Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[JimmyFingers]

Neither damning, or even evidence

 

[Zam_Olyas]

It is funny that back in 2010 Mr. Wiggins was winning the poll for who is the most overrated cyclist but hey what do posters know right

 

[Trudgin]

I respect Pinotti for his personal choices but he has no right suggesting that others are doping, given the teams he has ridden for. That said I don't think he has implied as much.

Eh? Surely Pinotti (and any professional rider / DS) have more right than most of us to comment on what they suspect another team may or may not be doing..

Even if you suspect them of not being entirly honest about their own choices previously...

I'm grateful the pro's want to make any comments

 

[BroDeal]

Neither damning, or even evidence

Ol' Jimeny VIckers would not think Sky are doping if they were caught with hypodermics sticking out of their butts with EPO emblazoned on them in seventy-two point font. The pros on the other hand know who is doping. They are not totally stupid. When they have spent half a decade or more riding with someone, they know that person's potential compared to their own. A giant leap upward in performance does not go unnoticed. That is why everyone from Madiot to Evans to Pinotti has alluded to Sky's doping.

 

[The Hitch]

I respect Pinotti for his personal choices but he has no right suggesting that others are doping, given the teams he has ridden for. That said I don't think he has implied as much.

Considering pinotti was just about the only pro rider in the world who expressed his disgust at lance doping before it was cool to do so (before Landis even) I'd say that has earned him a few trust points that can perhaps explain away a few dodgy teams.

 

[Ferminal]

My problem is not that (I have hope that Pinotti is clean), but what he hasn't said about Santambrogio/Ballan/Rihs/Ochowicz/Lelangue/Aldag/Holm/Zabel etc etc.

And there is far more against those names than there is against Sky.

 

[thehog]

I respect Pinotti for his personal choices but he has no right suggesting that others are doping, given the teams he has ridden for. That said I don't think he has implied as much.

He has every right.

He knows better than most here.

Or are you suggesting he shouldn't spit in the soup?

If he's doped before himself it means he'll know the tell tail signs

Respect to the man.

 

[taiwan]

On the face of it he could be simply agreeing that Sky have had a poor classics season, but there's a definite subtext to the tweet that won't be lost on Pinotti: one of the most reputable and outspokenly anti-doping pros.

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Something I would really like to see is a statistical analysis of how long both Team Sky, and each of their individual riders spends on the front of the bunch during stages races.

I'm personally bored hearing about how the average race speed has (apparently) dropped so doping is finished, but I have never seen one team spend so much time riding on the front. I think Kiryenka rode 30% of the Tour of Basque on the front, and in last years tour it seemed Eisel was driving the peloton along at 45km/h for hour after hour in pole position.

Estimating power outputs vs durations for these Team Sky monster sessions on the front could be very revealing.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Ol' Jimeny VIckers would not think Sky are doping if they were caught with hypodermics sticking out of their butts with EPO emblazoned on them in seventy-two point font. The pros on the other hand know who is doping. They are not totally stupid. When they have spent half a decade or more riding with someone, they know that person's potential compared to their own. A giant leap upward in performance does not go unnoticed. That is why everyone from Madiot to Evans to Pinotti has alluded to Sky's doping.

But still neither damning, or evidence, and given that most riders/DS/team managers have doped/facilitated doping/turned a blind eye strange that you find such insight in their words. Unless you consider Pinotti and Evans clean?

Also interesting you say 'everyone' has alluded to Sky's doping and then the only three that has, and all in very ambiguous terms.

Damning evidence lol.

 

[del1962]

Considering pinotti was just about the only pro rider in the world who expressed his disgust at lance doping before it was cool to do so (before Landis even) I'd say that has earned him a few trust points that can perhaps explain away a few dodgy teams.

Had a look at some of the stuff Pinotti said in the past though

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/marco-pinotti-interview-with-italian-cyclings-voice-of-reason-30133/

On Armstrong

He definitely has that. I rode the 2009 Giro alongside him and you could see his charisma. Cycling has benefited from that.

Almost Wiggoesque statement in 2011

More on Armstrong

When I rode the Tour in 1999 he was a source of inspiration. I was like a lot of other people.

When Wiggo has said this stuff he gets crucified on here.

120 in Grand Tours to top 10 in 2010, almost Wiggoesque too,

For example, at Lampre, Compex supplied us with electro-stimulators, like they do here. But there the directeurs gave us the Compex and that was it, whereas here, last year, we had a two-hour seminar on how to use it.

Almost wiigoesque marginal gains


And what he says about Da Luca after reduced ban for co-operating with CONI

Don’t get me started on Di Luca because if you do we’ll still be here tomorrow morning. I don’t want to talk about him.

What he said aboutMcQuaid

Everyone whinges about McQuaid but ever since he took over at the UCI – I don’t know, maybe under another president there would have been even greater strides – but things have improved.

 

[Ferminal]

120 in Grand Tours to top 10 in 2010, almost Wiggoesque too,

Disgraceful.

Zoncolan 2007 46'01"
Zoncolan 2010 43'37"

Ventoux 2007 70mins+
Ventoux 2009 58'26"

If only Marco got in a break as a 25 year old in l'Avenir.

 

[thehog]

Disgraceful.

Zoncolan 2007 46'01"
Zoncolan 2010 43'37"

Ventoux 2007 70mins+
Ventoux 2009 58'26"

If only Marco got in a break as a 25 year old in l'Avenir.

Of course doped.

Who didn't?

But dopers are much better at calling out others than non-dopers.

Don't be so silly.

What moral high ground are working from here?

 

[Ferminal]

Sorry, probably a bit cryptic for someone who doesn't watch cycling. It is a comparison of two riders and changes in performance over time.

 

[thehog]

On the face of it he could be simply agreeing that Sky have had a poor classics season, but there's a definite subtext to the tweet that won't be lost on Pinotti: one of the most reputable and outspokenly anti-doping pros.

Can someone re-post the tweet?

I've lost it in the melee.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

I remember having a convo with the old gooner about pinotti, the old gooner was his biggest supporter for his anti doping stance.

 

[Netserk]

Can someone re-post the tweet?

I've lost it in the melee.

Here you go:

Sky's classic season was seriously bad. I don't understand how marginal gains only applies to five guys from a team of 20 plus.

Marco Pinotti favoured this tweet from Digger_forum (posts on here occasionally I think) on twitter.

Pretty interesting I thought. Evans has made some subtle comments about Sky too.

Pretty clear that BMC think (or at least highly suspect) that Sky's GC Tenerife gang were doping last year.

 

[The Hitch]

Had a look at some of the stuff Pinotti said in the past though

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/marco-pinotti-interview-with-italian-cyclings-voice-of-reason-30133/

On Armstrong


Almost Wiggoesque statement in 2011

More on Armstrong



When Wiggo has said this stuff he gets crucified on here.

120 in Grand Tours to top 10 in 2010, almost Wiggoesque too,



Almost wiigoesque marginal gains


And what he says about Da Luca after reduced ban for co-operating with CONI



What he said aboutMcQuaid

I wasn't aware of that article. I don't like what he says about mcquaid and yes I will criticize him for that.
It's a bit rich to attack people for not criticizing the comments if they weren't aware of them.

But what you did in the middle of the post there is quite pathetic. You took a quote where he criticized Armstrong and calls him out as a doper (and this is 2011 so a year before usada)

When I rode the Tour in 1999 he was a source of inspiration. I was like a lot of other people. Looking back now….when he gave up the first time and L’Equipe published the article about his 1999 urine samples, it was a bit of a kick in the stomach

And in michael more style selectively edited out the important bits to give what he said a entirely different meaning.

when I rode the Tour in 1999 he was a source of inspiration

I really can't believe you did that. There is nothing "wiggoesque" about it. He's calling lance out as a doper, and NOT siding with lance all the way, attacking those who accused him and constantly trumping up in the media all of the great things about lance. Like Wiggins did. That's what Wiggins gets attacked for. Totally different

Can you really not see the difference between calling lance out as a doper and calling him a hero?

 

[del1962]

I wasn't aware of that article. I don't like what he says about mcquaid and yes I will criticize him for that.
It's a bit rich to attack people for not criticizing the comments if they weren't aware of them.

But what you did in the middle of the post there is quite pathetic. You took a quote where he criticized Armstrong and calls him out as a doper (and this is 2011 so a year before usada)

And in michael more style selectively edited out the important bits to give what he said a entirely different meaning.



I really can't believe you did that. There is nothing "wiggoesque" about it. He's calling lance out as a doper, and NOT siding with lance all the way, attacking those who accused him and constantly trumping up in the media all of the great things about lance. Like Wiggins did. That's what Wiggins gets attacked for. Totally different

Can you really not see the difference between calling lance out as a doper and calling him a hero?

I didn't want to quote too much of the article, if you read the article it seems Pinotti, despite riding the tour with him in 1999 and 2001, had no clue of Armstrong doping (or at least wasn't prepared to beleive it until 2005), then in 2009 he is interacting with him (arranging photo shoots) at the Giro, he seems to like Armstongs charisma and says Cycling has benefitted from Armstrong, this interview was after Floyd's revelations, now compare the soft treatment Armstrong gets to his feelings in the article to De Luca. Obviously this was before USADA, but people roast Wiggo for this sort of stuff.

Now we have a man who could not spot Armstong was a doper until at least 2005, (and seemingly hoping he wasn't), supposedly able to spot it at Sky (that is if his favouring a tweet can be interpreted that way)

 

[Lanark]

But what you did in the middle of the post there is quite pathetic. You took a quote where he criticized Armstrong and calls him out as a doper (and this is 2011 so a year before usada)

And in michael more style selectively edited out the important bits to give what he said a entirely different meaning.



I really can't believe you did that. There is nothing "wiggoesque" about it. He's calling lance out as a doper, and NOT siding with lance all the way, attacking those who accused him and constantly trumping up in the media all of the great things about lance. Like Wiggins did. That's what Wiggins gets attacked for. Totally different

Wow, that was an intellectual dishonesty that's even striking for a Sky fan

 

[thehog]

Here you go:

Thanks.

He's right you know.

Wiggins doesn't like bone idle Internet ****ers having a pop so its better an actual Pro does.

And when he does no one seems to like it....

He's saying what everyone is thinking.

The Dawg needs to go Lance on him and bully him out of the peloton.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Something something saddle sore.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/gallery-wiggins-trains-on-tre-cime-di-lavaredo
Wiggins had trained in Mallorca before arriving in Italy for the Giro del Trentino. He told Gazzetta that he has been on antibiotics “for the last two or three days” due to a saddle sore and he confirmed that he will not line up at next Sunday’s Liège-Bastogne-Liège: “Doing it two days after Trentino would be too stressful.”

LEINDERS! Where the bloody hell are ya!?

 

[JimmyFingers]

Wow, that was an intellectual dishonesty that's even striking for a Sky fan

Sorry but the hell does this mean? You think the team is doping so it follows the fans are dishonest?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Sorry but the hell does this mean? You think the team is doping so it follows the fans are dishonest?

Hi Jimmy,
Sky doping or not doping has nothing to do with the dishonesty portrayed by certain Sky fans.
You're welcome.

 

[The Hitch]

I didn't want to quote too much of the article,
.

)

yet you made conclusions on the stuff you did quote, even though by taking away other stuff you totally changed the meaning

if you read the article it seems Pinotti, despite riding the tour with him in 1999 and 2001, had no clue of Armstrong doping (or at least wasn't prepared to beleive it until 2005), then in 2009 he is interacting with him (arranging photo shoots) at the Giro, he seems to like Armstongs charisma and says Cycling has benefitted from Armstrong, this interview was after Floyd's revelations

your comment here is confusing you are saying the interview is after Landis -2011, yet also saying it's 2009. The interview date on your link is 2011. He is talking in 2011 not 2009 so why are you also claiming he said in 2009 that lance had charisma (btw even Walsh said this). The photoshoot took place in 2009 but he is talking on 2011. You can't possibly equate his minor priase of lance here with what Wiggins did because unlike Wiggins he is calling lance out as a doper.

, now compare the soft treatment Armstrong gets to his feelings in the article to De Luca. Obviously this was before USADA, but people roast Wiggo for this sort of stuff

ugh Wiggins himself said he knew lance was a doper since 2008. Vaughters confirms at Garmin he told Wiggins did. So all the praise anx hero worship wiggins gave to lance was while knowing lance was a doper and a liar. Whatsmore he knew Landis was telling the truth when he decided to cast doubt on what Landis said. And you either have no concept of morality or simply have your head stuck as far up wiggos *** as wigo did up Armstrong's if you can't notice that this is fiendish and disgusting behaviour on the part of Wiggins that cannot possibly be justified.

Pinnoti on the other hand when he found out lance was a doper said it. There's no similarity whatsoever.