Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Digger]

Paul kimmage???
I hope asks sky some questions.

He doesn't have a current employer to do such a thing.
And that really is a shame.

 

[Casualfan]

For me, this is just Brailsford using similar methods as he did which transformed British Track Cycling. This is either means that there is 1)A very large scale doping programme taking place across both Track and Road cycling, evading various governing bodies in the process or 2) Sky are simply adopting a winning training and preparation approach, which is now being replicated by other countires in Track cycling, leading to less dominant performances by Britain.

TBH, I have no clue why Sky would arouse so much suspicion if they were up to accusations. It seems more likely that Wiggins would win by 30/40 secs if he was doping so to not arouse this suspicion we're seeing now.

 

[hrotha]

Correct. Cobo I never believed. Problem with him is that he has all sorts of self-admitted depression problems too. Can't motivate himself to get on the bike at times.

Another elephant in the room!

Wait for it...

Cobo is Spanish.

 

[ManInFull]

you can't drop 20kg, still TT in flat course like before, just impossible

Is he really claiming that he dropped 20 kg??

 

[Arnout]

For me, this is just Brailsford using similar methods as he did which transformed British Track Cycling. This is either means that there is 1)A very large scale doping programme taking place across both Track and Road cycling, evading various governing bodies in the process or 2) Sky are simply adopting a winning training and preparation approach, which is now being replicated by other countires in Track cycling, leading to less dominant performances by Britain.

TBH, I have no clue why Sky would arouse so much suspicion if they were up to accusations. It seems more likely that Wiggins would win by 30/40 secs if he was doping so to not arouse this suspicion we're seeing now.

Track is something different to road. Road is way more competitive and with way more variables. To be as dominating from a non-dominant position as on track you need much more "planning".

 

[BYOP88]

I thought they'd be more action here today.

 

[roundabout]

Here are just some of the questions that I desperately hope some brave journalist will ask Bradley Wiggins and / or Dave Brailsford today at the post stage press-conferences:

excellent questions, you anonymous internet ****er, you

 

[Parrot23]

Another elephant in the room!

Wait for it...

Cobo is Spanish.

That's right. Big elephant! Yet Cobo is really hard to read too.

Nationality is irrelevant, but not with Sky, it seems.

(Bertie is my favourite rider: remember when he attacked on that rainy stage last year when behind already? Classic. Guy's got the heart of a lion, even if dodgy like Sky.)

 

[dlwssonic]

The question is will sky ever get busted???

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

For me, this is just Brailsford using similar methods as he did which transformed British Track Cycling. This is either means that there is 1)A very large scale doping programme taking place across both Track and Road cycling, evading various governing bodies in the process or 2) Sky are simply adopting a winning training and preparation approach, which is now being replicated by other countires in Track cycling, leading to less dominant performances by Britain.

TBH, I have no clue why Sky would arouse so much suspicion if they were up to accusations. It seems more likely that Wiggins would win by 30/40 secs if he was doping so to not arouse this suspicion we're seeing now.

I'd like to think so too, but the spectre of USPS hangs over the peleton like a dark cloud. Sky must be mindful that there's no point in dominating and winning clean if no one believes you are actually clean.

 

[wattage]

The question is will sky ever get busted???

They will. They always get caught. I doubt they will test positive because UCI and ASO would not allow it to happen.

There will always be some outside factor that will blow the lid. It's only matter of time. I hope sooner rather than later.

 

[Cervelo77]

@The Joker: you clearly have a lot of time on your hands.

 

[ansimi]

Haha, the stats on the road forum when I look:

Professional road racing: 88 viewing

The clinic: 338 viewing

Tells me what the forum lurkers thought of this stage!

 

[SaxonUK]

The question is will sky ever get busted???

Maybe it'll go the same route as USPS. We're still waiting for the big bust

 

[hrotha]

That's right. Big elephant! Cobo is really hard to read.

Nationality is irrelevant, but not with Sky, it seems.

(Bertie is my favourite rider: remember when he attacked on that rainy stage last year when behind already? Classic. Guy's got the heart of a lion, even if dodgy like Sky.)

Ah, but see, you're not the Anglo-Saxon cycling media.

 

[Stingray34]

Here are just some of the questions that I desperately hope some brave journalist will ask Bradley Wiggins and / or Dave Brailsford today at the post stage press-conferences:

1. Brad, after you improved dramatically in 2009 to finish fourth overall at the Tour de France, you were interviewed by Daniel Benson from cyclingnews.com (interview published here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-calls-for-biological-passport-data-to-be-made-public).

You stated in that interview that you understood why some people thought you doped. Specifically, you said “I think it was the natural thing. Everyone thought I was on gear after that and I can’t blame people for that.” You also said ““I would have thought the same thing about someone who had come from absolutely out of nowhere from the gruppetto and finished fourth on the Tour”.

Yesterday, you stated that people on the internet that think you and or Team Sky are doping are “c*nts”, “w*ankers” and “bone-idle”.

Can you please explain why you thought it was natural to speculate you were doping in 2009, but now anyone who speculates that you dope is a “c*nt”?

2. Brad, in an interview with L’Equipe earlier this year, you stated that “It would be nice to be part of it in a positive way, because there aren’t a lot of Tour winners who you can believe in. For the first time last year, you had a Tour winner who everyone could believe in. He is a fantastic ambassador for the sport, he works hard, he didn’t win by showing off, but with great determination. So to be able to follow on from somebody like him would be nice, rather than doing it after somebody had a positive test hanging over his head for a year or two.” (Source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-wants-to-be-a-credible-tour-de-france-winner).

Since even you don’t believe that many Tour de France winners have been clean, does that mean that you too are a are “c*nt”, “w*anker” and “bone-idle”, or are you just a hypocrite?

3. Earlier this year, Team Sky met with the owners of le Tour de France, ASO, and presented them training data, power details and information to justify your performances this year (source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/sky-meeting-with-aso-is-routine-team-says).

Can you confirm that you presented ASO with your training data to allay suspicions about your performance? Can you also advise if you think the ASO are “c*nts”, “w*ankers” and “bone-idle”?

4. In response to the news that Team Sky had met with ASO, a spokesman for the team told cyclingnews.com that: ““We felt it’s our job to be transparent and tell people what we’re doing, and the more we can tell people the less mystery there is. We’re not doing it to try and convince them we’re clean, we are clean. We’re meeting them because we’re genuinely proud of the work we doing and they enjoyed what we had to show them.”

If Team Sky is genuinely proud about the work you are doing, why have you been transparent with the ASO and given them access to your data, but not been transparent with the fans and general public? In order to allay suspicions, will you publish on the internet all training data, training plans, blood testing data and the like not just for Brad Wiggins, but for every rider on Team Sky?

5. In July 2009, in a bid to prove that you had raced clean at the 2009 Tour de France, where you finished 4th, you published your blood passport data for the period February 16, 2008 to July 28, 2009. You later told cyclingnews.com, in an interview, that:

“I think they should make these things public. The whole blood passport should be on [the] internet, every rider in the peloton. I don’t see why it shouldn’t be. It’s got to that stage now where if there’s nothing to hide why aren’t they up there? You can pull up in any walk of life, company accounts, people’s tax and that’s public knowledge, so I don’t see why the blood passport shouldn’t be public knowledge. It will silence people or challenge certain things but I don’t see what harm it would do. It would give you credibility in the public’s eyes … but I don’t think everyone would agree to it, maybe for moral reasons or people thinking that it might be an invasion of privacy.” (Source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-calls-for-biological-passport-data-to-be-made-public).

Since you have not published any of your blood passport data since that time, does that mean, by your own words, that you have something to hide? Again, if you have nothing to hide, will you now publish your blood passport data on the internet for the period July 29, 2009 to today’s date?


6. You have been quoted as saying that when you concentrated on your track career, you weighed 82 kg, and that now you weigh 71 kg (source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tour-shorts-losing-interest-time-trial-preparation-and-drinking) .

When you were a track athlete, you were an elite athlete, a multiple world and Olympic champion. You were in peak physical condition. Your BMI would have been very low, and there would have been little if any fat on your frame that you could lose. Realistically therefore, when you lost the 11kg after concentrating on road racing, you primarily lost 11kg of muscle mass.
According to the book "Human Anatomy and Physiology" the average male adult is made up of approximately 42 percent skeletal muscle. (Source: http://www.livestrong.com/article/368497-percentage-of-body-mass-bone/). At 82kg, you would therefore have had 33.62kg (approximately) of skeletal muscle mass.

Can you please explain to the internet skeptics how you could lose one third of your skeletal muscle mass, but not lose any power? Indeed, can you please explain how you can lose one third of your muscle mass, and actually increase your power?

7. You stated in 2007, when your team Cofidis was ejected from the tour, that:
"Hopefully in two years time when I return to the Tour I might be the Prologue winner or I might win the Time Trial and be a credible Time Trial winner because I haven't beaten someone by two and a half minutes. Credible, clean riders are what's gonna be the future of the sport." (Source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/angry-wiggins-sees-hope-in-new-generation).

Since your winning time today was 57 seconds quicker than the 4 time world time trial champion, 1min 43s quicker than a noted time trailer like Cadel Evans, or 2min 08s quicker than multiple grand tour winner and noted time trialist Dennis Menchov, and 2min 16s quicker than the current world time trial champion, can you explain to the skeptics why they should think your performance today was credible?

8. You have claimed that you no longer drink any alcohol (source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tour-shorts-losing-interest-time-trial-preparation-and-drinking). If that is true, can you please explain your ridiculous sideburns?

Good questions, good post.

I wonder if any British journos would ask these with the London Olympics looming? If they're French, Sky could just use the Armstrong construct. Their PR will have to do better than some mod's indignation. Let's get Paul Weller to ask the big prat.

 

[dlwssonic]

They will. They always get caught. I doubt they will test positive because UCI and ASO would not allow it to happen.

There will always be some outside factor that will blow the lid. It's only matter of time. I hope sooner rather than later.

I really hope they do.
Its blatant and obvious.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I'd say the ducks are quacking quite loudly.

 

[Dalakhani]

either SKY put cycling sport into future
or put the sport back 10 years

That's a good point, IMO.

If any team is going to create a huge breakthrough in the legal preparation of riders then, IMO, it's Sky.

(Coming from outside of the sport, with different ideas they've been tweaking over 3 years.)

However... I can't get away from the fact Froome didn't even have a contract extension prior to the Vuelta - and now he's trouncing Cancellara by 21 secs after 2 days of working in the mountains.

It seems to be a hell of an improvement from someone who, 10 months ago, Sky didn't seem keen to lock down.

 

[Casualfan]

Track is something different to road. Road is way more competitive and with way more variables. To be as dominating from a non-dominant position as on track you need much more "planning".

He has extra resources at Sky. There are obviously more variables to encounter, but Wiggins has had an issue-free season. No crashes or illness and he's been able to stick exactly to plan in terms of prep. I still don't understand why Sky would blatantly arouse suspicion like this if they had something to hide. They're looking for a British TdF winner, not a one-two or even two riders on the podium. It doesn't make much sense to me

 

[Parrot23]

Ah, but see, you're not the Anglo-Saxon cycling media.

Who cares? I don't.

People on the continent?

(I'm in North America.)

 

[MacRoadie]

Here are just some of the questions that I desperately hope some brave journalist will ask Bradley Wiggins and / or Dave Brailsford today at the post stage press-conferences:

1. Brad, after you improved dramatically in 2009 to finish fourth overall at the Tour de France, you were interviewed by Daniel Benson from cyclingnews.com (interview published here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-calls-for-biological-passport-data-to-be-made-public).

You stated in that interview that you understood why some people thought you doped. Specifically, you said “I think it was the natural thing. Everyone thought I was on gear after that and I can’t blame people for that.” You also said ““I would have thought the same thing about someone who had come from absolutely out of nowhere from the gruppetto and finished fourth on the Tour”.

Yesterday, you stated that people on the internet that think you and or Team Sky are doping are “c*nts”, “w*ankers” and “bone-idle”.

Can you please explain why you thought it was natural to speculate you were doping in 2009, but now anyone who speculates that you dope is a “c*nt”?

2. Brad, in an interview with L’Equipe earlier this year, you stated that “It would be nice to be part of it in a positive way, because there aren’t a lot of Tour winners who you can believe in. For the first time last year, you had a Tour winner who everyone could believe in. He is a fantastic ambassador for the sport, he works hard, he didn’t win by showing off, but with great determination. So to be able to follow on from somebody like him would be nice, rather than doing it after somebody had a positive test hanging over his head for a year or two.” (Source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-wants-to-be-a-credible-tour-de-france-winner).

Since even you don’t believe that many Tour de France winners have been clean, does that mean that you too are a are “c*nt”, “w*anker” and “bone-idle”, or are you just a hypocrite?

3. Earlier this year, Team Sky met with the owners of le Tour de France, ASO, and presented them training data, power details and information to justify your performances this year (source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/sky-meeting-with-aso-is-routine-team-says).

Can you confirm that you presented ASO with your training data to allay suspicions about your performance? Can you also advise if you think the ASO are “c*nts”, “w*ankers” and “bone-idle”?

4. In response to the news that Team Sky had met with ASO, a spokesman for the team told cyclingnews.com that: ““We felt it’s our job to be transparent and tell people what we’re doing, and the more we can tell people the less mystery there is. We’re not doing it to try and convince them we’re clean, we are clean. We’re meeting them because we’re genuinely proud of the work we doing and they enjoyed what we had to show them.”

If Team Sky is genuinely proud about the work you are doing, why have you been transparent with the ASO and given them access to your data, but not been transparent with the fans and general public? In order to allay suspicions, will you publish on the internet all training data, training plans, blood testing data and the like not just for Brad Wiggins, but for every rider on Team Sky?

5. In July 2009, in a bid to prove that you had raced clean at the 2009 Tour de France, where you finished 4th, you published your blood passport data for the period February 16, 2008 to July 28, 2009. You later told cyclingnews.com, in an interview, that:

“I think they should make these things public. The whole blood passport should be on [the] internet, every rider in the peloton. I don’t see why it shouldn’t be. It’s got to that stage now where if there’s nothing to hide why aren’t they up there? You can pull up in any walk of life, company accounts, people’s tax and that’s public knowledge, so I don’t see why the blood passport shouldn’t be public knowledge. It will silence people or challenge certain things but I don’t see what harm it would do. It would give you credibility in the public’s eyes … but I don’t think everyone would agree to it, maybe for moral reasons or people thinking that it might be an invasion of privacy.” (Source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-calls-for-biological-passport-data-to-be-made-public).

Since you have not published any of your blood passport data since that time, does that mean, by your own words, that you have something to hide? Again, if you have nothing to hide, will you now publish your blood passport data on the internet for the period July 29, 2009 to today’s date?


6. You have been quoted as saying that when you concentrated on your track career, you weighed 82 kg, and that now you weigh 71 kg (source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tour-shorts-losing-interest-time-trial-preparation-and-drinking) .

When you were a track athlete, you were an elite athlete, a multiple world and Olympic champion. You were in peak physical condition. Your BMI would have been very low, and there would have been little if any fat on your frame that you could lose. Realistically therefore, when you lost the 11kg after concentrating on road racing, you primarily lost 11kg of muscle mass.
According to the book "Human Anatomy and Physiology" the average male adult is made up of approximately 42 percent skeletal muscle. (Source: http://www.livestrong.com/article/368497-percentage-of-body-mass-bone/). At 82kg, you would therefore have had 33.62kg (approximately) of skeletal muscle mass.

Can you please explain to the internet skeptics how you could lose one third of your skeletal muscle mass, but not lose any power? Indeed, can you please explain how you can lose one third of your muscle mass, and actually increase your power?

7. You stated in 2007, when your team Cofidis was ejected from the tour, that:
"Hopefully in two years time when I return to the Tour I might be the Prologue winner or I might win the Time Trial and be a credible Time Trial winner because I haven't beaten someone by two and a half minutes. Credible, clean riders are what's gonna be the future of the sport." (Source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/angry-wiggins-sees-hope-in-new-generation).

Since your winning time today was 57 seconds quicker than the 4 time world time trial champion, 1min 43s quicker than a noted time trailer like Cadel Evans, or 2min 08s quicker than multiple grand tour winner and noted time trialist Dennis Menchov, and 2min 16s quicker than the current world time trial champion, can you explain to the skeptics why they should think your performance today was credible?

8. You have claimed that you no longer drink any alcohol (source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tour-shorts-losing-interest-time-trial-preparation-and-drinking). If that is true, can you please explain your ridiculous sideburns?

You obviously have far too much time on your hands, you anonymous internet bone-idle w***** c***.

Oh yeah, and you're obviously bitter and a liar too...

 

[DavidW78]

Incredible levels of hate on this thread.

If the testing has improved then perhaps you can win the tour without hitting 6.7W/kg at threshold? If the testing has improved then perhaps you can win a time trial without exceeding 520W average? Perhaps Cancellara has come OFF the gear rather than Froome getting on it?

Perhaps.

 

[ruamruam]

Unbelievable

 

[luckyboy]

I'd say the ducks are quacking quite loudly.

.......