Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[thehog]

Some of the stuff said in apparent seriousness was just astounding.

Reminds back in 2000 when the "fans" couldn't understand why Lance wasn't winning the sprints.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

In the interests of balance, it should be noted that to a normal person, being astounded is probably an understated description of their experience on first visiting this forum. It's not known as "The Asylum" on other forums without very good reason!

They can't handle the truth.

 

[blackcat]

Reminds back in 2000 when the "fans" couldn't understand why Lance wasn't winning the sprints.

cos they werent held at yellow rose

he was the fastest in the horizontal plane there

 

[thehog]

They can't handle the truth.

Cruise is a dreadful actor. Nickerson makes that scene and Cruise just plays all over it.

 

[Yiasemi]

As a Brit i have heard unbelievably jingoistic commentary from the Olympics this Summer. Including my family sadly. The basic crapness of "Great" Britain since 1944 and especially since the housing and stock market crashes of the last few years with resultant pension and job losses seems to have resulted in an Olympics we Love You defiance (or denial) that everyone I know seems to have swallowed. It's bloody depressing, but seems to be similar to the Falklands war revival of Thatcher or the "we can now be emotional" phenomena of Princess Di's death. For all their supposed cynicism and much lauded irony, Brits are just as susceptible to media hype as anyone else. Well, just now and then, but when they do fall it's en masse, big time and desperately needy and embarrassing to the minority. Sadly.

Sky are guilty as charged says this Yorkshire woman. I guess being half-Greek helps with the detachment. By éck.

 

[Velo_vicar]

As a Brit i want to believe in Sky, but most of all i want the sport we love to be clean. So if sky have cheated i hope it is exposed. But one thing i am curious about is this.
If you had a large budget and aimed to win the tour clean, how would you go about it?
-Of course you would find someone who physically could win it.
But then
-Would you buy up the best support riders for that rider (not just the best climbers, to support they must match his style whatever that is, no good having a Porte to support a Contador as they climb so differently).
-Would you not spend lot of time training in the best conditions possible.
-Would you not ride in such a way as to maximise the leaders chances.
-Would you not be looking for every legal edge you could find and be a bit secretive about it as you don't want other teams to have that edge too.

Maybe i am missing something but it seems to me that sky are in a no win situation. i agree they haven't helped themselves with some statments and some hiring and could give better answers to those things. But to win clean you will need to do things which for some here are signs of doping.

So if you had sky's budget how would you go about winning the TDF clean?
It seems that winning in some eyes means doping which has to change at some point.

As a side point what do people make of the fact that the mainstream uk newspaper that has done more to expose doping in cycling and given people like David Hands and Paul Kimmage a platform is the Times that is the same stable as Sky.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

There are cycling fans who like wiggo as number 1, then the wiggos fans who know very little about the sport apart from what they learn following wiggo.

This is true of most sports, though. Even committed football fans in one country will only really know much about their own team and the major competitions (eg the top league in their own country, the world cup and the major club and international tournaments in their geographical region e.g. European Championship and Champions League). They won't follow the lower leagues in their own country or other countries' leagues that closely, either due to disinterest or lack of coverage.

Interestingly, many Wiggo fans are also Cav and Chris Hoy fans (ie they are fans of British success.) Simply by following these three, you cover track endurance events, track sprint, road sprints, short stage races, long stage races and Time Trials. The only thing you don't cover are one-day races. So, overall, that's a fair amount of the sport covered, even moreso when you consider that most British cycling fans are also well disposed to the Brownlee Bros, thus adding triathlon to their range of interests.

 

[JRanton]

Not a chance. The camera crews had a tight window to use and had to stick to that. Not all of the footage was from this year either.

Team Sky told BSkyB that Bradleys poor first tour with them was due to others doping. A company that doesn't see too much wrong with hacking peoples voicemails won't even think twice about charging its riders up.

Can I ask how you know this?

Wiggins was getting dropped by Michael Barry on pre-tour training camps in 2010. If it's true what you say then it seems more likely to me that Sky were using 'the others are doping' line as an excuse for their own failings in 2010 (Wiggins' preparation was awful, team-wide GC results were pathetic and EBH was pretty much the best climber on the squad). On the other hand if Sky genuinely thought that Wiggo's poor 2010 tour was purely due to others doping then it really does make their performances and actions (hello Leinders) ever since incredibly worrying.

 

[doolols]

A company that doesn't see too much wrong with hacking peoples voicemails won't even think twice about charging its riders up.

Excellent! Well done. Brilliant to link a newspaper subsidiary of a company to a completely different subsidiary, who are sponsors of a cycling team. Yep, they're one and the same. *insert sarcastic emoticon*

 

[doolols]

If you had a large budget and aimed to win the tour clean, how would you go about it?
-Of course you would find someone who physically could win it.
But then
-Would you buy up the best support riders for that rider (not just the best climbers, to support they must match his style whatever that is, no good having a Porte to support a Contador as they climb so differently).
-Would you not spend lot of time training in the best conditions possible.
-Would you not ride in such a way as to maximise the leaders chances.
-Would you not be looking for every legal edge you could find and be a bit secretive about it as you don't want other teams to have that edge too.

Yep. I have no problem with accusations of Sky doping, if there was any real evidence. It's all too easy to scream "Sky ... dopers ... it's obvious ...", but it was sole intention to create a winner of the TdF inside 5 years. And they created the team to do this, to support Wiggins. As I said elsewhere, this is probably his only chance of winning - the course was right, no Contador, no Schlecks. He's not an attacking rider, so they developed a 'time trialling' strategy, to climb at maximum steady power, and it worked.

 

[bobbins]

Can I ask how you know this?

Wiggins was getting dropped by Michael Barry on pre-tour training camps in 2010. If it's true what you say then it seems more likely to me that Sky were using 'the others are doping' line as an excuse for their own failings in 2010 (Wiggins' preparation was awful, team-wide GC results were pathetic and EBH was pretty much the best climber on the squad). On the other hand if Sky genuinely thought that Wiggo's poor 2010 tour was purely due to others doping then it really does make their performances and actions (hello Leinders) ever since incredibly worrying.

Seem one from BSkyB told me. Sounded like sore losing but as Dave B said in that doco, he hates to lose.

 

[RichWalk]

Yep. I have no problem with accusations of Sky doping, if there was any real evidence. It's all too easy to scream "Sky ... dopers ... it's obvious ...", but it was sole intention to create a winner of the TdF inside 5 years. And they created the team to do this, to support Wiggins. As I said elsewhere, this is probably his only chance of winning - the course was right, no Contador, no Schlecks. He's not an attacking rider, so they developed a 'time trialling' strategy, to climb at maximum steady power, and it worked.

from their official site, don't mean to be pedantic or nit picking but do you see the word 'clean' anywhere?

2009: February - Satellite broadcaster BSkyB announce Team Sky, managed by Brailsford with three stated aims: create the first British winner of the Tour de France within five years; inspire people of all ages and abilities to get on their bikes, through the team's positive profile, attitude and success; add further support to competitive cycling in Great Britain.

 

[bianchigirl]

Remember that the next time you make a jibe about l'equipe & the tour will you?

 

[RichWalk]

Remember that the next time you make a jibe about l'equipe & the tour will you?

?

 

[JRanton]

Seem one from BSkyB told me. Sounded like sore losing but as Dave B said in that doco, he hates to lose.

And you've no reason to doubt what the person from BSkyB told you (as in he or she is definitely someone who would know)? Sorry to pry, it just seems like this information is potentially a very important piece in the story.

If, and I repeat IF, Sky genuinely thought that the reason for their poor 2010 tour was due to other teams doping then you can begin to easily explain and understand how a doping programme started on the team. After all, they couldn't keep finishing 24th in the tour with Wiggins year after year and expect the money to keep rolling in from Sky. On the other hand, you have Wiggo's 2009 tour performance, and if we assume he achieved that by riding clean with Garmin, then the idea that Sky simply got things badly wrong in 2010 gains significant credibility.

 

[DirtyWorks]

... But one thing i am curious about is this.
If you had a large budget and aimed to win the tour clean, how would you go about it? ...

Of the teams contending for the final GC results all of them presumably do all of the things you mentioned. Based on the stuff JV1973 posted, Garmin certainly is. We're back to the arguments neither proving nor disproving the doping question.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Can I ask how you know this?

Wiggins was getting dropped by Michael Barry on pre-tour training camps in 2010. If it's true what you say then it seems more likely to me that Sky were using 'the others are doping' line as an excuse for their own failings in 2010 (Wiggins' preparation was awful, team-wide GC results were pathetic and EBH was pretty much the best climber on the squad). On the other hand if Sky genuinely thought that Wiggo's poor 2010 tour was purely due to others doping then it really does make their performances and actions (hello Leinders) ever since incredibly worrying.

+1 to this. Very good.

 

[DirtyWorks]

And you've no reason to doubt what the person from BSkyB told you (as in he or she is definitely someone who would know)? Sorry to pry, it just seems like this information is potentially a very important piece in the story.

If, and I repeat IF, Sky genuinely thought that the reason for their poor 2010 tour was due to other teams doping then you can begin to easily explain and understand how a doping programme started on the team. After all, they couldn't keep finishing 24th in the tour with Wiggins year after year and expect the money to keep rolling in from Sky. On the other hand, you have Wiggo's 2009 tour performance, and if we assume he achieved that by riding clean with Garmin, then the idea that Sky simply got things badly wrong in 2010 gains significant credibility.

+1 Nice summary of the issue specific to Wiggo. I'm even willing to entertain the possibility that an ex-pursuiter might possibly make it to GT podium even though there haven't been any in the history of competitive cycling before. There have been other track stars on GT podiums, but it happened practically concurrent to their GT results. I don't think Wiggo's case is at all likely but it might have happened.

But, we've got a number of other ProTour veterans have extraordinary performances over the course of an entire season where no such performance was previously seen. That for me is the most incriminating part of the fairy tale.

 

[The Hitch]

Re the lack of verbiage relating to Cobo vs that relating to Wiggo, it's most likely because he's a low profile rider, with no fan base, and only his Mum really cares. (He might generate more gigabytes on a Spanish forum.)

The volume of threads relating to Lance, Ullrich and Berto - both pro and anti - suggest that it's the profile of the rider that generates the volume of postings rather than the rights or wrongs of the rider in question's case.

Cobo did generate some controversy last year on several forums, but this was lost in the greater controversy of Froome's performances and, of course, the delight generated in the anti-Sky faction by Sky's support of Wiggins early on ultimately (probably) costing Froome top spot on the podium.

Yet many people who are adamant Cobo is dirty will go to any lengths to flame anyone who questions sky.

Nationality has a part to play with it.

I know some fans who used to derail every single race thread in which a member of radioshack came in the top 10 screaming at what injustice the other riders were coming up against when facing kwiatkowski and sergeant on their "brunyeel secret sauce" at the 3 days of west flanders, who since july 2012 suddenly began to defend with every bone in their body the - never tested positive principle.

 

[thehog]

+1 Nice summary of the issue specific to Wiggo. I'm even willing to entertain the possibility that an ex-pursuiter might possibly make it to GT podium even though there haven't been any in the history of competitive cycling before. There have been other track stars on GT podiums, but it happened practically concurrent to their GT results. I don't think Wiggo's case is at all likely but it might have happened.

But, we've got a number of other ProTour veterans have extraordinary performances over the course of an entire season where no such performance was previously seen. That for me is the most incriminating part of the fairy tale.

The Wiggo explanation whilst has some rational element to it because of his previous exploits on the tracks falls away when you have to explain Froome.

As per my awesome post on the Kerrison thread. What has suddenly changed on the anti-doping front that the Tour now is clean?

You do realise and putting nationalism aside for one moment statistically speaking that; 99.9999999% of all Tour de France winners for the last 20 years have been doping.

Proven fact.

What made 2012 buck this trend?

In a race dominated like none other in the history of the sport do you want me to believe a 0.00000000000001% chance that the winner wasn't doping?

Simply not possible. Statistically, mathematically, logically not possible.

 

[DirtyWorks]

The Wiggo explanation whilst has some rational element to it because of his previous exploits on the tracks falls away when you have to explain Froome.

As per my awesome post on the Kerrison thread. What has suddenly changed on the anti-doping front that the Tour now is clean?

Agreed. Only I'd say it falls away with more riders than just Froome!

 

[thehog]

Agreed. Only I'd say it falls away with more riders than just Froome!

More so seeing his Romandie performance. He didn't just get a little bit better. He was x1000 much better. In 6 short weeks.

Some Italian guy who won the Vuelta and was 2nd in LBL by a whisker couldn't even keep up.

Not normal.

Last years winner couldn't keep up.

 

[sniper]

The Wiggo explanation whilst has some rational element to it because of his previous exploits on the tracks falls away when you have to explain Froome.

As per my awesome post on the Kerrison thread. What has suddenly changed on the anti-doping front that the Tour now is clean?

Yeah, a clean Tour, why not?

(and Elvis is still alive)

 

[cineteq]

Did you guys talk about what happened to Froome in La Toussuire? We all saw it, and I doubt he was playing poker. Was that a side effect?

Tejay van Garderen's interview @ Velonews
VN: Did you see Froome as stronger than Wiggins?
Tejay: It was weird. There were a couple of times when it looked like Froome was in trouble. I remember on the stage to La Toussuire, he was dropped, and Wiggins was pulling on his own to get Nibali back. And then all of a sudden, Froome came up again, started setting pace and then dropped Wiggins. I was like, ‘weren’t you just getting dropped?’ .

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012...ur-i-took-advantage-of-the-opportunity_248044

 

[Libertine Seguros]

That's not surprising. Back in the 2011 Vuelta he was dropped before La Manzaneda, then came back, paced for Wiggins and then was dropped again, and once more was dropped on San Lorenzo before coming back and killing everybody on La Farrapona.