Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Dear Wiggo]

Am, where were the first "factoids"?

English is my first language and its nuances are obvious to me. Sorry you are struggling but I can't help you, Doc.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

English is my first language and its nuances are obvious to me. Sorry you are struggling but I can't help you, Doc.

So, they were not facts. Thanks

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So, they were not facts. Thanks

Yep they are. You can't read English, no biggie.

 

[sittingbison]

Sky's a unique situation as the Pro Team and National team are pretty much interchangeable bar David Millar and Steve Cummings.

A common fallacy:
Wiggo England
EBH Norway
Cav Isle of Man
Eisel Austria
Vroome Kenya/Planet X
Knees Germany
Porte Oz
Dodger Oz
Sivtsov Belarus

In fact, there is only a single ENGLISH rider on the team

edit: Thanks to thehog and JRanton for corrections

 

[thehog]

A common fallacy:
Wiggo England
EBH Norway
Cav Isle of Man
Eisel Austria
Vroome Kenya
Knees Germany
Porte Oz
Dodger Oz
Sivtsov Bulgaria

In fact, there is only a single ENGLISH rider on the team

One correction.

Froome is an alien. He's not human. Not sure from which planet he is from.

 

[JRanton]

I posted some Brailsford quotes the other day but there are some more included in the interview below that touch on a few other issues, the Manchester post-season meet-up for instance. According to Richard Moore, cycling journalist, we're also due a Leinders update imminently.

The other main talking point at the Tour was more serious. It was only when Wiggins came to appreciate that the questions about doping were the legacy of the race’s dirty past that he began to deal with the issue coherently, and, ultimately, convincingly. But the more recent revelations concerning Lance Armstrong have underlined how much work there remains in convincing people that it is possible to win the Tour clean.

“I’ve been thinking a lot about it,” says Brailsford of the case against Armstrong, and the US Anti-Doping Agency’s decision to strip him of his seven Tour titles. “You’ve got the past, the present and the future. I’ve seen it referred to as generation EPO. You can’t deny that happened. The more you read, and the more that comes out, and you sit there and your jaw drops, you think: let’s accept there was a past; let’s not try to deny it. There definitely was a past. And the tentacles of that past impact on the present.

“We set this team up to be a clean team and to try and use coaching and science. Our job is to try to make people go faster, and when you’re good at it, [some people] use that to substantiate that you’re doping. It’s unfortunate, but it is understandable that people will question it.”

Brailsford said during the Tour that at the end of the season he would invite the doubters to Manchester, where he would explain his methods. Does he still intend to do that? “Yeah, but we’re not at the end of the season yet. There’s this group out there, anonymous people who keep banging on, using pseudo science. It’s totally understandable why they have their opinions, and draw the conclusions they do, but I’d like to meet them and say, ‘right, fire away, what do you want to talk about?’

“The thing is, we’ve still got to win,” he continues. “We’re in a competitive environment. So on the one hand, you think, we’ll open ourselves up and show people what we do. On the other, we’d then be educating everybody else, who we’re competing against.”

It presents a dilemma. And yet there is only one answer, and Brailsford knows it. “Trying to be transparent is the only way we’re going to get rid of the tentacles of the past and get to the future we want. We want to be at the forefront of the drive towards clean cycling, and so it’s incumbent on us to not duck and dive and say, ‘Here we are, this is where we’re at'.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/inter...n-t-ruling-out-a-move-into-football-1-2564587

Reads to me like Dave B wants to meet the 12 apostles of the clinic, face to face in Manchester.

 

[JRanton]

One correction.

Froome is an alien. He's not human. Not sure from which planet he is from.

And another one. Sivstov is from Belarus, not Bulgaria.

 

[thehog]

I posted some Brailsford quotes the other day but there are some more included in the interview below that touch on a few other issues, the Manchester post-season meet-up for instance. According to Richard Moore, cycling journalist, we're also due a Leinders update imminently.



http://www.scotsman.com/sport/inter...n-t-ruling-out-a-move-into-football-1-2564587

Reads to me like Dave B wants to meet the 12 apostles of the clinic, face to face in Manchester.

I'll eat my hat if he holds said conference. Won't happen.

 

[Tinman]

From @PaulKimmage past 12 hours

In May 2010, on the day the Floyd Landis admission broke, I sent Dave Brailsford a text: 'Dave, you would be doing the sport a huge service

...if you encourage Michael Barry to tell the truth.' Brailsford was on the Giro with Barry that week. He phoned me back and I told him...

...Barry had been implicated by Floyd. The following morning, Brailsford told reporters he was "aware of the allegations" and said he...

...and said he would clarify the facts with the Canadian before taking any action. Barry denied Landis' claims. No action was taken.

Brailsford had offered me full access to the team that summer for the Tour. On the eve of the race, the offer was withdrawn. "Bradley...

...wasn't happy," he said. I requested an interview with Barry but this was also refused. I called Jonathan Vaughters at Garmin and...

...and asked if I could come on board for the Tour. "Not a problem," he replied. So please, the soon-to-be Sir Dave, spare us the lectures..

...on ducking and diving and transparency.

 

[sittingbison]

I'll eat my tin foil hat if he holds said conference. Won't happen.

Fixed. Free of charge

 

[Ferminal]

I'll eat my hat if he holds said conference. Won't happen.

Apparently no one is interested?

Maybe a group of these anonymous people using pseudoscience can put their hands up and take Dave up on the offer.

The real question about Dave - is he is a JV, or a Theo de Rooij? In either case, you wouldn't take anything he says too seriously.

 

[Bannockburn]

Here's my final factoid:

1. JV claims Brad came 4th at the Tour in 2009 clean. But Brad trained with Sky's Rod Ellingworth, in Manchester and Girona. There was little to no contact between Brad and JV in 2009. How do you know someone's clean? Via their passport numbers?
2. JV claims Ryder was clean when winning the Giro in 2012. Imagine this: your brand new, 4 year old team are winning their first ever GT and you are not there to witness it. How does that even make sense? How the hell do you know your rider is clean? Because he looks you in the eye and tells you?
3. Look at the rider-boss interaction for the Lowe incident. Emails with no replies for weeks at a time.

Perception is reality.

I won't haggle over the merits of each point, but for the sake of not diluting any potential significance of mine, let's assume everything is true in the context in which you reference.

It's a point I haven't seen directly addressed here though it's been indirectly alluded to numerous times: In terms of the evolution of doping, there is much emphasis placed and effort spent on the chemical and physical components, and they seem to end up overshadowing the organizational components. The latter has evolved just as the others have and must be taken into account when we see a phrase used such as "highly sophisticated." Whether this was Ashenden's line of thinking or not, it immediately points me to what I know: Do not discount the evolution of organization. It's crucial.

It's not a free-for-all anymore, which makes the concept of plausible deniability among team directors and certain others all the more important.

 

[Tinman]

In terms of the evolution of doping, there is much emphasis placed and effort spent on the chemical and physical components, and they seem to end up overshadowing the organizational components. The latter has evolved just as the others have and must be taken into account when we see a phrase used such as "highly sophisticated."

It's not a free-for-all anymore, which makes the concept of plausible deniability among team directors and certain others all the more important.

Absolutely. It should be an easy UCI ruling to make teams accountable for the doping of their riders, and to penalize them for failing these. Now that logistics are so much more critical, teams need to insist and assume responsibility for rider time accountability leading up to and during GT's, and for the duration of the classics season. 24/7. No more unexplained rest day excursions to Girona, trips to Mexico, the convenient blind eye, separate hotel or team van, etc.

 

[hrotha]

Apparently no one is interested?

Maybe a group of these anonymous people using pseudoscience can put their hands up and take Dave up on the offer.

The real question about Dave - is he is a JV, or a Theo de Rooij? In either case, you wouldn't take anything he says too seriously.

If he'll pay for my trip to Manchester, I'm game.

 

[Benotti69]

If he'll pay for my trip to Manchester, I'm game.

If Brailsfrod was game and had nothing to hide he'd come in here and answer every question put to him

But he gets paid millions not deal with this crap.

I also guess Sky Corp dont give flip how SkyCycling gets its results as long as they get them.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

If Brailsfrod was game and had nothing to hide he'd come in here and answer every question put to him

But he gets paid millions not deal with this crap.

I also guess Sky Corp dont give flip how SkyCycling gets its results as long as they get them.

http://road.cc/content/news/31011-dave-brailsford-hints-team-sky-may-be-softening-anti-doping-stance

There's no place for drugs in the sport and we like to think that we're at the forefront of promoting clean cycling," insists Brailsford.

"That philosophy will always stay. If we thought it wasn't possible then I'd be out. However, when you're trying to lift performance, and you look at the staffing side, if you want experience of professional cycling you have to go back a long way to find people over 40 who haven't been tainted in some way.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/15/dave-brailsford-team-sky

Wiggins finished fourth in the 2009 Tour; and that wholly unexpected result has continuing ramifications for Team Sky

Ya know. Coach a guy for 10 years on the track to multiple world championships and olympic gold medals, coach him for 2009 for the Tour (Ellingworth), and he goes and performs unexpectedly. We never knew he was going to come 4th. Not. Normal.

 

[The Hitch]

I don't get why they are delaying with lienders. Its not like this their fans are going to stop believing if they find him guilty of past shadyness. .most won't even know about it unless they release the information in July.

Once they find him.guilty, admit that they were wrong to take him on and give him some nice cash to.keep his mouth shut, the likes of Kimmage are not going to call attention to it so why has bailsford been waiting so long to do that.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I don't get why they are delaying with lienders. Its not like this their fans are going to stop believing if they find him guilty of past shadyness. .most won't even know about it unless they release the information in July.

Once they find him.guilty, admit that they were wrong to take him on and give him some nice cash to.keep his mouth shut, the likes of Kimmage are not going to call attention to it so why has bailsford been waiting so long to do that.

My theory: he has a contract. We have no way of knowing its details. I am guessing it's not the downward (Brailsford --> public) disclosure that's the problem, but the upward (Brailsford --> BSkyB) disclosure that's the problem.

If JV and Brailsford are anti-doping scandal, the company that closes an entire newspaper company (NewsCorp closing NOtW) after being sprung tapping mobile phones should be considered even more strictly anti-scandal.

Plus, given how pathetic someone like Fuentes is say compared to Ferrari, you need someone with experience and skills (eg: Leinders) to administer the program, or you're going to
1. sicken more riders (Vuelta 2010)
2. underperform entirely (Tour 2010)

Now, they can out Leinders and even pay him off but if they out him, there goes your omerta pass. Imagine you're a doping doctor prepared to work with Team Sky. Team Sky out their current doping doctor. How happy are you to now sign a contract with Team Sky?

Methinks Brailsford is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

ETA: The pro / elite cycling world is in a bubble, and the track side of that even more opaque than the road. Fancy being able to brush off one of your star rider's Hct dropping from 50.3 to 45 in the space of 2 weeks of no competing and probably no training either - in 2008. No questions asked. But it's much easier to hide things on the track - far less media attention. The road is another kettle of fish and Brailsford is out of his depth here. Wonder if JV is coaching him for a fee. Will be interesting to see how he handles this. Will set a good precedent for the future. They definitely need help with preparation to continue their good form.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Not. Normal.

I have to say, this repeated use of "Not normal" to make a point is getting effing annoying. Like all catchphrases, it was good once, but that time has long since passed.

However, is "Not. Normal" more or less not normal than the usual "Not normal"?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I have to say, this repeated use of "Not normal" to make a point is getting effing annoying. Like all catchphrases, it was good once, but that time has long since passed.

However, is "Not. Normal" more or less not normal than the usual "Not normal"?

No more annoying than being called a 5 year old, I can assure you Actually I lie. That doesn't annoy me, it just clouds the issue and muddies the discussion. Muddying the discussion is annoying.

"Not. <adjective>" is a mechanism that causes the reader to change the cadence of their internal dialogue, emphasising the NOT, rather than subvocalising it.

Not sure if I can stop saying "not normal" either. I can understand where you're coming from. Would it make it easier if we / I wrote nN instead?

 

[The Hitch]

My
Now, they can out Leinders and even pay him off but if they out him, there goes your omerta pass. Imagine you're a doping doctor prepared to work with Team Sky. Team Sky out their current doping doctor. How happy are you to now sign a contract with Team Sky?

Methinks Brailsford is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

The whole sky philosophy is don't get caught same as mcquaid. If someone gets caught they want life bans because for them there's no difference between a 6 month ban and a.life one both screw your reputation so you might as well appear anti doping and appeal for the long one

So in the future doping doctors would merely have to be without a history or better yet working in secret. Not every doer has to go round praising and defending their doctor in public like.lance did.

 

[sniper]

"Not. <adjective>" is a mechanism that causes the reader to change the cadence of their internal dialogue, emphasising the NOT, rather than subvocalising it.

looking for the "like" button

 

[Tinman]

My theory...

... between a rock and a hard place.

You are one smart cookie Dear Wiggo. I am a huge fan of yours in my small time here, luckily I am a reasonably quick study, so can mostly keep up with where you're heading. The biggest problem is that many folk coming in fresh from the outside reading your stuff would probably think you are straight out of the UFO conspiracy club from the 70's. And therein lies a problem. This is so f***ing complex and interwoven AND IMPORTANT we/you need to find a way to get it across to broader audiences. And so I respect your patience and dedication to explain repeatedly. Please bear with those of us who may find your conclusions and inferences hard to swallow at first instance. Even the average cycling journo would probably struggle .... Anyhow, thanks for raising the level of discussion here dramatically.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

"Not. <adjective>" is a mechanism that causes the reader to change the cadence of their internal dialogue, emphasising the NOT, rather than subvocalising it.

Changing cadence achieves nothing. I thought we all knew that.

 

[RichWalk]

My theory: he has a contract. We have no way of knowing its details. I am guessing it's not the downward (Brailsford --> public) disclosure that's the problem, but the upward (Brailsford --> BSkyB) disclosure that's the problem.

good point, does anyone know who Brailsford is accountable to within the BSkyB organisation? If its Board level then it would need to be some pretty difficult questions hitting the main stream media before any one regulatory within Sky started asking the right questions.