Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[mastersracer]

It's getting silly really. People simply don't read the thread and just say "but this one thing in isolation, that sure could be real, right?". If then you point out there are a long list of strange things which need explanation it's deafening silence. And two pages on they start all over again.

- It's the performance (admitted by them selves when quoting their wattages)
- It's the structure of the medical team. <= really the marker in doping as is shown by cyclings history.
- It's the oddity that only two guys with links to Ferrari manage to keep up.
- It's the amazing form and maintaining this form through a year.
- It's a DS who learn the trade by USPS
- It's the ranking on the infamous suspicion list of certain riders.
- It's the history with VERY dirty teams by certain riders.

Yet we are ****ers/whiners when we refuse to go with this on faith alone.

It's truly the world backwards.

it's called confirmation bias. You can cherry pick confirming 'evidence' for any team like this. When in the history of doping has 1 team had a significant advantage and PED use been anything than randomly distributed throughout the peloton?

 

[Caruut]

So in turn:

Sky expended a lot of energy due to a failure to control breakaways. Their domestiques were non-factors in the closing stages as a result. Both those facts indicate one seriously inadequate team-wide doping programme right there.

Lotto broke the field down to I think 7 or 8 riders (they picked up one Leopard Trek from the breakaway and I am being generous as three of the lead group were riders who actually rejoined at the summit) and Sky broke it down to 5. So yes, if you are splitting hairs, it wasn’t the same effect – but Jelle’s effort (a fine one and not one I’m casting doubts on) was greater than any of the individual Sky riders on the preceding stage, as they spread the workload throughout the team.

I'm going to re-watch the finish and get back to you on that, that's not quite how I remember it, but memory can be pretty fickle.

 

[Caruut]

it's called confirmation bias. You can cherry pick confirming 'evidence' for any team like this. When in the history of doping has 1 team had a significant advantage and PED use been anything than randomly distributed throughout the peloton?

Ah, the favourite last stand of those arguing against overwhelming evidence - "confirmation bias!". The idea that any of us want to believe that Wiggins is dirty is ludicrous (apart from maybe Galic Ho, I don't think he could handle Wiggins beating Evans clean ).

Read some of my posts after La Vuelta in the Froome threads. I tried to say a top 20 on a Giro mountain stage and a 2nd in the British nats TT proved he had GT potential. I have been more than willing in the past to see Sky as clean, but I just cannot help seeing what I see when Sky do that.

I don't even want to believe Sky are dirty - I'm British and my friends all know I'm a cycling fan. They will be expecting me to rave about Wiggins' victory. My life would only be easier if I thought that they were clean - saves me having to either pretend or explain this all to people who don't know the history of this sport.

USPS, also, were quite clearly a level above.

 

[Bala Verde]

I’d add to that that dubious medical staff are in several teams since 2008, yet since 2008 individual performances in GTs (with some notable exceptions e.g. Contador, two folk in the 2011 Vuelta etc) have been considerably slower, less aggressive and less powerful than they were in preceding years. With all these bad pennies still in circulation as medical staff, 1) some are clearly either reformed characters or 2) are unable to have the same influence on their rider’s performance than was previously the case. Therefore, although it is disappointing that teams that claim to be squeaky clean (e.g. Garmin, Sky, Saxo) employ individuals who have likely facilitated doping in the past, it isn’t a smoking gun.

3) Or are just doing the same as they have been doing in the past, trying to ensure that their riders don't get caught, while providing them with/or ensuring the proper administration of doping.

Slower speeds are to be expected with the introduction of the blood passport because it sets upper and lower limits to blood manipulation. Coincidentally, I think it was introduced in 2008, just when you observe slower speeds and less aggressive riding...

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Rogers faking a pain face after sand bagging the TT.

 

[Franklin]

it's called confirmation bias. You can cherry pick confirming 'evidence' for any team like this. When in the history of doping has 1 team had a significant advantage and PED use been anything than randomly distributed throughout the peloton?

Cherry pick? Ok, now you are trolling. Not only do I show that it is anything but cherry picking, that the whole structure is tainted, you are one of those who keep on focussing on individual riders.

 

[Fergoose]

Aye Caruut, if either if us saw it differently it is an easy mistake to make, what with commentators constantly mistaking VdB for Vanendert during half of the ascent and RSNT riders both infront of and behind of the lead selection just prior to the summit. Happy to stand corrected, but I had the main field down to maybe 5 or 6 riders right near the summit before a couple of RSNT guys caught them up as VdB was unable to keep the pace up that he and Vanendert had set out earlier in the climb.

3) Or are just doing the same as they have been doing in the past, trying to ensure that their riders don't get caught, while providing them with/or ensuring the proper administration of doping.

Slower speeds are to be expected with the introduction of the blood passport because it sets upper and lower limits to blood manipulation. Coincidentally, I think it was introduced in 2008, just when you observe slower speeds and less aggressive riding...

Yes. Your 3) & my 2) are similar. Both an acknowledgement that USPS type comparisons are inappropriate, as that isn't happening in this era and it is arguably not possible for one team to dominate through a doping programme anything like to the extent that USPS did.

 

[SafeBet]

Froome's time at first check.
That ends any discussion for me.

 

[Franklin]

Sorry, this was answered almost immediately by a poster a couple of days ago, which is why I've been ignoring it since then. They answered it better than I can, but it was words to the effect that the cycling world is a small one and any team is liable to have people with chequered pasts in their ranks given the extent to which doping was systemic in the 1990s & 2000s.

You know what, let's rehire this doctor who bolloxed the whole Rasmussen affair. There is simply no way we can find anyone else!

Preposterous! Hiring Leinders is a very concious decision with far-reaching ramnifications. The "they couldn't find someone else" is so ridiculous that I find this dishonest reasoning.

And Kerrison stinks as well, but let's not start nit-picking....

I’d add to that that dubious medical staff are in several teams since 2008, yet since 2008 individual performances in GTs (with some notable exceptions e.g. Contador, two folk in the 2011 Vuelta etc) have been considerably slower, less aggressive and less powerful than they were in preceding years.

Simply they can't jack as much as they would like to

With all these bad pennies still in circulation as medical staff, some are clearly either reformed characters or are unable to have the same influence on their rider’s performance than was previously the case. Therefore, although it is disappointing that teams that claim to be squeaky clean (e.g. Garmin, Sky, Saxo) employ individuals who have likely facilitated doping in the past, it isn’t a smoking gun.

Once again preposterous. Certain doctors have always run farreaching doping schemes, well documented and filled with allegations. Just a few:

Celaya, van Mol, Ibarguren, Leinders

They only functioned in fully fledged dope schemes. Yet you say that now all of a sudden by no particular reason at all we should assume they have seen the light?

The world backwards indeed.

 

[Parrot23]

http://www.chris-froome.com/news/7-froome-trainingpeaks-analysis

 

[Franklin]

And there goes the Sky train through the ITT.

Nothing to see here, move along

 

[drfunk000]

Froome's time at first check.
That ends any discussion for me.

Let's see if he holds it to the finish. If that happens then...

 

[Ferminal]

Maybe Evans is clean.

 

[thehog]

Froome's time at first check.
That ends any discussion for me.

Weak field. He’s only 23 seconds up on the unknown Cancellera

 

[Der Effe]

Next time you all dope, do it a little less obvious.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Weak field. He’s only 23 seconds up on the unknown Cancellera

Or around 21 seconds up on TJVG.

 

[Parrot23]

Maybe Evans is clean.

No, lol, according to one poster here who absolutely knows he's a client of Ferrari--which is BS.

My take on Evans is that he's clean and also aging a bit now. He's riding as he has all year. And looks like he's had a bad day, too. Combo of three factors.

 

[SafeBet]

And I guess Wiggo is gonna be even faster.

 

[therhodeo]

I see this getting to 200 pages quickly after today.

 

[Parrot23]

Or around 21 seconds up on TJVG.

LOL, of course, yes.

 

[Franklin]

No, lol, according to one poster here who absolutely knows he's a client of Ferrari--which is BS.

Ahahahaha Now let's forget that Rominger had all his clients tested and let's dismiss the good Doctors own post on his webpage.

Even if we POOH-POOH that away we can go to the third of the Moser-Triumvirate, Aldo Sassi, trainer of Evans, Ricco, Rogers and Basso.

Roll eyes? Parrot23, try to look into this stuff before you try to dance.

 

[mastersracer]

http://www.chris-froome.com/news/7-froome-trainingpeaks-analysis

5.8 watts/kg. not extra-terrestrial.

 

[Ferminal]

No, lol, according to one poster here who absolutely knows he's a client of Ferrari--which is BS.

My take on Evans is that he's clean and also aging a bit now. He's riding as he has all year. And looks like he's had a bad day, too. Combo of three factors.

Things must be cleaning up a lot, JV could be spot on. That it took twenty years to find someone who could win the Tour clean (Evans) [Wiggins' words not mine], we now have a couple more capable of that, and a clean winner of the Giro.

Seems that progress is being made more rapidly than at any point previously.

 

[thehog]

Wiggins and Froome have already filed Federal injunctions against w****** and c**** to stop any suggestion this is not credible.

 

[hrotha]

5.8 watts/kg. not extra-terrestrial.

You won't see extraterrestrial wattages anymore. It's too obvious.

Doesn't mean you can't dope till you reach the upper human wattage levels though. Some people say there are less differences than ever between riders on average - maybe that's why.