Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1557 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Parker said:
I just posted some facts.
I guess Wiggins is referring more to Sky's Tour de France dominance also combined with the Team performance the rest of the season too.
If we look back to Armstrong's Tour dominance, US Postal Team in terms of UCI World ranking were really very poor each year barely scraping into the top 10 teams most years, unlike Sky who float around top 3 with Movistar and Quickstep who all have incredible depth to their riders throughout the season.
Depends what ranking system you use of course for the current day. The CQ ranking tends to favour teams with more all-round depth like Quickstep & and UCI ranking tends to favour the more Grand Tour focused teams like Sky & Movistar. Sky are certainly not running away with it though, it's often very very close each year who emerges ontop.
If we take UCI's rankings, Sky have only topped it in 2012 and 2017. Movistar or Quickstep generally pip them on points by a little. Valverde's long season probably just about makes the different for Movistar in both CQ or UCI rankings.
 
Re: Re:

TourOfSardinia said:
LaFlorecita said:
macbindle said:
Going by your avatar you are probably good at spotting dopers :D

It's a mark of how cynical the sport and it's spectators have become that Froome's attack on Ventoux is not regarded as panache.
It is not the doping that bothers me, it's the arrogance
Thumbs Up!
would be a good signature for this forum
Ah ... #7 ... the deadly sin that keeps on giving and giving ... opportunities for attack by the Cinic downtrodden ... upon those pedestal peddlers/pedalers ... at the top of some HC climb. Soldier on, lads. You've just about got 'em.
 
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
macbindle said:
Going by your avatar you are probably good at spotting dopers :D

It's a mark of how cynical the sport and it's spectators have become that Froome's attack on Ventoux is not regarded as panache.
It is not the doping that bothers me, it's the arrogance
And yet your post was all about spotting what you consider to be suspicious and potentially doped performances. Nothing to do with arrogance.

I found Contador's attempt to convince us that a widely used PED entering his system from a specific piece of meat from a specific butcher to be arrogance in the extreme. Indeed, as a rider he was widely known to be disliked due to arrogance.

I agree with you that Team Sky have displayed spectacular arrogance, but I see a fair dose of wilful blindness where it suits and an application of double-standards in quite a number of posts hereabouts.

I don't particularly care that much about this, but I do think that ultimately if the sport is to change then everyone has to go under the bus.
 
Re: Re:

macbindle said:
LaFlorecita said:
macbindle said:
Going by your avatar you are probably good at spotting dopers :D

It's a mark of how cynical the sport and it's spectators have become that Froome's attack on Ventoux is not regarded as panache.
It is not the doping that bothers me, it's the arrogance
And yet your post was all about spotting what you consider to be suspicious and potentially doped performances. Nothing to do with arrogance.

I found Contador's attempt to convince us that a widely used PED entering his system from a specific piece of meat from a specific butcher to be arrogance in the extreme. Indeed, as a rider he was widely known to be disliked due to arrogance.

I agree with you that Team Sky have displayed spectacular arrogance, but I see a fair dose of wilful blindness where it suits and an application of double-standards in quite a number of posts hereabouts.

I don't particularly care that much about this, but I do think that ultimately if the sport is to change then everyone has to go under the bus.
He wasn't trying to convince us, but the UCI and WADA, and that was perfectly justified way of legal defence. And it was perfectly possible that tiny amount of clenbuterol he had came that way in his organism. The other thing is that I don't believe in that, nor did UCI, or WADA, or CAS. There's no arrogance in that.

And no, he was not widely known as an arrogant, nor disliked because of that.
 
Re:

macbindle said:
You obviously haven't heard what his team mates thought of him.

And no, you are also wrong in yourestimation of Contador's doping defence.
What teammates? Basso? Jesus Hernandez? Sagan? Mick Rogers? Tirralongo? Sergio Paulinho? Or you think Roman Kreuziger's opinion on Contador should be most important of all, and binding for all of us? :rolleyes:
 
Re: Re:

macbindle said:
LaFlorecita said:
macbindle said:
Going by your avatar you are probably good at spotting dopers :D

It's a mark of how cynical the sport and it's spectators have become that Froome's attack on Ventoux is not regarded as panache.
It is not the doping that bothers me, it's the arrogance
And yet your post was all about spotting what you consider to be suspicious and potentially doped performances. Nothing to do with arrogance.

I found Contador's attempt to convince us that a widely used PED entering his system from a specific piece of meat from a specific butcher to be arrogance in the extreme. Indeed, as a rider he was widely known to be disliked due to arrogance.

I agree with you that Team Sky have displayed spectacular arrogance, but I see a fair dose of wilful blindness where it suits and an application of double-standards in quite a number of posts hereabouts.

I don't particularly care that much about this, but I do think that ultimately if the sport is to change then everyone has to go under the bus.
it´s a shame Wisniowski is not wearing the Quick-Step jersey anymore. there would be nothing but praise, the wolfpack delivers again, the strong rider from Quickstep shows his progress riding for the belgian squad, Wisniowski uses his experience to stay away, he was already on form in Algarve when he was the best quickstep rider in the TT, good boys quicksteppers thank Wisniowski for his performance etc etc ;)
 
Re: Re:

macbindle said:
LaFlorecita said:
macbindle said:
Going by your avatar you are probably good at spotting dopers :D

It's a mark of how cynical the sport and it's spectators have become that Froome's attack on Ventoux is not regarded as panache.
It is not the doping that bothers me, it's the arrogance
And yet your post was all about spotting what you consider to be suspicious and potentially doped performances. Nothing to do with arrogance.

I found Contador's attempt to convince us that a widely used PED entering his system from a specific piece of meat from a specific butcher to be arrogance in the extreme. Indeed, as a rider he was widely known to be disliked due to arrogance.

I agree with you that Team Sky have displayed spectacular arrogance, but I see a fair dose of wilful blindness where it suits and an application of double-standards in quite a number of posts hereabouts.

I don't particularly care that much about this, but I do think that ultimately if the sport is to change then everyone has to go under the bus.
Serious question, Macbindle ... WTF are you talking about!?!

Or are you just droning the Clinic party line, "under the bus" 'n all, FFS.
 
Re:

macbindle said:
You obviously haven't heard what his team mates thought of him.

And no, you are also wrong in yourestimation of Contador's doping defence.
He is widely liked by his (ex)-colleagues... the only ones who he apparently was on bad terms with were Lance and Kreuziger aka Backstabber. Many of his ex-teammates loved working with him and admired him. Please don't spread lies about him.
Klödi, Basso, Nico Roche, Oscar Perreiro, Rogers, Tiralongo, Luisle, Pantano, Bennati, Scarponi (RIP), Zubeldia, Theuns, obviously Jesus, just a couple of names that come to mind and I'm probably forgetting plenty. Only good things said about him by his sport directors also.
And then there are many riders that have never raced for the same team that also like and/or admire him, Aru, Bardet, Brambilla, Tommeke, Samu a few examples
 
Lot of dopers in that list ;)

If I recall Oleg gave a fairly excoriating summary of Contador.

Can I ask you a question though. I picked you up on your doping-spotting of Sky riders which is based upon what you perceive to be exceptional performances. At which point during Contador's career did you start to notice that his performances were unnatural?
 
Re:

macbindle said:
Lot of dopers in that list ;)

If I recall Oleg gave a fairly excoriating summary of Contador.

Can I ask you a question though. I picked you up on your doping-spotting of Sky riders which is based upon what you perceive to be exceptional performances. At which point during Contador's career did you start to notice that his performances were unnatural?
Oleg? Really? He hated everyone but himself.
 
Re: Re:

Alpe73 said:
macbindle said:
You have to read the part you've highlighted in the context of the rest of my post.
Have read it ... for 2nd time ... my question remains.

C’mon, give it a whirl.
Sure, no problem.

My post was about double-standards, and fixating on one team. It doesn't matter (to me) what team is being fixated upon, and of course in this case it's Sky.

I think, in some way, this is synonymous with omerta in the peloton. It's a sort of whataboutery which distracts from the bigger picture.

As for clinic line, I dont really know what that means given my infrequent postings here.
 
No double standards as far as Sky is in question. They're the worst, and the margin is big, very big. We saw that with US Postal in Verbruggen era, and we saw that with Sky in McQuaid, and especially Cookson, era's. No other team came close in entire cycling history!
 
Re:

macbindle said:
Really? Evidence??

All we know is that they abused the TUE system and that Froome over-used an asthma medicine.
Evidence? I'm not in court, I call it as I see it!
You just need to see them race in races which are most important to them (aka Le Tour), and everything becomes clear.
They make wonders. They turn track specialists into climbers, nobody's into multiple GT winners, lightweight riders into best TT-ists, rolleurs into de luxe climbers, and so on and on...
They invented marginal gains :lol: They train harder, they're smarter, they have more determination, etc.
And they are doing that being totally clean. We just need to believe them, that's all. They're the champions of clean cycling. All we need to do is to believe on their word. That's it.
 
Re:

macbindle said:
Lot of dopers in that list ;)

If I recall Oleg gave a fairly excoriating summary of Contador.

Can I ask you a question though. I picked you up on your doping-spotting of Sky riders which is based upon what you perceive to be exceptional performances. At which point during Contador's career did you start to notice that his performances were unnatural?
You're using Oleg to support your position?? Good luck with that!
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
macbindle said:
Really? Evidence??

All we know is that they abused the TUE system and that Froome over-used an asthma medicine.
Evidence? I'm not in court, I call it as I see it!
You just need to see them race in races which are most important to them (aka Le Tour), and everything becomes clear.
They make wonders. They turn track specialists into climbers, nobody's into multiple GT winners, lightweight riders into best TT-ists, rolleurs into de luxe climbers, and so on and on...
They invented marginal gains :lol: They train harder, they're smarter, they have more determination, etc.
And they are doing that being totally clean. We just need to believe them, that's all. They're the champions of clean cycling. All we need to do is to believe on their word. That's it.
They haven't managed to get fat guys climbing mountains like aeroplanes (to quote Lemond) so they aren't the worst in cycling history. ;)

It's nonsense in fact. Sheer overstatement and exaggeration. I agree with some of what you said with your allusions to Froome, but if you think that they run a team wide doping programme à la USPS, then you are deluded. Sure, they occupy grey areas. Sure, they probably outright dope certain riders, but to pretend that they dope as if it was the 1990s is just nonsense.

Oh...and they have an active PR department, hence the marginal gains nonsense. Big deal.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS