- Jul 7, 2015
- 170
- 0
- 0
Re:
Welcome back. I still laugh out loud when I think of parakeets. :lol:blackcat said:this gif better work.
does anyone know how to pronounce gif?
Re:
The absurd is good, acknowledging our hypocrisy likewise, but supporting Sky now is impossible innit? Support them in an amusingly absurd way though, I could get that. The degree of lies and manipulation and intelligence-insulting management speak has been too much. But buy all the team kit and go riding, definitely, great craic.
I'd quite like to literally hang them. Not in a nasty way just a kind of Monty Python style, Froome in his yellow jersey, bike gaffa taped under him, screaming 'yes certainly yes certainly' in a panicked psychosis. Brailsford, hanging, jowls clenched giving a last minute management speech whilst his hands are being flapped in various shapes by a midget puppeteer perched ontop the gibbet cackling manically. Maybe that's more Jodorowsky than Monty Python (anyone seen the film El Topo?).
Anyway I was gonna say, I like the Milgram reference, fascinated me for years that'un. Our autonomy is being manipulated constantly (if we even have any at all, deterministic theory etc) and a lot of fans have been manipulated by Sky, like Armstrong before. It's a bit difficult for some to admit being duped and so they maintain their 'suspension of disbelief' (see Bikeradar discussions!!).
I wonder if Sky, with their vast media empire resources, have been using Artificial Intelligence via Facebook, Google, Twitter etc., to target their PR and gather their fan base. The technology is there (see Trump election, Brexit etc). Even if Sky only use it in a fairly minimal way it's possible in a relatively short time their current problems will be forgotten and they will carry on regardless with the same number of Sky-clad fanboys filling the UK roads (see Bikeradar!!).
Ha ha, like a mad intellectual's stream of consciousness post. I like it.blackcat said:
The absurd is good, acknowledging our hypocrisy likewise, but supporting Sky now is impossible innit? Support them in an amusingly absurd way though, I could get that. The degree of lies and manipulation and intelligence-insulting management speak has been too much. But buy all the team kit and go riding, definitely, great craic.
I'd quite like to literally hang them. Not in a nasty way just a kind of Monty Python style, Froome in his yellow jersey, bike gaffa taped under him, screaming 'yes certainly yes certainly' in a panicked psychosis. Brailsford, hanging, jowls clenched giving a last minute management speech whilst his hands are being flapped in various shapes by a midget puppeteer perched ontop the gibbet cackling manically. Maybe that's more Jodorowsky than Monty Python (anyone seen the film El Topo?).
Anyway I was gonna say, I like the Milgram reference, fascinated me for years that'un. Our autonomy is being manipulated constantly (if we even have any at all, deterministic theory etc) and a lot of fans have been manipulated by Sky, like Armstrong before. It's a bit difficult for some to admit being duped and so they maintain their 'suspension of disbelief' (see Bikeradar discussions!!).
I wonder if Sky, with their vast media empire resources, have been using Artificial Intelligence via Facebook, Google, Twitter etc., to target their PR and gather their fan base. The technology is there (see Trump election, Brexit etc). Even if Sky only use it in a fairly minimal way it's possible in a relatively short time their current problems will be forgotten and they will carry on regardless with the same number of Sky-clad fanboys filling the UK roads (see Bikeradar!!).
- Mar 13, 2009
- 16,854
- 1
- 0
Re: Re:
the only time i spend 7k pounds is when I have won[sic] of froomes motors inside it giving me 200watts over 60 minutes.otherwised, wont pay the money.
*and 'sublimating one's agency' is almost Zeno's paradox. can one abnegate autonomy? oxymoron
ofcourse 'we' enable them. I mentioned in this post following viewtopic.php?p=2069216#p2069216, about the suspension of disbelief, and ofcourse it follows, we enable them buying 7k GBP Pinarellos kitted out with Dura-ace automatic shiftingDan2016 said:
the only time i spend 7k pounds is when I have won[sic] of froomes motors inside it giving me 200watts over 60 minutes.otherwised, wont pay the money.
*and 'sublimating one's agency' is almost Zeno's paradox. can one abnegate autonomy? oxymoron
It is the other fella who is a bit gnarly hahaRe: Re:
Everyone has assumed that there was one dose of whatever it was in that Jiffy bag.
Surely with a cupboard full in Manchester the whole team didn't have extreme hayfever.....
My guess is that a number of key domestiques were also dosing kenalogue to drop those last few kilos before major stage races. It's all about power to weight ratio and watts per kilo after all.pastronef said:
Everyone has assumed that there was one dose of whatever it was in that Jiffy bag.
Surely with a cupboard full in Manchester the whole team didn't have extreme hayfever.....
Cope 'I knew nothing at the time and I know nothing now and what I knew then I can't remember'. Bet he's seething - been made to look a total fool ; a general dogsbody with half a job. I'd feel like I'd been stitched up as well.
As for the 'lost computer'. Geez. They had missing medical records for 3 years for their star rider? What a crock.
Dog ate my homework indeed.
As for the 'lost computer'. Geez. They had missing medical records for 3 years for their star rider? What a crock.
Dog ate my homework indeed.
- Mar 13, 2009
- 16,854
- 1
- 0
Re: Re:
proof is, all the drugs were available in the previous era, and also in bodybuilding. In bodybuilding now, their out-of-competition walk-around-weight, is about 10% less than in the 90s and 2000s. Why? its the lipotropin stupid(George Stephanopoullos sounbite for bubba clinton)
they are all leaner. See Katusha's Zakarin. Nibali. mebbe Hesjedal (not sure on him). definitely Froome and Wiggins.
clen, hgh, testo, corticos, all available in the previous epoch. so that is the control sample. Available to bodybuilders and cyclists. now, bodybuilders dont put on all the extra weight out of competition. And in cycling, Froome and Wiggins got down about ~7% less weight than they would have in the mid-2000s if they were on a TdF gc tilt.
it is lipotropin.B_Ugli said:
proof is, all the drugs were available in the previous era, and also in bodybuilding. In bodybuilding now, their out-of-competition walk-around-weight, is about 10% less than in the 90s and 2000s. Why? its the lipotropin stupid(George Stephanopoullos sounbite for bubba clinton)
they are all leaner. See Katusha's Zakarin. Nibali. mebbe Hesjedal (not sure on him). definitely Froome and Wiggins.
clen, hgh, testo, corticos, all available in the previous epoch. so that is the control sample. Available to bodybuilders and cyclists. now, bodybuilders dont put on all the extra weight out of competition. And in cycling, Froome and Wiggins got down about ~7% less weight than they would have in the mid-2000s if they were on a TdF gc tilt.
BBC Radio 5 Live now, cycling program in context of Sky shenanigans with journo Richard Moore and the boss of Wiggle women's team.
Froome interview: Hilarious. Very prickly. Says basically 'we just need to ignore what's going on right now', nothing to see hear. Gets defensive and denies the idea Sky won't get much roadside support in France in July. The guy is delusional, or in denial, or both.
Mildly interesting: Moore being guardedly very critical of Sky (I thought he was a fully paid up fanboy!?), suggesting tramadol and out-of-competition cortisone use in Sky are rampant (my word). Questioning this line between legal and ethical. Is doping just a legal issue or is it an ethical issue. Do riders carry a responsibility to define the ethics or just follow the current rules. Reckons if Brailsford goes the team will folds, cannot have one without the other.
Wiggle women says rider/s on her team was taking tramadol and she put a stop to it, not on ethical grounds but solely because of aggression and abuse towards staff as a drug side effect, and big come-downs after a tramadol high. I had no idea tramadol worked like that, with 'highs' and aggression.
Froome interview: Hilarious. Very prickly. Says basically 'we just need to ignore what's going on right now', nothing to see hear. Gets defensive and denies the idea Sky won't get much roadside support in France in July. The guy is delusional, or in denial, or both.
Mildly interesting: Moore being guardedly very critical of Sky (I thought he was a fully paid up fanboy!?), suggesting tramadol and out-of-competition cortisone use in Sky are rampant (my word). Questioning this line between legal and ethical. Is doping just a legal issue or is it an ethical issue. Do riders carry a responsibility to define the ethics or just follow the current rules. Reckons if Brailsford goes the team will folds, cannot have one without the other.
Wiggle women says rider/s on her team was taking tramadol and she put a stop to it, not on ethical grounds but solely because of aggression and abuse towards staff as a drug side effect, and big come-downs after a tramadol high. I had no idea tramadol worked like that, with 'highs' and aggression.
BBC Radio 5...Ex British Cycling president Tony Doyle ripping shreds out of everyone right now. Not mincing words. Brailsford, Brian Cookson, Wiggins, Freeman etc. ''Wiggins needs to stop hiding and be honest with everyone''. ''Freeman needs to not cry off sick''. ''Cookson has a lot of questions to answer''.
Full of support for good old Shane Sutton though. He's been made a fall-guy apparently. I can't work that one out but anyway...
Full of support for good old Shane Sutton though. He's been made a fall-guy apparently. I can't work that one out but anyway...
Re:
that´s what I am curious about. the investigation still needs to go on, and the contents of the jiffy bag made clear before Wada or Ukad can do something.
no?
yes but for now this kind of proof could make Sky and UK sport stop the £££ founding, but until there is no official proof, no knighthoods nor Tour wins can be taken away.blackcat said:
that´s what I am curious about. the investigation still needs to go on, and the contents of the jiffy bag made clear before Wada or Ukad can do something.
no?
- Jul 10, 2012
- 421
- 5
- 9,285
Re:
I'll have to listen back; but I don't think he mentioned Brailsford when he was dishing out the blame ?Dan2016 said:
- Dec 7, 2010
- 8,770
- 3
- 0
How does the monarch get rid of a SIR? a couple of them? I mean sir ***** witz fitz and **** pederverts? Should not be a sir any longer NO?
Fing Brits and the BS. Give me tea and I will drown you.
Fing Brits and the BS. Give me tea and I will drown you.
- Mar 13, 2009
- 16,854
- 1
- 0
Re: Re:
we have seen in cycling under Verbruggen, 'proof', as in, this proof you seek, is a difficult and inaccessible thing to attain. With good reason. The WADA statute and regulations have thresholds before you are assessed to test 'non-negative'.
As I said in the post immediately before^, an experienced person in the field, a biochemist/doctor in blood/ will be able to see all of one's bloodwork, their testing, their MSGC tests, other urine tests, other blood tests, and assess it as NOT NORMAL.
We cannot prosecute this case at WADA. athletes know they have thresholds to stay within. and they know if they are up before a WADA sanctioning committee, they can fight it if they have the resources like Landis, and keep it before the 'courts' for years. And this inverts the deterrent principle of justice, they have turned it onto the administrative body, and deterred them from 'prosecuting' borderline and/or ambiguous threshold 'breaches'.
pastronef said:
we have seen in cycling under Verbruggen, 'proof', as in, this proof you seek, is a difficult and inaccessible thing to attain. With good reason. The WADA statute and regulations have thresholds before you are assessed to test 'non-negative'.
As I said in the post immediately before^, an experienced person in the field, a biochemist/doctor in blood/ will be able to see all of one's bloodwork, their testing, their MSGC tests, other urine tests, other blood tests, and assess it as NOT NORMAL.
We cannot prosecute this case at WADA. athletes know they have thresholds to stay within. and they know if they are up before a WADA sanctioning committee, they can fight it if they have the resources like Landis, and keep it before the 'courts' for years. And this inverts the deterrent principle of justice, they have turned it onto the administrative body, and deterred them from 'prosecuting' borderline and/or ambiguous threshold 'breaches'.
- Mar 13, 2009
- 16,854
- 1
- 0
Re: Re:
this post pastronef I filed it away in the Brits Don't Dope thread. because, as we know, what a silly question, ofcourse they don't dope. They have also left the forum and cannot now report my posts to the moderators as racist and full of profanitypastronef said:
blackcat said:
- Jul 6, 2014
- 1,628
- 263
- 10,880
Re:
I realised this in myself when the tdf ran last year ~ and suddenly considered the threat of terror attacks in France, against the fantasy space of cols and tt's; and this sense that terrorism had already succeeded in violating the dream bubble that is the tdf.
To return Zizek on you, that's the Real intervening. The rest is all symbolic, and it all requires that suppression of disbelief.
The suppression of disbelief goes deeper than that, does it not? It is a necessary condition for having any investment in the sport at all (or any sport), above and beyond some dialectic of doping/clean.blackcat said:
I realised this in myself when the tdf ran last year ~ and suddenly considered the threat of terror attacks in France, against the fantasy space of cols and tt's; and this sense that terrorism had already succeeded in violating the dream bubble that is the tdf.
To return Zizek on you, that's the Real intervening. The rest is all symbolic, and it all requires that suppression of disbelief.
- Jul 30, 2011
- 7,539
- 107
- 17,680
Can't skip fantasy (fans under symbolic; team player aspirations) if you're bringing on Zizek's (Lacan).
@cat, re Murdoch: no prizes for why Freud and Jung could never make the Elektra complex dangerous.
@cat, re Murdoch: no prizes for why Freud and Jung could never make the Elektra complex dangerous.
- Mar 13, 2009
- 16,854
- 1
- 0
@aphronesis the most glaring is this lightfoot dance the pro sportsmen/women play, when they decry doping and castigate dopers like Ricco and Armstrong, whilst doing exactly the same thing themselves, the dissonance. They may justify it to themselves with aphorisms like 'it is not doping if it does not show up', then smear the character of Ricco and Diluca.*
*I am not aware of what character they have, but they smear their character nevertheless. Like Chelsea/Bradley Manning. This character defamation, is built into the system, it is institutional deterrence. Not a formal legal tenet of criminal deterrence, or civil engineering. But some manifestation of institutional bodies and bureaucracies and how they protect their own operations. It is another form like a mafia.
If we go back on all of Wiggins' quotes, we can indict him using his own words; hung on his own petard.
also, built into the system, the system of pro sport, it may be mere microcosm of capitalist society, professional sport cannot fathom risk, that cant estimate, and have zero concept of risk management.
One may see this as an opportunity, like perfect market theory, there is an option to specialise (marginal gains anyone?) and see the vacuum where such expertise may fill an advantage... WRONG.
It is based on the one-true measurement and ultimate metric of pro sport. which is the W.
risk and risk management will never usher in a W. Even in the Festina year of 98 when half the teams went home. You would need every team to go home, and you being the only remaining team.
*I am not aware of what character they have, but they smear their character nevertheless. Like Chelsea/Bradley Manning. This character defamation, is built into the system, it is institutional deterrence. Not a formal legal tenet of criminal deterrence, or civil engineering. But some manifestation of institutional bodies and bureaucracies and how they protect their own operations. It is another form like a mafia.
If we go back on all of Wiggins' quotes, we can indict him using his own words; hung on his own petard.
also, built into the system, the system of pro sport, it may be mere microcosm of capitalist society, professional sport cannot fathom risk, that cant estimate, and have zero concept of risk management.
One may see this as an opportunity, like perfect market theory, there is an option to specialise (marginal gains anyone?) and see the vacuum where such expertise may fill an advantage... WRONG.
It is based on the one-true measurement and ultimate metric of pro sport. which is the W.
risk and risk management will never usher in a W. Even in the Festina year of 98 when half the teams went home. You would need every team to go home, and you being the only remaining team.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Étoile de Bessèges 2023 (February 1-5)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 213
-
Volta a la Comunitat Valenciana 2023 (February 1-5)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 255
-
Vuelta a San Juan 2023 (January 22-29)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 530
-
-
Saudi Tour 2023 (January 30th - February 3rd)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 139
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 14K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Transfers and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 6K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram