Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[martinvickers]

No. it's called "intuitive". Check the "N" in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator

Sorry, Tinman that's giving it far too much credit - intuition adapts with evidence; these Clinic mantra's never change.

It's not intuition, it's bias.

 

[martinvickers]

So he is saying that "jumping around" is doping?

What does climbing style have to do with PEDs?

Seriously?

Somewhere in Oz, Wiggo is turning in his bed. All those posts on VO2 and threshold and we get - "PED's have nothing to do with climbing style".

 

[Ferminal]

Seriously?

Somewhere in Oz, Wiggo is turning in his bed. All those posts on VO2 and threshold and we get - "PED's have nothing to do with climbing style".

Which PED will make someone more or less able to accelerate relative to average power?

When you find it, let Basso know.

Can you answer my questions instead of just posting rubbish ridicule in response? If you don't have an answer I don't care, just don't reply with nonsense, I actually want a discussion.

 

[thehog]

Which PED will make someone more or less able to accelerate relative to average power?

When you find it, let Basso know.

Can you answer my questions instead of just posting rubbish ridicule in response? If you don't have an answer I don't care, just don't reply with nonsense, I actually want a discussion.

Problem being is during the Tour Wiggins in defense of his cleanness said you don't see riders like Virenque on lone mountain breakaways anymore.

Brailsford is now saying that you won't see "jumping around" anymore either - this is dispite Froome's jumping at Vuelta 2011/12, Tour 2012.

And DB says that clean cycling is punching 450w+ day after day on HC climbs so that no other team is able to "jump"!

I did hope for the best from the article but the narrative now is every other style of riding is doping and Sky's version (dispite Froome-dawg) is clean!

He could release the blood profiles to reduce speculation.

Sadly Sky have a willing fan base who'll eat up this trout good and proper.

I'm sorry. Not buying it.

 

[sniper]

...
I'm sorry. Not buying it.

is Walsh buying it?

 

[thehog]

is Walsh buying it?

No he's not buying it either. He wrote complimentary articles on Armstrong as well. He always admired Armstrongs vigor. It wasn't to later when Walsh learnt more that he realised that Armstrong's motivations were not just training hard but doping hard.

Walsh should have asked about why Wiggins/Sky loved Lance so much and admired the USPS riding at 500w style.

As I said; more questions than answers.

I still maintain Leinders was a smokescreen which worked perfectly.

 

[Swifty's Cakes]

Problem being is during the Tour Wiggins in defense of his cleanness said you don't see riders like Virenque on lone mountain breakaways anymore.

Brailsford is now saying that you won't see "jumping around" anymore either - this is dispite Froome's jumping at Vuelta 2011/12, Tour 2012.

And DB says that clean cycling is punching 450w+ day after day on HC climbs so that no other team is able to "jump"!

I did hope for the best from the article but the narrative now is every other style of riding is doping and Sky's version (dispite Froome-dawg) is clean!

He could release the blood profiles to reduce speculation.

Sadly Sky have a willing fan base who'll eat up this trout good and proper.

I'm sorry. Not buying it.

agree, the assertion by Brailsford that you ride clean by producing a steady output is flawed and self-serving. It just happens that is what suits Wiggins style.

On the upside I'm glad there is an article in the mainstream media asking Sky to justify themselves as clean, there are too many people in Britain who think Wiggo is clean just because he's says so; on the downside its a shame the justification used seems to be along the lines of JV says we are clean so it must be true.

If Sky want to set themsleves up as paragons then they need to be transparent about the blood profiles, and until they do they'll always be open to doubt and suspicion.

 

[oldcrank]

Yes, pretty clear Shane was trying for the "he's a character" role - little acronyms, just our of nowhere - can we assume SKY actually stands for Sutton killed yatesy?

I thought it was pretty well made in a cinematic sense

Without knowing either Shane or Sean personally, I like
both guys and respect their contributions to BMW's historic
season. I also like the fact both Sutto and Yatesy have
pretty decent palmares on the track (although obviously
not in the same league as BMW's).

Another bit from the doco I really liked was when Yatesy
was driving and Sutto was riding shot-gun following BMW
in the first time-trial and Sean says, with a very big grin
"Bradley can become the second British rider to win a
time-trial stage at the tour." Unfortunately the clip was
too short to show if Shane had a reply or not.

 

[MatParker117]

Sky are looking for a more central training base than Mallorca and Tenerife;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20535637

BBC suggest Girona and Nice.

 

[Mellow Velo]

is Walsh buying it?

No he's not buying it either. He wrote complimentary articles on Armstrong as well. He always admired Armstrongs vigor. It wasn't to later when Walsh learnt more that he realised that Armstrong's motivations were not just training hard but doping hard.

So, what you are really saying is that, at the present, Walsh is buying it.
The fact that you aren't buying it, comes as no surprise to anybody.

Far more credible to start from a position of faith, then move if and when any real evidence arrives, than to start at a position of disbelief, with no intention of moving, regardless of what comes to light.

 

[Mellow Velo]

On the upside I'm glad there is an article in the mainstream media asking Sky to justify themselves as clean, there are too many people in Britain who think Wiggo is clean just because he's says so; on the downside its a shame the justification used seems to be along the lines of JV says we are clean so it must be true.

If Sky want to set themsleves up as paragons then they need to be transparent about the blood profiles, and until they do they'll always be open to doubt and suspicion.

That's just about how I read and see it.

 

[sniper]

So, what you are really saying is that, at the present, Walsh is buying it.
The fact that you aren't buying it, comes as no surprise to anybody.

Far more credible to start from a position of faith, then move if and when any real evidence arrives, than to start at a position of disbelief, with no intention of moving, regardless of what comes to light.

what has come to light other than the fact that Walsh is not willing to pick an unnecessary fight? TheHog had his hopes up way too high yesterday. I warned him

Any speculation about Sky's ped-abuse will for now remain confined to the walls of Clinic, until something more tangible surfaces (Ferrari links? Bruyneel spilling beans?). For the average cycling journo, there is nothing tangible to go by at the moment. Anybody with a job and/or a family to protect will think twice before publicly doubting Sky.

 

[thehog]

what has come to light other than the fact that Walsh is not willing to pick an unnecessary fight? TheHog had his hopes up way too high yesterday. I warned him

Any speculation about Sky's ped-abuse will for now remain confined to the walls of Clinic, until something more tangible surfaces (Ferrari links? Bruyneel spilling beans?). For the average cycling journo, there is nothing tangible to go by at the moment. Anybody with a job and/or a family to protect will think twice before publicly doubting Sky.

My expectations were on line with Walsh. He wasn't writing an article to prove Sky doping. He was writing an article about Brailsford, Sky and their successes in 2012.

His MO was not doping. Just to report on his conversation with Brailsford.

DB gave him the speil if "our way is the clean way" which Walsh reported.

As you say until the Porte intel and Ferrari links come into the public domain it won't be printed in the Times.

One should remember the Sunday Times is a Murdoch owned newspaper. Walsh has already seen Kimmidge kicking about home sans a job. If was hardly going to write BMW Confidential.

For me it "just another article". Neither confirms doping or not confirms it.

In fact the comment in regards to "jumping around" = doping tells me it's just more spin.

Sorry. I want to believe but I can't.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

what has come to light other than the fact that Walsh is not willing to pick an unnecessary fight?

He certainly doesn't mind misrepresenting and taking cheap shots at Team Sky rivals on twitter.

 

[sniper]

He certainly doesn't mind misrepresenting and taking cheap shots at Team Sky rivals on twitter.

Walsh is cashing in on the Armstrong affair but is sweettalking Brailsford and Sky as if he hasn't learnt much from the Armstrong case. Understandable but slightly disappointing.
Perhaps Walsh is running for chief editor of the LST.

 

[zalacain]

There are very strict media impartiality laws here in the UK.

You haven't seen the Sun or The Mail then? Not for nothing are they called the Scum and the Fascist Gazette. The News of the World was known as the Screws of the World or the *****s Gazzette because of the main thrust of it's reporting.
The red tops in the UK are amongst the most biased and dishonest papers in the world.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

Walsh is cashing in on the Armstrong affair but is sweettalking Brailsford and Sky as if he hasn't learnt much from the Armstrong case. Understandable but slightly disappointing.
Perhaps Walsh is running for chief editor of the LST.

I honestly don't know his motives, but I have allways had issue with a global media body directly sponsoring a single competitor in any sport. As a key contribotor to public opinion, and in an age of trial by public, I have growing doubts regarding impartiality.

 

[Froome19]

My expectations were on line with Walsh. He wasn't writing an article to prove Sky doping. He was writing an article about Brailsford, Sky and their successes in 2012.

His MO was not doping. Just to report on his conversation with Brailsford.

DB gave him the speil if "our way is the clean way" which Walsh reported.

As you say until the Porte intel and Ferrari links come into the public domain it won't be printed in the Times.

One should remember the Sunday Times is a Murdoch owned newspaper. Walsh has already seen Kimmidge kicking about home sans a job. If was hardly going to write BMW Confidential.

For me it "just another article". Neither confirms doping or not confirms it.

In fact the comment in regards to "jumping around" = doping tells me it's just more spin.

Sorry. I want to believe but I can't.

To me this post is basically saying that you were right once and so you want to be right again. You got bored moved onto fresher pastures, but now you are realising that you may be wrong this time round. It is certainly not as clear cut as last time. You see all your previous helpers in your last endeavour failing to support you and you seem to be admitting that there will never be sufficient proof here because in reality there is nothing to worry about.

I do not know whether Sky are doping or not.. that is just how I am reading your posts in this thread over the last couple of days.

 

[martinvickers]

Which PED will make someone more or less able to accelerate relative to average power?

When you find it, let Basso know.

That's a strawman, and you know it.

Any product that can increase your total power output relative to your competitiors is going to allow you to attack more viciously more often. After that style is down to genetics of the muscle fibre make up.


Compare Nibili 2012 to Contador/Rasmussen 2007 -no difference?

 

[martinvickers]

Sorry. I want to believe but I can't.

Ach, now, Hog, come on, will ye stop

 

[thehog]

To me this post is basically saying that you were right once and so you want to be right again. You got bored moved onto fresher pastures, but now you are realising that you may be wrong this time round. It is certainly not as clear cut as last time. You see all your previous helpers in your last endeavour failing to support you and you seem to be admitting that there will never be sufficient proof here because in reality there is nothing to worry about.

I do not know whether Sky are doping or not.. that is just how I am reading your posts in this thread over the last couple of days.

This is not about me. I'm not doping.

Please take up your issues with Sky and Brailsford.

I'd much prefer if we spoke about the interview and not myself.

Please continue the debate without getting personal.

 

[Froome19]

This is not about me. I'm not doping.

Please take up your issues with Sky and Brailsford.

I'd much prefer if we spoke about the interview and not myself.

Please continue the debate without getting personal.

I was commenting on your reply.
It was generalised, but that is how it came across to me at the very least.

Sky and Brailsford are forcing people like Rogers, Yates and all the others out of the back door. That is enough for me at the moment. It is not pretty and is imo foolish but at least it demonstrates their stance on doping.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

I was commenting on your reply.
It was generalised, but that is how it came across to me at the very least.

Sky and Brailsford are forcing people like Rogers, Yates and all the others out of the back door. That is enough for me at the moment. It is not pretty and is imo foolish but at least it demonstrates their stance on doping.

The same one they had when flouting their own stance?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

My biggest stumbling block to believing Wiggins since 2009 was clean is that we are expected to believe the only reason he did not show his incredible road talent prior to 2009 is:

he couldn't be bothered.

Mega bucks are on offer to top 10 TdF riders since 2000.

Brad and all his apologists are saying, yeaaaaah Brad coulda been earning squillions of buckaroos, but he preferred to stick to his $50k pa salary and drink and smoke, rather than buckling down and earning some real moolah.

Noone expected it, that 2009 4th place, including Millar, who, after coming back from 2 years off, beat or matched Wiggins the world champ pursuiter, in the TdF TT, and Rod Ellingworth, who already coached Brad to the top of the IP world. A world inhabited by very few truly world-class riders. I also found it interesting that Millar does not believe control-freak Wiggins did actually become a drunkard.

It is far easier for me to believe Wiggins just didn't have it, and that's why he never bothered trying. That the track IP got cancelled, his bread and butter, so the road is his last best hope, and he had to dope to be any good. It was 3 years after he first really tried, and failed dismally, in 2006, the 1000 days Tyler mentions in his book between someone trying road clean and finally capitulating.

Apologies for the slightly OT, but I have never really explained my trouble with Brad and his alleged latent ability. FWIW, this is the source of my disbelief.

I'll do my best to ignore the personal attacks this post illicits

 

[martinvickers]

My biggest stumbling block to believing Wiggins since 2009 was clean is that we are expected to believe the only reason he did not show his incredible road talent prior to 2009 is:

he couldn't be bothered.

Mega bucks are on offer to top 10 TdF riders since 2000.

Brad and all his apologists are saying, yeaaaaah Brad coulda been earning squillions of buckaroos, but he preferred to stick to his $50k pa salary and drink and smoke, rather than buckling down and earning some real moolah.

Noone expected it, that 2009 4th place, including Millar, who, after coming back from 2 years off, beat or matched Wiggins the world champ pursuiter, in the TdF TT, and Rod Ellingworth, who already coached Brad to the top of the IP world. A world inhabited by very few truly world-class riders. I also found it interesting that Millar does not believe control-freak Wiggins did actually become a drunkard.

It is far easier for me to believe Wiggins just didn't have it, and that's why he never bothered trying. That the track IP got cancelled, his bread and butter, so the road is his last best hope, and he had to dope to be any good. It was 3 years after he first really tried, and failed dismally, in 2006, the 1000 days Tyler mentions in his book between someone trying road clean and finally capitulating.

Apologies for the slightly OT, but I have never really explained my trouble with Brad and his alleged latent ability. FWIW, this is the source of my disbelief.

I'll do my best to ignore the personal attacks this post illicits

Well, you are entitled to your unbelief, and you've set out your reasons why. I don't think they hold up, but that's just one opinion thumping another, really. So no brickbats from me, it's a good post ;-)

I appreciate the 'megabucks' point, but i think that risks seriously underplaying the early influence of Peter Keen, the predecessor to Brailsford - the guy who first picked Wiggins for the track programme, and someone who was strongly anti-dope, and very very cynical on road culture - up to and including the formation of Sky.

I can easily see him presenting the case to Wiggins as - ride with us, ride clean, steady salary, olympic track glory is possible - ride the road full time, no hope unless you dope. And we'll drop you, so there'll be no stability.

In that case, sticking to the track becomes 'the path of least resistance'.

now, mind, I'm not saying that's what happened - only that it is just as plausible as the more sinister explanation.

For the record, it'll be interesting to watch bobridge over the next few years - the first pursuiter in a decade I know of that gets favourably compared to wiggins c. 2004-2008 - he's starting to do some serious prologues i believe, so I'll keep an eye out...