Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[thehog]

Sky and Brailsford are forcing people like Rogers, Yates and all the others out of the back door. That is enough for me at the moment. It is not pretty and is imo foolish but at least it demonstrates their stance on doping.

Conveniently after they won the Tour? That's some stance! and via the back door? No full disclosure?

That's like Lance using Hamilton et al to win the Tour before he rids himself of thoese riders/personnel to get a new batch in.

The similarities are staggering.

 

[sniper]

... at least it demonstrates their stance on doping.

still wet behind the ears I see?

 

[coinneach]

My biggest stumbling block to believing Wiggins since 2009 was clean is that we are expected to believe the only reason he did not show his incredible road talent prior to 2009 is:

he couldn't be bothered.

Mega bucks are on offer to top 10 TdF riders since 2000.

Brad and all his apologists are saying, yeaaaaah Brad coulda been earning squillions of buckaroos, but he preferred to stick to his $50k pa salary and drink and smoke, rather than buckling down and earning some real moolah.

Noone expected it, that 2009 4th place, including Millar, who, after coming back from 2 years off, beat or matched Wiggins the world champ pursuiter, in the TdF TT, and Rod Ellingworth, who already coached Brad to the top of the IP world. A world inhabited by very few truly world-class riders. I also found it interesting that Millar does not believe control-freak Wiggins did actually become a drunkard.

It is far easier for me to believe Wiggins just didn't have it, and that's why he never bothered trying. That the track IP got cancelled, his bread and butter, so the road is his last best hope, and he had to dope to be any good. It was 3 years after he first really tried, and failed dismally, in 2006, the 1000 days Tyler mentions in his book between someone trying road clean and finally capitulating.

Apologies for the slightly OT, but I have never really explained my trouble with Brad and his alleged latent ability. FWIW, this is the source of my disbelief.

I'll do my best to ignore the personal attacks this post illicits

You might be surprised: I thought it was one of your best posts...not dressed up in science to justify your beliefs, but actually trying to explore why you believe what you believe.

Where I think you need to develop your thinking is in relation to contexts. Roadies look down on trackies, always have, always will. For most sporting brits, the olympics is the top, and cycling on the track there is as good as it gets. For Brad, his (long lost) dad was best known as a track cyclist (albeit in the hard world of Belgium multiday events). You are right to say no one expected his result in 2009, but this was least of all Wiggins. Until that time, he'd thought, there was no way he could do that, but the context that needs to be understood through is the massive rejection of blood doping by the majority of the peleton round about that time.

As well as him, there is British Cycling, looking for new challenges.
And there is Sky, looking to spread into Europe, able to buy up the best of talent.

Then, in 12, maraculously, there is no Contador, Andy S, and last years winner Cadel, was ill/fading. And the route is made for him.

So his win this year wasn't a miracle or surprise even.

Or at least, that's how I see it, and I think I do understand the British sporting culture more than you BUT I'm probably, just as biased as you, but in an opposite direction!

 

[MatParker117]

My biggest stumbling block to believing Wiggins since 2009 was clean is that we are expected to believe the only reason he did not show his incredible road talent prior to 2009 is:

he couldn't be bothered.

Mega bucks are on offer to top 10 TdF riders since 2000.

Brad and all his apologists are saying, yeaaaaah Brad coulda been earning squillions of buckaroos, but he preferred to stick to his $50k pa salary and drink and smoke, rather than buckling down and earning some real moolah.

Noone expected it, that 2009 4th place, including Millar, who, after coming back from 2 years off, beat or matched Wiggins the world champ pursuiter, in the TdF TT, and Rod Ellingworth, who already coached Brad to the top of the IP world. A world inhabited by very few truly world-class riders. I also found it interesting that Millar does not believe control-freak Wiggins did actually become a drunkard.

It is far easier for me to believe Wiggins just didn't have it, and that's why he never bothered trying. That the track IP got cancelled, his bread and butter, so the road is his last best hope, and he had to dope to be any good. It was 3 years after he first really tried, and failed dismally, in 2006, the 1000 days Tyler mentions in his book between someone trying road clean and finally capitulating.

Apologies for the slightly OT, but I have never really explained my trouble with Brad and his alleged latent ability. FWIW, this is the source of my disbelief.

I'll do my best to ignore the personal attacks this post illicits

The same Tyler who recently stated on radio here that Wiggins won this tour clean?

 

[Mellow Velo]

Conveniently after they won the Tour? That's some stance! and via the back door? No full disclosure?

That's like Lance using Hamilton et al to win the Tour before he rids himself of thoese riders/personnel to get a new batch in.

The similarities are staggering.

A full disclosure would require those leaving to make a full confession.
They didn't sign the zero policy to avoid making a full confession.
Hamilton left USPS because he wanted to, not because he was being shown Lance's door.
Sky want to win the Tour next year.

Apart from that, you are spot on.

 

[thehog]

The same Tyler who recently stated on radio here that Wiggins won this tour clean?

He's the same guy who sent a mocking tweet to Wiggins on the nature of his ridiculous win.

 

[ferryman]

A full disclosure would require those leaving to make a full confession. Maybe a book in Yates yet.
They didn't sign the zero policy to avoid making a full confession.
That's why Rogers is leaving.
Hamilton left USPS because he wanted to, not because he was being shown Lance's door.
Yes he did but his relationship with Lance was shot by then

Sky want to win the Tour next year.

Froome to out climb and ITT Andy and Bertie?

 

[martinvickers]

A full disclosure would require those leaving to make a full confession. Maybe a book in Yates yet.
They didn't sign the zero policy to avoid making a full confession.
That's why Rogers is leaving.
Hamilton left USPS because he wanted to, not because he was being shown Lance's door.
Yes he did but his relationship with Lance was shot by then

Sky want to win the Tour next year.

Froome to out climb and ITT Andy and Bertie?

Froome would out ITT Andy very easily. Andy can't TT worth a damn. Berti's another matter.

 

[MatParker117]

A full disclosure would require those leaving to make a full confession. Maybe a book in Yates yet.
They didn't sign the zero policy to avoid making a full confession.
That's why Rogers is leaving.
Hamilton left USPS because he wanted to, not because he was being shown Lance's door.
Yes he did but his relationship with Lance was shot by then

Sky want to win the Tour next year.

Froome to out climb and ITT Andy and Bertie?

ITT Maybe, Climb not sure

 

[BroDeal]

Sky and Brailsford are forcing people like Rogers, Yates and all the others out of the back door. That is enough for me at the moment. It is not pretty and is imo foolish but at least it demonstrates their stance on doping.

The only people being shown the door are those who the public has connected with doping. If they were serious then they would be getting rid of nearly everyone who rode three or more years ago. Sky's anti-doping stance is completely phony. It is a public relations exercise.

It took months for Brailsford to decide the public knew too much about Rogers and he would have to go. Conveniently he held on to him until his transfer would not give points to another team.

 

[thehog]

The only people being shown the door are those who the public has connected with doping. If they were serious then they would be getting rid of nearly everyone who rode three or more years ago. Sky's anti-doping stance is completely phony. It is a public relations exercise.

It took months for Brailsford to decide the public knew too much about Rogers and he would have to go. Conveniently he held on to him until his transfer would not give points to another team.

One can compare how Vaughters publicly rid the team of White and named the transgression compared how Yates and co. quietly slipped out the backdoor with a bonus cheque.

ZTP indeed!

 

[Tinman]

Sorry, Tinman that's giving it far too much credit - intuition adapts with evidence; these Clinic mantra's never change.

It's not intuition, it's bias.

Read the Myers Briggs reference I provided. You are confusing the information-gathering (perceiving) functions, in this case "intuition", with the way people make decisions from that information (Jung termed it "judging" ).

So where you conclude "bias", its actually "judging", in this case based on intuitive information gathering (as opposed to "sensing" that information).

Your repetitive hobby horsing on the broader "evidence" topic undermines the power and validity of intuition and people contributing strengths in this domain. Your routine "labelling" of this as "bias" and "clinic mantra" illustrates your own bigotry on the topic. And your having to have the last word all the time shows either immaturity and/or a deep rooted feeling of insecurity. Or having skin in the game.

 

[martinvickers]

Read the Myers Briggs reference I provided.

I did. I fail to see how a discussion of personality types has anything to do with the question at hand.

You are confusing the information-gathering (perceiving) functions, in this case "intuition", with the way people make decisions from that information (Jung termed it "judging" ).

So where you conclude "bias", its actually "judging", in this case based on intuitive information gathering (as opposed to "sensing" that information).

I'm afraid your confusing occurance with validity. To quote that rather interesting Wikipedia :

the MBTI assessment is a measure of preference, not ability

I.e. it measures what information gathering style you tend to; not the validity or accuracy of the exercise of that style.

Your repetitive hobby horsing on the broader "evidence" topic undermines the power and validity of intuition and people contributing strengths in this domain. Your routine "labelling" of this as "bias" and "clinic mantra" illustrates your own bigotry on the topic.

A word of advise from Pope: a little learning is a dangerous thing. Again you confuse occurance with validity.

As to 'repetitive', what bores or irritates you is neither the measure of the reliability of what I write, nor a matter I feel the need consider when I write.

And to be frank, the laws of mathematics and logic do not bend to a jungian analysis.

And your having to have the last word all the time shows either immaturity and/or a deep rooted feeling of insecurity. Or having skin in the game.

'Evidence' of this? Or just some fun pop psych 101?

Get up a bit earlier to play those games with me, Tinman.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

He's the same guy who sent a mocking tweet to Wiggins on the nature of his ridiculous win.

What did he tweet (A link would be event better)?

 

[Parker]

What did he tweet (A link would be event better)?

As far as I can see this is the only time he's mentioned Wiggins on twitter.

https://twitter.com/Ty_Hamilton/status/231456183498719235

 

[Tinman]

Sorry to see you are so dismissive of intuition and the Myers Briggs etc to understand how people click and how interactions have certain dynamics. Your loss.

Here's what time I get up. 4.30 AM 3 times a week for a 70-160 km bike ride. And 6.30 on other mornings to get the kids to school. I sleep in until 8 for my Sunday AM long run.

During the week I have you for morning tea.

You?

 

[martinvickers]

Sorry to see you are so dismissive of intuition and the Myers Briggs etc to understand how people click and how interactions have certain dynamics. Your loss.

Here's what time I get up. 4.30 AM 3 times a week for a 70-160 km bike ride. And 6.30 on other mornings to get the kids to school. I sleep in until 8 for my Sunday AM long run.

During the week I have you for morning tea.

You?

Haha. I'll let you have the last word on that, fair enough?

 

[red_flanders]

The topic is Sky. We're very far afield at this point. Back to the topic please.

 

[blackcat]

One can compare how Vaughters publicly rid the team of White and named the transgression compared how Yates and co. quietly slipped out the backdoor with a bonus cheque.

ZTP indeed!

Vaughters knew White was the chief of the Jayco project of Jerry Ryan.

It was an expedient confluence.

Some of the Australian riders got a pretty sub-par program (racing program) or no program at all. Clear why.

White was jettisoned with a convenient justification. Vaughters is nothing if not strategic

 

[blackcat]

The topic is Sky. We're very far afield at this point. Back to the topic please.

ok, back to Sky.

I dont see much difference in Sky to other teams.

The bigger question is, will Sky temper their program, after dominance. I doubt it, this is pro sport. Winning is only that matters.

Froome might have to extend his risk quotient for a Contador and Andy battle

 

[thehog]

It certainly was a exhaustive interview by Walsh. I feel that I know so much more about Sky now.

I mean I was little suspicious before but now I know they're clean.

Seeing the open manner in which they dealt with Yates and co. makes me know Sky truly are clean.

 

[blackcat]

thats worthy of a

"good post hog" - thehog

 

[thehog]

thats worthy of a

"good post hog" - thehog

Good post blackcat

 

[Dear Wiggo]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/froome-wont-assume-tour-de-france-leadership

Team Sky's leadership at the 2013 Tour de France is far from certain according to this year's second-place overall Chris Froome.

 

[DirtyWorks]

In other olympic news, London games made a ton of money and the UCI is set for a windfall profit. http://m.espn.go.com/extra/olympics/story?storyId=8694677&i=TWT&w=1cdqh&wjb

If you divide the estimated $400 million evenly, that's $15 million each sport. I don't know the formula, so the number could be $5-12 million. FYI, Pat McQuaid is Vice President of the International Association of Athletics Federations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Summer_Olympic_International_Federations

http://www.asoif.com/IFDirectory/Default.aspx

We know that Pat and Hein are about revenues first, then revisit my crackpot theory that the UCI assisted Sky in making the fairy tale of 2012 come true. They'd do it for a few million bucks just like they did it with Wonderboy.

Now, is that exactly the sports fraud story that breaks? Probably not. Did the UCI assist Sky's pursuit of wins in 2012 in exchange for a bigger Olympics payout? Very likely.