Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[DirtyWorks]

We can't disprove it. But we can point out things that make it stupid.

Here's some things to mull over.

1. Eight of GB's gold medals in Beijing came from cycling - the British public were aware that this was the hot ticket years ago.

2. The British public turned out in surprisingly good numbers for the test event in 2011

Fair enough. If only you left out the personal attack at the end though. You void any credibility that came with posting some good counter-arguments.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

We can't disprove it. But we can point out things that make it stupid.

Here's some things to mull over.

1. Eight of GB's gold medals in Beijing came from cycling - the British public were aware that this was the hot ticket years ago.

2. The British public turned out in surprisingly good numbers for the test event in 2011

3. The British public turned out in huge numbers for the torch relay which started in May.

4. The British public turned out in big numbers just to watch the 50km walk - the most boring event in the Olympics.

To suggest that Wiggins's win was anything to do with the Olympics is just stupid.

Now, I think Sky are clean, but there are legitimate questions to be asked (eg Leinders), but trying to shoehorn each and every little thing into a doping story exposes you and others for what you really are - moronic fanatics.

I will not stand for this abuse of the 50km walk. More interesting than half the repetitive swimming events (especially the synchronised ones) and the misery and tedium of track sprints and the keirin for sure. And far superior to the ridiculous BMX, which might actually be an event that merits something other than sarcastic slow-clapping if they did a handful of laps instead of just one.

 

[BroDeal]

I will not stand for this abuse of the 50km walk. More interesting than half the repetitive swimming events (especially the synchronised ones) and the misery and tedium of track sprints and the keirin for sure. And far superior to the ridiculous BMX, which might actually be an event that merits something other than sarcastic slow-clapping if they did a handful of laps instead of just one.

Yup. The 50K walking like a dork event is one of the better Olympic sports to watch. It is like a bike race of attrition. There are breakaways, people slowly closing the gap to the leaders ahead, and walkers suffering physical collapse.

 

[martinvickers]

They won't take that lying down..

Amen, Brother.

 

[martinvickers]

Fair enough. If only you left out the personal attack at the end though. You void any credibility that came with posting some good counter-arguments.

It's not overly constructive , I grant you that. I'm not sure it voids the credibility of the argument.

If Einstein perfected some piece of his theory on special relativity, and took it into his mad wee head to end his first lecture on the subject at some Austrian gymnastiam, crammed with the most high profile theoretical physicists, with an..

"Eat that, b1tches!",

it would certainly not be constructive, but I'm not sure it would void the credibility of the preceding maths.

 

[BroDeal]

OK troops, whilst funny, the blame UCI/Sky posts are really cluttering up the thread. And will just more than likely result in similar responses when the Australian members are back on-line. And round and round we go

I don't think any particular post merits deletion but it may come to that, so please, back on topic (of sorts at least). Same will apply to any posts in response to the blame Sky ones of a similar nature.

Cheers

When will you begin deleting these posts?

Heretic!! Kill the Unbeliever!!

They won't take that lying down..

Amen, Brother.

Tell them to take to PM or Bike Radar.

 

[MatParker117]

I will not stand for this abuse of the 50km walk. More interesting than half the repetitive swimming events (especially the synchronised ones) and the misery and tedium of track sprints and the keirin for sure. And far superior to the ridiculous BMX, which might actually be an event that merits something other than sarcastic slow-clapping if they did a handful of laps instead of just one.

The fact they dropped the kilo for BMX still ****es me off.

 

[martinvickers]

The fact they dropped the kilo for BMX still ****es me off.

The OG track program is very frustrating - IOC very stubborn, but there is word cycling may get two more events come 2016, both on the track - either kilo or IP

 

[Dear Wiggo]

It's not overly constructive , I grant you that. I'm not sure it voids the credibility of the argument.

If Einstein perfected some piece of his theory on special relativity, and took it into his mad wee head to end his first lecture on the subject at some Austrian gymnastiam, crammed with the most high profile theoretical physicists, with an..

it would certainly not be constructive, but I'm not sure it would void the credibility of the preceding maths.

Equating Einstein, his relativity theory and lack of any personal attack, with any post in this forum as a means to justify embedded personal attacks in said posts.

Gotcha.

I am very glad Sky are still debating sending Wiggo to the Tour as leader. Would like to get another chance for him to be pinged.

 

[ferryman]

When will you begin deleting these posts?


I'm working from home tomorrow afternoon so will pick this mess up then

 

[AcademyCC]

Bro deal i know your kicking about somewhere. Could I just get your view on SKY in a short burst? thanks

 

[JimmyFingers]

When will you begin deleting these posts?


Tell them to take to PM or Bike Radar.

There's a beautiful irony of you asking a mod to delete posts.

 

[BroDeal]

AcademyCC's post asking for my opinion on Sky appears to have disappeared.

Anyway, I don't know what to think about pro cycling these days. There is pretty good evidence for the prevalence and effects of doping being reduced. I think there are probably a lot of riders who doped in the past and have stopped, if only because the risks of getting popped have greatly increased and the reduction in doping allows people to keep their jobs without juicing. So I am not prepared to say that because someone doped five years ago he must be doping today.

People point to reduced power-to-weight ratios during climbs as evidence that the peloton is mostly clean. I am not totally convinced. The criteria used is the limit of what is humanly possible. Great riders from the late eighties are used as the benchmark, but those were truly great riders with physiologies that were off the charts even amongst fellow pros. Aside from Contador, I don't see anyone presently who looks to be a LeMond, Hinault, or even a Fignon.

Vaughters says blood parameters show that oxygen vector doping has been nearly eliminated and the performance effects of what riders can do without tripping the bio passport has been reduced to a level that can be made up by marginal gains of non-doping methods. Again, I am not totally convinced. While a rider with a doping program and sloppy training methods might no longer have an advantage over a clean rider with fastidious training methods, such a situation would reward doping with careful attention to all details by eliminating those who used doping in the past as a crutch for disorderly preparation. In perverse irony, there is greater incentive to dope as doping decreases. Doping, even at a reduced level, would allow a rider to put a thumb on the scale. It may not be very potent for single day races, but over a three week grand tour the cumulative effect might make a large difference.

I am skeptical that the bio passport can prevent microtransfusions. There has to be a floor below which unnatural blood variations cannot be separated from natural variations, especially with infrequent and chaotically spaced data points. My guess is that there is still a lot of room left for dopers to operate within.

The bottom line is that even with a radically improved doping situation, I think there is a lot of opportunity for careful dopers in longer events.

When it comes to Sky, it is a guess about whether a collection of components of varying probability produce a whole that is improbable rather than evidence of doping. In such guesses there is a lot of subjectivity and inaccuracy. The bottom line is whether Sky's performance seems to make sense when held up against other teams and other riders.

This thread is filled with the various things that people are skeptical about. It is not any one thing. It is Wiggins AND Froome AND Porte AND Rogers AND Lienders AND Evans getting outperformed by Rogers AND et cetera. Assign a chance of being kosher to each item. Even if each item has a very high chance of being innocent, when all the items are multiplied together, the combined chance makes Sky's performance unlikely, and I don't place things like Rogers performing better than he did while a client of Dr. Ferrari as having a high chance of being kosher. The team's performance looks very suspicious.

 

[BroDeal]

There's a beautiful irony of you asking a mod to delete posts.

Do you and your lads ever plan on posting anything relevant to the thread?

 

[JimmyFingers]

When will you begin deleting these posts?


Tell them to take to PM or Bike Radar.

Just to point out my post was a response to a now deleted post by Parker, FYI

 

[ianfra]

Nothing at all suspicious about the Sky success. Sometimes you have to look beyond doping and at the facts and the integrity of those involved. Clean team. Happy about that are you? Or do you really want them to be dirty, eh?

 

[DirtyWorks]

it would certainly not be constructive, but I'm not sure it would void the credibility of the preceding maths.

You are enabling the name-calling idiocy by letting the end of his post slide.

I could be wrong. Right/Wrong I don't care. I care that we now have some more information to work with thanks to your post about the sport groups.

 

[DirtyWorks]

The OG track program is very frustrating - IOC very stubborn, but there is word cycling may get two more events come 2016, both on the track - either kilo or IP

So, we don't know how the IOC quantifies the performance of their various sporting events, but apparently cycling did well enough for the IOC to consider expanding the events.

 

[BroDeal]

Nothing at all suspicious about the Sky success. Sometimes you have to look beyond doping and at the facts and the integrity of those involved. Clean team. Happy about that are you? Or do you really want them to be dirty, eh?

That's it. You have to not only ignore Sky's performance being so outrageous that people refer to the team as UK Postal and even Sky riders use the comparison but outright deny that there is anything suspicious at all. Put your faith in those who may have an interest in lying. Faith, man, faith. That's the ticket. This strategy has worked so well in the past. This time, like every time until the truth is revealed, it's different.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

So, we don't know how the IOC quantifies the performance of their various sporting events, but apparently cycling did well enough for the IOC to consider expanding the events.

Worth noting that the IOC has historically been as dodgy as they come in terms of sports governing bodies. If they think that there's money to be made from more cycling, they will be after that money for themselves, not for the UCI.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

This thread is filled with the various things that people are skeptical about. It is not any one thing. It is Wiggins AND Froome AND Porte AND Rogers AND Lienders AND Evans getting outperformed by Rogers AND et cetera. Assign a chance of being kosher to each item. Even if each item has a very high chance of being innocent, when all the items are multiplied together, the combined chance makes Sky's performance unlikely.

Great post, particularly the bit I've quoted.

I'd only disagree with the inclusion of "Evans being outperformed by Rogers". Firstly, Evans was cr*p this year relative to last year. He was outperformed by his own team-mate amongst others in the Tour. Secondly, I don't think objective analysis supports a conclusion that Evans was outperformed by Rogers. Rogers made tactical bursts that Evans didn't/couldn't follow, but these inevitably cost Rogers a lot, which is why he generally finished minutes down on Evans in the key stages.

 

[martinvickers]

Equating Einstein, his relativity theory and lack of any personal attack, with any post in this forum as a means to justify embedded personal attacks in said posts.

Gotcha.

If you can't understand example by hyperbole, I ain't gonna help ya.

I am very glad Sky are still debating sending Wiggo to the Tour as leader. Would like to get another chance for him to be pinged.

Well, admitting the bias is the first step, so congratulations on that.

As to waiting in hope, well, good luck to you, everybody needs a hobby...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Wonder if Froome dawg will hang around and get treated like a second class citizen again.

Or maybe say to hell with it and ditch Wiggins on a TdF climb and put time into him.

Be interesting to see how Rogers goes at Saxo too. Given the close similarities between Sky and US Postal, you'd be half expecting one of their vacating elites to get pinged in the 12-36 months following.

Such a shame they let Rogers go without the bonus of pointing to his departure as a clear indication of the relentless pursuit of their ZTP. That would have been really convincing.

Still Shane Sutton to deal with though. Wonder if that is ever going to get handled properly or just continue on its merry, unbelievable way.

Plenty of things to look forward to.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

If you can't understand example by hyperbole, I ain't gonna help ya.

I think Stephen Hawking would have been a better choice is all. Being British and all.

 

[martinvickers]

You are enabling the name-calling idiocy by letting the end of his post slide.

I could be wrong. Right/Wrong I don't care. I care that we now have some more information to work with thanks to your post about the sport groups.

Always happy to help, Dirty. I like actual information, too - indeed, it's the demand for information/evidence over pure conjecture and frankly, in many cases, devout wishful thinking has got me the most abuse in this forum!! If the conversation revolves around info, you will usually find I try to explore that, and look that up, etc- it's when, and you are by no means key offender in this, the whole thing turns into an emotional bilious shambles that I get tetchy.

So i will readily admit, for once, I went right down what might be called the sarcasm/satire route - i don't think it's off topic to do so, i was still debunking possible accusations, and it was great fun - and a couple of the more snide full time anti-sky, anti-brit posters in here took sudden hurt-feely offence, which given how they act generally in here, was kinda funny too. seems a lot of mockers don't like being mocked. Who'd have thunk it.

But let's return to normal programming. The IOC look at 'programmes' for each 'sport' and 'discipline' every few years. you may remember Golf and rugby sevens got in last time, and Karate and Squash are front runners now.

In addition, IOC look into programmes, and attempt to agree with the Federations the number of events, competitors, officials and venues - with a key eye on cost sustainability and gender equality (gymnastics excluded - apparently, and I asked!, you'll never see the olympic Men's beam or women's pomell) - gender equality is their 'thing' right now...

Now every sport makes compromises of a sort - even the biggies like athletics (no cross-country event), and swimming (no 50m other than freestyle, only one of the long distance events per gender) anf gymnastics (no individual apparatus for rythmic, no aerobic gymnastics (thank god) and no double trampoline or acrobatic gymnastics)

UCI made a relatively big sacrifice to gender equality in 2012 - they ditched a rather large number of track events (by ioc standards) to allow for women's team events.

The UCI world track programme is 19 events - the olympics only 10 - in addition there are no 'freestyle' (artistic) bike events, and no mountain bike downhill. For a Group 2 sport (one of the main ones after Athletics) that's pretty limited.

The UCI have been trying to get more track events since they brought in BMX (it was brought in at the moment IOC were getting most worried about X-Games) - not least because velodromes are specialist and expensive buildings. As are purpose built BMX tracks.

Byt he way, I'm reliably tiold the worst offender for expensive specialist buildings is the canoe slalom course - incredibly expensive, environmentally difficult, fit for absolutely nothing by canoe slalom - of which there are 4 olympic events - only 4! wheras canoe sprint, just reuses the rowing course - IOC like that kinda thing!

So in that sense, the new events thing is not new, and the Brit dominance in it is actually unhelpful - IOC don't like giving out 'certain' medals to already successful teams.

So are Pat and Hein corrupt b*stards?

Abso-f***ing-lutely, as Mr Big used to say.

Are they using their olympic contacts, particularly Pat Hickey, to smooze something out of the IOC?

I'd be shocked if they weren't - the Keirin is a great fun event, but how it got in the games is a disgrace - a disgrace i might add, uncovered by British TV journalists if memory serves...

Would it suit TeamGB to see the existing track programme expanded to include say Individual pursuit and Kilo?

definitely, especially since GB - who are much more about science than tactics - specialises at these 'time trial' style events.

Does a Sky/Wiggins win in he tour de france help that fight?

Not one bit.

1. IOC don't like the number of cycling golds GB wins as it is - they are quite open about it - they don't like China's divers either, for the same reason - it's not going to just give more events if they won't be competitive - burgeoning GB dominance on the road only going to make them more jittery.

2. Velodromes are usually easily enough sold out at the games - small packed atmospheric venues - there's no financial gain, because they won't be allowed extra sessions - it'll be the same bums on seats - just a half hour more each per session. Frankly if the IOC had a a titter of wit, it would beg UCI to run all nineteen events over a whole week - hell, even invent a few new ones - anytihng to increase the room for good ticket sales - but that's not the IOC way...