Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[ToreBear]

But is that line of reasoning - applied to 21 teams - any more far-fetched than simply "Sky doped"?

When they dominated Algarve, it was a pre-season race. When they dominated Paris-Nice, it was, well, a fairly good route for Wiggins. When they dominated Romandie, it was, well, we'll see when it comes to Tour preparation. When they dominated the Dauphiné, it was, well, everybody's preparing for the Tour, it'll be different then. When we got to the Tour, it was, well, everybody's screwed up their preparation for the Tour.

At what point do we stop making excuses on the behalf of every other team? As it turned out, it wasn't that other teams were preparing for the Tour and letting Sky win these smaller races at all! It was that Sky were just that little bit better, all year long!

Oh, did I say "little bit" better? I meant "vast yawning chasm" better.

I like the everybody is clean, and sky is better argument better than the everybody is doping and sky is doping more argument.

 

[ToreBear]

interesting that you go for bad day or riding clean, i guess you could be right, schleck was so clean he tested positive for a masking agent just a couple days later, valverde decided to go clean for the tour only because he knew he was facing clean oposition there, at the vuelta he was going full blast so i guess he decided to face dirty bertie doping not to be in disadvantaged against that spanish doping cheat, bottle has been clean since 07 according to himself and michele "i would have won the 2010 giro if i had another blood bag" scarponi also decided to go clean to face sky.

oh wait. . . .

Or it's dopers fatigue. No one wanted to dope at the giro and the tour or at the tour and the vuelta.

Or doctor Fuentes replacements freezer had a power outage. Or everybody was calling ferrari for advice, and Ferrari was to scared to pick up the phone?

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

'...'One thing I will say: people say Brailsford is clever and a lot of this is PR spin, but if he was clever he would have played 2012 so much better. Really, Sky couldn't have made themselves more suspicious looking if they tried: dodgy doctors, Tenerife training camps, a DS that worked with Lance, USPS racing tactics. Most of what they have done just invited accusations of doping, and so people have been queuing up to do so, as this thread is testament to. Don't tell me Brailsford is clever, or that master of media spin, because all of this could have been handled so much better, going all the way back to 2010.

IMO, Pro cycling, including Brailsford, has had its head stuck so far up it's collective ****, they beleived they could go on with business as usual. By buisness as usual I mean blatantly act in a way that is at odds with their words, make a few bold statements about being clean, and expect to be beleived.

Brailsford tried it with the clean team of untainted ones, knowing full well it was more than likely Rogers, Yates, Ulich Sutton etc had stories to tell.

The UCI tried it with their messages about 4 year sanctions and self congratulatory announcements about doing everything possible to stop doping.

This is Armstrong's real legacy. The belief that you can say whatever BS you want and the dumb fans and dumb media will repeat it, or even believe it.

It won't work any more. The dumb media and dumb fans have learnt the pattern. Internet and social media mean we can stay much more informed than before and communicate much better too. It's time to try some honesty and transparency.

Brailsfords latest comments are probably the first thing he has ever said that makes me even consider the possibility he might have a real interest in running a clean team. What I will be looking for next is whether Rogers gets the chop, or whether they circle the wagons, let Yates and Ulich take the rap, and preserve the "clean team 2012 image."

 

[ToreBear]

The blurred links between British Cycling and Sky Professional Cycling Team are worrisome in and of themselves, and not for Clinic purposes. It actually hurt them at first, because the commitment to a British Tour winner meant no experienced GC man would ever sign for them, and they had to bank everything on Wiggins, who had never come into a GT as team leader before at that point.

But moreover, it's a problem for young British riders, as it cuts off development opportunities. That is starting to be rectified with Endura, but the sense that Team Sky needed all the top British talent can put other teams off picking up talented young British riders, because they know Sky will come poaching before long.

Good point! Time will show weather this works out for them.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Wiggo:

Paris-Nice by 8 seconds
Romandie - 12 seconds
Dauphine 1min 17 secs (to teammate Rogers, 1:26 to Cadel)

Porte:
Algarve 37 secs

Heck Romandie basically boiled down to the Stage win bonus for Wiggo's 'sprint' on Stage 1.

A dominant team for sure, but hardly a vast chasm between them and those behind them.

exactly. romandie was nearly won by talansky for christ sake

 

[balkou]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/dave-brailsfords-pursuit-of-utopia-for-team-sky

“When I created this team, one of the first things I had to decide was if David Millar come to the team,” Brailsford says.

“He’s a good friend of mine, and I really agonised over that at the time. With this clean sheet of paper I had to make a really tough decision and say ‘Actually Dave, we’re going to try and have a clean policy’. Now, I’m not going to change that policy. My belief going forward is to have clean team with the same policy, albeit it has proved to be very challenging to implement.”

And then he brought Rogers, Yates and later worked with Leinders too.

“If people want to lie they’ll lie. I want to encourage people that now is probably the time to come forward. Someone who is sitting there and keeps on lying they have to realise that the likelihood of that coming out is way greater than it’s ever been. I think the truth will come out, across the board,” Brailsford says.

“They’d have to leave the team but I’d make sure we looked after them. Be that financially… I’m not going to kick them out the door. They’ll have to realise that for team Sky this relationship is over.”

They have to leave, but he won't kick them cause he will look after them "financially". He isn't convincing even a 5yrs child.
What if all the (at least) suspicious cases stick with the stance that they had nothing to do with doping? He will search evidence so to get rid of them asap, or wait till they "explode" into his hands?
Or if there will be 2-3 guys that will speak out (plus Barry), is he so naive to think that last TDF's win won't look more suspicious?
And OK Leinders is history, but did he explain what he found?

Anyway, I see teams close to the UCI take decisions that are enforcing omerta', and not the opposite.
Quick-Step (Lefevere has very good relations with the federation) sacked Levi who spoke.
Brailsford (close to Pat) remembered his zero tolerance policy.
Rabobank (close to Hein) discovered that rider 14 is theirs (and probably they are to be discovered that they contributed to their riders' tax evasion).

ps

“I feel such a responsibility for Mrs Dombrowski who just sent Joe from America to come over here and I wouldn’t blame her at all if my phone rings and she says I want some reassurances for my son, tell me who you can guarantee me about my son’s future and that’s a big responsibility to have,” Brailsford says.

So he used Julich to persuade Dombrowski (and his family) but now here he comes Zoro Brailsford to save the rider from the bad influences. Schizophrenic.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

ahah yes indeed. what an idiot. things have to change there and I can't wait for them to fire yates

 

[Parker]

exactly. romandie was nearly won by talansky for christ sake

Yes, but Paris-Nice was ahead of Lieuwe Westra. Yes, that Westra. The great Westra, winner of 2009 Tour of Picardie. How can a man beat Westra and Talansky - they are the modern day Hinault and Merckx. It's not normal.

What Wiggins did this year hasn't been done for 12 months since Evans almost did it. It's unprecedented.

 

[ferryman]

As I said, Sky have made it so easy to accuse them of doping it makes me confident that they aren't. If they were they would have been much more underhand about it, much cleverer.


Brilliant. Thank you, it is always good to end the week on a right good laugh. Cheers man

 

[Libertine Seguros]

JV criticises Sky's doping policy:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...t-Team-Sky-and-says-it-is-doomed-to-fail.html

Still, the UK paper does its best to show everything it learnt from the Armstrong days, by portraying JV in the worst possible light.

Sub-headline:

Jonathan Vaughters, a confessed drug cheat

Image caption:

Speaking out: Jonathan Vaughters rode with Lance Armstrong

Second paragraph:

Vaughters, 39, a US Postal team-mate of Lance Armstrong during what has been described as the biggest doping conspiracy in the history of sport, now runs his own Garmin-Sharp team and he believes Sky’s approach simply cannot work

Regardless of whether or not we believe everything Vaughters espouses, the fact of the matter is that he has acted much less suspiciously in this whole situation than Brailsford. There is mention of Garmin's policy in the article, but only after making reference to the hiring of dopers and that Vaughters told DZ, Vande Velde and Danielson their jobs would be waiting for them if they were sanctioned by USADA - and making sure to point out JV said that Sky were clean.

It's like they wrote a bit of positive spin on JV and acknowledged the validity of his criticism of Sky's policy only after doing their best to discredit him by painting him as a jealous ex-doper.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Yes, but Paris-Nice was ahead of Lieuwe Westra. Yes, that Westra. The great Westra, winner of 2009 Tour of Picardie. How can a man beat Westra and Talansky - they are the modern day Hinault and Merckx. It's not normal.

What Wiggins did this year hasn't been done for 12 months since Evans almost did it. It's unprecedented.

dear parker

2687 / 1957 = 1.37

sincerely,
DW

 

[del1962]

struggling on the flat? lolque? schleck lost a couple minutes on one of the early stages due to a crash, he wasn't struggling on the flat. . .

also please provide your reasoning to why you think they are clean, other then the they are british therefore they are clean argument.

I can't proove they are clean but here are my thoughts on the matter.

Firstly from all the indications that I read the tour is slower than the early to mid 2000s, so the current perfrmances are far more believable that at the height of the doping era.

People point to Wiggins in 2006, but here we have a rider who concentrated on the track against opponents that doped with far more unbeleivable times, his first real attempt at the tour was in 2009 while riding from Garmin where he finished 4th, all indications are that Garmin was a clean team.

On Froome, I have read elsewhere on this thread there were credible reasons for Froomes improvements which seemed reasonable, ( a lot of his technical problems were sorted out).

I know little of Porte though he did well in the Giro in 2010.

On Rogers, it is possible that in the past he was doping, I don't know, but I think that this year he has been riding consistently and his performances are credible.

I have not heard of one positive test for any sky rider including ones that were attempted to be explained away (such as Armstrong in 1999), not has any member of the peleton that I have heard of accused Sky of doping.

All we have is inuendo based on nothing more than hearsay, which is why I am of the opinion that is it unlikely that they are doping.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

correction. 2009 wiggins rode and raced for garmin.

prepared by sky.

no garmin interaction. cvv was team leader.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

correction. wiggins prepared for 2006 race exclusively. failed

 

[skidmark]

dear parker

2687 / 1957 = 1.37

sincerely,
DW

I don't think he was talking about CQ score, I think he was talking about winning the Tour, Dauphine, Romandie and P-N. Evans did almost all that last year, except it was T-A in the early season and he got 2nd in the Dauphine. That's how I interpreted it at least.

And if you mean to suggest that this is some kind of proof of Wiggins' doping, what have you got on Gilbert last year?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

correction. michael barry was a sky rider.

rogers is a sky rider.

sean yates is a sky ds.

all tied up in doping.

 

[del1962]

Correction : Dear Wiggo is making things up

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I don't think he was talking about CQ score, I think he was talking about winning the Tour, Dauphine, Romandie and P-N. Evans did almost all that last year, except it was T-A in the early season and he got 2nd in the Dauphine. That's how I interpreted it at least.

And if you mean to suggest that this is some kind of proof of Wiggins' doping, what have you got on Gilbert last year?

he said cadel nearly did a wiggins. cq says no. cadel had a champagne year built on a foundation of many years at the pointy end. wiggins bathed in champagne after 1year.

gilbert did it all solo in one-dayers. i'm aiming for the tour of redemption fiasco, which is far more conspiratorial.

ps. gilbert was not normal, no.

 

[The Hitch]

Still, the UK paper does its best to show everything it learnt from the Armstrong days, by portraying JV in the worst possible light.

Sub-headline:


Image caption:


Second paragraph:


Regardless of whether or not we believe everything Vaughters espouses, the fact of the matter is that he has acted much less suspiciously in this whole situation than Brailsford. There is mention of Garmin's policy in the article, but only after making reference to the hiring of dopers and that Vaughters told DZ, Vande Velde and Danielson their jobs would be waiting for them if they were sanctioned by USADA - and making sure to point out JV said that Sky were clean.

It's like they wrote a bit of positive spin on JV and acknowledged the validity of his criticism of Sky's policy only after doing their best to discredit him by painting him as a jealous ex-doper.

that is brendan gallagher, who is the british anthony tan. Total tool. Wrote 2 months ago that Britain was always going to dominate cycling when doping was eliminated (and he has declared it eliminated) because they are morally and physically superior - the people from this country that is.

Hillariously today his 5 minute wikipedia piece on Rabobank found that they must have been good cos they won 23 stages at the Tour de France most recently into whatever the **** by some rider called Sanchez in 2011.

I mean the guy doesn't even realize that Il Sanchez won a stage this year

 

[The Hitch]

Wiggo:

Paris-Nice by 8 seconds
Romandie - 12 seconds
Dauphine 1min 17 secs (to teammate Rogers, 1:26 to Cadel)

Porte:
Algarve 37 secs

Heck Romandie basically boiled down to the Stage win bonus for Wiggo's 'sprint' on Stage 1.

A dominant team for sure, but hardly a vast chasm between them and those behind them.

Well in Romandie he had the puncture so ability wise the gap was more, and in Paris Nice as i recall he played a major role in splitting the field on stage 2, and only missed carrying the jersey all week because of crap conditions on the prologue.

 

[Parker]

I don't think he was talking about CQ score, I think he was talking about winning the Tour, Dauphine, Romandie and P-N. Evans did almost all that last year, except it was T-A in the early season and he got 2nd in the Dauphine. That's how I interpreted it at least.

Exactly right.

 

[ferryman]

I can't proove they are clean but here are my thoughts on the matter.

Firstly from all the indications that I read the tour is slower than the early to mid 2000s, so the current perfrmances are far more believable that at the height of the doping era.

People point to Wiggins in 2006, but here we have a rider who concentrated on the track against opponents that doped with far more unbeleivable times, his first real attempt at the tour was in 2009 while riding from Garmin where he finished 4th, all indications are that Garmin was a clean team.

On Froome, I have read elsewhere on this thread there were credible reasons for Froomes improvements which seemed reasonable, ( a lot of his technical problems were sorted out).

I know little of Porte though he did well in the Giro in 2010.

On Rogers, it is possible that in the past he was doping, I don't know, but I think that this year he has been riding consistently and his performances are credible.

I have not heard of one positive test for any sky rider including ones that were attempted to be explained away (such as Armstrong in 1999), not has any member of the peleton that I have heard of accused Sky of doping.

All we have is inuendo based on nothing more than hearsay, which is why I am of the opinion that is it unlikely that they are doping.

All been done and dusted and the arguments against ie for doping are far more compelling. At least you didn't slip in the English card.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Exactly right.

wrong.

wiggins: 3 1 1 1- 28 days as race leader
evans: 3 7 1 - 4 days as race leader.

cq summarises performance. i thought a scientist would recognise this?

 

[The Hitch]

Yes, but Paris-Nice was ahead of Lieuwe Westra. Yes, that Westra. The great Westra, winner of 2009 Tour of Picardie. How can a man beat Westra and Talansky - they are the modern day Hinault and Merckx. It's not normal.

If you start ridiculing riders palmares before they became good, well we can play that game too

The great Wiggins winner of the 2009 giro prologue and one at the Dauphine a few years before that.

The great Chris Froome, winner of, eh, eh eh, help me out.

and id propose the latter 2 went on to achieve greater things this year than a PN stage and a podium.

 

[del1962]

All been done and dusted and the arguments against ie for doping are far more compelling. At least you didn't slip in the English card.

I have read those arguments on here, and I have hionestly not found them more compelling, (I guess on either side ppl are inclined to beleive things that suppport their prejudices), but I was asked the question as to why I thought sky were most likely clean and I put them forward.