Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[blackcat]

I am convinced, that froome is a more talented rider, natural talent, than Wiggins, and should have won 2012

 

[martinvickers]

I am convinced, that froome is a more talented rider, natural talent, than Wiggins, and should have won 2012

For the avoidance of doubt, Road races are decided on the objective basis of accumulated time.

If you want medals awarded on the basis of perception, might I suggest figure skating....

 

[blackcat]

touche. but froomedog looks more like a cicada/grasshopper/stick-insect than Wiggins, he does not look like he would have an elegant figure when skating

 

[will10]

I am convinced, that froome is a more talented rider, natural talent, than Wiggins, and should have won 2012

Didn't you start that "Froome could always climb" thread and abused anyone who told you you were talking out of your ***?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I am becoming even more convinced that Wiggo is more talented rider, naturally speaking, than Basso.

Hihihihihihihihi, u Brits are so funny. Checkup for you, the world is round, you do not posess the colonies any more. Britain is not the main country in the world any more, and really, cycling is for the Europeans.

 

[will10]

My interest is in Wiggo first, Sky second. Wiggo made Sky. Wiggo's performance's are in line with his performances at Garmin in the Tour. Incremental. Period.

Are his performances at Sky in line with his performances in any race prior to the Giro in 2009?

 

[blackcat]

Didn't you start that "Froome could always climb" thread and abused anyone who told you you were talking out of your ***?

I would not say I "abused" anyone. If you can find me the posts, I can retract and apologise.

I may well have. I cannot remember. (I however hope I did not)

 

[martinvickers]

touche. but froomedog looks more like a cicada/grasshopper/stick-insect than Wiggins, he does not look like he would have an elegant figure when skating

point well made.

 

[simo1733]

Did anyone see Cycle Sport Magazine.In the celebrity lookalikes section they compared Chris Froome with a house fly.Quite remarkable likeness, the best I have seen since Jimmy Sommerville was likened to a potato.

 

[zalacain]

My interest is in Wiggo first, Sky second. Wiggo made Sky. Wiggo's performance's are in line with his performances at Garmin in the Tour. Incremental. Period.

More than incremental than from his time with Cofidis though. As Boyer said on Stade 2 last week on the AICAR discussion. The way some of his riders improved so dramtically after leaving him is "incroyable".

 

[Alphabet]

+1. I don't think we've yet seen him bring back a really big attack alone. I think that fact alone might say a lot to both sides of the debate.

I think my post has been misinterpreted a little. What I was saying wasn't intended to have anything in relation whatsoever to Sky's doping (or lack of it).

Someone had posted something along the lines of "Wiggins would have won the 2011 Tour easily", which I disagreed with and cited his apparent inability to control monstrous attacks as a reason why Evans would still have won. It was just an opinion that 2011 Wiggins/Sky would not have been able to control or win the 2011 Tour, crash-or-no-crash. He was getting dropped by Cobo, there's no way he'd have been able to follow the attacks in the Alps or even those downhill attacks by Evans, Sanchez and Contador.

 

[peterst6906]

@michellecound
Have my doubts about this "confession", but lets face it, @lancearmstrong isn't the problem, the fact that he never tested positive is.

If he is doping, then Chris will have a different view.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Yes, a lot of people underperformed or were absent at the Tour. But I still saw Mick Rogers - that's 'Ferrari' Mick 'Freiburg' Rogers - decimating the bunch and were told about him watching guys like Cadel Evans and Vincenzo Nibali attack and be able to cheerfully tell his leaders that they wouldn't get away based on the tempo he was grinding out.

As I have said elsewhere, I'm deeply suspicious of Rogers. A very poor signing for Sky but one that fitted in with their zero-tolerance simply because he had never tested positive (same for de Jongh, Barry, Yates etc) and someone showing the best form of their career despite their being a very high probability he was doping certainly around 2005 when he was working with Ferrari and winning back to back WC time trials. That said I do believe if he was he was doing it independently. My opinion of course.

There is clearly a number of variations to view Sky's 2012 form: team-wide doping, a core that was doping (the Teide 5 perhaps) or individuals doping independently without the knowledge or consent of team management or teammates, or maybe marginal gains

 

[JimmyFingers]

As Jimmyfingers said, and I'm fond of pointing out because it's very true and it coming from one of Sky's bigger defenders on the board helps highlight that it's not just a conspiracy theorist's fantasy, Sky did a really, really poor job of showing that they were clean at the Tour. Their racing style, behaviour and the way they've conducted themselves over the various affairs regarding riders with suspect histories, couldn't have drawn more suspicion to themselves if they tried.

I think i,m falling in love with Libertine Seguros

Think you may have mis-directed that emotion: he was quoting me, as he has done a few times. You're welcome

 

[JRanton]

Brailsford looks worried this morning:

https://twitter.com/fizikofficial/status/291125097882853376/photo/1/large

 

[ebandit]

LOve

i love him...............lance...........he has taken all the attention away from

the sky thread

 

[Benotti69]

As I have said elsewhere, I'm deeply suspicious of Rogers. A very poor signing for Sky but one that fitted in with their zero-tolerance simply because he had never tested positive (same for de Jongh, Barry, Yates etc) and someone showing the best form of their career despite their being a very high probability he was doping certainly around 2005 when he was working with Ferrari and winning back to back WC time trials. That said I do believe if he was he was doing it independently. My opinion of course.

There is clearly a number of variations to view Sky's 2012 form: team-wide doping, a core that was doping (the Teide 5 perhaps) or individuals doping independently without the knowledge or consent of team management or teammates, or maybe marginal gains

B*llixs.

Sky never had a zero tolerance policy. Those in the sport know who dopes and who doesn't. It is a small sport at the top. The lies Sky have repeated in the PR spin has been a joke and all for the man in the street who has a passing interest in the sport when the Tour is on.

Sky are a doping team just like OPQS, RadioShack, Lotto, Rabo, Movistar, Garmin, Liqui, Lampre, BMC etc

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

B*llixs.

Sky never had a zero tolerance policy. Those in the sport know who dopes and who doesn't. It is a small sport at the top. The lies Sky have repeated in the PR spin has been a joke and all for the man in the street who has a passing interest in the sport when the Tour is on.

Sky are a doping team just like OPQS, RadioShack, Lotto, Rabo, Movistar, Garmin, Liqui, Lampre, BMC etc

as always very good arguments and evidence on your part.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

as always very good arguments and evidence on your part.

I endorse this post.

 

[JimmyFingers]

B*llixs.

Sky never had a zero tolerance policy. Those in the sport know who dopes and who doesn't. It is a small sport at the top. The lies Sky have repeated in the PR spin has been a joke and all for the man in the street who has a passing interest in the sport when the Tour is on.

Sky are a doping team just like OPQS, RadioShack, Lotto, Rabo, Movistar, Garmin, Liqui, Lampre, BMC etc

As I suggested here and have said elsewhere, they did/do have a zero-tolerance policy. That said riders like Rogers and Barry fitted it simply because they have never tested positive. They may have signed them knowing there were question marks, but outwardly they did not cross it. In the wake of the USADA report it has blown up in their faces, but I'm guessing it was a pragmatic decision given the degrees of seperation between clean and dirty in the pro-tour are tiny indeed.

Yes it was/is PR, but in my opinion PR with some substance i.e. I believe they blurred the distinctions to sign these people, but then raced largely clean. If there riders doping, as I have said I believe they were doing independently. My opinion, which clearly differs from yours.

 

[Knutsen]

The Sky thread on the clinics page 2? Are they clean after all?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

As I suggested here and have said elsewhere, they did/do have a zero-tolerance policy. That said riders like Rogers and Barry fitted it simply because they have never tested positive. They may have signed them knowing there were question marks, but outwardly they did not cross it.

You could consider that as of December 2009 (a couple of months after Barry's signing but before he became technically speaking a Sky rider) the USPS link was all that there was that linked Barry to doping; it's not strictly-speaking accurate but it was mostly rumour at the time and therefore he fits within the parameters. But at first it wasn't just "nobody who's tested positive". Hell, Alejandro Valverde and Ivan Basso haven't tested positive. They had some additional bluster, along the "nobody who has a ban for doping. Nobody who has a connection to doping" lines. Mick Rogers does NOT belong in this, with his Ferrari links already known and with Sinkewitz naming him as one of the Freiburg phantoms. While he hadn't tested positive, hopefully you can see why some people might consider that visiting a banned doctor and being part of the T-Mobile group that went to Freiburg should be considered a "connection to doping", thus making his signing in September or whenever it was in 2010 a key sign that the anti-doping talk was being relaxed.

 

[JimmyFingers]

You could consider that as of December 2009 (a couple of months after Barry's signing but before he became technically speaking a Sky rider) the USPS link was all that there was that linked Barry to doping; it's not strictly-speaking accurate but it was mostly rumour at the time and therefore he fits within the parameters. But at first it wasn't just "nobody who's tested positive". Hell, Alejandro Valverde and Ivan Basso haven't tested positive. They had some additional bluster, along the "nobody who has a ban for doping. Nobody who has a connection to doping" lines. Mick Rogers does NOT belong in this, with his Ferrari links already known and with Sinkewitz naming him as one of the Freiburg phantoms. While he hadn't tested positive, hopefully you can see why some people might consider that visiting a banned doctor and being part of the T-Mobile group that went to Freiburg should be considered a "connection to doping", thus making his signing in September or whenever it was in 2010 a key sign that the anti-doping talk was being relaxed.

That requires quite detailed knowledge though. For example look at Rogers wikipedia page and there's no mention of any drug controversy. For Sky's sponsors and their target demographic i.e. the British public, that is a win. They won't be going to check dopeology or this place for some more insider knowledge. We know Rogers is dirty, the world at large isn't so sure, hence why they could fly him in under the radar but couldn't put Millar on the roster.

 

[Ferminal]

Rogers used to be on Ferrari's wiki page but randomly disappeared.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Rogers used to be on Ferrari's wiki page but randomly disappeared.

Interesting. Wonder if the rider has forced a purge....