Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

Dr Alan Farrell would be interesting to hear - http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-...-fourth-tue-for-bradley-wiggins-sunday-times/

Have you read Inside Team Sky. Farrell is a cheerleader.

 

[Robert5091]

Re: Re:

Dr Alan Farrell would be interesting to hear - http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-...-fourth-tue-for-bradley-wiggins-sunday-times/

Have you read Inside Team Sky. Farrell is a cheerleader.

Even so, it would be interesting to know why he stopped Freeman getting a TUE for Wiggins.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Dr Alan Farrell would be interesting to hear - http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-...-fourth-tue-for-bradley-wiggins-sunday-times/

Have you read Inside Team Sky. Farrell is a cheerleader.

Even so, it would be interesting to know why he stopped Freeman getting a TUE for Wiggins.

Because that was their stated policy. Google it, I think you'll find a Kimmage column on it.

 

[Robert5091]

Do you mean it was Sky's policy not to abuse the TUE system?

edit - Kimmage has been trying to talk to Farrell - https://cyclingtips.com/2017/03/interview-paul-kimmage-team-skys-charade-exposed/ - Sky lawyers standing maybe in the way.

 

[The Hegelian]

Re:

Who says it was a Team Sky programme? It might have been a Richard Freeman programme.

That is the thing about doping, even if a given team's management are completely ethical (Not Sky :lol: ) there isn't a lot they can do if one cyclist decides to go and dope.

We have to be careful drawing conclusions, after all, if the reports about other Sky doctors trying to stop Freeman doping....ahem, I mean treating...Wiggins are true it would suggest that some or most of them were acting ethically.

The point is this:
1. Go read the earlier - first 500?- posts in this thread. Every inference is basically speculative; debates are often about watts, climbing times, comparisons with US Postal etc.
2. Now: We've had the Wiggins Tue leak, Froome actually popped + Sky doctor busted with testosterone which he tried to cover up. We can have debates about all of this, but we're clearly no longer in the realm of speculative reasoning. We're in the realm of law, institution, parliament and actual allegations of doping.

It is also hardly unreasonable to make this inference: those are the things that have emerged in actuality. How many things are likely to have occurred that have not (and maybe never will) emerge?

 

[macbindle]

My post was a reply. You need to read it in that context.

 

[macbindle]

Re: Re:

Who says it was a Team Sky programme? It might have been a Richard Freeman programme.

That is the thing about doping, even if a given team's management are completely ethical (Not Sky :lol: ) there isn't a lot they can do if one cyclist decides to go and dope.

We have to be careful drawing conclusions, after all, if the reports about other Sky doctors trying to stop Freeman doping....ahem, I mean treating...Wiggins are true it would suggest that some or most of them were acting ethically.

The point is this:
1. Go read the earlier - first 500?- posts in this thread. Every inference is basically speculative; debates are often about watts, climbing times, comparisons with US Postal etc.
2. Now: We've had the Wiggins Tue leak, Froome actually popped + Sky doctor busted with testosterone which he tried to cover up. We can have debates about all of this, but we're clearly no longer in the realm of speculative reasoning. We're in the realm of law, institution, parliament and actual allegations of doping.

It is also hardly unreasonable to make this inference: those are the things that have emerged in actuality. How many things are likely to have occurred that have not (and maybe never will) emerge?

what we have is possibility v reality

it's possible that team sky were doping...........even likely but it's not a given

why waste time with TUEs if the doping is already covered?

you're hoping that 'the sky doctor was busted with testo' but for a bust to occur they will have

to have been used..........................surely?

da dwag may have got carried away with his puffing but in hindsight it never was much of a pop

The Tesco analogy, perhaps?

But that is a good point, regardless.

 

[ferryman]

Re: Re:

Who says it was a Team Sky programme? It might have been a Richard Freeman programme.

That is the thing about doping, even if a given team's management are completely ethical (Not Sky :lol: ) there isn't a lot they can do if one cyclist decides to go and dope.

We have to be careful drawing conclusions, after all, if the reports about other Sky doctors trying to stop Freeman doping....ahem, I mean treating...Wiggins are true it would suggest that some or most of them were acting ethically.

The point is this:
1. Go read the earlier - first 500?- posts in this thread. Every inference is basically speculative; debates are often about watts, climbing times, comparisons with US Postal etc.
2. Now: We've had the Wiggins Tue leak, Froome actually popped + Sky doctor busted with testosterone which he tried to cover up. We can have debates about all of this, but we're clearly no longer in the realm of speculative reasoning. We're in the realm of law, institution, parliament and actual allegations of doping.

It is also hardly unreasonable to make this inference: those are the things that have emerged in actuality. How many things are likely to have occurred that have not (and maybe never will) emerge?

what we have is possibility v reality

it's possible that team sky were doping...........even likely but it's not a given

why waste time with TUEs if the doping is already covered?

you're hoping that 'the sky doctor was busted with testo' but for a bust to occur they will have

to have been used..........................surely?

da dwag may have got carried away with his puffing but in hindsight it never was much of a pop

The Tesco analogy, perhaps?

But that is a good point, regardless.[/quote]

Not really. Legal, in competition doping knowing you are going to be tested but you have a nice little TUE behind you. A nice wee 'legal' top up I would suggest....

 

[The Hegelian]

Re: Re:

Who says it was a Team Sky programme? It might have been a Richard Freeman programme.

That is the thing about doping, even if a given team's management are completely ethical (Not Sky :lol: ) there isn't a lot they can do if one cyclist decides to go and dope.

We have to be careful drawing conclusions, after all, if the reports about other Sky doctors trying to stop Freeman doping....ahem, I mean treating...Wiggins are true it would suggest that some or most of them were acting ethically.

The point is this:
1. Go read the earlier - first 500?- posts in this thread. Every inference is basically speculative; debates are often about watts, climbing times, comparisons with US Postal etc.
2. Now: We've had the Wiggins Tue leak, Froome actually popped + Sky doctor busted with testosterone which he tried to cover up. We can have debates about all of this, but we're clearly no longer in the realm of speculative reasoning. We're in the realm of law, institution, parliament and actual allegations of doping.

It is also hardly unreasonable to make this inference: those are the things that have emerged in actuality. How many things are likely to have occurred that have not (and maybe never will) emerge?

what we have is possibility v reality

it's possible that team sky were doping...........even likely but it's not a given

why waste time with TUEs if the doping is already covered?

you're hoping that 'the sky doctor was busted with testo' but for a bust to occur they will have

to have been used..........................surely?

da dwag may have got carried away with his puffing but in hindsight it never was much of a pop

I'm not hoping for a bust. I'm just saying: look how profoundly the discourse has shifted in the last few years.

As for the TUES: they were roundly abused in the 90's & 00's. And that is precisely why the Wiggins leak was so damaging - loading up with TUE sanctioned cortico-steriods before a GT was a textbook doping practice from before the "clean era." That's why the MPCC banned it, and because they banned it, that's why Sky refused to join the MPCC. It's rather a stretch to then assert: "All of this is somehow good evidence of a commitment to riding clean." And that's what I'm trying to point out - these stretches are getting more and more flimsy and unreasonable.

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

Who says it was a Team Sky programme? It might have been a Richard Freeman programme.

That is the thing about doping, even if a given team's management are completely ethical (Not Sky :lol: ) there isn't a lot they can do if one cyclist decides to go and dope.

We have to be careful drawing conclusions, after all, if the reports about other Sky doctors trying to stop Freeman doping....ahem, I mean treating...Wiggins are true it would suggest that some or most of them were acting ethically.

The point is this:
1. Go read the earlier - first 500?- posts in this thread. Every inference is basically speculative; debates are often about watts, climbing times, comparisons with US Postal etc.
2. Now: We've had the Wiggins Tue leak, Froome actually popped + Sky doctor busted with testosterone which he tried to cover up. We can have debates about all of this, but we're clearly no longer in the realm of speculative reasoning. We're in the realm of law, institution, parliament and actual allegations of doping.

It is also hardly unreasonable to make this inference: those are the things that have emerged in actuality. How many things are likely to have occurred that have not (and maybe never will) emerge?

what we have is possibility v reality

it's possible that team sky were doping...........even likely but it's not a given

why waste time with TUEs if the doping is already covered?

you're hoping that 'the sky doctor was busted with testo' but for a bust to occur they will have

to have been used..........................surely?

da dwag may have got carried away with his puffing but in hindsight it never was much of a pop

I'm not hoping for a bust. I'm just saying: look how profoundly the discourse has shifted in the last few years.

As for the TUES: they were roundly abused in the 90's & 00's. And that is precisely why the Wiggins leak was so damaging - loading up with TUE sanctioned cortico-steriods before a GT was a textbook doping practice from before the "clean era." That's why the MPCC banned it, and because they banned it, that's why Sky refused to join the MPCC. It's rather a stretch to then assert: "All of this is somehow good evidence of a commitment to riding clean." And that's what I'm trying to point out - these stretches are getting more and more flimsy and unreasonable.

MPCC haven't banned TUEs or Corticosteroids. They simply pull you from a race if your cortisol is too low and enforce the 8 day rule, which is essentially what UCI do too now.

As for TUE abuse, this was more traditionally about your team Dr faking an injury for you, requesting an intra-articular (non-performance-enhancing route of administration) to fix it, but then giving you an intra-muscular (Systemic performance enhancing route of administration) instead and the TUE would protect you AAF-ing from the level found in sample, but because route of administration impossible to detect, you would not ADRV as you had a TUE expecting some of it to be in your sample to the lab.

What is significantly different with Wiggins TUE compared to typical TUE abuse in past, is he appears to have used an external ENT to the team to diagnose steroidal treatment for his Rhinutus, submitted a TUE application with that medical evidence and then been granted a TUE for an intra-muscular injection, which is not typical of how a TUE used to be abused. Actually applying for an intra-muscular injection from the get-go, is not typical of how Millar, Armstrong, Jacshe etc told the authorities how they used to abuse Corticosteroids. They always abused it via injury and intra-articular application, not intra-muscular illness application.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

Some people do seem intent on setting themselves up for a fall. The assumption that the project is ended and the personnel will be dispersed is ... optimistic. Still, six months from now, if a new sponsor is announced, these assumptions will be overlooked and reality spun into a new narrative...

What's really, really hilarious of course is that there's some people more willing to believe a real estare agent with no experience can launch a Sky-level Chinese team than are willing to believe that Brailsford can secure fresh funding.

And lo, it came to pass that Team Sky are expected to announce their new sponsor ahead of the Giro, rather than waiting for six months to elapse and do it ahead of the Tour:

Matteo Tosatto has told the Spanish press that Team Sky will apparently have an agreement in place with a new main sponsor ahead of May's Giro d'Italia, and that who it is could also be announced then.

Talking to marca.com, the Italian – who's been a sports director at Sky since 2017, having retired as a pro rider with Saxo Bank the previous year – said that he thought that an announcement might have been made ahead of the Tour de France, but that it could now come sooner.

Speaking at the UAE Tour, Tosatto told Marca that Team Sky's management team has worked hard to allay any fears the riders may have had about their futures.

"Before the Giro, we should have an agreement [with a new sponsor] that will ensure the safety of the team," he said. "It was only going to be finalised ahead of the Tour, but we are likely to announce it before the Corsa Rosa.

"It will be European, from home – de casa," Tosatto added, suggesting – and subsequently confirming – that the possible scenario of Colombian backing was not going to happen, but perhaps suggesting that the new backer could be Italian – i.e. from his home country of Italy.

GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer, anyone?

 

[samhocking]

Re: Sky

Italian Sponsor wants their sponsorship to be announced in Italy at Italy's biggest bike race? Sounds like deal progressing with or without Freeman being a GP to me.

 

[Jacques (7 ch)]

Re: Sky

Italian Sponsor wants their sponsorship to be announced in Italy at Italy's biggest bike race? Sounds like deal progressing with or without Freeman being a GP to me.

Ferrari as lead sponsor with San Pellegrino as a secondary ‘because it’s dangerous to drink too much orange juice’ and Vini Fantini, so Santa can have a comeback vehicle.

 

[samhocking]

Re: Sky

As long as it's San Pellegrino 'Blood Orange' ; )

I'm assuming the new sponsor is LVMH and pushing Pinarello & Tag Heur brands. Wild guess but Giro use Tag Heur timing and obviously Pinarello from Treviso are Italian and 2019 Giro Stage 19 begins in Pinarello's home town and why sponsor announcement has been moved from Tour de France to Giro as claimed by Tosatto.

 

[pastronef]

Re: Sky

As long as it's San Pellegrino 'Blood Orange' ; )

I'm assuming the new sponsor is LVMH and pushing Pinarello & Tag Heur brands. Wild guess but Giro use Tag Heur timing and obviously Pinarello from Treviso are Italian and 2019 Giro Stage 19 begins in Pinarello's home town and why sponsor announcement has been moved from Tour de France to Giro as claimed by Tosatto.

or maybe just to be as early as possible. by TDF rest days the riders agents are already putting pen to paper. May is much better and leads the team to July with confirmed future

 

[topcat]

Ferrari. It must mean the doctor.

 

[rick james]

A sad state when a team sponsor is the main subject of a now useless thread.....as I’ve said this place could do so much better

 

[MartinGT]

Egan Bernal the new Panzer. See Tony. That's your problem! If you want to drop riders in windy stages just drop to 60kg

 

[70kmph]

Re: Sky

60kg Sky riders faster than Cancellara...

 

[rick james]

Re: Sky

60kg Sky riders faster than Cancellara...

any proof of that claim?

 

[samhocking]

Re: Sky

Quintana (58kg), Moulard (62kg), Bardet (63.5kg) all seem to be coping with the echelons along with Bernal and are a similar weight and climbing all-rounders too? I think what's making the difference is Bernal has Rowe who is demonstrating rouler prowess and perfect race craft and the other teams have no answer to him when the wind comes.

 

[70kmph]

Yeah Luke Rowe...thats it. He must be the new Cancellara, hes going to win 3 PR

 

[samhocking]

Re: Sky

I wouldn't go that far! 40/1, he's worth a bet though ; )

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Sky

Quintana (58kg), Moulard (62kg), Bardet (63.5kg) all seem to be coping with the echelons along with Bernal and are a similar weight and climbing all-rounders too? I think what's making the difference is Bernal has Rowe who is demonstrating rouler prowess and perfect race craft and the other teams have no answer to him when the wind comes.

Totally. One guy destroying the peloton, trailing only his tiny climber, with no one else able to follow is normal. He’s the only rider who knows how to deal with the wind through his superior race craft. Makes sense.

 

[samhocking]

I wouldn't agree he's destroying the peloton lol! He's guiding & protecting Bernal & Kwiato in the cross-winds much better than anyone in other teams are doing for their GC leaders though like Quintana or Bardet from the racing i've watched the last 3 days that's for sure. Bernal admitted himself the other day that it was great he doesn't even need to think about where to ride in the road, he just does what Rowe tells him to do to stay safe.