Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Bobby G]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Murray-sets-epic-battle-Wimbledon-title.html

Nobody told your cricketers. Bahahahaha. Good job yet again. Ask Steve Waugh, Warnie and Glenn McGrath about sledging. History really isn't your strong point. Then go ask Marcus Trescothick why he hurried on back to the UK one Ashes campaign before facing a single ball. He knew the sledging was coming and couldn't cope. Not just from the Aussie cricketers, but the English media, who so graciously turn on their own.

When in Rome dear boy, when in Rome.....

 

[Galic Ho]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Armstrong

Boxer Henry Armstrong was simultaneously champion in three divisions. Not sure if his weight swing was 12kg, but pretty close to it, alternating between featherweight and middleweight. Admittedly by the time he made middleweight champion he could only go back down to lightweight and not to flyweight, but still shows substantial losses and gains in muscle mass possible while maintaining power, in an era before modern scientific doping.

If your evidence against my argument is "I talked to some people at the gym and to my dietitian, and they laughed" may I suggest you take a course in statistics.

Wow, just wow. Got a timing on those fights? What happens to a boxer, albeit an unknown name in the grand scheme of a sport with an illustrious history, when they drop a division. Oh snap, you'd lose power. Ask any modern boxer. Look at the ones who do drop divisions. They take a year to do it. A year. That sport has even less doping rules and monitoring than almost any sport other than weight lifting. Do note I said MODERN BOXER. Ask them. Ask Danny Green what happens when you drop weight. Not some guy from the WWI era FFS. Sheesh, keep it real.

Oh and another thing...use your brain. Read my posts today. I clearly stated something to BlackCat that left no doubt as to what I've studied. It's implied I've studied statistics in depth. Again, thanks for such a wonderous contribution. You drag up dead people from a 100 years ago into the context of modern doping. Great move. Pro move. In light of that, perhaps talking to real people who train all the time, in todays medical world, might know a bit more than you think they would.

 

[King Of The Wolds]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Murray-sets-epic-battle-Wimbledon-title.html

Go read the comments. England's finest being sullied once again by the lower rank and file. That's how Scotland is viewed. Murray's detractors in the UK arguably outweigh his fans. But this is old news. It's not like there is a running joke about how Murray is a Brit until he loses. Then he is simply Scotish.

Nobody told your cricketers. Bahahahaha. Good job yet again. Ask Steve Waugh, Warnie and Glenn McGrath about sledging. History really isn't your strong point. Then go ask Marcus Trescothick why he hurried on back to the UK one Ashes campaign before facing a single ball. He knew the sledging was coming and couldn't cope. Not just from the Aussie cricketers, but the English media, who so graciously turn on their own.

You may find that the Daily Fail isn't necessarily representative of the nation's views.

Re: history and cricket. Mine's OK, but if it's ancient history we're talking, it's not my strongest point, I'll grant you.

 

[BYOP88]

Do you not go back and re-read all the pages you miss on a thread? If the answer is no then that would explain you're not being up to date on the posting habits of particular posters. It also explains your second paragraph. No *** doping is going on else where other than Sky. We're not at day 21 yet. This thread is about Sky and took off because it appears Sky have a team based doping program. People doping alone stand next to no chance against a system wide program which has produced the results Sky have done this season. That's the point of this thread...not that anyone hear posting credibly or rationally assumed everyone else was clean. No, we're presuming Sky have a system wide program that has taken it to a whole other level.

Of course Sky have a team wide doping programme, but they're not the only ones. It just happens that they're in yellow. I'm also guesing when someone else takes yellow in the coming days, you'll be all over them and their team?

 

[Galic Ho]

You are one mad MTF who I hope never to meet if you are in a bad mood Keep giving it to them my mad Aussie friend. No offence intended

I am actually in a good mood here. Not mad at all. Little confused as to why all these apologist keep flooding back in here, but calm none the less. There is a reasonably good pro forum on this site. They have appreciation threads. Maybe they're lost?

Don't worry, I wouldn't be too worried about any pro cyclist who gets mad at you. This is sadly, the best physical assault one could hope for:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRTlStScolw

Or perhaps this from Cadel to SBS Tour de France Aussie presenter Mike Tomolaris:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FikzgWE3t0A

Recreational riders? My country they're more concerned about being hit by a car. The two sides are constantly at war with one another. Cyclists are hated by many on Aussie roads. So they are a cranky bunch at times.

The journalists should press the riders more. Ask them the hard questions. Done some disguise if they're really worried. What's the worst that can happen. They drop the F-bomb or Wiggins calls you a c#%t? Most are highly strung individuals with the upper body strength of a feather. Hitting you would hurt them more than it would you. The sprinters and bigger ITT'ists are a different matter though. They bounce off the road and don't snap on it. They have muscle and could hurt someone. Hence why volatile Cav is given room by the press. GC guys however are all talk. Mostly the English speakers who are the wannabe tough guys. Go figure hey.

 

[cineteq]

He has been peaking all year? It's only July and He had no spring campaign. Or were you joking?

No joke. Obviously I was talking about Wiggo. Froome has been sick part of the year, otherwise he would've performed similarly.

 

[Zarvinov]

When I first seen Bradley Wiggins in the Tour I never envisaged that he would be a contender for the the overall general classification. His transformation from a complete non-contender to one of the favorites is so remarkable that it completely defies 'NATURAL' progression.

 

[Caruut]

Of course Sky have a team wide doping programme, but they're not the only ones. It just happens that they're in yellow. I'm also guesing when someone else takes yellow in the coming days, you'll be all over them and their team?

You're not being fair here - it was not because they won. It was how they won, and how far away from winning so many of them were before.

 

[Galic Ho]

Of course Sky have a team wide doping programme, but they're not the only ones. It just happens that they're in yellow. I'm also guesing when someone else takes yellow in the coming days, you'll be all over them and their team?

If they're called Rinaldo Nocentini. Yes. Honestly, though, how many guys are going to take yellow? At this stage of the race. Only a breakaway can take yellow other than another GC rider. Of those GC riders, who has a team performing like Sky has?

I don't have a problem with Cav, Eisel, or EBH. Even Knees is fine. It's the four GC guys. They're on some other realm entirely. Especially the two Aussies and Froome. No real reference in their past for it. If you couldn't match this level of performance whilst at T-Mobile on their freakish program or riding for Bjarne Riis helping Contador it's saying something.

I honestly didn't think the whole GC group at Sky, the mountain boys, would be this good. I honestly don't know how bad it really is...will know by the third week. Maybe they will drop it down a notch. Maybe yellow will depart Wiggins shoulders. Then again, maybe not. We'll see tonight.

 

[Caruut]

He has been peaking all year? It's only July and He had no spring campaign. Or were you joking?

No spring campaign? Sure he didn't ride the Ardennes, but he did win Paris-Nice and the Tour of Romandie either side of that, and then the the Dauphiné as Spring turned to summer.

 

[Galic Ho]

Oh come on, Trescothick had depression. Have some class, man.

I'm not knocking the man. I actually felt sorry for him and understood. I've seen the sledging. Only confirming that it happens, and that many Aussie sportsmen and some women have made it into an art form. That's all I was doing. He simply wanted to go home. I get that. He has my sympathy. Just illustrating a point, not knocking the man. As I was trying to explain, there are many factors there making people's lives difficult. Even worse for someone with depression. Best to get out, go home, rest up and get help.

 

[Caruut]

I honestly didn't think the whole GC group at Sky, the mountain boys, would be this good.

You made the point quite vigorously, if I remember rightly

 

[luckyboy]

When I first seen Bradley Wiggins in the Tour I never envisaged that he would be a contender for the the overall general classification. His transformation from a complete non-contender to one of the favorites is so remarkable that it completely defies 'NATURAL' progression.

Everyone seems to have accepted this now.

 

[Caruut]

I'm not knocking the man. I actually felt sorry for him and understood. I've seen the sledging. Only confirming that it happens, and that many Aussie sportsmen and some women have made it into an art form. That's all I was doing. He simply wanted to go home. I get that. He has my sympathy. Just illustrating a point, not knocking the man. As I was trying to explain, there are many factors there making people's lives difficult. Even worse for someone with depression. Best to get out, go home, rest up and get help.

Perhaps I misinterpreted slightly. Just think that the depression and the sledging are unrelated.

 

[function]

No joke. Obviously I was talking about Wiggo. Froome has been sick part of the year, otherwise he would've performed similarly.

04 - 11 March : Paris Nice
24 - 29 April : Romandie
03 - 10 June : Dauphine

Thanks for the clarification and it's a fair point, Wiggins has been doing well since early this year (although interspersed with breaks), i'll have to see what happens to his form later on this year.

 

[Galic Ho]

You may find that the Daily Fail isn't necessarily representative of the nation's views.

Re: history and cricket. Mine's OK, but if it's ancient history we're talking, it's not my strongest point, I'll grant you.

I know it's not representative of the nations views. But it does show how some sectors and some groups can turn vocally violent and abusive at the drop of a hat. Especially when you don't win. They're only ever looking to sink the boot in. It's not like the people questioning Sky here hate Sky. Cav wins, it's acknowledged and congratulated. It's the manner in which you are behaving that's disliked here. Especially when it's blatantly obvious. Sky could do to learn some subtlety and drop the PR nonsense.

 

[Galic Ho]

You made the point quite vigorously, if I remember rightly

That I did. I knew they were likely doping, but thought they'd burnt through all their blood bags earlier in the season.

I also said if I was wrong the conversation would move to the Clinic.

 

[Galic Ho]

When in Rome dear boy, when in Rome.....

Tall poppy syndrome may afflict some of my countrymen, but I'll give credit where it is due. Take our State of Origin decider last Wednesday. NSW vs QLD. Queensland won 7 in a row. The tall poppy syndrome cut deep into the hearts of many New South Welshmen, who took to Facebook and other social electronic media fronts to express their rage. I know all too well. It's good for a laugh and some entertainment.

BTW, I don't like Michael Clarke one iota. Tool. But I acknowledged when his from suddenly returned and the results merited it. Didn't really care when they weren't though.

 

[Love the Scenery]

Oh and another thing...use your brain. Read my posts today. I clearly stated something to BlackCat that left no doubt as to what I've studied. It's implied I've studied statistics in depth. Again, thanks for such a wonderous contribution. ... Great move. Pro move. In light of that, perhaps talking to real people who train all the time, in todays medical world, might know a bit more than you think they would.

I have read all your posts today and I have yet to identify a single logical argument based on actual data. Instead I read posts about Sky crotches and fanboys. You have engaged in just about every logical fallacy in the book -- the argument ad hominem (attacking your opponent's character or personal traits instead of engaging with their argument), the appeal to authority )using the opinion or position of an authority figure, or institution of authority, in place of an actual argument), the anecdotal argument )using personal experience or an isolated example instead of a valid argument), and the bandwagon (appealing to popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation), the latter being your primary argument in favor of Sky team doping, with the first being your favorite counterargument.

Seriously, there are a lot of solid arguments as to why we should suspect team Sky, but yours are not among them. I will consider responding to further posts if I detect anything resembling correct logic, until then I see no point in it. I wouldn't want to be accused of having a faceful of Sky crotch

 

[Caruut]

That I did. I knew they were likely doping, but thought they'd burnt through all their blood bags earlier in the season.

I also said if I was wrong the conversation would move to the Clinic.

I thought they would be okay, set the pace a bit on the first climb, maybe try to shed off some of the other doms having a bad day on the final. Was not expecting genuine climbers to be strung out down the road like it's freakin' Alpe D'Huez and Contador has started dancing.

 

[Throbbobank]

Some lovely Aussie comments here which is nice given the number of Aussie cycling "heroes" known to have raced in an era when doping was rife and proven....personally, I was there at the Commonwealth Games in 2002 at Rivington when O Grady won from Evans and Cooke and had to accept that the reason for their dominance was that they'd completed the "Tour" so had the miles in the legs, rather than, as seems to be the concept here, won because they were doped to the eyeballs......

ps We like the fact that Michael Clarke has the nickname "pup" - we assume that it is because he is able to lick his own b*lls because he is completely incapable at playing or captaining - one can only assume that Australia who were ranked number 1 in one day cricket have been beaten 3 nil so far because the England team are on a major doping programme and/or when Australian athletes don't do very well it's always the fault of someone else doping....

 

[Caruut]

I have read all your posts today and I have yet to identify a single logical argument based on actual data. Instead I read posts about Sky crotches and fanboys. You have engaged in just about every logical fallacy in the book -- the argument ad hominem (attacking your opponent's character or personal traits instead of engaging with their argument), the appeal to authority )using the opinion or position of an authority figure, or institution of authority, in place of an actual argument), the anecdotal argument )using personal experience or an isolated example instead of a valid argument), and the bandwagon (appealing to popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation), the latter being your primary argument in favor of Sky team doping, with the first being your favorite counterargument.

Seriously, there are a lot of solid arguments as to why we should suspect team Sky, but yours are not among them. I will consider responding to further posts if I detect anything resembling correct logic, until then I see no point in it. I wouldn't want to be accused of having a faceful of Sky crotch

If you ask me, Sky are guilty of all the bolded.

 

[Frosty]

I don't have a problem with Cav, Eisel, or EBH. Even Knees is fine. It's the four GC guys. They're on some other realm entirely. Especially the two Aussies and Froome. No real reference in their past for it. If you couldn't match this level of performance whilst at T-Mobile on their freakish program or riding for Bjarne Riis helping Contador it's saying something.

Have you seen Porte's results from 2010? He came 4th in the world ITT, 4th in the Eneco Tour and finished 10th-20th on many mountain stages of the Giro. All while 25. His performances last year were poor but maybe he overtrained or something? When a rider is young i guess sometimes people decide a different training plan would help them get better results but it doesnt work out. If you look at his 2010 results and think that he would get stronger as he is now 27 rather than 25, then i dont think the results thus far look that out of place.

Mick Rogers had some tough times with illness last year, and didnt race much, but if you look back at his 2010 results then you see some good ones there - 6th in Tirreno-Adriatico, 2nd in Crit International, 3rd in the tour of romandie, 1st in tour of california, 5th in the worlds ITT. In the tour he didnt do so well, finishing just behind the leaders on the stage to Morzine but his performances fell away after that. He seemed to do better at the week long events, i think he had to work for Cav a bit too which wouldnt have helped. He did say at the end of the 2010 season that he was going to concentrate on one week events but his performances in this year's tour dont look that out of place with the 2010 background. At least not yet.

 

[samerics]

I have read all your posts today and I have yet to identify a single logical argument based on actual data. Instead I read posts about Sky crotches and fanboys. You have engaged in just about every logical fallacy in the book -- the argument ad hominem (attacking your opponent's character or personal traits instead of engaging with their argument), the appeal to authority )using the opinion or position of an authority figure, or institution of authority, in place of an actual argument), the anecdotal argument )using personal experience or an isolated example instead of a valid argument), and the bandwagon (appealing to popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation), the latter being your primary argument in favor of Sky team doping, with the first being your favorite counterargument.

Seriously, there are a lot of solid arguments as to why we should suspect team Sky, but yours are not among them. I will consider responding to further posts if I detect anything resembling correct logic, until then I see no point in it. I wouldn't want to be accused of having a faceful of Sky crotch

What you said, I've read this thread today and found this particular individual to be sneering and obnoxious to anyone who disagrees with his views.

 

[luckyboy]

Just stacking up their results from this season so far is ridiculous..

Algarve: Porte 1st, Wiggins 3rd
Criterium Int: Rogers 1st
Paris-Nice: Wiggins 1st
Romandie: Wiggins 1st, Porte 4th, Rogers 5th
Bayern: Rogers 1st, Porte 4th
Dauphine: Wiggins 1st, Rogers 2nd, Froome 4th, Porte 9th


Wiggins is having a better year results-wise than Contador ever had leading up to the Tour.

Froome also coming back from another bout with his life-threatening blood illness just in time to help dominate the Dauphine and Tour.

The length of their peaks...