Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Dr. Maserati]

i dont know why u rate contador so highly. he is merely a high class climber who, when he was doping, was incredibly good

So, Contador is clean now?
Good to know.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Did you watch the stage?

He attacked first time just before the intermediate sprint in order to pick up the 3 second time bonus, which he won.

That put him 1 sec behind Froome on GC at that stage.

Nothing dumb about it. His later jump was just 2.5 km out on a mountain stage. There are plenty of examples of attacks sticking on climbs from that distance, particularly when 2 other top climbers jumped across and made it a group of 3.

That Froome still had a train of 3 riders assisting him at the start of that is the real surprise. To suggest that 3 domestics from Sky should be able to be beat the best climbers in the tour at that point in the race is a joke. No other team was able to do that.

Froome was still able to be dragged up to less than a km to go.

Froome having the legs left was no surprise. What was a surprise was the reason he was still able to have the legs left.

Not normal, at least not normal since USPS days, which is why it is so suspicious.

Just to highlight who Sky had on the very last 14k of that stage, because they did nothing apart from this: Kennaugh, then Cataldo, then Henao, then Uran.

Whatever colour jersey they have on their backs you should be able to say they'd be there at the sharp end of a climb, apart from Kennaugh, and they burnt him up early.

Froome won the stage by 6 seconds, from an attack in the last 2 k.

 

[mastersracer]

Just to be clear.
5.9w/kg is the new magic number.
Any performance under this is done without doping - is that your position?

And I think people normally look at all the statistics - including how performances are against their peers.

I think you know perfectly well that is not the position I've defended. I stated that the performances alone are not indicative of doping. They are consistent with non-doping. Hence, they do not provide evidence of doping. Fact is, most people here start with the assumption that everyone is doping and then take every performance as indicative of doping. If Froome had a bad day today, people here would be taking it as evidence that he's soft-pedaling to hide his doping.

Re your last point, I believe I'm the only one who has actually compared Froome's performance to his peers, comparing it to Contador's historical power outputs and the fact that it reveals Froome performed RELATIVELY better today only because riders such as Contador are performing at lower absolute levels than their historical performance.

Everyone here thinks Froome has found another gear. Reality is that other riders have lost one.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

You do know what Wiggins thinks about Vino right

Who knows? Has Wiggins commented in the last 24 hours on Vino? Otherwise, you know, his opinions could have changed. He might never have raced with Vino, or he may have known Vino was doping from 2002, or he may have considered Vino a great warrior and GT winner that he was honoured to race alongside. How would you ever know?

 

[willbick]

i dunno if contador is 100% clean in every race but i think due to blood passport and better testing he is clean most of the time, like the others. this is clear from his performances

 

[martinvickers]

So, Contador is clean now?
Good to know.

Clean? Who knows.

But by god, if he's on the sh!t, it ain't the good sh!t. This ain't your daddy's Contador, boy.

Have to admit, watched the highlights today and just started laughing when Froome leapt. He nearly crashed into one of the riders, had to swerve, still left them in dust.

After Porte pulled an ALMOST IDENTICAL stunt yesterday, I can well understand the co-operative exploding of heads in here.

If Froome is doped, and while I genuinely don't know and have no proof, I'd not be particularly surprised either, i hope to god he's caught, caught soon, and kicked out of the sport.

But, you know, I'd be lying just a little if i didn't admit that until then, the spectator sport of Clinic watching is going to be enormous fun - probably more fun than the cycling itself. I swear to god, people are gonna bust blood vessels by July at this rate...

and p.s. how f*cking stupid are Berti and Nibbles - co-operate you twits - get your DS's together an co-operate up the climbs - nullify the train and just wheelsuck. Tactically, it ain't rocket science.

Start pooling resources, and gang up on 'em...

rant over.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I think you know perfectly well that is not the position I've defended. I stated that the performances alone are not indicative of doping. They are consistent with non-doping. Hence, they do not provide evidence of doping. Fact is, most people here start with the assumption that everyone is doping and then take every performance as indicative of doping. If Froome had a bad day today, people here would be taking it as evidence that he's soft-pedaling to hide his doping.

How is anything in cycling 'consistent with non-doping'?

The performance may be within human limits, sure - but not all humans will ever reach those limits, what is unique that Sky have found so many riders who did not appear to posses this before?

Re your last point, I believe I'm the only one who has actually compared Froome's performance to his peers, comparing it to Contador's historical power outputs and the fact that it reveals Froome performed RELATIVELY better today only because riders such as Contador are performing at lower absolute levels than their historical performance.

Thanks for reminding me - I asked you before to link to the 'facts' of Contadors PN 09 performance.

Everyone here thinks Froome has found another gear. Reality is that other riders have lost one.

Well, i haven't seen the peloton zig zagging up hills yet.

 

[Ferminal]

Have to admit, watched the highlights today and just started laughing when Froome leapt. He nearly crashed into one of the riders, had to swerve, still left them in dust.
.

I thought he was lining up for a bunch sprint

(maybe he did too)

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Clean? Who knows.

But by god, if he's on the sh!t, it ain't the good sh!t. This ain't your daddy's Contador, boy.

Have to admit, watched the highlights today and just started laughing when Froome leapt. He nearly crashed into one of the riders, had to swerve, still left them in dust.

After Porte pulled an ALMOST IDENTICAL stunt yesterday, I can well understand the co-operative exploding of heads in here.

If Froome is doped, and while I genuinely don't know and have no proof, I'd not be particularly surprised either, i hope to god he's caught, caught soon, and kicked out of the sport.

But, you know, I'd be lying just a little if i didn't admit that until then, the spectator sport of Clinic watching is going to be enormous fun - probably more fun than the cycling itself. I swear to god, people are gonna bust blood vessels by July at this rate...

and p.s. how f*cking stupid are Berti and Nibbles - co-operate you twits - get your DS's together an co-operate up the climbs - nullify the train and just wheelsuck. Tactically, it ain't rocket science.

Start pooling resources, and gang up on 'em...

rant over.

Thats very revealing.
Because most cyclists would rather watch the event and be able to believe in it.

That you find "enormous fun" in people stating their disquiet at an ongoing freakshow that cycling still is because of Sky is one of your most insightful posts.

 

[Escarabajo]

Of course not, he was one of the bright prospects to win the Tour the France for Great Britain with a clean team and staff. (together with PK and GT) Wiggins was a surprise for them as well. In the beginning of 2011 , however, I think they were starting to doubt his talent, until they discovered he had that blood parasite. They were about to dump him back in Afrika where they picked him up. But any sign of revival of his old talent would lead to Sky re-signing him, and apparently they were already expecting a lot from him at the Vuelta. He'd be the main dom for Wiggo, so they'd probably decided he could stay.

The more you look at this the more you actually start to believe Froome is pretty credible, at least compared to Wiggins.

I think that the part of th problem is that the parasite had a low hematocrit %.

 

[The Hitch]

Everyone here thinks Froome has found another gear. Reality is that other riders have lost one.

That explains 1 gear. What about the other 10?

 

[martinvickers]

Thats very revealing.
Because most cyclists would rather watch the event and be able to believe in it.

That you find "enormous fun" in people stating their disquiet at an ongoing freakshow that cycling still is because of Sky is one of your most insightful posts.

Yes, it is fun, and any outsider looking in would see why. Because they aren't 'stating disquiet', they're having a sarcastic kiniption about it - and hey, good luck to them, it's fun.

So, please, don't attempt to take the high moral ground, Dr, because you don't have it - not least because my paragraph immediately above the one you bolded makes my view on, you know, the actual sport very clear.

You say people want to believe - i couldn't give a stuff about belief, especially, to be honest, clinic belief - i want a sport that's actually cleaner, not what some cynical groupthink 'deems' cleaner.

That's the difference.

 

[Escarabajo]

precisely. SKY can afford to get the best guys and look after/train them in the best way, virtually no expense spared, using all the technical knowledge gained from the GB track cycling years. its hardly surprising that they are capable of putting out a very strong performance on mountain stages and TTs, which is what they concentrate on the most as that is the way to win grand tours

You are right. They taught those roadies a lesson who had little technique about climbing and TT over 100 years of history.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

That was *** today. Not so much Froome, as I've grown used to seeing him do the impossible, but the domestiques.

The doms rode virtually all the top climbers off their wheels. Not through craftiness, not by being opportunistic, but by literally riding them off their wheels. Not. Normal.

This fanboy argument of 5.9w/kg being the new benchmark of what's humanly possible, and therefore anyone riding below 6w/kg is in the clear, is bullsh*t as well. I don't need to know what's humanly possible, I need to know what's "Froomenly" possible. Having an entire squad that can tap out tempo at 5.9 is as likely as having a squad who's 'crit is all at 49. You'd have better chances winning the lotto.

Crap like this makes me hate stage races...

 

[Escarabajo]

Froome had health issues before joining sky which seriously impaired his performances. Porte was a young 'top 20' climber - with a small improvement with sky no reason why he cant become a top 5-10 climber as he is now. Rogers was a former top class rider who was rejuvinated by joining a top team. bit silly to call him 'a has been' when he's only early 30s

Decline starts at 30 yrs. old. Please explain to me how you rejuvenate?

 

[Cyivel]

Not Froomenly possible is a great pun.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

When little Jackie Horner sticks in his thumb and pulls out a

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/horner-uses-his-experience-at-tirreno-adriatico

"It's amazing how strong his team was, it was a block headwind and they had two Colombian guys riding on the front. It was just incredibly smart and good racing by Sky. Froome was very patient when Contador was attacking, he stayed with his teammates. They were very strong.

you just know the peloton is cleaner.

Just a reminder about how Chris feels about Lance Armstrong (from Dec, 2012):

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features...orner-on-his-career-armstrong-and-pro-cycling

"Did he test positive?" he replies when asked about Armstrong's case with USADA.

Nowadays such a response leaves most people cringing. Armstrong did test positive for a steroid in 1999 and was given a post-dated exemption form from the UCI. But Horner continues.

"Look, I'm certainly old enough and wise enough to understand the magnitude of the situation, but in the end he's still getting prosecuted with no positive test. A lot of guys say they saw him and a lot say he did this and he did that, but I look at it and say: 'USADA, WADA, UCI, they're saying that the tests are worthless.' So do you take all the tests, 500, 1000, I don't know the number I've done in my own career and you basically say, that you took them for no reason?"

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Yes, it is fun, and any outsider looking in would see why. Because they aren't 'stating disquiet', they're having a sarcastic kiniption about it - and hey, good luck to them, it's fun.

So, please, don't attempt to take the high moral ground, Dr, because you don't have it - not least because my paragraph immediately above the one you bolded makes my view on, you know, the actual sport very clear.

You say people want to believe - i couldn't give a stuff about belief, especially, to be honest, clinic belief - i want a sport that's actually cleaner, not what some cynical groupthink 'deems' cleaner.

That's the difference.

I never claimed nor indeed am i on the high moral ground - but its higher than yours.
And I do think the sport is "cleaner' - but Sky are not part of that.

 

[martinvickers]

I never claimed nor indeed am i on the high moral ground - but its higher than yours.
And I do think the sport is "cleaner' - but Sky are not part of that.

We all have our delusions, it seems...well, enjoy.

 

[BroDeal]

We all have our delusions, it seems...well, enjoy.

Watch it, Dr. M. If you respond in kind Vickers will start crying about being abused. Insulting people then whinging when they do the same to him is his favorite tactic.

The Skrybaby has probably already moaned to the mods.

 

[Tinman]

When little Jackie Horner sticks in his thumb and pulls out a

you just know the peloton is cleaner.

"..plum, and said what a good boy am I."

Powerful resveratrol analogues now in clinical trials by GSK. The same GSK that supports WADA in developing new drug tests.

Not sure if Sky/Froome is on plums, but blueberries certainly high in resveratrol. Must be the new blueberry diet supplement then.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

"..plum, and said what a good boy am I."

Powerful resveratrol analogues now in clinical trials by GSK. The same GSK that supports WADA in developing new drug tests.

Not sure if Sky/Froome is on plums, but blueberries certainly high in resveratrol. Must be the new blueberry diet supplement then.

Blueberries are the new beet juice...

 

[Tinman]

On resveratrol itself. Note the enhanced potential effect with more powerful analogues.

http://pipeline.corante.com/archive...l_in_humans_results_of_a_controlled_trial.php

 

[Dr. Maserati]

That was *** today. Not so much Froome, as I've grown used to seeing him do the impossible, but the domestiques.

The doms rode virtually all the top climbers off their wheels. Not through craftiness, not by being opportunistic, but by literally riding them off their wheels. Not. Normal.

This fanboy argument of 5.9w/kg being the new benchmark of what's humanly possible, and therefore anyone riding below 6w/kg is in the clear, is bullsh*t as well. I don't need to know what's humanly possible, I need to know what's "Froomenly" possible. Having an entire squad that can tap out tempo at 5.9 is as likely as having a squad who's 'crit is all at 49. You'd have better chances winning the lotto.

Crap like this makes me hate stage races...

That pretty much sums up my feelings.

I was giving Sky some benefit of a doubt and I actually think Porte is one of their more talented riders. But they are ripping it up in 2 different races and having their doms making some other world class riders look ordinary is too much.

 

[Tinman]

The diabetes studies of the analogue SRT2104 that look at metabolism and insulin sensitivity will be particularly interesting.

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=Srt2104&Search=Search