Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1440 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Nope, the ambivalence about Astana compared with Sky is simply this: Sky have destroyed all comers - including Astana which everyone knows are doped to the gills. They have dominated (utterly) the dirtiest teams, with the dirtiest histories, year after year.

No one else is riding like that. They have crushed the opposition. When Nibali won, it wasn't Astana crushing the opposition, it was the opposition literally falling over. The Giro is a very different story. Astana in 2015 were probably more full on than Sky in any tdf - but the Giro does not attract mainstream interest. Sky are the only ones doing this, year in year out, in front of the global media circus that is the tdf.

So the most logical question in the world is this: how do you utterly destroy the dirtiest teams, whilst being clean as a whistle yourself? You don't, hence the questions.

Where there is hypocrisy - and of course there is - I think it is aesthetic not nationalistic. People liked Cadel because he was a fighter, they liked Wiggins because he was an interesting mod - but Froome is damn ugly on the bike, and his polite bourgeois manner does not appeal.
 
Jul 21, 2016
913
0
0
Re:

kwikki said:
I am aware of that argument but I find it a very weak one, because actually it contains within it a hypocrisy. The people who put that argument forwards are being hypocritical, and actually what they are saying is 'we won't object to you doping, as long as you never pretend to be clean....unless asked directly'. It's a nonsense argument.

People object to Sky and Froome primarily because they think they are cheating. The hypocrisy thing is there, but is in addition.

Did anyone ask Nibali in 2014 if he dopes? What was his answer??
To the bolded, is anyone really saying that? Seems like a bit of a strawman. The clinic exists because we all want the doping to stop. We object to it, full stop.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re:

Astana's series of positives? They only add to the sense of there being a pact between UCI and western teams in general (and Sky in particular).
Kwikki still has a poor grasp of the hypocrisy that is on display in present-day procycling.
It's also obvious Kwikki wasn't here when Contador tested positive for clen and pleaded not guilty.
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
Re:

The Hegelian said:
Nope, the ambivalence about Astana compared with Sky is simply this: Sky have destroyed all comers - including Astana which everyone knows are doped to the gills. They have dominated (utterly) the dirtiest teams, with the dirtiest histories, year after year.

No one else is riding like that. They have crushed the opposition. When Nibali won, it wasn't Astana crushing the opposition, it was the opposition literally falling over. The Giro is a very different story. Astana in 2015 were probably more full on than Sky in any tdf - but the Giro does not attract mainstream interest. Sky are the only ones doing this, year in year out, in front of the global media circus that is the tdf.

So the most logical question in the world is this: how do you utterly destroy the dirtiest teams, whilst being clean as a whistle yourself? You don't, hence the questions.

Where there is hypocrisy - and of course there is - I think it is aesthetic not nationalistic. People liked Cadel because he was a fighter, they liked Wiggins because he was an interesting mod - but Froome is damn ugly on the bike, and his polite bourgeois manner does not appeal.
You are right about most things in this post.

However, this point about 'everyone knowing Astana' is doped to the gills isn't quite such an easy one to accept primarily because it isn't frequently voiced publicly, at least apart from social media. I really cannot believe that the road side fans who hurled abuse, spit, and urine at anything Sky did so because they were annoyed at Sky's PR machine's hypocrisy. It was because they thought they were cheating.

So which is it? Were they annoyed because they thought Sky were cheating too much or because they thought Sky were cheating clean athletes (probably French ;) ).

It has to be the latter.

For the record, I agree with you that Sky's clean stance is likely bogus.
 
Jul 25, 2016
20
0
0
Re: Sky

New poster here; thanks to the clinic over the last several years for all the good discussions on offer.

I do think the real winner of this year's tour should get due credit.


 
Jan 4, 2013
236
0
0
Re:

kwikki said:
If you have documented evidence of British state sponsored doping programmes, coercion and threats of violence made towards British anti-doping labs by British security services, British state security services breaking into doping labs and switching samples, a British Government plan to dope athletes and hide positives, British government sponsored development of new doping techniques, then by all means publish it.

If you haven't got any documented evidence then what you say just looks like idle speculation with no factual basis.
Might be a long wait :( Sniper and some others here tend to use an appeal to probability, which is a formal fallacy, instead of compelling evidence.
 
Apr 7, 2015
656
0
0
Poor Poels and the other SKY domestics only have one washing machine each, while Froome have six. Of course, Bardet and Quintana still do their washing by hand. This is how you win Le Tour.
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
Re: Re:

adamfo said:
kwikki said:
If you have documented evidence of British state sponsored doping programmes, coercion and threats of violence made towards British anti-doping labs by British security services, British state security services breaking into doping labs and switching samples, a British Government plan to dope athletes and hide positives, British government sponsored development of new doping techniques, then by all means publish it.

If you haven't got any documented evidence then what you say just looks like idle speculation with no factual basis.
Might be a long wait :( Sniper and some others here tend to use an appeal to probability, which is a formal fallacy, instead of compelling evidence.
Well, I don't want to get into personal stuff. There are enough mature people here to have a friendly and sensible discussion. I've noted the schoolyard tactics of two, maybe three people who arent interested in a conversation, but as the Internet goes that's not many actually :)
 
Re:

The Hegelian said:
Nope, the ambivalence about Astana compared with Sky is simply this: Sky have destroyed all comers - including Astana which everyone knows are doped to the gills. They have dominated (utterly) the dirtiest teams, with the dirtiest histories, year after year.

No one else is riding like that. They have crushed the opposition. When Nibali won, it wasn't Astana crushing the opposition, it was the opposition literally falling over. The Giro is a very different story. Astana in 2015 were probably more full on than Sky in any tdf - but the Giro does not attract mainstream interest. Sky are the only ones doing this, year in year out, in front of the global media circus that is the tdf.

So the most logical question in the world is this: how do you utterly destroy the dirtiest teams, whilst being clean as a whistle yourself? You don't, hence the questions.

Where there is hypocrisy - and of course there is - I think it is aesthetic not nationalistic. People liked Cadel because he was a fighter, they liked Wiggins because he was an interesting mod - but Froome is damn ugly on the bike, and his polite bourgeois manner does not appeal.

they destroyed in July

Astana since 2010 won
2 Tours (Alberto 2010 Nibali 2013)
2 Giro (Nibali 2013-16)
1 Vuelta (Aru 2016)

got podiums in Giro Tour Vuelta

remember Hautacam 2013, when Nibali wanted to win the stage, Astana chased all day long as mad, and Nibali went bang and won.
I am glad Sky let the breakaways go this year
 
Re: Re:

pastronef said:
The Hegelian said:
Nope, the ambivalence about Astana compared with Sky is simply this: Sky have destroyed all comers - including Astana which everyone knows are doped to the gills. They have dominated (utterly) the dirtiest teams, with the dirtiest histories, year after year.

No one else is riding like that. They have crushed the opposition. When Nibali won, it wasn't Astana crushing the opposition, it was the opposition literally falling over. The Giro is a very different story. Astana in 2015 were probably more full on than Sky in any tdf - but the Giro does not attract mainstream interest. Sky are the only ones doing this, year in year out, in front of the global media circus that is the tdf.

So the most logical question in the world is this: how do you utterly destroy the dirtiest teams, whilst being clean as a whistle yourself? You don't, hence the questions.

Where there is hypocrisy - and of course there is - I think it is aesthetic not nationalistic. People liked Cadel because he was a fighter, they liked Wiggins because he was an interesting mod - but Froome is damn ugly on the bike, and his polite bourgeois manner does not appeal.

they destroyed in July

Astana since 2010 won
2 Tours (Alberto 2010 Nibali 2013)
2 Giro (Nibali 2013-16)
1 Vuelta (Aru 2016)

got podiums in Giro Tour Vuelta

remember Hautacam 2013, when Nibali wanted to win the stage, Astana chased all day long as mad, and Nibali went bang and won.
I am glad Sky let the breakaways go this year
2010 Tour? :confused:

2013 Tour, huh? :confused:

Astana did not win either of those...
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
pastronef said:
The Hegelian said:
Nope, the ambivalence about Astana compared with Sky is simply this: Sky have destroyed all comers - including Astana which everyone knows are doped to the gills. They have dominated (utterly) the dirtiest teams, with the dirtiest histories, year after year.

No one else is riding like that. They have crushed the opposition. When Nibali won, it wasn't Astana crushing the opposition, it was the opposition literally falling over. The Giro is a very different story. Astana in 2015 were probably more full on than Sky in any tdf - but the Giro does not attract mainstream interest. Sky are the only ones doing this, year in year out, in front of the global media circus that is the tdf.

So the most logical question in the world is this: how do you utterly destroy the dirtiest teams, whilst being clean as a whistle yourself? You don't, hence the questions.

Where there is hypocrisy - and of course there is - I think it is aesthetic not nationalistic. People liked Cadel because he was a fighter, they liked Wiggins because he was an interesting mod - but Froome is damn ugly on the bike, and his polite bourgeois manner does not appeal.

they destroyed in July

Astana since 2010 won
2 Tours (Alberto 2010 Nibali 2013)
2 Giro (Nibali 2013-16)
1 Vuelta (Aru 2016)

got podiums in Giro Tour Vuelta

remember Hautacam 2013, when Nibali wanted to win the stage, Astana chased all day long as mad, and Nibali went bang and won.
I am glad Sky let the breakaways go this year
2010 Tour? :confused:

2013 Tour, huh? :confused:

Astana did not win either of those...
Astana won the 2010 Tour for 18 months ;)

2013 is a typo, I suspect. You know he means 2014.
 
Re: Re:

pastronef said:
The Hegelian said:
Nope, the ambivalence about Astana compared with Sky is simply this: Sky have destroyed all comers - including Astana which everyone knows are doped to the gills. They have dominated (utterly) the dirtiest teams, with the dirtiest histories, year after year.

No one else is riding like that. They have crushed the opposition. When Nibali won, it wasn't Astana crushing the opposition, it was the opposition literally falling over. The Giro is a very different story. Astana in 2015 were probably more full on than Sky in any tdf - but the Giro does not attract mainstream interest. Sky are the only ones doing this, year in year out, in front of the global media circus that is the tdf.

So the most logical question in the world is this: how do you utterly destroy the dirtiest teams, whilst being clean as a whistle yourself? You don't, hence the questions.

Where there is hypocrisy - and of course there is - I think it is aesthetic not nationalistic. People liked Cadel because he was a fighter, they liked Wiggins because he was an interesting mod - but Froome is damn ugly on the bike, and his polite bourgeois manner does not appeal.

they destroyed in July

Astana since 2010 won
2 Tours (Alberto 2010 Nibali 2013)
2 Giro (Nibali 2013-16)
1 Vuelta (Aru 2016)

got podiums in Giro Tour Vuelta

remember Hautacam 2013, when Nibali wanted to win the stage, Astana chased all day long as mad, and Nibali went bang and won.
I am glad Sky let the breakaways go this year
Nibali bossed the cobbled stage in 2014, which to be honest, that one stage was more exciting than all of Froome's wins put together.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
The marketing department sure got this one wrong. A jersey to celebrate the most common method of drug use the modern day peloton, lol! :lol:
You sure about that? I'm on the fence. As Swart said, maybe they just don't care. Maybe it was an intentional slip, just like the product leaks we see on riders' Instagrams. Maybe they're so smart and cavalier about it that they figured out a way to make money off the doubters. Or maybe I'm giving them way too much credit and I should just buy the t-shirt while supplies last.
 
Re: Re:

carton said:
thehog said:
The marketing department sure got this one wrong. A jersey to celebrate the most common method of drug use the modern day peloton, lol! :lol:
You sure about that? I'm on the fence. As Swart said, maybe they just don't care. Maybe it was an intentional slip, just like the product leaks we see on riders' Instagrams. Maybe they're so smart and cavalier about it that they figured out a way to make money off the doubters. Or maybe I'm giving them way too much credit and I should just buy the t-shirt while supplies last.
Yes, go buy the t-shirt, its a good idea, you'll look spiffy in it :)
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
Yes, go buy the t-shirt, its a good idea, you'll look spiffy in it :)
Well, spiffy seems like big ask for anything in a proper cycling cut. I'm also not sure I'm cool enough to properly pull off an ironic tee (I think it's one of those "if you have to ask" things). I was thinking about it more as a collectible. But thanks for the encouragement.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
pastronef said:
The Hegelian said:
Nope, the ambivalence about Astana compared with Sky is simply this: Sky have destroyed all comers - including Astana which everyone knows are doped to the gills. They have dominated (utterly) the dirtiest teams, with the dirtiest histories, year after year.

No one else is riding like that. They have crushed the opposition. When Nibali won, it wasn't Astana crushing the opposition, it was the opposition literally falling over. The Giro is a very different story. Astana in 2015 were probably more full on than Sky in any tdf - but the Giro does not attract mainstream interest. Sky are the only ones doing this, year in year out, in front of the global media circus that is the tdf.

So the most logical question in the world is this: how do you utterly destroy the dirtiest teams, whilst being clean as a whistle yourself? You don't, hence the questions.

Where there is hypocrisy - and of course there is - I think it is aesthetic not nationalistic. People liked Cadel because he was a fighter, they liked Wiggins because he was an interesting mod - but Froome is damn ugly on the bike, and his polite bourgeois manner does not appeal.

they destroyed in July

Astana since 2010 won
2 Tours (Alberto 2010 Nibali 2013)
2 Giro (Nibali 2013-16)
1 Vuelta (Aru 2016)

got podiums in Giro Tour Vuelta

remember Hautacam 2013, when Nibali wanted to win the stage, Astana chased all day long as mad, and Nibali went bang and won.
I am glad Sky let the breakaways go this year
Nibali bossed the cobbled stage in 2014, which to be honest, that one stage was more exciting than all of Froome's wins put together.
my mistake, I meant Tour 2014.
and yes Astana won the Tour on the road in 2010, then they awarded Andy

speaking about exciting wins. it´s subjective. you like some, I like some others, normal.
 
Jul 14, 2016
161
0
0
Re: Re:

deValtos said:
tretiak said:
kwikki said:
I am aware of that argument but I find it a very weak one, because actually it contains within it a hypocrisy. The people who put that argument forwards are being hypocritical, and actually what they are saying is 'we won't object to you doping, as long as you never pretend to be clean....unless asked directly'. It's a nonsense argument.

People object to Sky and Froome primarily because they think they are cheating. The hypocrisy thing is there, but is in addition.

Did anyone ask Nibali in 2014 if he dopes? What was his answer??
His W/kg ratio is more human. Maybe that's why.
Are they though?

I remember this article from 2014.

http://cyclingtips.com/2014/08/tour-de-france-2014-analysis-of-climbing-data-and-what-does-it-mean/
Read this. He has done much better W/kg in other occasions https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jul/21/team-sky-data-chris-froome-tour-de-france

And this about osymetric chainrings http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/product-news/osymetric-chainrings-do-they-work-28044
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
In case anyone forgot and maybe some newcomers never knew, but Brailsford thought Kimmage sceptical in 2009...

He handed me a copy of the team's recruitment strategy - a huge tome that must have weighed half a ton - and impressed on me that Sky would be different

Roger Palfreeman, the chief medical officer at British Cycling, would lead an internal testing programme.

The team would only employ British doctors, have a zero tolerance of doping and would not employ anyone who had been associated with doping. The staff would be "enthusiastic and positive, fit and healthy, and willing to try new things".
Sky lied. Sky lied big time from the beginning.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/paul-kimmage-tour-de-france-leader-chris-froome-would-be-well-advised-to-invite-questions-31386946.html

Sky's internal testing program that never picked up Bilharzia or JTL's blood anomalies..... :rolleyes:

Even the Deputy editor, Sunday Times Sport, is tweeting BS that after 4 years and no 'evidence', Froome is a clean winner. Imagine he oversaw all the Armstrong articles, imagine that. Boy 'journalism' can be a dirty word sometimes.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
Sky might not win another TdF for a while.

Large drop in TV ratings #TDF2016 : -32% Holland -25% Spain -16% Flanders -12% France -10% UK -10% Germany -5% USA.

It would appear Sky's dominance is not good for ASO's product or selling France as a holiday destination and Ministers will not be happy.

Well, that might mean they'll have to forgo next years win....
 
Re:

Benotti69 said:
In case anyone forgot and maybe some newcomers never knew, but Brailsford thought Kimmage sceptical in 2009...

He handed me a copy of the team's recruitment strategy - a huge tome that must have weighed half a ton - and impressed on me that Sky would be different

Roger Palfreeman, the chief medical officer at British Cycling, would lead an internal testing programme.

The team would only employ British doctors, have a zero tolerance of doping and would not employ anyone who had been associated with doping. The staff would be "enthusiastic and positive, fit and healthy, and willing to try new things".
Sky lied. Sky lied big time from the beginning.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/paul-kimmage-tour-de-france-leader-chris-froome-would-be-well-advised-to-invite-questions-31386946.html

Sky's internal testing program that never picked up Bilharzia or JTL's blood anomalies..... :rolleyes:

Even the Deputy editor, Sunday Times Sport, is tweeting BS that after 4 years and no 'evidence', Froome is a clean winner. Imagine he oversaw all the Armstrong articles, imagine that. Boy 'journalism' can be a dirty word sometimes.
I thought Sky had done a blood test on JTL just before the UCI (or whatever) one, but it was within the parameters (but perhaps only just)? Or is my memory wrong ...
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY