Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1479 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Re: Sky

Wondering how Great Transformations work?

marginal food, marginal proteins, marginal timing, marginal lean mass, marginally lightweight muscles... that's how it works!

lean mass around 10:30
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gzd-nYSDgos

wondering whether it would work for this knight - from big TT guy to lightweight climber while losing weight and simultaneously gaining watts
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
Benotti69 said:
Zypherov said:
ferryman said:
Zypherov said:
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
I was going to respond but remembered Neil Young put it better:

'I really got some news
I met a man from Mars.
He picked up all my guitars
And played me traveling songs.

And when we got on ship
He brought out
something for the trip
And said, It's old but it's good
Like any other primitive would.'
And what has that nonsense got to do with my post. Perhaps you should read my post and learn something.

Please provide evidence that Sky are doping. You can't. If that post is the best you can do then perhaps you should just forget about it.
Sky hired a doctor banned for life from the sport (afterwards). If that is not considered evidence then you might as well believe in Santa Claus.
Well your argument for sky doping was so well executed with proof of sky doping, quick where are the pitchforks
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
It's absolutely amazing that people are so sure that Sky are doping. Perhaps you should present your fully detailed documented evidence to the UCI & WADA. By the way what will the winning Lotto numbers for Saturday nights draw be.
 
Re:

Zypherov said:
It's absolutely amazing that people are so sure that Sky are doping. Perhaps you should present your fully detailed documented evidence to the UCI & WADA. By the way what will the winning Lotto numbers for Saturday nights draw be.
Why would we need clairvoyance when we already possess such compelling and substantial empirical knowledge?

Knowledge, incidentally, that was fully detailed and documented from WADA.
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
Re: Re:

The Hegelian said:
Zypherov said:
It's absolutely amazing that people are so sure that Sky are doping. Perhaps you should present your fully detailed documented evidence to the UCI & WADA. By the way what will the winning Lotto numbers for Saturday nights draw be.
Why would we need clairvoyance when we already possess such compelling and substantial empirical knowledge?

Knowledge, incidentally, that was fully detailed and documented from WADA.
So where are the sanctions ?
 
Re: Re:

Zypherov said:
The Hegelian said:
Zypherov said:
It's absolutely amazing that people are so sure that Sky are doping. Perhaps you should present your fully detailed documented evidence to the UCI & WADA. By the way what will the winning Lotto numbers for Saturday nights draw be.
Why would we need clairvoyance when we already possess such compelling and substantial empirical knowledge?

Knowledge, incidentally, that was fully detailed and documented from WADA.
So where are the sanctions ?

Do you know the meaning of empirical?
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
Zypherov said:
The Hegelian said:
Zypherov said:
It's absolutely amazing that people are so sure that Sky are doping. Perhaps you should present your fully detailed documented evidence to the UCI & WADA. By the way what will the winning Lotto numbers for Saturday nights draw be.
Why would we need clairvoyance when we already possess such compelling and substantial empirical knowledge?

Knowledge, incidentally, that was fully detailed and documented from WADA.
So where are the sanctions ?

Do you know the meaning of empirical?
Of course I do. Why do you ask ? Does it spoil your fun and libellous allegations.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Indeed I'm afraid the words "empirical knowledge" were not well spent on Zypherov.
Were Indurain, Riis or Ulrich ever sanctioned?

Hegelian is right, we have the empirical knowledge of Wiggins' doping (like we do of Indurain, Riis and Ulrich's doping, and like we did of Lance's doping pre-sanction) and it comes straight from WADA, so it's rather difficult to refute.
As somebody else said, the rest is with the lawyers.
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
Re:

sniper said:
Indeed I'm afraid the words "empirical knowledge" were not well spent on Zypherov.
Were Indurain, Riis or Ulrich ever sanctioned?

Hegelian is right, we have the empirical knowledge of Wiggins' doping (like we do of Indurain, Riis and Ulrich's doping, and like we did of Lance's doping pre-sanction) and it comes straight from WADA, so it's rather difficult to refute.
As somebody else said, the rest is with the lawyers.

So by your logic every rider that has a sudden drop in weight, starts a high cadence, etc, TUE'S and all the rest must be doping. Observation is not evidence of the facts. If you were going to use a perception such as "empirical knowledge" in this case, it would not stand up in court. Well of course this is not a court of law. But still.

One must remember that if Chris Froome had been allowed a free reign when Wiggins won the Tour, Froome would have won it.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Me and thehog we were only saying that your "where are the sanctions?"-response was a fail.
The lack of sanctions does not nullify the empirical knowledge of doping, as shown by the cases of Indurain, Ulrich, Riis and tons of other known dopers who for one reason or another were never sanctioned.

Apart from that i think we agree. What we have on Wiggins wouldn't stand up in court. But again, that's pretty meaningless in terms of 'did he dope or not'. Not even the evidence against Ulrich could stand up in court. Nor did the evidence against Lance stand up in any kind of court prior to 2012. The threshold is very high.
 
Re:

sniper said:
Me and thehog we were only saying that your "where are the sanctions?"-response was a fail.
The lack of sanctions does not nullify the empirical knowledge of doping, as shown by the cases of Indurain, Ulrich, Riis and tons of other known dopers who for one reason or another were never sanctioned.

Apart from that i think we agree. What we have on Wiggins wouldn't stand up in court. But again, that's pretty meaningless in terms of 'did he dope or not'. Not even the evidence against Ulrich could stand up in court. Nor did the evidence against Lance stand up in any kind of court prior to 2012. The threshold is very high.
Considering LA's lack of sanctions for his time actually riding, I'd say that if we see Froome, Wigans and DB on the guestlist of Jeremy Kyle, then they could be coming...
 
Re: Re:

Zypherov said:
sniper said:
Indeed I'm afraid the words "empirical knowledge" were not well spent on Zypherov.
Were Indurain, Riis or Ulrich ever sanctioned?

Hegelian is right, we have the empirical knowledge of Wiggins' doping (like we do of Indurain, Riis and Ulrich's doping, and like we did of Lance's doping pre-sanction) and it comes straight from WADA, so it's rather difficult to refute.
As somebody else said, the rest is with the lawyers.

So by your logic every rider that has a sudden drop in weight, starts a high cadence, etc, TUE'S and all the rest must be doping. Observation is not evidence of the facts. If you were going to use a perception such as "empirical knowledge" in this case, it would not stand up in court. Well of course this is not a court of law. But still.

One must remember that if Chris Froome had been allowed a free reign when Wiggins won the Tour, Froome would have won it.
And Froome is less suspicious of course.
 
Re:

B_Ugli said:
Of course Brailsford probably doesn't know anything about this either:

Diego Rosa
From: Astana
To: Team Sky

BMC and Team Sky fought over Rosa's future throughout the spring with both teams keen on the Italian's signature. In the end British Pound won over US Dollar and Dave Brailsford landed his latest acquisition from a team he once felt the UCI should sanction and ban.

Speaking of bans, Rosa also found himself on the cusp of a suspension during the season due to three possible whereabouts errors. However two of those episodes were struck off just before the Olympics, leaving the Italian clear to race.
You don't understand. Rosa was doping at Astana. Now that he'll be riding for Sky he'll no longer dope and be even better. That's the magic of Sky.
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Re: Sky

pastronef said:
good guy Elissonde showing there´s no good or bad, warms my heart (I am not kidding and I support Kenny)

https://www.twitter.com/Digger_forum/status/801401545178968064

this to all of those who moaned when he signed for Sky.

it´s pro sport, guys and girls, the "my fav rider is better than yours" narrative has no place in it.
no wonder Kenny is happy at SKY - impossible he haven't heard of Brailsford's dream of "coaching the french Tour winner"
 
Re: Re:

Zypherov said:
sniper said:
Indeed I'm afraid the words "empirical knowledge" were not well spent on Zypherov.
Were Indurain, Riis or Ulrich ever sanctioned?

Hegelian is right, we have the empirical knowledge of Wiggins' doping (like we do of Indurain, Riis and Ulrich's doping, and like we did of Lance's doping pre-sanction) and it comes straight from WADA, so it's rather difficult to refute.
As somebody else said, the rest is with the lawyers.

So by your logic every rider that has a sudden drop in weight, starts a high cadence, etc, TUE'S and all the rest must be doping. Observation is not evidence of the facts. If you were going to use a perception such as "empirical knowledge" in this case, it would not stand up in court. Well of course this is not a court of law. But still.

One must remember that if Chris Froome had been allowed a free reign when Wiggins won the Tour, Froome would have won it.
Empirical = documented medical evidence that Sky rider Wiggins used the age old practice of big doses of cortico-steroids to drop weight and gain power/recovery, before each GT that he targeted.

That is not mere observation + speculation. It is something theoretically grounded in the medical science that underpins cycling. This is demonstrated by the fact the MPCC has a clear policy on cortio-steroid use, which is based on a direct understanding of the abuse of steroids in the pro peloton, its harmful implications for the human body (long term) and its demonstrable performance enhancing effects.

Let us be clear: you want to hold that it is libelous to assert that Sky are doping, and, that such inferences are as speculative and loose as guessing the lotto numbers before they are drawn.

I would hold that it is as clear as seeing the lotto numbers on screen, after they are drawn, and stating what they are.

Quite a difference between us on that matter!
 
No punishment for Wiggins over the package, Sky and BC could still be reprimanded for poor record keeping according to The Times:

The Times reports that UKAD is close to ending their investigation, which was launched in October. In addition to Cope, another member of staff is understood to have told UKAD that they have no recollection of what the package contained. UKAD has concerns about documentation kept by British Cycling and Team Sky, says the paper, along with the transportation of medicine. It is unlikely that any charges will be made.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re:

MatParker117 said:
No punishment for Wiggins over the package, Sky and BC could still be reprimanded for poor record keeping according to The Times:

The Times reports that UKAD is close to ending their investigation, which was launched in October. In addition to Cope, another member of staff is understood to have told UKAD that they have no recollection of what the package contained. UKAD has concerns about documentation kept by British Cycling and Team Sky, says the paper, along with the transportation of medicine. It is unlikely that any charges will be made.
The SkyTimes.

Brit cycling doing an internal investigation has to be as laughable as the Russians doing an internal investigation. Same outcomes.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS