Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[thehog]

They dropped becouse good riders in GC attack from the start. The team started with the crashes of Thomas and Stannard, so others riders had to help more than usual. It wanst a hard firs week, but anyway the TTT was demanding and after that there were two demanding stages.

Of course some rides could be afected by changes in weather, as in others teams.

Proudhomme dont refers only to SKy when talk about that

Agree with Brailsford, in the internet everyone thinks he is scientits when in reallity they have no clue what they're talking about.
For exemple people keep saying that is not possible to ride above 6w/kg clean. Well thats wrong!
I have pro friends that can do these wattages, but they dont ride pro tour because they lack endurance.
They can do it one time no problem, but they cant do it over and over again
These people have no idea of what is possible doing clean and what's not.
Also vo2 is not limiter of performance as most people think, i've seen riders do 6.4w/kg at LT with a vo2 of 75which far from the 90-100 range that people are saying all the time.
Also you cant use ex pros like Lemond to say that his best performacne are the limit of what is humanly possible, because he didn't train perfectly, far from it, and there is no limit for performance. It is exponencially harder to improve but there is always improvement possible

 

[Cycle Chic]

And as Cadel Evans pointed out...Sky have never had a problem RECOVERING before....So why now ??

 

[ebandit]

of course

And as Cadel Evans pointed out...Sky have never had a problem RECOVERING before....So why now ??

of course................however when you refer to 'team sky' you are talking about different riders under different conditions

you completely ignore that 2 riders were injured.............another crashed etc

Mark L

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Agree with Brailsford, in the internet everyone thinks he is scientists when in reality they have no clue what they're talking about.
For example people keep saying that is not possible to ride above 6w/kg clean. Well thats wrong!
I have pro friends that can do these wattages, but they dont ride pro tour because they lack endurance.
They can do it one time no problem, but they cant do it over and over again
These people have no idea of what is possible doing clean and what's not.
Also vo2 is not limiter of performance as most people think, i've seen riders do 6.4w/kg at LT with a vo2 of 75which far from the 90-100 range that people are saying all the time.
Also you cant use ex pros like Lemond to say that his best performance are the limit of what is humanly possible, because he didn't train perfectly, far from it, and there is no limit for performance. It is exponentially harder to improve but there is always improvement possible

in ironic mode perhaps.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

of course................however when you refer to 'team sky' you are talking about different riders under different conditions

you completely ignore that 2 riders were injured.............another crashed etc

Mark L

Circumstances knocked Sky over, I agree.

Helped by an uber strong Movistar team which was able the kill off 90% of the peloton by setting a strong pace from mid race and out.

And Porte is ambitious, he was going all in for as long as he could on stage 9. He must have chased hard for 40-50kms pretty much alone. Best hilly TT in the tour so far.

However Sky's performance on stage 8 was ridiculous. Gewiss 2.0 led by Froome almost breaking records on the climb.

 

[lemoogle]

Helped by an uber strong Movistar team which was able the kill off 90% of the peloton by setting a strong pace from mid race and out.

Who did they "kill off" though, I mean, Chavanel was pretty much there until the final climb. A group of 30 after 4 cat 1 climbs is not really killing it.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Agree with Brailsford, in the internet everyone thinks he is scientits when in reallity they have no clue what they're talking about.
For exemple people keep saying that is not possible to ride above 6w/kg clean. Well thats wrong!
I have pro friends that can do these wattages, but they dont ride pro tour because they lack endurance.
They can do it one time no problem, but they cant do it over and over again
These people have no idea of what is possible doing clean and what's not.
Also vo2 is not limiter of performance as most people think, i've seen riders do 6.4w/kg at LT with a vo2 of 75which far from the 90-100 range that people are saying all the time.
Also you cant use ex pros like Lemond to say that his best performacne are the limit of what is humanly possible, because he didn't train perfectly, far from it, and there is no limit for performance. It is exponencially harder to improve but there is always improvement possible

Those Portugeze know their stuff.

Goud one.

Frontpage of CN really rocks sometimes.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Who did they "kill off" though, I mean, Chavanel was pretty much there until the final climb. A group of 30 after 4 cat 1 climbs is not really killing it.

Look at the GC result, its cleaned up nicely.

Rogers gone
Talanksy gone
Most of Shack gone
Sky gone except Froome
etc
etc

Many were asking for more top end GC action, but most captains are still too weak for that and Froome was ultra strong. Mid race action showed that. It would have been foolish to destroy the Spanish armada on stage 9 to try and gain 10-20s.

The battle is now down to Froome vs Belkin vs Movistar vs Saxo. To keep the Irish happy we can include Martin. Very focused and it sets the 3rd week up pretty good.

And Chavanel is old school. He can perform very well on these hilly courses.

 

[ebandit]

thanks!

Circumstances knocked Sky over, I agree.

However Sky's performance on stage 8 was ridiculous. Gewiss 2.0 led by Froome almost breaking records on the climb.

thanks! i disagree a little..............team skys performance was weaker than the 2012 tour

porte was just as strong..............but appeared to pay for his efforts

froomey was the one that sent the clinic into meltdown............potentially
'ridiculous' performance.............i laughed but still consider the situation
..undecided...the remaining mountain / tt stages will tell more

Mark L

 

[lemoogle]

It would have been foolish to destroy the Spanish armada on stage 9 to try and gain 10-20s.

Not when the next day was a rest day, and no Mountain stages until Sunday, what they did had no effect on sky, aside from Kiri I guess but was that really caused by Movistar? I mean he finished way behind the sprinters, guess we'll never know/understand what happened there.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Not when the next day was a rest day, and no Mountain stages until Sunday, what they did had no effect on sky, aside from Kiri I guess but was that really caused by Movistar? I mean he finished way behind the sprinters, guess we'll never know/understand what happened there.

Well, we can't agree on everything. I think it was very close to the best possible result when considering the weakness of some riders and the strength of Froome.

When Contador didn't react to Valverde's duo attack mid race (Saxo had Rogers up the road), it told me everything. Damage control all the way. Same with J-Rod. Nothing in the tank.

Here is Schelck trying to get things going on the last climb:

Froome can easily follow.

Plenty of doping going on, but we are not operating in 2005 after all.

 

[meat puppet]

brailsford's mea culpa:

http://road.cc/content/news/87579-t...rd-admits-using-belgian-doctor-geert-leinders

 

[Benotti69]

brailsford's mea culpa:

http://road.cc/content/news/87579-t...rd-admits-using-belgian-doctor-geert-leinders

Again cycling leads the way in people not taking responsibility for their actions.

If Brailsford is truely responsible for hiring a doping doctor then he should resign and if not, why sack all the others who had history. None of them hired a doping doctor.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

thanks! i disagree a little..............team skys performance was weaker than the 2012 tour

porte was just as strong..............but appeared to pay for his efforts

froomey was the one that sent the clinic into meltdown............potentially
'ridiculous' performance.............i laughed but still consider the situation
..undecided...the remaining mountain / tt stages will tell more

Mark L

Agree again, Sky was stronger in '12 certainly the mid part of the train. But Froome, Porte and Kennaugh were ridiculous on stage 8. All three.

How long did Kennaugh lead the peloton for (shedding almost everybody) 10km (excluding descent) or more? Crazy pace and distance.

Kennaugh was chasing Quintana. Small individual, lets see how he does in the flat TT.

 

[Rollthedice]

Agree again, Sky was stronger in '12 certainly the mid part of the train. But Froome, Porte and Kennaugh were ridiculous on stage 8. All three.

How long did Kennaugh lead the peloton for (shedding almost everybody) 10km (excluding descent) or more? Crazy pace and distance.

Kennaugh was chasing Quintana. Small individual, lets see how he does in the flat TT.

They destroyed the whole field whereas almost all Movistar couldn't get rid of anybody important the next day. If I remember well TeeJay said the pace in first climb in stage 8 was faster than they did all year.

 

[Alphabet]

Why is the now ostensibly clean peloton given as a reason for Sky's unprecedent rise? Last time I looked, it wasn't any cleaner at all. Just two months ago, top ten finishers at the Giro were testing positive.

 

[Benotti69]

Why is the now ostensibly clean peloton given as a reason for Sky's unprecedent rise? Last time I looked, it wasn't any cleaner at all. Just two months ago, top ten finishers at the Giro were testing positive.

I would like to know where and when the peloton got clean?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I would like to know where and when the peloton got clean?

When the incentive to dope ceased to exist. Around 2006/2007 is the correct answer to this. Certainly in 2008 when the ABP came in place. Verbier 2009 was plausible given Ax3 this weekend and Belle Filles last year. So speeds are really down.

 

[Benotti69]

When the incentive to dope ceased to exist. Around 2006/2007 is the correct answer to this. Certainly in 2008 when the ABP came in place. Verbier 2009 was plausible given Ax3 this weekend and Belle Filles last year. So speeds are really down.

The BP can be beaten easily. Ashenden has stated that. Also UCI control the BP and as Ashenden stated they withheld the Armstrong BP tests, so again the incentive to dope has not diminished.

Most teams test their riders to monitor their levels, this can also be used to monitor their doping so they do.

Who knows what the riders are doing. UCI wont release info. Teams wont release info. Look waht happened to Contador's positive for Clen.

Nothing has changed and if anything Froome's rise from a rider about to lose his contract to a GT posium in weeks shows the incentives are as strong as ever.

A knighthood is a pretty big incentive.

 

[lemoogle]

The BP can be beaten easily. Ashenden has stated that. Also UCI control the BP and as Ashenden stated they withheld the Armstrong BP tests, so again the incentive to dope has not diminished.

Most teams test their riders to monitor their levels, this can also be used to monitor their doping so they do.

Who knows what the riders are doing. UCI wont release info. Teams wont release info. Look waht happened to Contador's positive for Clen.

Nothing has changed and if anything Froome's rise from a rider about to lose his contract to a GT posium in weeks shows the incentives are as strong as ever.

A knighthood is a pretty big incentive.

While I don't believe it's clean, I do think it may be a bit cleaner, if we look at the climb times for AX 3 domaines they 're matching the slow-down curve we've been seeing for the past 5-6 years.
EXCEPT of course for froome and porte who were completely out of this world on stage 8

I think a lot of people got sort of angry after last year and this year that just as things were slowly starting to look better, we're back with a ridiculous dominant team. But I guess what's worse is that they're once again pretending to be the embodiment of "clean cycling" and moral values.

 

[Ferminal]

Except Porte was only as fast as "clean" riders Gesink and Van den Broeck were in 2010.

 

[lemoogle]

Except Porte was only as fast as "clean" riders Gesink and Van den Broeck were in 2010.

Ok OK froome only then.
I included Porte due to him pulling to destroy what was left of the GC field and catch quintana and still being fresh enough to drop everyone for the 1-2.
Gesink and Van Den Broeck were not domestiques back in 2010. And I guess the whole idea is that the performances should be going down rather than stay equal to 2010, if we're really getting cleaner ( since it's not an on/off switch )

 

[Benotti69]

While I don't believe it's clean, I do think it may be a bit cleaner, if we look at the climb times for AX 3 domaines they 're matching the slow-down curve we've been seeing for the past 5-6 years.
EXCEPT of course for froome and porte who were completely out of this world on stage 8

I think a lot of people got sort of angry after last year and this year that just as things were slowly starting to look better, we're back with a ridiculous dominant team. But I guess what's worse is that they're once again pretending to be the embodiment of "clean cycling" and moral values.

It may be cleanER, but that is not acceptable as at any moment it can easily revert back to full on dirty. 1 vial of epo a day is cleanER than 2 a day, but that is still dirty.

I think UCI is running a 'protection racket' with most teams saying keep levels to acceptable 6.0w/kg or fail the BP. That is not to say teams are keeping to that unwritten agreement and using whtever they can get their hands on.

That Sky seem to be able to beat that makes me guess that they have a USPS type agreement in place.

That Froome and Wiggins came from the Grupetto to beat the likes of Contador, Schleck, Nibali, Purito and others just stinks.

 

[EnacheV]

That Froome and Wiggins came from the Grupetto to beat the likes of Contador, Schleck, Nibali, Purito and others just stinks.

Why it stinks? That's your whole argumentation , you belive that the order must be x>y>z>... based on your personal preferences and likes.

Maybe Froome and Wiggins are simply better than Contador, Schleck, Nibali, Purito and others. Even with all others doped.

 

[the sceptic]

Why it stinks? That's your whole argumentation , you belive that the order must be x>y>z>... based on your personal preferences and likes.

Maybe Froome and Wiggins are simply better than Contador, Schleck, Nibali, Purito and others. Even with all others doped.

Youre the one bringing nonsense fanboyism into the argument.