack and solo to the win from 7k out? Magnificent ride, deserved win. Powerful, strong win, after he put in the ride of the day in MSR.

But I'm biased.

Instead of nonsensical answers, why not just admit you are completely and utterly wrong. At least then people might take you seriously at some point.

Just unbelievable.

The usual clinic browbeating. Talking of who was the strongest is incredibly ambiguous. Anyone at the sharp end of that race was 'strong'. You say Geraint was because it suits your whinging agenda about him. I saw the race, I saw how heavily marked he was and that Debuschere clung to his wheel for the last 70k, but I also watched Vandenburgh launch multiple attacks, as did Tersptra, and I watched Paolini crash, get back on, get dropped, get back on and then escape in the last few kilometres. He rode clever but it was also an incredibly powerful ride as well.

 

[The Hitch]

Wow, that's some impressive name dropping there. When you first joined the forum you didn't know who Quintana was. Now look who's acting all Mr cycling analyst.

 

[Netserk]

Ah, brilliant logic. If one doesn't believe all riders all the time, one shouldn't believe any rider at any time. Wonderful. 'cause there's an equal chance of riders lying when asked if they are doping or if they are analysing a race...

 

[JimmyFingers]

Re: Re:uenuen

I post where I choose to post and no romanticising, that was an insane race in terrible conditions. You even ride a bike bro? You ever ride in conditions like that?

I only wanted to inform you that since you seem to have such a strong dislike for the clinic it would be quite easy to talk about how awesome that race was in another part of the forum.

To be fair you are spot on. I come here I infrequently as it is, and only feel compelled to speak up when I feel particularly fallacious comments are being made. It is pointless really, we are dealing in conspiracy and assumption, arguments with holes big enough in them that when pointed out the response is fanboy, troll, bot.

It's a shame that so much debate gets answered with condescension and insult. I didn't come here simply to argue, I genuinely want the best for the sport, if someone is dirty I want them busted, whoever it is. No doubt I'll wander in again but I am going to try to resist posting, just hope the sport can sort itself out.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Re: Re:uenuen

To be fair you are spot on. I come here I infrequently as it is, and only feel compelled to speak up when I feel particularly fallacious comments are being made. It is pointless really, we are dealing in conspiracy and assumption, arguments with holes big enough in them that when pointed out the response is fanboy, troll, bot.

It's a shame that so much debate gets answered with condescension and insult. I didn't come here simply to argue, I genuinely want the best for the sport, if someone is dirty I want them busted, whoever it is. No doubt I'll wander in again but I am going to try to resist posting, just hope the sport can sort itself out.

Perfect. As if you read my mind. Agree with all you said. Nice to see some posters here still have class.
To the bolded: Excatly thats the "weapon" used when the attackers have no arguments. Happens to me and many others too; those who indicate holes in the most absurd theories about Sky´s alleged über-doping...

 

[Netserk]

Re: Re:uenuen

I post where I choose to post and no romanticising, that was an insane race in terrible conditions. You even ride a bike bro? You ever ride in conditions like that?

I only wanted to inform you that since you seem to have such a strong dislike for the clinic it would be quite easy to talk about how awesome that race was in another part of the forum.

To be fair you are spot on. I come here I infrequently as it is, and only feel compelled to speak up when I feel particularly fallacious comments are being made. It is pointless really, we are dealing in conspiracy and assumption, arguments with holes big enough in them that when pointed out the response is fanboy, troll, bot.

It's a shame that so much debate gets answered with condescension and insult. I didn't come here simply to argue, I genuinely want the best for the sport, if someone is dirty I want them busted, whoever it is. No doubt I'll wander in again but I am going to try to resist posting, just hope the sport can sort itself out.

Why not just post in the PRR-section a little more often?

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

I must be missing something because that made sense to me.

It made sense to you that when someone says "Paolini might disagree who was the strongest" and the answer is a direct quote from Paolini that "I don't think I was the strongest" that there is more to say on the topic?

So the clinic now believes everything riders say..?

Brilliant stuff. I (one person) point out a specific statement by a specific rider in a specific context. The response is to ask if the Clinic (hundreds of people) believe millions of non-specific statements by hundreds (or thousands, historically) riders.

Not surprising some people can't read a race with that kind of thinking in evidence.

It's more pointing out that posters will choose to believe a riders' statement, or use it to back up their position, or not purely based on confirmation bias. Read the race and make your decisions based on that, picking and choosing when to believe riders and when not to doesn't do any argument any good when the logic that most of them are lying b*stards is so consistently pushed by the large majority of regular posters in the clinic (Is that sufficiently qualified Benotti? ).

The point is to address specifics instead of making sweeping statements about what posters do or don't do.

Again. The statement was "Paolini might disagree with who was the strongest", with the clear meaning being that Paolini was the strongest and would have felt that way being the winner.

Whether he was the strongest or not, he clearly, factually and unequivocally did not "disagree" in the way suggested. In fact, he did the opposite and confirmed it. That's all there is to it.

The fact that anyone could see he wasn't the strongest is incidental.

And to your tangential point, I agree with riders when what they say meshes with what I see. Of course. Particularly in this case where there is no motivation to lie, and much motivation to admit what was obvious, that he won opportunistically. Which is no criticism of Paolini, he rode a great race.

Jimmy Fingers made his original statement because I'm pointing out how utterly ridiculous the performance of yet another Sky rider was. It was absurd. He was seeking to deflect attention from another absurd Sky transformation, and act like Paolini was the strongest, because he was the winner. Which is dumb. And agenda-driven. Pure Sky defender nonsense. And pointless as it's just as certain most riders in the finishing group were doping. But the transformation of Thomas is again, another absurdity, and one wonders how they're getting away with clearly doping on another level than everyone else.