Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Wallace and Gromit]

honesty looks good on you

There's enough cr*p to contend with in the real world e.g. tax, health, flooding, kids' schooling, unemployment, commuting etc, without getting too het up about the escapism provided by watching sport.

It's interesting that on this forum, the anti-Lance brigade have now, by and larged, simply switched to be anti-Sky/anti-Wiggo. Some people are just made to be unhappy about cycling, however it pans out. Even Lance's demise appears to have brought very little real cheer into their lives.

It's better to leave your realism at the gate and enjoy the spectacle for what it is, and if you can't enjoy it as it is, stop watching and take up basket weaving. Someone has to win, and on balance, I prefer that to be "my team", however peripheral my relationship is to said team.

 

[the big ring]

If that were the attitude of everyone, the Clinic would not exist. It does, therefore we assume people either want to whinge, or discuss it.

To say, "suck it up and move on" doesn't fit as something to be posted in the Clinic.

I want cycling to be clean. Silly, I know. But even in the face of a juggernaut, my resolve remained. That's where I am.

 

[pmcg76]

I dont disagree that the ones mentioned are suspect, yet with the algerian it was completely out of the blue, he came to the olympics without a prayer and left the champion. When the commentators were saying they could not believe what they were seeing they were in complete shock and it was not just the brits.

It would be akin to nicholas roche suddenly becoming a time trial specialist at the tour . The surprise could not be covered up in any way as past performance in races would say it could not be done. With the others they have all in some way shown progress and not suddenly appeared on the scene.
Still agree with the sentiment though.

Or like Chris Froome coming from nowhere to almost win the Vuelta or Bradley Wiggins going from riding in the autobus to being one of the top climbers.

 

[JimmyFingers]

If that were the attitude of everyone, the Clinic would not exist. It does, therefore we assume people either want to whinge, or discuss it.

To say, "suck it up and move on" doesn't fit as something to be posted in the Clinic.

I want cycling to be clean. Silly, I know. But even in the face of a juggernaut, my resolve remained. That's where I am.

So explain the relevance of your comment on BBC bias to cleaning up cycling? You've ducked my response

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

If that were the attitude of everyone, the Clinic would not exist. It does, therefore we assume people either want to whinge, or discuss it.

To say, "suck it up and move on" doesn't fit as something to be posted in the Clinic.

I want cycling to be clean. Silly, I know. But even in the face of a juggernaut, my resolve remained. That's where I am.

Indeed. And there are people who would rightly point out that me complaining in the Clinic about people complianing in the Clinic about doping is an odd thing to do!

My concern is for my fellow citizens, who appear - to my untutored eye - to take their sport spectating/following rather too seriously. It might not be healthy, as there are to many "uncontrollable" factors to come and bite you on the bottom. Imagine how the anti-Lancers suffered for years, as Lance bestrode the world like a God, totally undeservingly in their eyes. And now the poor fanboys must suffer too, following the demise of their idol.

These poor souls are beyond saving, but the anti-Wiggoites can still be saved. There is still time to recant, and view it all as harmless entertainment. Most people I know enjoyed watching Titanic. Does it matter that it was all CGI enhanced? Of course not. And so a bit of EPO enhancement shouldn't bother sports fans either...

 

[Frosty]

I dont disagree that the ones mentioned are suspect, yet with the algerian it was completely out of the blue, he came to the olympics without a prayer and left the champion. When the commentators were saying they could not believe what they were seeing they were in complete shock and it was not just the brits.

It would be akin to nicholas roche suddenly becoming a time trial specialist at the tour . The surprise could not be covered up in any way as past performance in races would say it could not be done. With the others they have all in some way shown progress and not suddenly appeared on the scene.
Still agree with the sentiment though.

Looking at Makhloufi's best performances pre-2011 it would seem that 2011 was just a bad year. Take 2011 away and you have someone improving by 2 seconds between the ages of 22 and 24. Being 5th in Monaco and then winning the Olympics is not that strange as he may have timed his peak correctly, be better at running several times in a few days, etc. Not saying that he isnt doping at all, and i know that the 1500m can be a tactical race (although with pacemakers this effect is reduced) but i dont see it being the same as Roche suddenly becoming a top TTer.

2012 3:30.80 Monaco 20/07/2012
2011 3:34.4 Alger 09/07/2011
2010 3:32.94 Monaco 22/07/2010
2009 3:34.34 Roma 10/07/2009

http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biographies/country=ALG/athcode=232780/index.html

 

[Darryl Webster]

These poor souls are beyond saving, but the anti-Wiggoites can still be saved. There is still time to recant, and view it all as harmless entertainment. Most people I know enjoyed watching Titanic. Does it matter that it was all CGI enhanced? Of course not. And so a bit of EPO enhancement shouldn't bother sports fans either...

Would you have the balls to say that to the face of riders, like myself and countless others who,s careers were and our still being stolen because they refuse to dope?
Your NOT a cycling fan your moronic idiot for who the capacity for concious reasoning is wasted.
You should have been born a plant.

 

[RichWalk]

Indeed. And there are people who would rightly point out that me complaining in the Clinic about people complianing in the Clinic about doping is an odd thing to do!

My concern is for my fellow citizens, who appear - to my untutored eye - to take their sport spectating/following rather too seriously. It might not be healthy, as there are to many "uncontrollable" factors to come and bite you on the bottom. Imagine how the anti-Lancers suffered for years, as Lance bestrode the world like a God, totally undeservingly in their eyes. And now the poor fanboys must suffer too, following the demise of their idol.

These poor souls are beyond saving, but the anti-Wiggoites can still be saved. There is still time to recant, and view it all as harmless entertainment. Most people I know enjoyed watching Titanic. Does it matter that it was all CGI enhanced? Of course not. And so a bit of EPO enhancement shouldn't bother sports fans either...

If your concern is genuine then maybe it would be beneficial to consider the demographic within this forum, leg pulling aside you may find more solace on a movie forum.........

 

[veganrob]

Indeed. And there are people who would rightly point out that me complaining in the Clinic about people complianing in the Clinic about doping is an odd thing to do!

My concern is for my fellow citizens, who appear - to my untutored eye - to take their sport spectating/following rather too seriously. It might not be healthy, as there are to many "uncontrollable" factors to come and bite you on the bottom. Imagine how the anti-Lancers suffered for years, as Lance bestrode the world like a God, totally undeservingly in their eyes. And now the poor fanboys must suffer too, following the demise of their idol.

These poor souls are beyond saving, but the anti-Wiggoites can still be saved. There is still time to recant, and view it all as harmless entertainment. Most people I know enjoyed watching Titanic. Does it matter that it was all CGI enhanced? Of course not. And so a bit of EPO enhancement shouldn't bother sports fans either...

Wow..just Wow

shaking my head with disbelief

 

[Bumeington]

Usain Bolt does not appear in the top 10 fastest 100m times for junior or youth according to wikipaedia?

He ran 200m and 400m as a junior. He holds the world junior record for 200m with 19.93.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Guys - Despite (I thought) being clearly ironic/tongue in cheek, I seem to have hit a raw nerve here. Which kind of proves my point.

Mr Webster - Sorry for any offence caused. My post was clearly highlighted as being aimed at spectators/followers, not exponents. You probably don't realise it, but you were actually damned lucky to be in the position you were. We all have our dreams, but 99% of us don't have the talent to get anywhere close to achieving them. I trained like an animal for years to achieve close to b*gger all at rowing. I was not lucky in the genetic lottery of life. You were andp had the chance to "live the dream" - though you obviously needed heroic levels of dedication and commitment to exploit your natural talent - whereas the rest of us only ever had death and taxes to look forward to.

Life's a *****, unfortunately. Be thankful for what you had, not what you didn't get.

 

[The Hitch]

I dont disagree that the ones mentioned are suspect, yet with the algerian it was completely out of the blue, he came to the olympics without a prayer and left the champion. When the commentators were saying they could not believe what they were seeing they were in complete shock and it was not just the brits.

It would be akin to nicholas roche suddenly becoming a time trial specialist at the tour . The surprise could not be covered up in any way as past performance in races would say it could not be done. With the others they have all in some way shown progress and not suddenly appeared on the scene.
Still agree with the sentiment though.

Woggins 2009 and Froome 2011 were not out of the blue? People laughed at wiggins when he said he wanted to come top 20 in that Tour. As for Froome, even the english channel was saying before the Vuelta that Froome would not be much help as a domestique. NO ONE saw him contending for the damn thing.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Woggins 2009 and Froome 2011 were not out of the blue? People laughed at wiggins when he said he wanted to come top 20 in that Tour. As for Froome, even the english channel was saying before the Vuelta that Froome would not be much help as a domestique. NO ONE saw him contending for the damn thing.

Did you think Wiggins (and the name manipulation is a cheap shot, but symptomatic of this place) was doping in 2009, or is it only now he's realised the promise shown in that TdF you are hopping up and down saying doper?

 

[thehog]

Did you think Wiggins (and the name manipulation is a cheap shot, but symptomatic of this place) was doping in 2009, or is it only now he's realised the promise shown in that TdF you are hopping up and down saying doper?

Wiggins is clean. So is Sky. No doping going on. None. Never never never.

They were able to completely dominate the Tour from start to finish without even looking like being challenged. They didnt need to resort to dopijg because they are British. They used new aged training techniques that other teams haven't discovered yet.

Next year they will discover more new aged training techniques and be able to dominate again.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Wiggins is clean. So is Sky. No doping going on. None. Never never never.

They were able to completely dominate the Tour from start to finish without even looking like being challenged. They didnt need to resort to dopijg because they are British. They used new aged training techniques that other teams haven't discovered yet.

Next year they will discover more new aged training techniques and be able to dominate again.

Amazing post. Very insightful. Very worthy of you taking your time to write it and hit the submit button. We are all enriched for your effort.

 

[The Hitch]

Did you think Wiggins (and the name manipulation is a cheap shot, but symptomatic of this place) was doping in 2009, or is it only now he's realised the promise shown in that TdF you are hopping up and down saying doper?

Lol cheapshot. O is right next to i on a keyboard. All.my other posts say wiggins anyway. But yeah seems far more plausible that i switched the i for an o to.insult him.

Yes i thought wiggins was doping in 09. 09 was the year he became a big armstrong fan and defender. Was the year contador got the vam record on verbier and just behind him is wiggins beating kloeden Frank schleck and just behind an obviously doped armstrong ( who wiggins beat in the mountains and on the tt.)

Its not.just wiggins of course who is suspicious as a cyclist, especially from the 09 tour, but you sycophant types don't read any of.the threads about all the other riders, and then cry that its just some haters hating on poor old wigginscos he's British.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Lol cheapshot. O is right next to i on a keyboard. All.my other posts say wiggins anyway. But yeah seems far more plausible that i switched the i for an o to.insult him.

Yes i thought wiggins was doping in 09. 09 was the year he became a big armstrong fan and defender. Was the year contador got the vam record on verbier and just behind him is wiggins beating kloeden Frank schleck and just behind an obviously doped armstrong ( who wiggins beat in the mountains and on the tt.)

Its not.just wiggins of course who is suspicious as a cyclist, especially from the 09 tour, but you sycophant types don't read any of.the threads about all the other riders, and then cry that its just some haters hating on poor old wigginscos he's British.

Then in this case proof reading is your friend. And if Wiggins beat Armstrong in the mountains and the TT, how did he finish behind him in GC? And while this forum does address other riders than Wiggins, it never does with the same vigour. Sycophant is a lazy jibe, it was a genuine enquiry. Were you posting here in 2009? Are there historical discussions from this forum on Wiggins in 2009?

I ask because I think a lot of the accusers are retro-actively applying suspicions to performances that didn't warrant discussion at the time.

 

[kingjr]

Then in this case proof reading is your friend. And if Wiggins beat Armstrong in the mountains and the TT, how did he finish behind him in GC?

He lost 40 seconds on a flat stage where the bunch split up, Armstrong came in with the first group, Wiggins with the second

 

[will10]

Then in this case proof reading is your friend. And if Wiggins beat Armstrong in the mountains and the TT, how did he finish behind him in GC? And while this forum does address other riders than Wiggins, it never does with the same vigour. Sycophant is a lazy jibe, it was a genuine enquiry. Were you posting here in 2009? Are there historical discussions from this forum on Wiggins in 2009?

I ask because I think a lot of the accusers are retro-actively applying suspicions to performances that didn't warrant discussion at the time.

Other posters make more of an effort to disguise the fact they only watch cycling in July, and only one July at that judging from your recent efforts.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Then in this case proof reading is your friend. And if Wiggins beat Armstrong in the mountains and the TT, how did he finish behind him in GC? And while this forum does address other riders than Wiggins, it never does with the same vigour. Sycophant is a lazy jibe, it was a genuine enquiry. Were you posting here in 2009? Are there historical discussions from this forum on Wiggins in 2009?

I ask because I think a lot of the accusers are retro-actively applying suspicions to performances that didn't warrant discussion at the time.

And you would be wrong - this is the opening post from this thread started about Brad in July 2009.

The guy has been the revelation of the tour and he has been very impressive, but this is a guy who was a prologue rider at best, now he's one of the best stage racers in the world, go in a time machine go back two years ago and tell your past self that brad wiggins will be a bona-fide podium contender in the TDF, and you would slap your future self in the face. What I'm hearing is that he has lost weight so he is a much better climber, that makes sense as I am a much better climber now at 39 than when i was at 25, because I lost weight, but the side effect is that I don't have the power I used to have so I lack in the time trial. Now brad wiggins has become a climber while keeping his time trial ability after losing about 8 kilos, Now that sounds like the excuse for a certain rider, when he became the revelation of the tour.

 

[zapata]

Then in this case proof reading is your friend. And if Wiggins beat Armstrong in the mountains and the TT, how did he finish behind him in GC? And while this forum does address other riders than Wiggins, it never does with the same vigour. Sycophant is a lazy jibe, it was a genuine enquiry. Were you posting here in 2009? Are there historical discussions from this forum on Wiggins in 2009?

I ask because I think a lot of the accusers are retro-actively applying suspicions to performances that didn't warrant discussion at the time.

Take it easy with the persecution complex. All blatant dopers get lambasted in the clinic, wiggins and his gang just happen to be the most obvious dopers this year, and so naturally they get the most attention. The idea that Sky is persecuted because they are british is very weird. And yes, people were discussing wiggums in 2009:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=2333&highlight=wiggins
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=2516&highlight=wiggins
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=8315&highlight=wiggins

etc

 

[The Hitch]

Then in this case proof reading is your friend. And if Wiggins beat Armstrong in the mountains and the TT, how did he finish behind him in GC? And while this forum does address other riders than Wiggins, it never does with the same vigour. Sycophant is a lazy jibe, it was a genuine enquiry. Were you posting here in 2009? Are there historical discussions from this forum on Wiggins in 2009?

I ask because I think a lot of the accusers are retro-actively applying suspicions to performances that didn't warrant discussion at the time.

Ok i take back the sycophant bit, it was a stupid comment, i aplogize.

As for proof reading i have 15000 post if i proof read every one i would be losing hours.

Wiggins finished behind armstrong in the gc due to a peloton split. Armstrong was on the back of the htc train when they split the peloton on stage 3. Wiggins contador schleck and everyone else was caught out and lost 40 seconds.
That wasnt armstrong being stronger just better ability to read the race.

The next day, thanks to having Contador Kloeden and Leipheimer Armstrong took further time on Wiggins and all the other contenders in the team time trial.

If we look at the actual tts and mountain stages Wiggins was stronger than Armstrong.

I was not a poster in 2009 no, i joined in June 2010.

I dont know about retro actively applying suspicions. I dont see why anyone who thinks he is a doper now would think he was clean in 2009.

The clinic is full of posters who think top 5 in the Tour is unachievable without some pharmaceutical aid and that was especially the case in 2009 and 2010, so the number of people who thought wiggins a doper back then would probably be quite large.

 

[JimmyFingers]

And you would be wrong - this is the opening post from this thread started about Brad in July 2009.

Ok that clears there was a certain level of suspicion directed at Wiggins, although a fraction of what there is now.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Take it easy with the persecution complex. All blatant dopers get lambasted in the clinic, wiggins and his gang just happen to be the most obvious dopers this year, and so naturally they get the most attention. The idea that Sky is persecuted because they are british is very weird. And yes, people were discussing wiggums in 2009:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=2333&highlight=wiggins
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=2516&highlight=wiggins
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=8315&highlight=wiggins

etc

Sorry but I really take issue with the word 'blatant'. He isn't Lance, as many of you continuinely try to insinuate, he doesn't climb like him, he's not putting out the same wattage, he's not as fast or as dominate as dopers have been in the past. There has to remain a question mark: winning is not proof.

 

[noddy69]

Ok i take back the sycophant bit, it was a stupid comment, i aplogize.

As for proof reading i have 15000 post if i proof read every one i would be losing hours.

Wiggins finished behind armstrong in the gc due to a peloton split. Armstrong was on the back of the htc train when they split the peloton on stage 3. Wiggins contador schleck and everyone else was caught out and lost 40 seconds.
That wasnt armstrong being stronger just better ability to read the race.

The next day, thanks to having Contador Kloeden and Leipheimer Armstrong took further time on Wiggins and all the other contenders in the team time trial.

If we look at the actual tts and mountain stages Wiggins was stronger than Armstrong.

I was not a poster in 2009 no, i joined in June 2010.

I dont know about retro actively applying suspicions. I dont see why anyone who thinks he is a doper now would think he was clean in 2009.

The clinic is full of posters who think top 5 in the Tour is unachievable without some pharmaceutical aid and that was especially the case in 2009 and 2010, so the number of people who thought wiggins a doper back then would probably be quite large.

Wiggins out performed LA in the TT but not in the mountains. LA took more time out of wiggins in the mountain stages than wiggins did out of LA.In fact it was only stage 15 that Wiggo took any signifcant time, LA out performed him after that by a good stretch.