Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Benotti69]

I never claimed Sky is clean. I'm interested in inferences of doping based on performance and the consistency of those claims. I've stated that relative performance is not a good indicator in itself and requires some corroborating evidence. Absolute performance is better, and there is a lack of such evidence for the Sky doping theory. There's also a great deal of confirmation bias in these threads - Boonen's comment about a tired peloton is evidence of doping, but his comment about Sky being human is ignored. Riders being fresh at the end of hard races used to be support for doping. Now being tired is. Domination at the Tour is evidence of doping. Failure to control the Olympic road race is evidence of doping - despite the fact that the Tour doping theory predicts Olympic road race control. Rogers being ET at the Tour was evidence of doping. Now his time losses in the ITT will be interpreted as going off the program, done intentionally to not raise suspicion, etc. The doping theories here are not falsifiable because there's nothing that could count against them..

The inference of clean cycling by performance is a total red herring as UCI could be putting the squeeze on certain teams while allowing others to micro dope to what is considered the maximum possible.

But what is the maximum possible we are not sure and to be able to do it for 3 weeks long will tell you all you need to know about natural performance.

Why would GB dope an Aussie? Rogers rode for Australia not sky.

It is very possible that it was made clear to non British riders that they will not get assistance for riding for their respective countries. After all Brailsford works for GB aswell as Sky.

 

[Montanus]

Froome's ITT result first half of 2011

Vuelta Castilla y León stage 4 - 11.2k
1 Alberto Contador (Saxo Bank-SunGard) 13:42
2 Richie Porte (Saxo Bank-Sungard) + 0:01
3 Xavier Tondo (Movistar Team) + 0:02
4 Bauke Mollema (Rabobank) + 0:15
5 Alex Dowsett (Sky) + 0:19
6 Igor Antón (Euskaltel-Euskadi) + 0:20
7 Juan Pablo Suárez (EPM-UNE) + 0:26
8 Rafael Infantino (EPM-UNE) + 0:31
9 Jerome Coppel (Saur Sojasun) + 0:32
10 Chris Froome (Sky) + 0:37

Tour de Romandie stage stage 4 - 20.1k

1 David Zabriskie (USA) Team Garmin-Cervelo 27:57:00
2 Richie Porte (Aus) Saxo Bank Sungard 0:00:02
3 Lieuwe Westra (Ned) Vacansoleil-DCM Pro Cycling Team 0:00:14
4 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Sky Procycling 0:00:18
5 Tony Martin (Ger) HTC-Highroad 0:00:27
6 Andrew Talansky (USA) Team Garmin-Cervelo 0:00:42
7 Steven Kruijswijk (Ned) Rabobank Cycling Team 0:00:43
8 Cadel Evans (Aus) BMC Racing Team 0:00:45
9 Jonathan Castroviejo Nicolas (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi 0:00:48
10 Linus Gerdemann (Ger) Leopard Trek 0:00:54
50 Christopher Froome (GBr) Sky Procycling 0:01:49


Tour de Sussie stage 8 - 32k
1 Fabian CANCELLARA Team Leopard-Trek 41:01.170
2 Andreas KLÖDEN Team RadioShack + 0:09
3 Levi LEIPHEIMER Team RadioShack + 0:13
4 Nelson OLIVEIRA Team RadioShack + 0:25
5 Tom DANIELSON Team Garmin - Cervelo + 0:38
6 Gustav LARSSON Saxo Bank SunGard + 0:41
7 Jakob FUGLSANG Team Leopard-Trek + 0:44
8 Thomas DE GENDT Vacansoleil - DCM + 0:48
9 Chris FROOME Sky Procycling + 1:02
10 Christian VANDEVELDE Garmin-Cervelo + 1:04

Then came the breakthrough in the Vuelta

Stage 10 - 47k
1 Tony Martin (Ger) HTC-Highroad 0:55:54
2 Christopher Froome (GBr) Sky + 0:59
3 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Sky + 1:22
4 Fabian Cancellara (Swi) Leopard Trek + 1:27
5 Taylor Phinney (USA) BMC Racing + 1:33
6 Jakob Fuglsang (Den) Leopard Trek + 1:37
7 Tiago Machado (Por) RadioShack + 1:54
8 Janez Brajkovic (Slo) RadioShack + 1:56
9 Luis Leon Sanchez Gil (Spa) Rabobank + 2:02
10 Maxime Monfort (Bel) Leopard Trek + 2:06

Then a year later the Olympics:
Oympics ITT - 44k
1 Bradley Wiggins (Great Britain) 0:50:39.54
2 Tony Martin (Germany) 0:00:42.00
3 Christopher Froome (Great Britain) 0:01:08.33
4 Taylor Phinney (United States of America) 0:01:58.53
5 Marco Pinotti (Italy) 0:02:09.74
6 Michael Rogers (Australia) 0:02:11.85
7 Fabian Cancellara (Switzerland) 0:02:14.17
8 Bert Grabsch (Germany) 0:02:38.50
9 Jonathan Castroviejo Nicolas (Spain) 0:02:49.82
10 Janez Brajkovic (Slovenia) 0:03:30.18
11 Lieuwe Westra (Netherlands) 0:03:40.08
12 Vasil Kiryienka (Belarus) 0:03:50.75
13 Edvald Boasson Hagen (Norway) 0:03:51.33
14 Lars Ytting Bak (Denmark) 0:03:53.67
15 Jakob Fuglsang (Denmark) 0:03:54.95
16 Gustav Larsson (Sweden) 0:03:55.72
17 Philippe Gilbert (Belgium) 0:04:00.44
18 Nelson Filipe Santos Simoes Oliveira (Portugal) 0:04:02.03

In the first half of 2011 Froome was beaten by or equal with riders like Larsson, Fuglsang, Westra, Oliveira, Castroviejo. Today he was 1.40 ahead of Castroviejo, 2.32 ahead of Westra, 2.47 ahead of Fuglsang and 2.48 ahead of Larsson, and 2.54 ahead of Oliveira. Quiet an improvement in less than 18 months.

 

[DirtyWorks]

In the first half of 2011 Froome was beaten by or equal with riders like Larsson, Fuglsang, Westra, Oliveira, Castroviejo. Today he was 1.40 ahead of Castroviejo, 2.32 ahead of Westra, 2.47 ahead of Fuglsang and 2.48 ahead of Larsson, and 2.54 ahead of Oliveira. Quite an improvement in less than 18 months.

Excellent work!

 

[User Guide]

The following from Private Eye Magazine titled Bradley Wiggins Selling Onions.

'It’s a blessing because it allows success in the sport of cycling to raise the profile of cycling in general. British success in sports cycling has, I think, far outstripped any improvements for cycling in general over the last decade, with multiple world and olympic champions on the track and the road, and now a Tour de France winner. Meanwhile cycling for transport, despite some positive stirrings, lags far behind, particularly on the evidence of national modal share patterns. Anything that puts bikes – of whatever form – on the front pages of newspapers is surely a good thing.
It’s a curse, however, primarily because plenty of British people aren’t all that interested in sport, or physical exertion – let alone the particular niche of cycling for sport. There is a danger that that the great success of our professional sports cyclists could lead to a reinforcement of the idea that ‘cycling’ necessarily involves exertion, and needs special, expensive-looking bicycles, and weird clothes, and consequently that the idea of ‘cycling’ becomes less attractive to the less athletically-minded sections of our population. Indeed, alongside hostile road conditions, I think this perception has been one of the main barriers to the uptake of cycling over the last few decades – the idea that riding a bike is necessarily a sporting activity. It’s only recently that practical – really practical bicycles, not just hybrids – have started to appear in significant numbers in bike shops.
Getting the message right is important because the current non-cycling demographic – principally women – are less likely to be interested in sport, and physical activity. The increase of cycling in London has primarily been amongst more athletically-minded young and middle-aged men, for instance. The physical demands of cycling safely on the roads of towns and cities in Britain have selectively created a cycling demographic dominated by young and middle-aged men. Those roads and streets have simultaneously put off the less physically able. In other words, these non-cyclists – the very people we need to reach – are those who are not as fast, or as powerful, and who had probably never heard of Bradley Wiggins until a week ago.
I don’t doubt that the success of Wiggins et al. will have a positive impact on British cycling, primarily for sport, but also for transport. But we should be very careful that, in trumpeting that success, we don’t put off potential cyclists by making cycling seem like an extraordinary activity. The message that riding a bike is easy, comfortable and (usually) effortless should be rammed home, and should not be lost in the promotion of cycling in the wake of sporting success.
We don’t use success in distance running to promote and publicise the ease of walking to the shops. Nor would we expect British success in motor racing to influence people’s decision to drive to the supermarket, instead of cycling, or walking, or getting the bus. It is only cycling that faces this problem of multiple meanings, and we should tread very carefully.'

http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2012/07/25/bradley-wiggins-selling-onions/

Good article that Mr Murdoch should read all that wasted £££££££££££ that Mr Brailsford has spent

Maybe private eye should of done their homework.Cycling in Britain has enjoyed double digit growth year on year for a while now.Both in terms of actual industry bike related sales figures but anecdotaly too.Sooooo many more cycling commuters than there was ten years ago,sportives have exploded over the last few years etc etc.
However there is a disconnect with the sport of cycling ie interest in major races and people getting involved locally taking part or supporting local races.
With recent sucsess maybe that can all change for the better.
Two main reasons for the disconnect
1, road cycling is seen as cliquey and elitist at a local club level
2, cycling sport is seen as dirty ie doping
Now wether people want to believe it or not there is a different attitude towards doping in the uk from commentators(see snarky comments towards dwain chambers etc), the media ,institutions but mostly the public.
Which is why I hope to frekkin god sky and wiggins in particular is clean,as the fallout would be worse than in Germany.
One im not sure it would'nt recover from( given the huge media attention), for a very long time.
As we do like too build em up to knock em down in the UK.

I still think people have fit facts to support the arguement they all dirty as sin ie
"here comes robbo-porte">>porte goes out the back>>>"well they have too knock it back make it look believable" etc etc.
However
Although each performance has been nothing ET like, there is starting to get a very very large number of them

 

[ferryman]

So we are let to believe Wiggo gains 2 minutes in a year on der Tony? He mustn't be that dedicated with Jose I. on his side of course.

Anchorman Smeets, Dutch tv, went basurk/basork/how do u spell it, when he got the message. Must be his last season of cycling coverage.

Question, where did Chavanel go? He was fifth at the last intermediate?

Edit: one must see I am not even talking about Vrrroooom, must be because he is not a cyclist.

It's berserk. What did Smeets say? Was it a full on rant about Wiggins/Sky live on Dutch TV?

 

[Darryl Webster]

The reality of a big increase in cycling numbers is predominately London commuters thanks in large part to the congestion charge .
A few other cities have experienced increases but nothing on Londons scale.
Sportive, s have drawn a largish number of MAMIL,s ( Middle aged men in lycra) of there sofa,s ..a good portion of which are former cyclists in there youth who,s kids have now grown up. Cycling is frequently being described as "the new golf" as all the rather chubby mammil,s spend an awful lot of money on carbon bling.
As for the racing side. Time Trials are now predominantly participated in by veterans ( over 40) and have very few junior participation and road races on the open road are far less than they were in the 80,s.
Triathlete,s account for a good portion of increased quality cycle sales.
BC membership is up substantially but this may be largely to do with the insurance than grass roots competition.
The phrase " all style and no substance" springs to mind.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The following from Private Eye Magazine titled Bradley Wiggins Selling Onions.

'It’s a blessing because it allows success in the sport of cycling to raise the profile of cycling in general. British success in sports cycling has, I think, far outstripped any improvements for cycling in general over the last decade, with multiple world and olympic champions on the track and the road, and now a Tour de France winner. Meanwhile cycling for transport, despite some positive stirrings, lags far behind, particularly on the evidence of national modal share patterns. Anything that puts bikes – of whatever form – on the front pages of newspapers is surely a good thing.
It’s a curse, however, primarily because plenty of British people aren’t all that interested in sport, or physical exertion – let alone the particular niche of cycling for sport. There is a danger that that the great success of our professional sports cyclists could lead to a reinforcement of the idea that ‘cycling’ necessarily involves exertion, and needs special, expensive-looking bicycles, and weird clothes, and consequently that the idea of ‘cycling’ becomes less attractive to the less athletically-minded sections of our population. Indeed, alongside hostile road conditions, I think this perception has been one of the main barriers to the uptake of cycling over the last few decades – the idea that riding a bike is necessarily a sporting activity. It’s only recently that practical – really practical bicycles, not just hybrids – have started to appear in significant numbers in bike shops.
Getting the message right is important because the current non-cycling demographic – principally women – are less likely to be interested in sport, and physical activity. The increase of cycling in London has primarily been amongst more athletically-minded young and middle-aged men, for instance. The physical demands of cycling safely on the roads of towns and cities in Britain have selectively created a cycling demographic dominated by young and middle-aged men. Those roads and streets have simultaneously put off the less physically able. In other words, these non-cyclists – the very people we need to reach – are those who are not as fast, or as powerful, and who had probably never heard of Bradley Wiggins until a week ago.
I don’t doubt that the success of Wiggins et al. will have a positive impact on British cycling, primarily for sport, but also for transport. But we should be very careful that, in trumpeting that success, we don’t put off potential cyclists by making cycling seem like an extraordinary activity. The message that riding a bike is easy, comfortable and (usually) effortless should be rammed home, and should not be lost in the promotion of cycling in the wake of sporting success.
We don’t use success in distance running to promote and publicise the ease of walking to the shops. Nor would we expect British success in motor racing to influence people’s decision to drive to the supermarket, instead of cycling, or walking, or getting the bus. It is only cycling that faces this problem of multiple meanings, and we should tread very carefully.'

http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2012/07/25/bradley-wiggins-selling-onions/

Good article that Mr Murdoch should read all that wasted £££££££££££ that Mr Brailsford has spent

Private Eye?
Its someones blog and they used a picture from Private Eye.

Also - I seriously hope the author has nothing to do with the sport.

 

[Cycle Chic]

Private Eye?
Its someones blog and they used a picture from Private Eye.

Also - I seriously hope the author has nothing to do with the sport.

I stand corrected - well spotted.

 

[DirtyWorks]

.Cycling in Britain has enjoyed double digit growth year on year for a while now.Both in terms of actual industry bike related sales figures but anecdotaly too.Sooooo many more cycling commuters than there was ten years ago,sportives have exploded over the last few years etc etc.

This kind of reporting tends to bubble to the top of some media sources after the Olympics. In most cases, increases in cycling use is due to access issues, not competitive or even recreational growth. Meaning, the numbers of recreational cyclists tends to stay about the same. Competitive cycling remains a tiny mostly static sized group relative to functional cyclists in most places.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Yep. This is one of the two most amazing and unbelievable transformations I've ever seen in cycling. I'm even tempted to rank it as no. 1, but I need to cool down a bit first.

Yep the undisputed No. 1 will be now and forever Armstrong. Cool down relax, and... rank Wiggins No. 2, that´s fair

 

[Lanark]

Yep the undisputed No. 1 will be now and forever Armstrong. Cool down relax, and... rank Wiggins No. 2, that´s fair

Although Armstrong's GT transformation was just as big, he was a much, much better road-rider than Wiggins used to be. Armstrong was a good to great classic rider, Wiggins was barely more than a curiosity.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Although Armstrong's GT transformation was just as big, he was a much, much better road-rider than Wiggins used to be. Armstrong was a good to great classic rider, Wiggins was barely more than a curiosity.

But Wiggins has yet to finish another 6 TdF as No. 1 in Paris. And Armstrong was a 6 min loser in ITT´s to Indurain, a non climber, and his classics hero stuff is PR saga.

What did he win? The bribed 1-Mio-$-Race in the USA. What else?

No doubt, Armstrong is the clear No. 1 transformer. He was nothing. So Wiggins is 2nd at best (Froome is close too).

 

[hrotha]

But Wiggins has yet to finish another 6 TdF as No. 1 in Paris. And Armstrong was a 6 min loser in ITT´s to Indurain, a non climber, and his classics hero stuff is PR saga.

What did he win? The bribed 1-Mio-$-Race in the USA. What else?

No doubt, Armstrong is the clear No. 1 transformer. He was nothing. So Wiggins is 2nd at best (Froome is close too).

Leaving aside the time they kept it up, judging their transformations from a synchronic point of view:

LA: from good at ITTs, very good on the hills and semi-decent (top 40 material) on the mountains to best at ITTs and top 3 on the mountains.
Wiggins: from good at ITTs but terrible at everything else to top 3 at ITTs and world-class at climbing.
Riis: from good on the flat and your typical hard, semi-versatile rouleur to world-class on the hills, mountains and ITTs.

It's a close call, I'd say, but that's the podium for me. At least Froome is still the same kind of rider he was before (climber/time-trialist), it's just that now, all of sudden, he's world-class, so it's laughable, but not the same kind of transformation.

 

[iZnoGouD]

Although Armstrong's GT transformation was just as big, he was a much, much better road-rider than Wiggins used to be. Armstrong was a good to great classic rider, Wiggins was barely more than a curiosity.

if it wasn't the dope he wouldn't even have finished the Tour...

 

[Benotti69]

if it wasn't the dope he wouldn't even have finished the Tour...

I agree. Armstrong was never gonna top 100 in a GT without juice. Then he wins 7. Wiggins has a long way to go to beat that.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

It's berserk. What did Smeets say? Was it a full on rant about Wiggins/Sky live on Dutch TV?

I was zapping from Sporza to NOS and to my surprise the were delaying the stream by 15 minutes. Suddenly I hear Smeets stating 'so we are led to believe these Sky guys are one and two in the Tour and now beat Martin and Cancellara'. Other gestures like 'Wiggo is a miracle on wheels'. 'I am not suggesting anything, but'. I said to my wife, she hates cycling and the olympics, 'this is news! is he eventially saying what everyone else is thinking?'. Never heard this on live TV before, certainly not on Dutch TV. Even my wife agreed with me, and, I gotta tell y, she really hates watching cycling and the commentaries.

He had a lot of gestures. Untill he realised he was breaking his own style it seemed; never break the omerta. His fellow commentator just was silent, believed the miracle on wheels Vrrrrrrrrrroooom because he was second in the Tour TT. Come on, be an journalist you friggin pri#ck.

I was watching BBC too, why doesn't a guy like Boardman open his mouth?

One of the biggest scams ever seen.

At one point you could see from the helicopter camera the leaves in the trees rustling and the roadside flags pointing towards Wiggins backside. A little hometown push?

Never seen that before off course:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKkbMuc_W5g

 

[Sigmund]

But Wiggins has yet to finish another 6 TdF as No. 1 in Paris. And Armstrong was a 6 min loser in ITT´s to Indurain, a non climber, and his classics hero stuff is PR saga.

What did he win? The bribed 1-Mio-$-Race in the USA. What else?

No doubt, Armstrong is the clear No. 1 transformer. He was nothing. So Wiggins is 2nd at best (Froome is close too).

First, I am in no way claiming LA was clean, but to say LA classics stuff is PR saga is not true, WC in Oslo at 21 on a very hard parcours is he stuff of good to great classics riders, espescially when you add inn 2nd at LBL and a win at Fleche Wallone

 

[Dead Star]

I was watching BBC too, why doesn't a guy like Boardman open his mouth?

He has bikes to sell. That'd be commercial suicide.

 

[AcademyCC]

He has bikes to sell. That'd be commercial suicide.

+1 You can see him sometimes lost for words when he is interviewed by over enthusiastic BBC anchors. Hes not quite sure what to make of Wiggins then he just thinks of the cash register going nuts and throws out the party line.

 

[buckle]

He has bikes to sell. That'd be commercial suicide.

He also has arthritis - doping anyone?

 

[hondated]

He also has arthritis - doping anyone?

Blimey that is an interesting comment and something I have thought for many years but unlike you never been brave enough to say it.
But to add to that doesnt Sean Yates also have a heart problem !

Oh sorry bit controversial.

 

[doolols]

So I guess what you're saying is that riders aren't allowed to improve? Because if their performance is better than it was 1/2/4 years ago, they must be doping.

 

[Caruut]

+1 You can see him sometimes lost for words when he is interviewed by over enthusiastic BBC anchors. Hes not quite sure what to make of Wiggins then he just thinks of the cash register going nuts and throws out the party line.

He also quit his role at GB cycling. A couple of times during the Tour it seemed like he was extremely unsure of what to say, but that might be me projecting my own opinions out onto him.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

He has bikes to sell. That'd be commercial suicide.

Chris is the first and last true winner of the gold in the TT for Britain, he should speak.

But maybe you are right, quit sad.

So I guess what you're saying is that riders aren't allowed to improve? Because if their performance is better than it was 1/2/4 years ago, they must be doping.

Gaining two minutes in eleven months is too much, even for suppawiggo,

 

[Caruut]

So I guess what you're saying is that riders aren't allowed to improve? Because if their performance is better than it was 1/2/4 years ago, they must be doping.

Yawn. If you're going to troll, at least be inventive.