Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[sniper]

1. Bradley Wiggins 87:34:47
2. Christopher Froome +3:21
3. Vincenzo Nibali +6:19

Had almost forgotten how absurd it was.
NN.

 

[mastersracer]

1. Bradley Wiggins 87:34:47
2. Christopher Froome +3:21
3. Vincenzo Nibali +6:19

Had almost forgotten how absurd it was.
NN.

or maybe just like the pre-EPO days when a team could hoard talent:

1986 Tour de France

1 Greg LeMond (USA) La Vie Claire-Wonder-Radar 110h 35' 19"
2 Bernard Hinault (FRA) La Vie Claire-Wonder-Radar +3' 10"
3 Urs Zimmermann (SUI) Carrera +10' 54

 

[the sceptic]

id say theres only a 30% chance of Wiggo and Froome being as talented as LeMond and Hinault

 

[ferryman]

id say theres only a 30% chance of Wiggo and Froome being as talented as LeMond and Hinault

You are in a generous mood

 

[Netserk]

You are in a generous mood

If you read something earlier in the thread (or was it another one?), you'll find out that the number 30 isn't random

 

[biker jk]

Nice quote by Ashenden.

"Despite the self-serving data benders [Krebs Cycle, Coggan, Vaughters?] and associated propaganda to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers, even within 'new age' cycling teams. Personally, I don't accept that the 'dark era' has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise."

 

[Netserk]

Nice quote by Ashenden.

"Despite the self-serving data benders [Krebs Cycle, Coggan, Vaughters?] and associated propaganda to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers, even within 'new age' cycling teams. Personally, I don't accept that the 'dark era' has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise."

Quoted For Truth

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Nice quote by Ashenden.

"Despite the self-serving data benders [Krebs Cycle, Coggan, Vaughters?] and associated propaganda [CADF report 2010/11] to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers, even within 'new age' cycling teams. Personally, I don't accept that the 'dark era' has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise."

Added the propaganda info for you.

 

[JRanton]

Nice quote by Ashenden.

"Despite the self-serving data benders [Krebs Cycle, Coggan, Vaughters?] and associated propaganda to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers, even within 'new age' cycling teams. Personally, I don't accept that the 'dark era' has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise."

A pocket of highly sophisticated dopers within a new age team?

I wonder who that could refer to. Surely not Sky's 2012 Tenerife gang who went on to dominate the Tour in a fashion not seen for decades?! It can't be! I refuse to believe it!

 

[The Hitch]

Nice quote by Ashenden.

"Despite the self-serving data benders [Krebs Cycle, Coggan, Vaughters?] and associated propaganda to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers, even within 'new age' cycling teams. Personally, I don't accept that the 'dark era' has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise."

Good quote, but dont lump in the likes Krebs who's wikipedia quick guide to cycling led him to believe that no pure climber has ever won a gt, with Vaughters.

 

[JRanton]

Also from Ashenden:

I ended the call with a sense of despair and resignation that felt like it was drowning me. Yet again, a member of the cycling fraternity had confided to me a shocking anecdote, this time calling into question the integrity of cycling’s overlords. Yet again, despite my pleadings, they refused to share their knowledge with authorities. They were terrified that if ever their name was leaked they would be ostracized from cycling forever.

 

[thehog]

Also from Ashenden:

Richie Porte again?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Nice quote by Ashenden.

"Despite the self-serving data benders [Krebs Cycle, Coggan, Vaughters?] and associated propaganda to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers, even within 'new age' cycling teams. Personally, I don't accept that the 'dark era' has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise."

whats wrong with riding at the front for 3000kms, getting 6 stage wins with three different riders and place 1-2 in the final GC. Its perfectly normal.

I think Ashenden is making a mistake here.

 

[ferryman]

If you read something earlier in the thread (or was it another one?), you'll find out that the number 30 isn't random

Yes, I had, and know why the 30% reference

A bit unfair on Master Racer as he was wasn't comparing riders, rather justifying his case about how teams can dominate the TDF.

 

[The Hitch]

oh, that comment was from September 2012. Plenty of time for the dopingbusters Bailsford and Wiggins to have convinced Ashenden the sport is clean.

How on earth can he argue afterall with Bailsford saying "we are transparent, we won clean" and wiggo saying "those who doubt me are losers who wear girls clothes and live with their mums".

Theres just no response to that.

 

[Ferminal]

Was Ashenden invited to the ASO presentation?

 

[acoggan]

"Despite the self-serving data benders [Krebs Cycle, Coggan, Vaughters?]

Clearly you didn't take my advice to stop making yourself look foolish.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

You seem to be confusing me with 131313, who thought he could accurately estimate Wiggins' power by making numerous assumptions. I simply pointed out the fallacy of that approach, based on my factual knowledge (e.g., of the physics of cycling).

Andrew, Andrew, Andrew. No, I did not confuse a name comprising numbers with your clearly letter-derived moniker.

Let me refresh your little memory:

Fact: Wiggins posted an early 2012 article in a newspaper, saying, "If I win all the TTs this year, it's coz we worked on it. I lowered my cadence and went further for the same power, something to do with rolling resistance and the gears and stuff".

Fact: Wiggins went from a deficit to Tony Martin @ the 2011 World champs to beating him soundly at the Olympics.

Many, including the esteemed poster 131313 you mention, posited the theory that Wiggins produced more power to do this incredible feat.

Not so, you replied and laid out the following guesses to "explain away" his turn around in performance:

And more:

"Wiggin's CdA (not including traffic, ie. wind tunnel CdA) was around 0.224 at the British National 10 Mile championships in 2011"

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/wattage/IsBdRhgJHPY/_xdXyI5mep0J

So, even w/o traffic and ignoring differences in equipment (which Xav believes would favor the UKSI bike), Wiggins is more aero than the 0.23-0.25 that 131313 assumed. Now toss in [1]lead vehicles, [2]a bit of crosswind (given Wiggins' build, [3]his CdA likely decreases at yaw), perhaps a few [4]equipment/positional tweaks, and his effective CdA during the Olympic TT could very well have been 0.20-0.21 m^2. As I said, this value fits with the assumption that his power is comparable to what he was capable of generating in 2004-2011.

You don't know any of these "guesses" - they are all just that, guesses, not facts at all. And you made them up, very creatively, to explain the win.

That, is what I call defending a rider's performance.

Self-serving data bender indeed.

 

[blackcat]

Andrew, Andrew, Andrew. No, I did not confuse a name comprising numbers with your clearly letter-derived moniker.

Let me refresh your little memory:

Fact: Wiggins posted an early 2012 article in a newspaper, saying, "If I win all the TTs this year, it's coz we worked on it. I lowered my cadence and went further for the same power, something to do with rolling resistance and the gears and stuff".

Fact: Wiggins went from a deficit to Tony Martin @ the 2011 World champs to beating him soundly at the Olympics.

Many, including the esteemed poster 131313 you mention, posited the theory that Wiggins produced more power to do this incredible feat.

Not so, you replied and laid out the following guesses to "explain away" his turn around in performance:



You don't know any of these "guesses" - they are all just that, guesses, not facts at all. And you made them up, very creatively, to explain the win.

That, is what I call defending a rider's performance.

Self-serving data bender indeed.

they are not guesses.

they are Coyle theories.

 

[acoggan]

you replied and laid out the following guesses to "explain away" his turn around in performance

Those aren't guesses, those are facts. Too bad that the truth is so inconvenient for you.

 

[acoggan]

they are not guesses.

they are Coyle theories.

And as it turns out, Coyle's theories (re. the trainability of efficiency) are proving to be correct...or don't you read the scientific literature?

 

[acoggan]

(BTW, if it seems as if I am supremely confident - even arrogant - re. my opinions here, it is because I am privvy to more information than I can ethically reveal. But, anybody with half-a-brain will have figured that out by now...heck, they could probably figure out Wiggins' exact power in 2012, rather than relying on data from previous years.)

 

[blackcat]

doping, its like porn, you know it when you see it.

NOT NORMAL

 

[acoggan]

doping, its like porn, you know it when you see it.

If that were really true then doping wouldn't be such a problem. But hey, that's just me talking logically...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Those aren't guesses, those are facts. Too bad that the truth is so inconvenient for you.

"Perhaps a few positional / equipment tweaks" is a fact?
"Wiggins CdA decreases at yaw", based on "a bit of crosswind" is a fact?

Wow.

No wonder you don't do this for a living.