Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[The Hitch]

I have read those arguments on here, and I have hionestly not found them more compelling, (I guess on either side ppl are inclined to beleive things that suppport their prejudices),.

Its wrong to dismiss all posters as being prejiduced. In fact there are plenty of posters on here with no allegiances who suspect sky because theyve been watching cycling since before this july and find the way sky behave and certain revelations about their staff to be the kind of trick they promised themselves many times they wont fall for again.

I wont put myself in that list since i admit am a bit biased against wiggins cos on general principle i hate jerks, but i love froome and i think he dopes too, but i think hrotha gooner, ls ferminal are examples of the types of posters im reffering to, as well as a few Brits and Sky fans who in recent days and weeks have aknowledged they feel a bit suspicious too - JR Anton, Martin.

On the other side there are some people who believe in sky who are fair and balanced people too, but it seems to me that in the - believe sky catergory, posters from the United Kingdom are very heavily overrepresented.

 

[Parker]

At least you didn't slip in the English card.

Yeah, but you did, as usual.

 

[Parker]

wrong.

wiggins: 3 1 1 1- 28 days as race leader
evans: 3 7 1 - 4 days as race leader.

cq summarises performance. i thought a scientist would recognise this?

What does 3 1 1 1 and 3 7 1 mean?

 

[del1962]

On the other side there are some people who believe in sky who are fair and balanced people too, but it seems to me that in the - believe sky catergory, posters from the United Kingdom are very heavily overrepresented.

Wouldn't that be the case simply because Sky is a UK team who have delivered Britains first TDF winner though, I doubt that many from outside the UK who believed Sky was clean would be that bothered about defending them, so a UK bias as such is hardly unnatural.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

What does 3 1 1 1 and 3 7 1 mean?

scientist with no pattern recognition. weird.

evans should have been 3 7 1 2

positions in all races pre-tour. you said evans nearly matched wiggins. wrong.

 

[Parker]

scientist with no pattern recognition. weird.

evans should have been 3 7 1 2

positions in all races pre-tour. you said evans nearly matched wiggins. wrong.

Evans
1st Tirrano Adratico
1st Romandie
2nd Dauphine

(also a 7th, true).

So shouldn't it be 17121 v 1D111 (D=DNF). Are you leaving out 1s? Naughty, naughty.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Correction : Dear Wiggo is making things up

What did I make up?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Evans
1st Tirrano Adratico
1st Romandie
2nd Dauphine

(also a 7th, true).

So shouldn't it be 17121 v 1D111 (D=DNF). Are you leaving out 1s? Naughty, naughty.

Yes my bad. In my defense, I was in bed on an ipad (hence all lower case posts) and they really are crap for looking at information or typing with (for me at any rate).

Wiggins was 3rd overall at Agarve too, so add that to the list.

What I take umbrage with is comparing Wiggins year to Cadel's, when clearly Wiggins provided a significantly more dominant season - days in leader's jersey is a good indication of that, as is CQ score.

 

[the omertà hurts]

Yes my bad. In my defense, I was in bed on an ipad and they really are crap for looking at information or typing with.
Yes my bad. In my defense, I was in bed on an ipad and they really are crap for looking at information or typing with.
Yes my bad. In my defense, I was in bed on an ipad and they really are crap for looking at information or typing with.
Yes my bad. In my defense, I was in bed on an ipad and they really are crap for looking at information or typing with.
Yes my bad. In my defense, I was in bed on an ipad and they really are crap for looking at information or typing with.
Yes my bad. In my defense, I was in bed on an ipad and they really are crap for looking at information or typing with.

 

[ferryman]

*snip*

Very good. Maybe make your colours, you know, a bit more English next time for the full effect.

 

[Parrulo]

the omertà hurts has been warned for trolling and his post has been deleted rather careless to troll when a mod is actively participating on the discussing . . . .

 

[Parrulo]

so nearly 24h later and the best argument for the karpets analogy the sky crowd could get was, "since sky is british and Movistar is spanish and the british unlike the spanish care if their top sportsman dope (lol andy murray) it's not even possible to compare the situations not even on the simple rider X vs rider Y comparison"

 

[Froomador]

Shane...

Expect Mail on Sunday to run exposé on Shane Sutton soon - courtesy of Darryl Webster...

 

[Darryl Webster]

Expect Mail on Sunday to run exposé on Shane Sutton soon - courtesy of Darryl Webster...

Hold fire on that. I had a reporter turn up at my door unexpected this morning. Was a shock to say the least!..courtesy of this "clinic". So now ya know for certain the major papers view this forum .
Me finks there,s much more to be looked into before owt is published.

 

[Ferminal]

Hold fire on that. I had a reporter turn up at my door unexpected this morning. Was a shock to say the least!..courtesy of this "clinic". So now ya know for certain the major papers view this forum .
Me finks there,s much more to be looked into before owt is published.

Hope you are ok with that Darryl and all went well.

I guess people being interested is something.

 

[Franklin]

A dominant team for sure, but hardly a vast chasm between them and those behind them.

Considering they consistently won it all we can say the chasm is quite large.

And that's without even looking at the truth which is where they absolutely dominated every race USPS style. The other contenders simply tried to hang on.

 

[Krebs cycle]

The facts of this PB are very different to simply "racing vs training".

Stage 6 of a PT race, 150km + 2000m into the stage, riding the front group, coming second overall? Yes. I do think that would be unusual. You are a/an <insert derogatory noun of choice> if you think otherwise.

In this race, it's the penultimate and queen stage.

I'm interested, can you please enlighten me with you super amazing self taught genius physiology professorship about the bit in bold....

You have made it abundantly clear that Mick Rogers could not possibly achieve "one of his best ever power measures" in the Dauphine because he would have been fatigued and therefore he should achieve his best numbers in training when he is fresh. So what is your point? Is Mick Rogers just lying here about this or are you saying it was only possible because he was doping?

If he was telling the truth and thus you say it was only possible because he was doping what does that say about his training? Does that mean that he doesn't dope during his training when he does 30min hill climb efforts (such as in Tenerife for example)? Or perhaps it means that he does dope during his training but he just dopes more during racing? If it was the latter, how does he do that.... dope more? Does he use blood transfusions or does he just use larger doses of EPO leading up to the race?

I'm confused because I've only got a PhD in exercise physiology, I'm not as smart or learned as your professorship oh wise one clinic guru anti-doping hero. Please help me to understand your lordship dear wiggo.

 

[Krebs cycle]

What did I make up?

oh lets see in the past few days alone you made up the following surrounding Mick Rogers and his June ridemedia interview....

You said, in the very next sentence following Rogers statement regarding a 5-7% improvement in threshold power, that he went on to refer to the dauphine climb.

Not true = MADE UP

You said that Rogers said in that interview his bodyweight was the same as it was when he was 16.

Not true = MADE UP

You said that Rogers claims he posted an average power PB during the Dauphine.

Not true = MADE UP

You said (this is more like a lie that you repeat over and over) that Rogers is specifically comparing his 5-7% increase in threshold power to his BEST EVER threshold power.

Unverified = MADE UP.

You said that Rogers couldn't have achieved "one of his best ever" power records (because he wasn't fresh enough)

Unverified = MADE UP

You said that Rogers would know for certain if the Dauphine climb was "one of his best ever" power records because he has been training and racing and recording every km with a power meter for many years

Unverified = MADE UP

Lets not forget the little paradox there in your unfounded allegations, you said that Rogers couldn't possibly achieve "one of his best ever" power records but you're certain he would know because he always trains and races with a power meter. So please answer my previous post. Was he lying about this?

You're rather like Lance aren't you? You invent a little fantasy world and make things up to populate your fantasy with and then you repeat those lies over and over and over in the hope that someone will believe you. Maybe you're a pathological lier like Lance and you believe your own lies so convincingly that you don't even realize that they are pure fantasy?

 

[armchairclimber]

Krebs, you'll save yourself all kinds of blood pressure related illness if you just ignore his posts. You're not dealing with a rational human being. You'll be stuck here indefinitely.

 

[Franklin]

Krebs, you'll save yourself all kinds of blood pressure related illness if you just ignore his posts. You're not dealing with a rational human being. You'll be stuck here indefinitely.

Well, considering the Sky supporters have trouble handling facts about the roster and refuse to admit that history squarely is in favor of the cynics this will continue for quite awhile.

That said, nobody dares to deny that DB is a liar for some time now, so at least the facts start to get through. Now if only people start to realize what this means as his general trustworthiness....

 

[Big Doopie]

i agree 100% with JV's assessment that sky's latest demand for a sworn oath is the wrong way to go about this.

because it precisely encourages omerta. a rider in the middle of his career, yes, probably doped at some point. even if this rider felt that they could now compete clean, they are forced to choose between employment with sky or basically getting fired and taking a suspension if they choose not to sign the oath.

what sky is doing is actually promoting omerta.

and JV is dead on in his criticism.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

i agree 100% with JV's assessment that sky's latest demand for a sworn oath is the wrong way to go about this.

I would go slightly further and say it is a ****ing stupid idea.

 

[JimmyFingers]

i agree 100% with JV's assessment that sky's latest demand for a sworn oath is the wrong way to go about this.

I'm surprised JV said that, he stands to inherit some pretty tasty staff...

 

[coinneach]

i agree 100% with JV's assessment that sky's latest demand for a sworn oath is the wrong way to go about this.

because it precisely encourages omerta. a rider in the middle of his career, yes, probably doped at some point. even if this rider felt that they could now compete clean, they are forced to choose between employment with sky or basically getting fired and taking a suspension if they choose not to sign the oath.

what sky is doing is actually promoting omerta.

and JV is dead on in his criticism.

No, what Sky is doing is consistent with what they tried to do from the start. In 3-5 years time, I think they will be seen as having blazed a trail (albeit in the same direction as JV & Garmin). I do see the danger of Omerta being prolonged, but unless there is some general amnesty or truth & reconcilliation process, I cannot see how a team can encourage openness about the past. All a team can do (apart from lobying for a change in UCI) is manage thenselves, true to their principles. Sky have set off down a road, its bumpier than they were prepared to admit, but I don´t think we should knock them for it.
BTW I don´t think we should be knocking JV, DM or Garmin either. (I don´t think Brailsford has criticised Garmin´s aims and methods: he just wants to do things differently) With friends like these on the Clinic, who needs enemies?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

No, what Sky is doing is consistent with what they tried to do from the start. In 3-5 years time, I think they will be seen as having blazed a trail (albeit in the same direction as JV & Garmin). I do see the danger of Omerta being prolonged, but unless there is some general amnesty or truth & reconcilliation process, I cannot see how a team can encourage openness about the past. All a team can do (apart from lobying for a change in UCI) is manage thenselves, true to their principles. Sky have set off down a road, its bumpier than they were prepared to admit, but I don´t think we should knock them for it.
BTW I don´t think we should be knocking JV, DM or Garmin either. (I don´t think Brailsford has criticised Garmin´s aims and methods: he just wants to do things differently) With friends like these on the Clinic, who needs enemies?

Where is the incentive to admit to anything? In fact it is quite the opposite as has been pointed out in numerous posts. Please explain what they are achieving with this policy.

And you say true to their principles... They were founded on a zero tolerance policy to doping were they not? That is not really looking like the case at the moment. They keep mentioning they have shown the Tour can be won clean but they have not acted any differently to any other team and made a concerted effort to prove this.