Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[UlleGigo]

I'd just like to say 'thanks' to Nairo for ****ing off C. Froome and R. Porte enough with his 'suicidal' attack because we got to see the closest Sky are going to get to full *** for this tour.

For the record once Kennaugh dropped. Froome's time was quicker than Armstrong's record time from the same point. Defend that Skybots. Froome is better than '01 Armstrong. Yeah right.

This whole thing stinks to high heaven. Oh but wait, Brailsford's prescient attempt at a disclaimer a few days back explains everything.

Apparently we should expect to see riders in the future (ie. Froome, Porte, et al tomorrow) going faster than previously doped riders because of quasi-evolution. You know something similar to that 'thing' that takes place over vast timeframes and cannot be examined or observed because of the slow pace at which it occurs. Yeah that thing. That's why today is to be believed.

Sky. If we are to believe that today was the result of evolution then show us the data otherwise shut up and be happy to be called creationists.

 

[UlleGigo]

Another healed by a miracle and it made him into the champion he is today!

Haha. Heard that. I actually thought they're really scrapping the bottom of the barrel for recovery stories now.

Armstrong. Nut Cancer.

Contador. Brain Injury.

Wiggins. Terrible Haircut.

Froome. Bilharzia.

Quintana. Cured of the sniffles by a witch doctor's potion of strawberries and mint leaves? (Not sure on the details)

 

[thehog]

I certainly hope not. I pray for the most over the top, outlandish decimation of the peloton in the history of the sport. Can you suggest anything more entertaining?

Me too! Must go full ***. Must go full ***!

 

[Galic Ho]

I'd just like to say 'thanks' to Nairo for ****ing off C. Froome and R. Porte enough with his 'suicidal' attack because we got to see the closest Sky are going to get to full *** for this tour.

For the record once Kennaugh dropped. Froome's time was quicker than Armstrong's record time from the same point. Defend that Skybots. Froome is better than '01 Armstrong. Yeah right.

This whole thing stinks to high heaven. Oh but wait, Brailsford's prescient attempt at a disclaimer a few days back explains everything.

Apparently we should expect to see riders in the future (ie. Froome, Porte, et al tomorrow) going faster than previously doped riders because of quasi-evolution. You know something similar to that 'thing' that takes place over vast timeframes and cannot be examined or observed because of the slow pace at which it occurs. Yeah that thing. That's why today is to be believed.

Sky. If we are to believe that today was the result of evolution then show us the data otherwise shut up and be happy to be called a creationist.

Did you read the Rupert Guiness fluff piece given to him by Tim Kerrison the other day in the Herald? Was pretty much predicting this very thing.

Sky have so much more power that they are actually holding back. It looks like Froome has peaked all year because he never actually hit 100%. He's just been bottling it up.

Thehog mentioned this last year. All the pent up power...it slowly eats away at riders. They want to show everyone. To squash every doubter. The whole "Me against the world mentality." Quite a few of us predicted those two were DUMB enough to do it. Remove all doubt.

It's good in a way. Anyone supporting that crap, given what you wrote, is clearly not pro clean cycling. That includes the one who went after LA. People get to make a choice. They're either for it or against it.

Did you happen to catch the SBS after show comments? I didn't. I wanted to see how the forum handled last night. It crashed! Figuratively speaking, that makes sense!

If Sky aren't torn apart...well I don't think Pro Cycling will have any worth left at all. 2008...pick on the Italians. Pick on Saunier Duval. Do the same to the Brits and Sky? Time will tell.

 

[darwin553]

It was right there with Paul's explanation of the topography of the Pyrenees versus Quintana's native Columbia. So the details....fill them in. Because if you had of listened, you'd have understood partially why Hitch used Quintana. But you're just another July fan...time to go back to cyclingcentral and listen to the TanMan.

It looks like you need a reminder of what The Hitch actually said:

I don't think you understand the gravity of this performance. Porte if you take into account the fact that he rode into the wind the whole time and that he was doing track stands and toying with Quintana put a performance that surpassed almost all the uber doped once from.the "dark era". If he's clean then that makes him (and presumably froome if clean too) a once in a lifetime talent. There may never be anyone that good again.

Now let me break this down for you to understand: the subject matter of The Hitch's pitch is Porte's performance and the method he has used to judge porte's performance is (1) that he was riding in the wind (which is neither here nor there for me) and importantly (2) that he was doing 'track stands and toying with Quintana' - my point is that he was able to do this and make it look easy as he wasn't the one who broke away at the previous climb and therefore arguably felt more tired than Porte at that stage.

If you have another 'partial' reason why The Hitch used Quintana as, may I say again, the performance yardstick for Porte, I'm all ears

 

[Galic Ho]

NICE face plant! Take a look at Porte's climbing times from 2011 when he was numero uno domestique for Contador and TROLL some more. Then answer my question and don't deflect. Remind us who the great climber Sherwen was talking about last night from the 80s? He's Colombian as well...same build as Quintana. Same pedigree. But you clearly don't know squat about what EPO did to pro cycling in 1991 onwards. As I said...troll some more.

Unbelievable that so much fail can exist in Australia in the shape and form of YOU. Must be a Labor voting Kruddite who got lost on the way to the annual failed Labor chook raffle at the local pub and thought you'd take a gander in the Clinic. Wrong place, wrong time. Nobody needs your deflections and lack of cycling history acumen. SBS might like to hear from you though!

When you can name the greatest climber from the 80s you'll be taken seriously. Even Sherwen, who is a bought and paid for hack can do it. He did it last night when he was talking about Quintana. Another thing you refused to talk about! I wonder why? Shouldn't be any trouble for you to enlighten us with actual historical info! Because when you do, you'll understand the Hitch's post. Won't you?

 

[Tyre Byter]

I'd just like to say 'thanks' to Nairo for ****ing off C. Froome and R. Porte enough with his 'suicidal' attack because we got to see the closest Sky are going to get to full *** for this tour.

For the record once Kennaugh dropped. Froome's time was quicker than Armstrong's record time from the same point. Defend that Skybots. Froome is better than '01 Armstrong. Yeah right.

This whole thing stinks to high heaven. Oh but wait, Brailsford's prescient attempt at a disclaimer a few days back explains everything.

Apparently we should expect to see riders in the future (ie. Froome, Porte, et al tomorrow) going faster than previously doped riders because of quasi-evolution. You know something similar to that 'thing' that takes place over vast timeframes and cannot be examined or observed because of the slow pace at which it occurs. Yeah that thing. That's why today is to be believed.

Sky. If we are to believe that today was the result of evolution then show us the data otherwise shut up and be happy to be called creationists.

Maybe we're just too traditional, looking at evolution as that old skewl stuff of Darwin, natural selection blah, blah....... And Brailsford is talking about the 'new and improved evolution' possible with gene doping?

 

[UlleGigo]

Did you read the Rupert Guiness fluff piece given to him by Tim Kerrison the other day in the Herald? Was pretty much predicting this very thing.

Sky have so much more power that they are actually holding back. It looks like Froome has peaked all year because he never actually hit 100%. He's just been bottling it up.

Thehog mentioned this last year. All the pent up power...it slowly eats away at riders. They want to show everyone. To squash every doubter. The whole "Me against the world mentality." Quite a few of us predicted those two were DUMB enough to do it. Remove all doubt.

It's good in a way. Anyone supporting that crap, given what you wrote, is clearly not pro clean cycling. That includes the one who went after LA. People get to make a choice. They're either for it or against it.

Did you happen to catch the SBS after show comments? I didn't. I wanted to see how the forum handled last night. It crashed! Figuratively speaking, that makes sense!

If Sky aren't torn apart...well I don't think Pro Cycling will have any worth left at all. 2008...pick on the Italians. Pick on Saunier Duval. Do the same to the Brits and Sky? Time will tell.

I only skimmed over Rupert's piece. He's Tommo in a colourful shirt for me I don't really care what he has to say. But yeah you're right. Apparently Porte's numbers were incredible up Col de la Madone. It's all nonsense pre-emptive damage control from Sky. Something for Skybots to point to after the fact. Haven't seen the trolls bring up Ten Dam yet. But it will happen. Same sort of thing.

I briefly watched the SBS after show. Was like you trying to get on the melted down forum at the same time.

Tommo was unimpressed, mainly because Evans got dropped for 4 minutes. He was criticising BMC for having a weak team as if that would have helped. So nothing of substance there. He talked about Porte getting 2nd as though it were fait accompli or that Porte might even win if something happened to Froome. Not with much enthusiasm mind you. Hard to get excited about such an obvious fraud I guess. Should take his lead from Phil or Paul or the next man in the ring.

Tan was carrying on talking slowly as always as if he were the sage orator he imagines himself to be. Praising Sky and Porte and everything. He's an idiot. He was up Armstrong's **** in '09. Now is no different. The guy is as thick as two bricks.

Don't know if I can be bothered tonight. I'll watch the highlights tomorrow. Not going sleep deprived for this ****.

 

[UlleGigo]

NICE face plant! Take a look at Porte's climbing times from 2011 when he was numero uno domestique for Contador and TROLL some more. Then answer my question and don't deflect. Remind us who the great climber Sherwen was talking about last night from the 80s? He's Colombian as well...same build as Quintana. Same pedigree. But you clearly don't know squat about what EPO did to pro cycling in 1991 onwards. As I said...troll some more.

Unbelievable that so much fail can exist in Australia in the shape and form of YOU. Must be a Labor voting Kruddite who got lost on the way to the annual failed Labor chook raffle at the local pub and thought you'd take a gander in the Clinic. Wrong place, wrong time. Nobody needs your deflections and lack of cycling history acumen. SBS might like to hear from you though!

When you can name the greatest climber from the 80s you'll be taken seriously. Even Sherwen, who is a bought and paid for hack can do it. He did it last night when he was talking about Quintana. Another thing you refused to talk about! I wonder why? Shouldn't be any trouble for you to enlighten us with actual historical info! Because when you do, you'll understand the Hitch's post. Won't you?

This is brilliant.

 

[UlleGigo]

Maybe we're just too traditional, looking at evolution as that old skewl stuff of Darwin, natural selection blah, blah....... And Brailsford is talking about the 'new and improved evolution' possible with gene doping?

Haha. Yeah. We're all idiots.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Did you read the Rupert Guiness fluff piece given to him by Tim Kerrison the other day in the Herald? Was pretty much predicting this very thing.

Sky have so much more power that they are actually holding back. It looks like Froome has peaked all year because he never actually hit 100%. He's just been bottling it up.

Thehog mentioned this last year. All the pent up power...it slowly eats away at riders. They want to show everyone. To squash every doubter. The whole "Me against the world mentality." Quite a few of us predicted those two were DUMB enough to do it. Remove all doubt.

It's good in a way. Anyone supporting that crap, given what you wrote, is clearly not pro clean cycling. That includes the one who went after LA. People get to make a choice. They're either for it or against it.

Did you happen to catch the SBS after show comments? I didn't. I wanted to see how the forum handled last night. It crashed! Figuratively speaking, that makes sense!

If Sky aren't torn apart...well I don't think Pro Cycling will have any worth left at all. 2008...pick on the Italians. Pick on Saunier Duval. Do the same to the Brits and Sky? Time will tell.

Many have woken up and smelt the roses it seems. I am surprised to be honest, but it was a good surprise.

NICE face plant! Take a look at Porte's climbing times from 2011 when he was numero uno domestique for Contador and TROLL some more. Then answer my question and don't deflect. Remind us who the great climber Sherwen was talking about last night from the 80s? He's Colombian as well...same build as Quintana. Same pedigree. But you clearly don't know squat about what EPO did to pro cycling in 1991 onwards. As I said...troll some more.

Unbelievable that so much fail can exist in Australia in the shape and form of YOU. Must be a Labor voting Kruddite who got lost on the way to the annual failed Labor chook raffle at the local pub and thought you'd take a gander in the Clinic. Wrong place, wrong time. Nobody needs your deflections and lack of cycling history acumen. SBS might like to hear from you though!

When you can name the greatest climber from the 80s you'll be taken seriously. Even Sherwen, who is a bought and paid for hack can do it. He did it last night when he was talking about Quintana. Another thing you refused to talk about! I wonder why? Shouldn't be any trouble for you to enlighten us with actual historical info! Because when you do, you'll understand the Hitch's post. Won't you?

Maybe he is secretly the TanMan or Tomalaris? The naivety and blind following of riders and teams matches those characteristics. I think it is a bit unfair to say he is a Labor voting Kruddite. Labor can't even produce a coherent argument to back up their case, so we shouldn't be too harsh

 

[nilfen]

Compare the names on the list for best times on Ax-3 Domaines. Spot the two NON-dopers on the list

1th Roberto Laiseka, Spain 22:57 (2001 - 12th stage)
2th Lance Armstrong, USA 22:59 (2001 - 12th stage)
3th Chris Froome, Great Britain 23:14 (2013 - 8th stage)
4th Jan Ullrich, Germany 23:17 (2003 - 13th stage)
5th Haimar Zubeldia, Spain 23:19 (2003 - 13th stage)
6th Jan Ullrich, Germany 23:22 (2001 - 12th stage)
7th Lance Armstrong, USA 23:24 (2003 - 13th stage)
8th Alexandre Vinokourov, Kazakhstan 23:34 (2003 - 13th stage)
9th Ivan Basso, Italy 23:36 (2003 - 13th stage)
10th Lance Armstrong, USA 23:40 (2005 - 13th stage)
11th Ivan Basso, Italy 23:42 (2005 - 13th stage)
12th Oscar Sevilla, Spain 23:45 (2001 - 12th stage)
13th Joseba Beloki, Spain 23:45 (2001 - 12th stage)
14th Denis Menchov, Russia 23:47 (2010 - 14th stage)
15th Samuel Sanchez, Spain 23:47 (2010 - 14th stage)
16th Jan Ullrich, Germany 24:00 (2005 - 13th stage)
17th Andy Schleck, Luxembourg 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
18th Joaquim Rodriguez, Spain 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
19th Robert Gesink, Holland 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
20th Alberto Contador, Spain 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
21th Jurgen van den Broeck, Belgium 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
22th Richie Porte, Australia 24:05 (2013 - 8th stage)
23th Levi Leipheimer, USA 24:15 (2005 - 13th stage)
24th Floyd Landis, USA 24:15 (2005 - 13th stage)
25th Iban Mayo, Spain 24:15 (2003 - 13th stage)
26th Santiago Botero, Colombia 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
27th Michael Boogerd, Holland 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
28th Alexandre Vinokourov, Kazakhstan 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
29th Stefano Garzelli, Italy 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
30th Inigo Chaureau, Spain 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)

list from Feltet

 

[auscyclefan94]

Compare the names on the list for best times on Ax-3 Domaines. Spot the two NON-dopers on the list

1th Roberto Laiseka, Spain 22:57 (2001 - 12th stage)
2th Lance Armstrong, USA 22:59 (2001 - 12th stage)
3th Chris Froome, Great Britain 23:14 (2013 - 8th stage)
4th Jan Ullrich, Germany 23:17 (2003 - 13th stage)
5th Haimar Zubeldia, Spain 23:19 (2003 - 13th stage)
6th Jan Ullrich, Germany 23:22 (2001 - 12th stage)
7th Lance Armstrong, USA 23:24 (2003 - 13th stage)
8th Alexandre Vinokourov, Kazakhstan 23:34 (2003 - 13th stage)
9th Ivan Basso, Italy 23:36 (2003 - 13th stage)
10th Lance Armstrong, USA 23:40 (2005 - 13th stage)
11th Ivan Basso, Italy 23:42 (2005 - 13th stage)
12th Oscar Sevilla, Spain 23:45 (2001 - 12th stage)
13th Joseba Beloki, Spain 23:45 (2001 - 12th stage)
14th Denis Menchov, Russia 23:47 (2010 - 14th stage)
15th Samuel Sanchez, Spain 23:47 (2010 - 14th stage)
16th Jan Ullrich, Germany 24:00 (2005 - 13th stage)
17th Andy Schleck, Luxembourg 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
18th Joaquim Rodriguez, Spain 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
19th Robert Gesink, Holland 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
20th Alberto Contador, Spain 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
21th Jurgen van den Broeck, Belgium 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
22th Richie Porte, Australia 24:05 (2013 - 8th stage)
23th Levi Leipheimer, USA 24:15 (2005 - 13th stage)
24th Floyd Landis, USA 24:15 (2005 - 13th stage)
25th Iban Mayo, Spain 24:15 (2003 - 13th stage)
26th Santiago Botero, Colombia 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
27th Michael Boogerd, Holland 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
28th Alexandre Vinokourov, Kazakhstan 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
29th Stefano Garzelli, Italy 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
30th Inigo Chaureau, Spain 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)

list from Feltet

All of the bolded riders have not officially been implicated in anything.

 

[darwin553]

NICE face plant! Take a look at Porte's climbing times from 2011 when he was numero uno domestique for Contador and TROLL some more. Then answer my question and don't deflect. Remind us who the great climber Sherwen was talking about last night from the 80s? He's Colombian as well...same build as Quintana. Same pedigree. But you clearly don't know squat about what EPO did to pro cycling in 1991 onwards. As I said...troll some more.

Unbelievable that so much fail can exist in Australia in the shape and form of YOU. Must be a Labor voting Kruddite who got lost on the way to the annual failed Labor chook raffle at the local pub and thought you'd take a gander in the Clinic. Wrong place, wrong time. Nobody needs your deflections and lack of cycling history acumen. SBS might like to hear from you though!

When you can name the greatest climber from the 80s you'll be taken seriously. Even Sherwen, who is a bought and paid for hack can do it. He did it last night when he was talking about Quintana. Another thing you refused to talk about! I wonder why? Shouldn't be any trouble for you to enlighten us with actual historical info! Because when you do, you'll understand the Hitch's post. Won't you?

What is this nonsense?

Am I meant to be deciphering some sort of hidden message into the use of the name Quintana other than Porte riding away from a rider named Quintana because a rider named Quintana had just made the sole break on the previous mountain and was out of energy ??

Oh and btw - I am embarrassed to find out that you are a Liberal supporter

 

[Night Rider]

Yes they did. I couldn't get on the forum for hours. So went to bed. I logged on and barely got on...there were 200 something in the Clinic alone. Had to reload...then there were well over double that. Servers crashed I think.

Did you see how many times Froome looked at his powermeter? Too many.

All the Skybots have gone. For good reason. They are too busy getting their jolies.

That was the most disgusting act I think cycling has ever seen. After everything that has happened, those two clowns have been permitted to do what they just did and nobody bats an eyelid?

Oh and WTF is up with the two Belkin riders? New sponsor and some extra dope all of a sudden?

Fret not thehog...the Sky riders still have to finish the race. Remove the two blatant obvious dopers and this Tour would be interesting. Porte beating Valverde, Quintana, Contador, Kreuziger and Purito says it all. Doped to the gills.

Oh and RR should do well to stay away from this forum for some time alas he will cop a battering (and rightfully so). Open your eyes and tell us your sob story again of how Richie batted his eyelids and swooned his way into your heart. Your ramblings the other week given what just happened are revolting. You should be ashamed of yourself. This is even more obvious than your favourite target Lance, because of what has transpired and how much of the veil has been lifted from the common viewers eyes. You and David Walsh need to get your priorities right.

Clean cycling beacons...prove it. You're either for it, or against it. This lukewarm BS does NOTHING. Just gets you a cult following and a nice salad.

Post of the day, it's commentary like this that keeps my interest in this forum

 

[Ripper]

Compare the names on the list for best times on Ax-3 Domaines. Spot the two NON-dopers on the list

1th Roberto Laiseka, Spain 22:57 (2001 - 12th stage)
2th Lance Armstrong, USA 22:59 (2001 - 12th stage)
3th Chris Froome, Great Britain 23:14 (2013 - 8th stage)
4th Jan Ullrich, Germany 23:17 (2003 - 13th stage)
5th Haimar Zubeldia, Spain 23:19 (2003 - 13th stage)
6th Jan Ullrich, Germany 23:22 (2001 - 12th stage)
7th Lance Armstrong, USA 23:24 (2003 - 13th stage)
8th Alexandre Vinokourov, Kazakhstan 23:34 (2003 - 13th stage)
9th Ivan Basso, Italy 23:36 (2003 - 13th stage)
10th Lance Armstrong, USA 23:40 (2005 - 13th stage)
11th Ivan Basso, Italy 23:42 (2005 - 13th stage)
12th Oscar Sevilla, Spain 23:45 (2001 - 12th stage)
13th Joseba Beloki, Spain 23:45 (2001 - 12th stage)
14th Denis Menchov, Russia 23:47 (2010 - 14th stage)
15th Samuel Sanchez, Spain 23:47 (2010 - 14th stage)
16th Jan Ullrich, Germany 24:00 (2005 - 13th stage)
17th Andy Schleck, Luxembourg 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
18th Joaquim Rodriguez, Spain 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
19th Robert Gesink, Holland 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
20th Alberto Contador, Spain 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
21th Jurgen van den Broeck, Belgium 24:01 (2010 - 14th stage)
22th Richie Porte, Australia 24:05 (2013 - 8th stage)
23th Levi Leipheimer, USA 24:15 (2005 - 13th stage)
24th Floyd Landis, USA 24:15 (2005 - 13th stage)
25th Iban Mayo, Spain 24:15 (2003 - 13th stage)
26th Santiago Botero, Colombia 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
27th Michael Boogerd, Holland 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
28th Alexandre Vinokourov, Kazakhstan 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
29th Stefano Garzelli, Italy 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)
30th Inigo Chaureau, Spain 24:19 (2001 - 12th stage)

list from Feltet

Inigo and Bobby?

I wonder what the power output was on the HC before Ax-3.

 

[UlleGigo]

Am I meant to be deciphering some sort of hidden message??

Ok firstly. Porte put time into everybody except Froome despite him toying with Quintana and wasting a lot of time. You accept he was toying with Quintana. You have stated as much. So what problem are you having with comprehending what the bolded implies?

Secondly. The message you are meant to be deciphering is not hidden as much as it would be considered part of cycling knowledge 101. That you have no idea what GH is alluding to is amusing in that you are trying to 'lay some knowledge down' when you have clearly strayed a bit far out of your depth.

Concentrate on the first point though. It doesn't require any knowledge of a certain amateur entrant. Its just a very interesting (and amusing) sub-plot.

 

[darwin553]

Ok firstly. Porte put time into everybody except Froome despite him toying with Quintana and wasting a lot of time. You accept he was toying with Quintana. You have stated as much. So what problem are you having with comprehending what the bolded implies?

Secondly. The message you are meant to be deciphering is not hidden as much as it would be considered part of cycling knowledge 101. That you have no idea what GH is alluding to is amusing in that you are trying to 'lay some knowledge down' when you have clearly strayed a bit far out of your depth.

Concentrate on the first point though. It doesn't require any knowledge of a certain amateur entrant. Its just a very interesting (and amusing) sub-plot.

Sorry about that one mate. It's all one big conspiracy theory around Sky on here and I ought to jump on the train or I'll miss out!

 

[slim charles]

I really find it tiring how whenever a rider has a good race, he's automatically labeled as doper. However, what we've seen yesterday, and what we are seeing this season [and in previous one] by Sky Team makes it really hard not to be skeptical.
Froome won routinely, kicked everyone's asses without even breaking a sweat? Sure. Porte now better than everyone in the world except Froome?
It is really strange. I will not say they are definitely doping because, despite not being Sky fan at all, I naively hope that this might be some sort of sporting [rather than chemical] miracle.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I really find it tiring how whenever a rider has a good race, he's automatically labeled as doper. However, what we've seen yesterday, and what we are seeing this season [and in previous one] by Sky Team makes it really hard not to be skeptical.
Froome won routinely, kicked everyone's asses without even breaking a sweat? Sure. Porte now better than everyone in the world except Froome?
It is really strange. I will not say they are definitely doping because, despite not being Sky fan at all, I naively hope that this might be some sort of sporting [rather than chemical] miracle.

My thoughts exactly. Well said

 

[chunksoul]

as an aussie and a porte and cadel fan i am 100% certain that sky a doping.

I am a realist and even though i think cadel might have been as close to keen as possible i doubt he didnt dope. but i am certain sky has an organised program.

They aren't even believable. Where is rogers this tour. He comes off the gear from sky and goes backwards.

 

[warrenfuk]

as an aussie and a porte and cadel fan i am 100% certain that sky a doping.

I am a realist and even though i think cadel might have been as close to keen as possible i doubt he didnt dope. but i am certain sky has an organised program.

They aren't even believable. Where is rogers this tour. He comes off the gear from sky and goes backwards.

Maybe Rogers should turn whistleblower? The new Edward Snowden? Riis could give him some tips on hiding and avoiding the authorites.

 

[henrikamby]

Pick up in mass media

Hi.
How is your local media picking up on this one?

In Denmark the Danish TV2, who broadcasts the tour, actually had a discussion in the studio after the race, if this effort was to belive in. Even included calculation on Froomes real vs. expected power output.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Hi.
How is your local media picking up on this one?

In Denmark the Danish TV2, who broadcasts the tour, actually had a discussion in the studio after the race, if this effort was to belive in. Even included calculation on Froomes real vs. expected power output.

Way to go Denmark!
.
The Rai folk only said the word incredible a few times - which isn't really wising up.

 

[Pulpstar]

The 4 2010 times are 4 team leaders on the same time, I assume working in with each other ?