Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[the sceptic]

The Wiggins dilemma. How could one of the most talented riders of all time have spent all those years in the gruppetto?

 

[JimmyFingers]

So Cancellara is riding clean?

 

[mastersracer]

The achievement is not impossible in itself. But for Bradley Wiggins to do it suddenly going into his 30's(at the same time as having massive changes of opinion on doping)

Hmmm.

When i look at results or vidoes from 4 or 5 years ago half the riders i look at were 10 times the climbers wiggins was, and younger than him and now they are people who cant hold his wheel on a climb.

Some of them have been climbing all their lives, some of them are buit for it as well and yet despite these advantages wiggins suddenly 1 day decides - ill try this climbing thing, and the next day hes better than all of them.

Or even, away from the climbers look at Cancellara. Better tter check. Better prologue rider check. Better climber check. Younger, check. And yet people are still saying Cancellara cant win Lombardy for example.
While Wiggins, who was worse in every department has a Tour de France and 2 other gt podiums to his name and is favorite going into the major mountains of the giro. Cancellara goes into the same race wondering if he can win a stage.

Cancellara was being told that if he wanted to become a decent climber he would lose his tt speed. Yet Wiggins while making all the sacrifices neccesary to become that climber only goes and improves his tt massively. To the point where his speeds are faster than Cancellara ever was or Lance for that matter ever was.


How does that work that everyone else is trying to balance disciplines while wiggins going into his 30s just like that essentially overnight, goes and posts massive accross the board improvements in all disciplines. Even the ones that contradict the other ones.

why is it so strange for an athlete who has shown extraordinary abilities from the time he was 16 and who was a world junior champion at 18? You all act like he was some sort of donkey who magically transformed into a thoroughbred. Wiggins never had a prototypical track pursuit build, and the drop in body weight and dedication to stage racing post 2008 Olympics is entirely plausible. This has all been thrashed out in other threads.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The achievement is not impossible in itself. But for Bradley Wiggins to do it suddenly going into his 30's(at the same time as having massive changes of opinion on doping)

Hmmm.

When i look at results or vidoes from 4 or 5 years ago half the riders i look at were 10 times the climbers wiggins was, and younger than him and now they are people who cant hold his wheel on a climb.

Some of them have been climbing all their lives, some of them are buit for it as well and yet despite these advantages wiggins suddenly 1 day decides - ill try this climbing thing, and the next day hes better than all of them.

Or even, away from the climbers look at Cancellara. Better tter check. Better prologue rider check. Better climber check. Younger, check. And yet people are still saying Cancellara cant win Lombardy for example.
While Wiggins, who was worse in every department has a Tour de France and 2 other gt podiums to his name and is favorite going into the major mountains of the giro. Cancellara goes into the same race wondering if he can win a stage.

Cancellara was being told that if he wanted to become a decent climber he would lose his tt speed. Yet Wiggins while making all the sacrifices neccesary to become that climber only goes and improves his tt massively. To the point where his speeds are faster than Cancellara ever was or Lance for that matter ever was.


How does that work that everyone else is trying to balance disciplines while wiggins going into his 30s just like that essentially overnight, goes and posts massive accross the board improvements in all disciplines. Even the ones that contradict the other ones.

I hate you. This is a great post. How have I overlooked something that illustrates the incredible transformation of Wiggins' performances as perfectly as a comparison with the previously-better-TTer-and-better-climber that is Fabian Cancellara for six whole months?!

 

[Dear Wiggo]

why is it so strange for an athlete who has shown extraordinary abilities from the time he was 16 and who was a world junior champion at 18? You all act like he was some sort of donkey who magically transformed into a thoroughbred. Wiggins never had a prototypical track pursuit build, and the drop in body weight and dedication to stage racing post 2008 Olympics is entirely plausible. This has all been thrashed out in other threads.

Because he may as well have been world champion in extreme underwater knitting given the shallowness of the pool of riders competing against him.

When he was 16 and going ok at pursuit and winning the British 25 mile (40km) TT champs in ~53 minutes a few months before that, Cancellara was making him look like a rank amateur over ~24km - by a large margin.

eg: Michael Hepburn is 21 and just rode a 4:15 pursuit on road miles alone (his claim) at Aussie titles.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Because they are all under suspicion. You have to watch every bike ride with the caveat that some or even all are doping. We're debating Wiggins and Sky but there is Boonen, Contador, Gilbert, Cavendish, Cancellara, Sagan, Valverde, Rodriguez, Evans, none of those we can be 100% certain they did it clean, or even what there programmes may have been from year to year.

Because of this uncertainty comparing riders performances and using it as a indicator of doping is a massive red herring.

I'm not saying don't be suspicious, but donkey/racehorse transformations happen the other way too. Maybe when Cancellara was smashing Wiggins up in the TT he was juiced, maybe now he's not, hence the relative performances.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I hate you. This is a great post. How have I overlooked something that illustrates the incredible transformation of Wiggins' performances as perfectly as a comparison with the previously-better-TTer-and-better-climber that is Fabian Cancellara for six whole months?!

It's an argument build on sand, comparing rider performances, unless we can be 100% sure that rider being used to gauge performance improvement in others, the control of the experiment so to speak. I ask again, is Cancellara clean?

 

[the asian]

Because they are all under suspicion. You have to watch every bike ride with the caveat that some or even all are doping. We're debating Wiggins and Sky but there is Boonen, Contador, Gilbert, Cavendish, Cancellara, Sagan, Valverde, Rodriguez, Evans, none of those we can be 100% certain they did it clean, or even what there programmes may have been from year to year.

Because of this uncertainty comparing riders performances and using it as a indicator of doping is a massive red herring.

I'm not saying don't be suspicious, but donkey/racehorse transformations happen the other way too. Maybe when Cancellara was smashing Wiggins up in the TT he was juiced, maybe now he's not, hence the relative performances.

Cancellara doesn't care anymore about Time Trials. And he hasn't become a donkey by anymeans.

 

[argyllflyer]

Wiggins' best defence against the 'suspicions' comes from himself and Sutton - he was ill-disciplined when it came to put the hours in, was lying to Sky & Sutton about what training he was doing prior to 2011, and it takes very little for him to go off the rails, be it post Athens, post Beijing or post Olympics/Tour.

Having track cycling to fall back on was a bit of an excuse. I wasn't dedicated enough. I am now. There were times when I hated riding a bike. For a long time I was confused as to why I was doing it. I started riding because I liked it, but I lost sight of that for a while. It became a chore. I'm way more dedicated to my sport these days, and I love it.

Wiggins, July 2010

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/mos...iggins-The-secrets-success.html#axzz2JgQ2iT3K

Then again, same piece has him saying... "Lance Armstrong is a legend"...oops.

 

[Benotti69]

It's an argument build on sand, comparing rider performances, unless we can be 100% sure that rider being used to gauge performance improvement in others, the control of the experiment so to speak. I ask again, is Cancellara clean?

Why would Canc be clean? Which makes Wiggo's doping big.

 

[the sceptic]

It's an argument build on sand, comparing rider performances, unless we can be 100% sure that rider being used to gauge performance improvement in others, the control of the experiment so to speak. I ask again, is Cancellara clean?

If Wiggo was clean in 2009, then imagine what he could have done if he went on the same program as Alberto or the Schlecks. He would break records on every mountain in the tour.

 

[The Hitch]

why is it so strange for an athlete who has shown extraordinary abilities from the time he was 16 and who was a world junior champion at 18? You all act like he was some sort of donkey who magically transformed into a thoroughbred. Wiggins never had a prototypical track pursuit build, and the drop in body weight and dedication to stage racing post 2008 Olympics is entirely plausible. This has all been thrashed out in other threads.

As far as gt racing and especially climbing goes, yes he was a donkey who transfered into a thoroughbred. Being good at 1 does not make someone good at the other. Thats like saying Cav can win the Tour de France because he won the green jersey, because to win the green jersey you need "extraordinary abilities".

In fact winning the green jersey has a hell of a lot more to do with a gt than winning the individual pursuit.

His climbing was horrendous. Its not like he showed some signs of talent that could be improved if he decided to focus on it. He had absolutely no talent.

And for "focusing in gts post Beijing". how is his 2009 attempt different from his 2006 one?

Even as late as 2011 Wiggins was saying his main focus was getting tp gold on the track in london 2012 and road racing was "just something to fill the time". So I dont see how he was dropping track to focus more on gt racing in 2008-2012 any more than in the previous 4 year cycle where his tdf results were among the worse ever recorded for a future gt winner, and i believe by far the worst ever recorded for a future gt winner of his age.

As for "dropping body weight". Explain why he got even better at flat power tts then?

 

[The Hitch]

It's an argument build on sand, comparing rider performances, unless we can be 100% sure that rider being used to gauge performance improvement in others, the control of the experiment so to speak. I ask again, is Cancellara clean?

I dont think personally that cancellara is clean due to his ties with Riis and the Schlecks.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Cancellara doesn't care anymore about Time Trials. And he hasn't become a donkey by anymeans.

I was trying to illustrate that given we can't know a) whether a rider is doping or not or b) what programme or what drug(s) he may be using, using comparative fluctuations in performances, both historical and current, as an argument that another rider is doping is a non-starter.

Even in clean riders performance will fluctuate, it isn't set it stone, and will vary throughout the season, and from season to season. There are hundreds of variations that may effect it, cleanly.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Why would Canc be clean? Which makes Wiggo's doping big.

If I honest this cracked me up, like it

 

[JimmyFingers]

I dont think personally that cancellara is clean due to his ties with Riis and the Schlecks.

Ok got it now. Still believe given the uncertainty of what and when and if riders are doping, performance comparisons are a red herring.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Hes saying that its unfounded against Wiggins. "Sky are very suspicious" as are "Froome" and everyone else, but not Wiggins.

Isnt this the poster who always said that he knows for a fact wiggins is clean. As if the virgin mary told him in a dream or something. Hes never explained it but always said that while everyone else at sky may dope, he knows 100% wiggins is clean.

Sorry if i got the wrong poster but i thought it was WandG who always said that.

Hitch,

Not guilty. I make no favourable claims re Wiggo. I abide by father in law's investment advice: if it sounds too good to be true then it probably is. I'm less uncertain re froome.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Why the need to rewrite crazy interpretations of things, "Unfounded allegations" are direct allegations of something that prove to be without merit.

Suspicions are very different - even you admit that you are suspicious. I am suspicious too,but based on facts, like Leinders and the constant change in position, the not quite zero tolerance policy etc.

Doc,

You're suspicious based on facts. I'm not saying you're making things up.

However, the conclusion that Wiggo isn't legit is not a fact.

In other words, the association with lenders is a fact. The inference of doping is not.

It's worth noting that this argument is heavily stacked against folk on your side of the argument given that reliable proof that doping is a fact, ie positive tests and reliable eye witness evidence, is so hard to come by. But cest la vie.

 

[The Hitch]

Hitch,

Not guilty. I make no favourable claims re Wiggo. I abide by father in law's investment advice: if it sounds too good to be true then it probably is. I'm less uncertain re froome.

ok. My apologies.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

6th in the World Amateur champs is all the evidence ya need to prove that on his day Paul was a top rider. No one achieved that ( clean) without considerable ability.

Thanx for that Darryl. Nuff said.

130th Paul Kimmage

Wallace,
At least Paul rode the Tour!

Let's stop bickering, okay?

PS: RMO was a big team, do not only look at the Tour de France results...

 

[mastersracer]

The achievement is not impossible in itself. But for Bradley Wiggins to do it suddenly going into his 30's(at the same time as having massive changes of opinion on doping)

Hmmm.

When i look at results or vidoes from 4 or 5 years ago half the riders i look at were 10 times the climbers wiggins was, and younger than him and now they are people who cant hold his wheel on a climb.

Some of them have been climbing all their lives, some of them are buit for it as well and yet despite these advantages wiggins suddenly 1 day decides - ill try this climbing thing, and the next day hes better than all of them.

Or even, away from the climbers look at Cancellara. Better tter check. Better prologue rider check. Better climber check. Younger, check. And yet people are still saying Cancellara cant win Lombardy for example.
While Wiggins, who was worse in every department has a Tour de France and 2 other gt podiums to his name and is favorite going into the major mountains of the giro. Cancellara goes into the same race wondering if he can win a stage.

Cancellara was being told that if he wanted to become a decent climber he would lose his tt speed. Yet Wiggins while making all the sacrifices neccesary to become that climber only goes and improves his tt massively. To the point where his speeds are faster than Cancellara ever was or Lance for that matter ever was.


How does that work that everyone else is trying to balance disciplines while wiggins going into his 30s just like that essentially overnight, goes and posts massive accross the board improvements in all disciplines. Even the ones that contradict the other ones.

why do you insist on repeating claims that have been discredited here (and elsewhere) by people with far more expertise than you in these matters? Coggan's critical power plot took values from Wiggins - TT, pursuit, climbs - from 2004-2012. Is an R squared of .9997 not good enough for you? In absolute performance terms, Wiggins' career trajectory is entirely consistent. Coggan also dismissed the age issue as a red herring. Absolute performance is what matters in this analysis.

 

[The Hitch]

why do you insist on repeating claims that have been discredited here .

Thats hillarious coming from you considering you were the one who said that everyone was "conveniently ignoring JV' comment that he thought Wiggins was clean, then ignored all the comments that disproved this and made the exact same post a week later.

Coggan's critical power plot took values from Wiggins - TT, pursuit, climbs - from 2004-2012. Is an R squared of .9997 not good enough for you? In absolute performance terms, Wiggins' career trajectory is entirely consistent. Coggan also dismissed the age issue as a red herring. Absolute performance is what matters in this analysis

So wait, what has been dismissed? That people jumping from 120th in the tour to 4th to 1st is suspicious? Ah never knew that.

I look forward to seeing Fabrice Jeandesboz following this natural career trajectory to a TDF podium next year.

 

[the sceptic]

Thats hillarious coming from you considering you were the one who said that everyone was "conveniently ignoring JV' comment that he thought Wiggins was clean, then ignored all the comments that disproved this and made the exact same post a week later.



So wait, what has been dismissed? That people jumping from 120th in the tour to 4th to 1st is suspicious? Ah never knew that.

I look forward to seeing Fabrice Jeandesboz following this natural career trajectory to a TDF podium next year.

That doesnt sound like a british name to me

 

[Parrulo]

I don't think anyone is really claiming they are truly impossible. A lot of people of this thread are saying that they feel they are so far out of the ordinary that dope is, sadly, the most likely conclusion. It is telling that Team Sky's performances must be compared to the original super-team, which had hired two of the greatest riders ever. Bernard Hinault is second only to Merckx in GT wins and has 5 monuments and a world championship to his name as well, while LeMond is widely regarded to have been possibly the most naturally talented cyclist to ever ride a bike, at least in terms of VO2max.

Bernard Hinault follows the classic GT rider's progression: start good, stay good. He won his first 4 Grand Tours, only skipping a beat with a withdrawal from the 1980 Tour due a knee injury before winning the next 4 as well. Yes, he won the first 8 Grand Tours that he finished. This glittering run only halts when he comes second to the great Laurent Fignon in the 1984 Tour before claiming a casual Giro-Tour double in '85 and then finishing second to LeMond himself in '86.

LeMond's timeline is less impressive, but frankly less impressive than Hinault is hardly an insult. A withdrawal in his first Vuelta is followed by podiums in his first two Tours (supporting the winner each time) before winning his first Tour as leader. Then you have the lost years post-shooting. After that he wins the next two Tours (each time posting a poor Giro beforehand - I assume as training) before EPO puts paid to the rest of his potential career.

Either way right there you have two of the most ludicrously talented bike riders ever - marked as future greats from the very first major races they entered. Wiggins and Froome between them have not yet achieved as much as Hinault did in his first two years as a pro taking LBL, GW, GP des Nations and the Dauphiné in 1977 and the Vuelta, Tour and GP de Nations in 1978. Up until their breakout performances (the 2009 Tour and 2011 Vuelta) Wiggins and Froome had each spent 4 years as a professional and yet their best GT performances were 71st and 36th, respectively, at the 2009 Giro. How can you use Hinault and LeMond as baselines for what these two could achieve?

The achievement is not impossible in itself. But for Bradley Wiggins to do it suddenly going into his 30's(at the same time as having massive changes of opinion on doping)

Hmmm.

When i look at results or vidoes from 4 or 5 years ago half the riders i look at were 10 times the climbers wiggins was, and younger than him and now they are people who cant hold his wheel on a climb.

Some of them have been climbing all their lives, some of them are buit for it as well and yet despite these advantages wiggins suddenly 1 day decides - ill try this climbing thing, and the next day hes better than all of them.

Or even, away from the climbers look at Cancellara. Better tter check. Better prologue rider check. Better climber check. Younger, check. And yet people are still saying Cancellara cant win Lombardy for example.
While Wiggins, who was worse in every department has a Tour de France and 2 other gt podiums to his name and is favorite going into the major mountains of the giro. Cancellara goes into the same race wondering if he can win a stage.

Cancellara was being told that if he wanted to become a decent climber he would lose his tt speed. Yet Wiggins while making all the sacrifices neccesary to become that climber only goes and improves his tt massively. To the point where his speeds are faster than Cancellara ever was or Lance for that matter ever was.


How does that work that everyone else is trying to balance disciplines while wiggins going into his 30s just like that essentially overnight, goes and posts massive accross the board improvements in all disciplines. Even the ones that contradict the other ones.

2 brilliant posts, couldn't have done it any better myself

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Doc,

You're suspicious based on facts. I'm not saying you're making things up.

However, the conclusion that Wiggo isn't legit is not a fact.

In other words, the association with lenders is a fact. The inference of doping is not.

It's worth noting that this argument is heavily stacked against folk on your side of the argument given that reliable proof that doping is a fact, ie positive tests and reliable eye witness evidence, is so hard to come by. But cest la vie.

I have not offered a conclusion - I have stated I have suspicions, nothing more.

So, there is no need to tell me that I am not making things up. That is why I requested you stay away from the diversion crap of La Vie Claire & kimmage.
My suspicions are based on facts - at any time you wish to address them instead of taking it off on some wild tangent, then I will be happy to discuss.