Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Benotti69]

.....................

As sherlock says

Sherlock would've sussed Sky are doping long before 2012

 

[zalacain]

Looks as if Kenya might be the new Girona
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/feb/15/ben-johnson-cynicism-drugs-wada?INTCMP=SRCH

 

[Tinman]

Sherlock's data are the equivalent of Clinic observations of team Sky. Plenty of those to apply to and testing of the hypothesis that Sky has an underlying doping problem...

 

[Tinman]

Looks as if Kenya might be the new Girona
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/feb/15/ben-johnson-cynicism-drugs-wada?INTCMP=SRCH

Kenia to become team Sky's Achilles heel in 2013 perhaps?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Froome - curled up in a ball, knees practically everywhere.

You need to lay off the Irish malt whiskey before posting, Marty, your eyes are seeing double!!

 

[JimmyFingers]

Sherlock's data are the equivalent of Clinic observations of team Sky. Plenty of those to apply to and testing of the hypothesis that Sky has an underlying doping problem...

I believe you have just perfectly illustrated both Martin's and Sherlock's point..

 

[martinvickers]

You need to lay off the Irish malt whiskey before posting, Marty, your eyes are seeing double!!

How dare you, Sir!!

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

If Sky have got rid of Yates, Leinders, etc, who is running the doping programme now - they don't seem to have eased off at all if the early season is anything to go by.

 

[SundayRider]

If Sky have got rid of Yates, Leinders, etc, who is running the doping programme now - they don't seem to have eased off at all if the early season is anything to go by.

Could still be using there services - unofficially? Riders paying for it themselves perhaps.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I'm guessing it is someone off the scene.

We'll know if Wiggins takes an interest in gardening who he's been hanging out with.

Sutton in his 'behind closed doors advisory role'?

I know Hog thinks that there is a Ferrari connection - but would they really go to someone who is almost certainly being watched?

I'd look for a name that is currently flying below the radar.

 

[cadelcrybaby]

The problem with this kind of thing is that it is an assumption based on an assumption. (that Sky are actively doping, that Leinders had something to do with the assumed doping).

That pretty much spanners the discussion from the start and encourages low-value speculation.

Far more interesting and useful is to focus on the tangible, and at the moment that means pursuing the appointment of Leinders.

 

[SundayRider]

The problem with this kind of thing is that it is an assumption based on an assumption. (that Sky are actively doping, that Leinders had something to do with the assumed doping).

That pretty much spanners the discussion from the start and encourages low-value speculation.

Far more interesting and useful is to focus on the tangible, and at the moment that means pursuing the appointment of Leinders.

On the balance of probability anyone with a sense of logic (and a small bit of cycling knowledge) would say there is a much higher chance of Leinders doping Sky than not...

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Not really no. It was speculation about Sky doping that brought about closer investigation of their backroom staff.

It was speculation about Armstrong that caused people to investigate the Ferrari connection.

Almost everything starts off with speculation and assumption.

 

[SundayRider]

Not really no. It was speculation about Sky doping that brought about closer investigation of their backroom staff.

It was speculation about Armstrong that caused people to investigate the Ferrari connection.

Almost everything starts off with speculation and assumption.

This is stating the obvious really, I don't know what point your trying to make? The speculation and assumption around Armstrong turned out to be true.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

This is stating the obvious really, I don't know what point your trying to make? The speculation and assumption around Armstrong turned out to be true.

I was responding to cadelcrybaby rather than you. Sorry if that wasn't clear - I think we were replying at the same time.

I am struggling to think of a case where people in the Clinic speculated and assumed and have pointed the finger and have been proven to be wrong.

 

[cadelcrybaby]

Thing is everybody's back room staff are likely to contain people with 'history'. The focus is on Sky purely because they won a bunch of races. If you put that focus on every other team you are likely to get a lead onto something hot. Look at Garmin. Stuffed to the hilt with dopers...doesn't mean they dope.

I think it is more useful to stick with the tangible, rather than intangibles like SundayRider's game of 'chance'.

Keep picking away at Leinders. That is the tangible. The tangible keeps people from falling victim to confirmation bias.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

You were doing so well until you 'assumed' and 'speculated' that they don't dope.

 

[cadelcrybaby]

I am struggling to think of a case where people in the Clinic speculated and assumed and have pointed the finger and have been proven to be wrong.

With respect, pointing the finger at pro cyclists is a bit of a turkey shoot

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

With respect, pointing the finger at pro cyclists is a bit of a turkey shoot

So it makes sense to work on the assumption that cyclists are dirty and that Sky are still doping and that they are working with someone new or they've 'contracted they doping out'.

 

[zalacain]

If they are in Tenerife I hope they enjoying the first snow of the year

 

[JimmyFingers]

I am struggling to think of a case where people in the Clinic speculated and assumed and have pointed the finger and have been proven to be wrong.

Given that proving you're clean is a lot harder than proving someone doped, proving the clinic wrong is something of an oxymoron.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Given that proving you're clean is a lot harder than proving someone doped, proving the clinic wrong is something on an oxymoron.

I have some windmills for you to tilt at.

 

[cadelcrybaby]

You were doing so well until you 'assumed' and 'speculated' that they don't dope.

On that basis you are a **** until you can prove otherwise


(just kidding here...no offence intended)

 

[martinvickers]

With respect, pointing the finger at pro cyclists is a bit of a turkey shoot

More to the point, proving a negative is a logical impossiblity - it's silly to even expect it.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I have some windmills for you to tilt at.

I prefer chasing waterfalls