• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1609 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Because my point clearly defined 'depth' in the points this year as that was the context.

1 CARAPAZ Richard(1730)4
2 BERNAL Egan(1261)12
3 THOMAS Geraint(928)26
4 YATES Adam(848)33
5 PORTE Richie(802)39
6 HAYTER Ethan(742)44
7 GANNA Filippo(705)49
8 KWIATKOWSKI Michał(664)57
9 VAN BAARLE Dylan(620)61
10 PIDCOCK Thomas(541)
I would hope they have depth considering the money they put out to get leaders. They have always had depth to compete everywhere, the only difference was Wiggins and Froome were always the undisputed leader in the race they were in.

Now UCI gives the points for all the riders, not just the top 5, in addition to more points.
 
I would hope they have depth considering the money they put out to get leaders. They have always had depth to compete everywhere, the only difference was Wiggins and Froome were always the undisputed leader in the race they were in.

Now UCI gives the points for all the riders, not just the top 5, in addition to more points.
Even then, in 2012, you had them dominating GCs when Wiggins was winning, as well as taking the lead early and holding it all through the race. The "A-unit" was Wiggins, Froome, Porte and Rogers, but they also had hilarious outlying years from the likes of Nordhaug, massive progress from the likes of Henao, and a career year from Boasson Hagen too.
Algarve: Porte 1st, Wiggins 3rd
Romandie: Wiggins 1st, Porte 4th, Rogers 5th
Bayernrundfahrt: Rogers 1st, Porte 4th, Siutsou 5th
Norway: Boasson Hagen 1st, Nordhaug 3rd
Dauphiné: Wiggins 1st, Rogers 2nd, Froome 4th, Porte 9th
Tour: Wiggins 1st, Froome 2nd

...and though it wasn't done in trade teams, Wiggins 1st, Froome 3rd and Rogers 6th in the Olympic TT...
 
Well, they traded the ghost of Froome for an old but still usable Porte and Yates, so that's extra non GT GC points.

But the point is anyway why is Yates good, but not outstanding in the Vuelta despite aiming for that from the start of the season and why Porte was not good in the Tour (crashes, team role etc including).

It seems like they traded GT performance for short stage race performance which is what the most recent thread bump was all about.
 
Well, they traded the ghost of Froome for an old but still usable Porte and Yates, so that's extra non GT GC points.

But the point is anyway why is Yates good, but not outstanding in the Vuelta despite aiming for that from the start of the season and why Porte was not good in the Tour (crashes, team role etc including).

It seems like they traded GT performance for short stage race performance which is what the most recent thread bump was all about.

A.Yates is performing at his usual level in grand tours, he was strong on stage 3 because at that point the race is like a one week race then as time goes on he looks ordinary. They signed the wrong Yates if the plan was to win grand tours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHAD0W93
Maybe brailsfrauds absence due to health issues plays a role? They are not quite their former selves.

Nah, it's obvious that after Armstrong et al, cycling teams had to lay and low play fair for a while, in these circumstances, all it took was big money to assemble a powerful group of domestiques willing to ride the train for three weeks in service of another guy. Because of the doping scandal, not many people were willing to put money into cycling, so Sky benefitted from an "easy era" to win Le tour many times.

Now the dark arts have re-emerged, and even Ineos with all their money can't beat superhumans.

I preferred the short era where big money won (like in football with Real Madrid etc), rather than the return to doping now - but there you go.
 
Nah, it's obvious that after Armstrong et al, cycling teams had to lay and low play fair for a while, in these circumstances, all it took was big money to assemble a powerful group of domestiques willing to ride the train for three weeks in service of another guy. Because of the doping scandal, not many people were willing to put money into cycling, so Sky benefitted from an "easy era" to win Le tour many times.

Now the dark arts have re-emerged, and even Ineos with all their money can't beat superhumans.

I preferred the short era where big money won (like in football with Real Madrid etc), rather than the return to doping now - but there you go.

So what was this? Human evolution? Bilharzia side effects?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyw8ia-Az4w
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: JosefK and Ripper
Nah, it's obvious that after Armstrong et al, cycling teams had to lay and low play fair for a while, in these circumstances, all it took was big money to assemble a powerful group of domestiques willing to ride the train for three weeks in service of another guy. Because of the doping scandal, not many people were willing to put money into cycling, so Sky benefitted from an "easy era" to win Le tour many times.

Now the dark arts have re-emerged, and even Ineos with all their money can't beat superhumans.

I preferred the short era where big money won (like in football with Real Madrid etc), rather than the return to doping now - but there you go.
Lame trolling attempt...
 
Lame trolling attempt...
My god , have you not been watching cycling recently? The only non-suspicious big wins in last couple of years were by Ineos riders - Carapaz at the Olympics, Bernal at the Giro and Tao Geoghagen Hart at last year's Giro. Every other GC win, Worlds and Olympic medal are dubious, pretty obviously so some of them too, even for the dim witted observer.
 
This guy just described TGH's Giro win as non-suspicious. His argument should therefore not be considered.

Did you watch the race? Dennis decided to put in a rare super-domestique turn in the final week, and destroyed the (pretty weak) competition, TGH's win was a bit lucky (because of the unpredictability of Dennis), but it wasn't suspicious - he just followed Dennis up the climbs. And it's not like he pulled off a superhuman time-trial effort either, unlike quite a few very dodgy superhumans have managed in recent years...
 
Not to mention that Dennis got dropped by De Gendt and multiple other riders on a tempogrinder like Madonna di Campiglio the day before the Stelvio stage, when he suddenly turned into the strongest climber in the whole race on the Stelvio.
Tao has also never been climbing on the same level before or after that Giro. If you want to talk about Carapaz and Bernal not being that suspicious compared to some of the other gc riders ok, you might have a point, but the 2020 Giro was some wild stuff.
 
Not to mention that Dennis got dropped by De Gendt and multiple other riders on a tempogrinder like Madonna di Campiglio the day before the Stelvio stage, when he suddenly turned into the strongest climber in the whole race on the Stelvio.
Tao has also never been climbing on the same level before or after that Giro. If you want to talk about Carapaz and Bernal not being that suspicious compared to some of the other gc riders ok, you might have a point, but the 2020 Giro was some wild stuff.
TGH dropped a minute to Nibali on Etna lol. We laugh at it now but it was in the Bag at that point.

2020 Giro is still the race where I base my 2020s PED doping theories on much more so than Pogacars Tour or something like that.
 
TGH dropped a minute to Nibali on Etna lol. We laugh at it now but it was in the Bag at that point.

2020 Giro is still the race where I base my 2020s PED doping theories on much more so than Pogacars Tour or something like that.

Finished 1:42 behind Nibali, apparently. Hindley also dropped 46 seconds to Nibali. Almeida and Bilbao was weak too, dropping some seconds. Then all were stronger than Nibali/Fuglsang/Pozzovivo/Majka come third week.
 
Last edited:
Can't respond individually to all the crazy comments above (jeez, are you guys on drugs?), but we had a very mediocre GIRO in 2020 won by a pretty mediocre rider not doing anything much beyond mediocre (that "thrilling" time-trial final stage for example)

Whereas, we have CLEAR examples of superhumans destroying the competition in time-trials and gaining MINUTES with INDIVIDUAL climbing efforts in the biggest races in last two years,, which you never saw with Sky/Ineos.

Stop being stupid people, a multi-million pound government backed investigation was done against British Cycling and they found a few dodgy TUEs and a testosterone order to an idiot in Manchester. No other nation has attempted such an investigation except USA, and we all know what they found.

Sorry to state the obvious again and again, Sky/Ineos won by paying for a hugely powerful train - now we are back to the dark times, with Superhumans.

The ignorant still seem to point to Froome's spectacular Stage 19 win at the 2018 Giro as "superhuman" - but any sensible person who analysed that knows that the chase group was extremely handicapped, Pinot abandoned the next day with illness, Reichenbach couldn't descend ("like an old lady") and Carapaz and Lopez were battling each other and just hung on the back - Dumoulin was dumb not to take off on his own and try to catch Froome in a mano a mano time trial - I mean just the previous year, after virtually no season races he managed to win Gold in the Worlds, catching Froome on the climb no less, who was in peak form after his Vuelta win, and beating him by over a minute (oh that sounds familiar recently). (Roglic's dodgy silver medal went under the radar).
 
Last edited:
7 Tour de France wins in 8 years ... but most impressive is it was with 4 different riders.
IMO, Bernal is the only one with enought talent that could have legitimately won without having the best drugs. (ie he could have won just taking the same drugs everyone else was/is taking). It now appears the rest of the peloton has caught up or that Sky/Inneos had an experimental drug that wasn't being tested for, but now is.

Regardless, it does appear the Sky/Inneos dominance is over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JosefK
Can't respond individually to all the crazy comments above (jeez, are you guys on drugs?), but we had a very mediocre GIRO in 2020 won by a pretty mediocre rider not doing anything much beyond mediocre (that "thrilling" time-trial final stage for example)

Whereas, we have CLEAR examples of superhumans destroying the competition in time-trials and gaining MINUTES with INDIVIDUAL climbing efforts in the biggest races in last two years,, which you never saw with Sky/Ineos.

Stop being stupid people, a multi-million pound government backed investigation was done against British Cycling and they found a few dodgy TUEs and a testosterone order to an idiot in Manchester. No other nation has attempted such an investigation except USA, and we all know what they found.

Sorry to state the obvious again and again, Sky/Ineos won by paying for a hugely powerful train - now we are back to the dark times, with Superhumans.

The ignorant still seem to point to Froome's spectacular Stage 19 win at the 2018 Giro as "superhuman" - but any sensible person who analysed that knows that the chase group was extremely handicapped, Pinot abandoned the next day with illness, Reichenbach couldn't descend ("like an old lady") and Carapaz and Lopez were battling each other and just hung on the back - Dumoulin was dumb not to take off on his own and try to catch Froome in a mano a mano time trial - I mean just the previous year, after virtually no season races he managed to win Gold in the Worlds, catching Froome on the climb no less, who was in peak form after his Vuelta win, and beating him by over a minute (oh that sounds familiar recently). (Roglic's dodgy silver medal went under the radar).

Froome in 2013 doesn’t ring any bells? Froome transformation from a mid to back of the peloton rider in 2011 doesn’t alarm you? Wiggins going from a track/flat course rider to winning the Tour doesn’t flummox you? Then Thomas? Bernal is the least shocking. He’s got the talent and the makeup of a classic climber and a GC man.
 
The british oligarch Ratcliffe was allowed to buy 33% of Mercedes F1 team on the condition that Mercedes won’t get bad PR from the cycling team. I’m sure Ineos won’t go full doping mode for this reason.

Something similar is the case with Bahrain. The Bahraini dictator/king dropped the name of his F1 team from the cycling team. Even if someone is busted from TBV, the average person can’t connect this to McLaren.
 

TRENDING THREADS