- Sep 14, 2011
- 1,980
- 0
- 0
thehog said:The remaining 189 cyclists in the Tour peloton who could not attack is all the evidence you need.
Riders did attack, I must have been watching a different race.
thehog said:The remaining 189 cyclists in the Tour peloton who could not attack is all the evidence you need.
thehog said:I would agree.
If Sky are looking for the edge, have 100% zero tolerance policy on doping and want to win clean then why are they going to doper paradise?
Tenerife is not "new" nor is it "innovative" training technique. Its a tried and tested hotbed for dopers who are part of a year long program.
Why do they want to emulate "Postal" via statements in the media and go to Tenerife?
With the resources Sky have wouldn't they be building a practice in England for future/teams generations? Wouldn't they be looking for places outside of the regular haunts of the last 20 years of mired in doping cycling to gain "the edge" ?
Outside of Kerrison wouldn't they be hiring people with no doping history or very little? Former Rabo Doctors and the like doesn't make a lot sense.
Zero Tolerance + Marginal gains = Tenerife (Lance) ? Does not add up.
Sorry.
thehog said:The remaining 189 cyclists in the Tour peloton who could not attack is all the evidence you need.
Froome19 said:So you are attacking their zero tolerance stance now..?
Well let me tell you a secret.. the zero tolerance stance was only ever a PR bluff. It was an intention of good will, but Sky never really bothered to back it up because they never really got the fact that the cycling world would expect them to actually bother to come along and really interrogate the team. They went to training camps which were the most ideal and hired the staff which were available and they wanted, regardless of their policy.
They hire the staff they hire.. zero tolerance or no zero tolerance
thehog said:Noddy you have to better than that.
All you're saying is "its not 100% certain" without providing any counter analysis yourself.
You've dumbed it down to "there is a god" - "no there's not" type argument.
I would have preferred if you put some thought and effort into it.
So here are my points I'd like to see you either debunk them or provide counter analysis of cleanness.
Wiggins/Froome -> Rogers/Yates/Julich(LANCE) -> Tenerife -> Extremem weight loss -> Absurd Tour performances - Doping/Ferrari.
noddy69 said:I have not said anywhere I believe them to be clean so I dont need to try to debunk what your saying.
In fact I find myself agreeing with the theory apart from the most damning point you make.
In my opinion they associated with dopers, they train in a place that is suspect,although a good training base, and lets be honest Wiggins just claimed third in a dopers tour so if he wasnt doping then its suspect enough but the performances over the last couple of years are nearly beyond belief.
But that is not enough to completely damn them. The vuelta was a good example of the spanish clearly doping yet not proof.
.
thehog said:Thanks Noddy. I now respect you. I agree. Sky are suspect. In my opinion they are bad eggs.
And those darn Spanish! Clearly doping. No proof.
So what is proof again?
profff said:tenerife is a very good spot for high altitude training, one of the best of the world.
tenerife is not a proof of doping, maybe all the other things you said are , but tenerife does not prove anything.
do you think that altitude training should be banned from the sport of cycling?
sierra nevada is ok, etna may be or are they suspicious too?
what about colombia or mexico?
stelvio and font romeu do prove doping?
what about the san pellegrino , where usually liquigas was doing altitude training?
can anybody suggest me a location for altitude training that is not a proof for doping ( i am obviously excluding a priori San Moritz) ?
thehog said:Thanks Noddy. I now respect you. I agree. Sky are suspect. In my opinion they are bad eggs.
And those darn Spanish! Clearly doping. No proof.
So what is proof again?
thehog said:Sure. Let's play connect the dots.
Ferrari (master of no positives & drugs)
|
Rogers/Yates/Lance love (mentoring proven)
|
Tenerife
|
Inhumane power levels for weight ratio (A Ferrari speciality)
|
Wiggins.
- But I'm sure you'll tell me this means nothing. All this has been disproven as hearsay
Its just a myth![]()
thehog said:Great post Hog.
But you forgot MotoMan!! The Sky car and Yates with his arm around MotoMan in the USADA dossier.
thehog said:Thanks Hog. I almost forgot! Good spot!
I've updated the "connect the dots":
Ferrari (master of no positives & drugs)
|
Rogers/Yates/Lance love (mentoring proven)
|
Motoman
|
Tenerife
|
Inhuman power levels for weight ratio (A Ferrari speciality)
|
Wiggins.
(John, Paul, Ringo and now George! - the band is back together again!)
andy1234 said:Shouldn't Kevin Bacon be in there somewhere?
thehog said:He was isolated from a small country town for the way he danced. Not for doping.
thehog said:Thanks Hog. I almost forgot! Good spot!
I've updated the "connect the dots":
Ferrari (master of no positives & drugs)
|
Rogers/Yates/Lance love (mentoring proven)
|
Motoman
|
Tenerife
|
Inhuman power levels for weight ratio (A Ferrari speciality)
|
Wiggins.
(John, Paul, Ringo and now George! - the band is back together again!)
profff said:tenerife is a very good spot for high altitude training, one of the best of the world.
tenerife is not a proof of doping, maybe all the other things you said are , but tenerife does not prove anything.
do you think that altitude training should be banned from the sport of cycling?
sierra nevada is ok, etna may be or are they suspicious too?
what about colombia or mexico?
stelvio and font romeu do prove doping?
what about the san pellegrino , where usually liquigas was doing altitude training?
can anybody suggest me a location for altitude training that is not a proof for doping ( i am obviously excluding a priori San Moritz) ?
spetsa said:Going to elevation to train is nothing more than a good excuse for a change in your blood passport. I am sure that if we were provided with Sky team passport info we would find that they are all very good receptors of being at elvation for a couple of weeks.![]()
spetsa said:Going to elevation to train is nothing more than a good excuse for a change in your blood passport. I am sure that if we were provided with Sky team passport info we would find that they are all very good receptors of being at elvation for a couple of weeks.![]()
noddy69 said:While what you say may have some merit, how exactly would teams train in the mountains without altitude training ? You cannot leave mountain training out of your preparation and when teams do go to altitude people cry foul....catch 22.
As far as I know the effects dont last long within the body so it should be a simple test to catch the cheats on this one and why they are not is beyond me. But at the end of the day if teams dont prepare in the mountains then they are preparing to fail.....go figure.
thehog said:Wats wrong with the Alps or Pyrenees?
The mountain ranges they use in the Tour not good enough?![]()
noddy69 said:While what you say may have some merit, how exactly would teams train in the mountains without altitude training ? You cannot leave mountain training out of your preparation and when teams do go to altitude people cry foul....catch 22.
spetsa said:Riding in the "mountains" does not equal elevation. There are many places where one could go and ride in the "mountains" all day long and never reach 5000ft in elevation.
