Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[mattghg]

Certain posters are fond of aggrandising this place, themselves and its role

You mean, like describing themselves as

the clinic guard, the elect few

for example?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

what complete nonsense. are u seriously suggesting that being by far the best 4km pursuit rider in the world is not a good indication that Wiggins could go up a mountain pretty well (especially if he lost a few kgs)

Yes. I am. Good grief, did you just discover cycling yesterday?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Just out of the mildest of interest, what metric are you using for this judgement?

1. Palmares, for one.
2. History of climbing capacity.
3. Froome only recently acquired the ability to climb in a straight line.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

what complete nonsense. are u seriously suggesting that being by far the best 4km pursuit rider in the world is not a good indication that Wiggins could go up a mountain pretty well (especially if he lost a few kgs)

No, it's only an indication that he could go up a mountain pretty well for 4 minutes...

 

[BYOP88]

Just wondering and this may have been covered already. But when Sky warm down after they've won a stage, got the leaders jersey or random selection, do they do it pre or post the after stage doping controls?

 

[mattghg]

I think if you're approached for a doping control you have to do it immediately. Surely you can't say 'hang on a minute, I'm warming down'?

 

[lavieclaire]

common sense

1. Palmares, for one.
2. History of climbing capacity.
3. Froome only recently acquired the ability to climb in a straight line.

Oh.

I was hoping for something a bit more measurable. Never mind.

 

[The Hitch]

The course benefited those riders, and Purito. A GT climber isn't necessarily going to be strong at a short 30% climb, especially if it's done 3X; nor is a GT climber going to be reknowned for b*lls-out descending ability.

Sagan and Nibali are known to be awesome descenders, and the vast majority of Froome's time was lost on the descent. With those three off the front working together, and they were obviously driving it, a chase group doesn't have much of a chance to bring them back in a few kms.
..

Rodriguez is a winner of the Giro di Lombardia in similar conditions, a former podium finisher and a podium finisher of Liege Bastogne Liege as well as several podiums and wins in semi classics

Nibali is a podium finisher of Liege Bastogne Liege and Milan San Remo.

Sagan last year at 22 came top 5 in MSR Flanders and Amstel Gold.

All 3 riders are clearly more well suited to yesterdays stage than Froome or Contador.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Jimmy,
It has been stated here already, numbers at or below 5.9-6.0 w/kg are not suspicious. What is suspicious is most of the team members hitting it at the same time. Sometimes driving up the mountains in group together at this power output (read Michael Rogers comments last year) is just suspicious because of statistical selection. A person hitting that number is a very special athlete, let alone most of the team doing it. In the 80's the only riders that were doing it were the Tour champions usually or some special mountain goats. This is not proof but is suspicious.

What Acoggan said about the natural freaks could be true, but if a fan were to choose between 1- doping and 2- natural freak, given the doping history of the sports, which one do you think the fan is going to pick? So don't get emotional over people suspecting doping on team Sky.

I don't get emotional over that, Sky are fair game as are the entire peloton. I mainly get emotional when someone is being a massive ******, in which case I will be a ****** back.

You make valid points, and what they do is demonstrate the inconclusivity of drawing judgements on performance, and how open they are to different interpretations given the paucity of data we have. As I have said, those intepretations are often down to personal bias (and I include myself in that). As you point out, the numbers are 'acceptable', more consistent but seemingly on tap, which again is suspicious, like FGL said, as doping is as much if not more about recovery and stamina than flat out speed. Those days are gone with Lance, where riders with 'arses the size of elephants' sprinting up ridiculous inclines.

This makes the numbers from Lance and Pantani for example something of a outlier, doubling the difficulty in identifying erroneous performances, since we may as well chuck away those numbers since any doper worth his salt and with a decent power meter knows how to taper his performance to within respectable levels.

And in saying this, I must concede something to thehog, who said as much to me months ago: comparing today's times with those proves nothing.

I will say T-A proves that Sky can't necessarily bring those numbers up throughout the team 'on tap' all the time. If you were to look at T-A objectively, you only see one stage when Sky were able to dominate. In a race over 7 stages, you should expect one team to be able to put on a show of force, and perhaps also expect them to fade afterwards, as Sky did. As I said, performance is inconclusive.

Acoggan's main point is nothing is totally predictable on past data, that whatever we may accept as natural and unnatural now can be blown apart by something unpredictable in the future. Darwin's theory of natural selection is that species evolve through random mutations over generations. As a phenom this is why I give Sagan the benefit of the doubt, because he just strikes me as a physical freak capable of just about anything.

But I'll concede that any natural freak like that will be open to suspicion: that is just human nature

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Rodriguez is a winner of the Giro di Lombardia in similar conditions, a former podium finisher and a podium finisher of Liege Bastogne Liege as well as several podiums and wins in semi classics

Nibali is a podium finisher of Liege Bastogne Liege and Milan San Remo.

Sagan last year at 22 came top 5 in MSR Flanders and Amstel Gold.

All 3 riders are clearly more well suited to yesterdays stage than Froome or Contador.

Exactly my point. It's like apples and oranges...

 

[The Hitch]

Have you checked into the dark side lately Byop? the prevailing explanation is very much that the fields are weak (yes even in TA) and Sky clearly have 10 times better training techniques than anyone else.

 

[JimmyFingers]

The course benefited those riders, and Purito. A GT climber isn't necessarily going to be strong at a short 30% climb, especially if it's done 3X; nor is a GT climber going to be reknowned for b*lls-out descending ability.

Sagan and Nibali are known to be awesome descenders, and the vast majority of Froome's time was lost on the descent. With those three off the front working together, and they were obviously driving it, a chase group doesn't have much of a chance to bring them back in a few kms.

Yesterday wasn't representative of much apart from who can fight their way up a retardedly steep col, and who can pull off risky descents.

Besides, I'm in no way saying anyone on the podium yesterday is clean.

I still love cycling, but the sport is going to have to do a lot more before I think any of the elites are riding paniagua...

Just a question: if this performance is so inconclusive, does stage 4 represent one easily to interpret and draw conclusions from? The huge amount of variables that a stage can throw up, from parcours to climate to rider action, can any stage be interpreted correctly, particularly if you haven't watched the stage from beginning to end? For example, can anyone give me an objective analysis of stage 4 vs stage 6 from start to finish.

You do qualify your assessment by stating you aren't stating anyone is clean, but you also allow that different parcours affect significantly a teams and a rider's performance, both doped or clean.

Which again highlights the difficulty in drawing conclusions from relative performance.

 

[The Hitch]

Just wondering and this may have been covered already. But when Sky warm down after they've won a stage, got the leaders jersey or random selection, do they do it pre or post the after stage doping controls?

That just reminds me. We heard Froome didnt warm down yesterday.

That 6th place is darn impressive then. Imagine if had warmed down. Tony Martin should be grateful.

 

[JimmyFingers]

It was a deja vue to the Olympic Road Race, where the Italians/Swiss/Spanjards and VINO went gungho against Team Brittain. Uncontrollable with 4 domestiques.

I was mostly impressed by the ease of Rodriguez. But this is those guys terrain. L-B-L/la Fleche Walonne profile. Why was for instance Mollema right up there? Or Poels? Evans? Sanchez?

Uran could have been up there if he wouldnt have had to play the domistique.

But who said those guys are clean? Their carreer path is just somehow more gradient/believable.

I totally agree with this: if the peloton is against you, you have no chance. As disappointed I was with the Olympic RR, I understand the politics and given the success we had enjoyed, don't begrudge them that, although Cavendish will no doubt disagree.

 

[JimmyFingers]

didn't bother reading a word of this

#Jussayin'

 

[WinterRider]

1. Palmares, for one.
2. History of climbing capacity.
3. Froome only recently acquired the ability to climb in a straight line.

Well there is your explanation. There must be an undocumented symptom of Bilharzia that effects the inner ear, and thus balance and the ability to ride a bike in a straight line.

So of course there would be a meteoric rise in Froome's hill climbing ability once he had been diagnosed and treated. If anything sideways Froome perfectly explains why his palmares is not even a little bit suspicious.

 

[uphillstruggle]

I will say T-A proves that Sky can't necessarily bring those numbers up throughout the team 'on tap' all the time. If you were to look at T-A objectively, you only see one stage when Sky were able to dominate. In a race over 7 stages, you should expect one team to be able to put on a show of force, and perhaps also expect them to fade afterwards, as Sky did. As I said, performance is inconclusive.

There's no doubt they did fade but I think it had more to do with the parcours than team strength. Putting out consistent wattage on steep climbs is very difficult and with short, steep climbs it tends to be more a case of going temporarily over ones threshold.

Look at a the stages/races Sky tend to dominate and they tend to be races with steadier, more consistent climbs where its easier to keep a very high but steady pace.

 

[The Hitch]

Tour de France, the ranking of the 2000s (W / kg)

1 Lance Armstrong | 2003 | 6.18 W / kg
2 Alberto Contador | 2009 | 6.17 W / kg
3 Lance Armstrong | 2004 | 6.09 W / kg
4 Lance Armstrong | 2005 | 6.09 W / kg
5 Lance Armstrong | 2001 | 6.07 W / kg
6 Bradley Wiggins | 2012 | 5.98 W / kg
7 Lance Armstrong | 2000 | 5.97 W / kg
8 Lance Armstrong | 2002 | 5.97 W / kg
9 Alberto Contador | 2007 | 5.92 W / kg
10 Carlos Sastre | 2008 | 5.85 W / kg
11 Alberto Contador | 2010 | 5.78 W / kg
12 Cadel Evans | 2011 | 5.68 W / kg
13 Floyd Landis | 2006 | 5.67 W / kg

What was the source for this?

 

[uphillstruggle]

What was the source for this?

I have seen that on a link that someone recently posted to JV's twitter. A Finnish forum I think.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Have you checked into the dark side lately Byop? the prevailing explanation is very much that the fields are weak (yes even in TA) and Sky clearly have 10 times better training techniques than anyone else.

I have taken the liberty to take a look there, I must say, FOX News is fair and balanced in comparison to that dribble.

* train harder
* science
* budget
* scouting
* Kerrison
* Kerrison
* Kerrison
* and, oh, I forgot: Kerrison

But okay, everyone is entitled to an opinion.

I totally agree with this: if the peloton is against you, you have no chance.

I dont think the peloton is against them, the peloton is just tired of the roboraces.

What was the source for this?

vetoo

 

[BYOP88]

That just reminds me. We heard Froome didnt warm down yesterday.

That 6th place is darn impressive then. Imagine if had warmed down. Tony Martin should be grateful.

Yeah and Nibbles should also be greatful, infact the entire field should be greatful or they'd have missed the time cut if Froome had warmed down yesterday. #marginalgains

 

[Cyivel]

He didn't warm down and hasn't been in a wind tunnel yet.

Be afraid be very afraid.

 

[uphillstruggle]

Hey Hitch as far as I can tell its from this guy https://twitter.com/ammattipyoraily

Have no idea if he's at all credible.

 

[thehog]

Yeah and Nibbles should also be greatful, infact the entire field should be greatful or they'd have missed the time cut if Froome had warmed down yesterday. #marginalgains

Saw a video the other day or Nicolous Roche in 2010. They're interviewing him post stage. What does he do? Warms down.

And that's supposed to be new?

 

[JimmyFingers]

How many GTs do you expect Sagan to win?
I didn't get to see yesterday's stage til after work but I saw comments here first and thought the was a savage MTF at the end, there wasn't it was a series of walls. Perfect for JRod &Sagan.
Contador was just meters behind Nibs at the top, but on a stage like that it all that's needed.

Quite honestly I think if Sagan trained in a certain way and changed his shape he might turn himself into a GT contender, although I also believe he would lose his ability as puncheur and sprinteur. And while Sagan is being re-invented as a classics rider, he hasn't actually won one yet, although the clever money says he will redress this next weekend.

As I said earlier I view him as a phenom, an athlete capable of pretty much anything, a freak even.

I'm really not the one to point at a performance and say that's suss, I was looking to point out significantly the performance in the stage 4 win was taken, while nothing has really been said about stage 6. It's interesting contrasting the reactions here compared to the road racing forum. The reactions after stage 4 in both were very negative towards Sky, and you had a legion of posters coming in here wanting to vent their disgust. After stage six the positivity in the road racing forum was overwhelming for Sagan's win and Nibali's overall and the concomitant reaction in the clinic was to continue to criticise Sky.

So even when they had failed and other riders put in exceptional performances, Sky remained the main object of ire.

And while you may qualify the differing reactions by citing parcours and conditions and the relative abilities of the riders, it does demonstrate the populist nature of analysis. Like buoys from the sea bed, multiple Sky and rider threads bobbed to the surface of the clinic, none so far on the winner of stage 6, stage 7 or the overall have.

It says much for an acceptance and even forgiveness of guilt of some, and volumes for the contempt others are held in.

I would qualify that by saying I am accusing neither Sagan of Nibali, I'll afford the same benefit of the doubt I afford Sky. Because the truth is I don't know either way.

So I'll just say innocent until proven guilty, because I am painfully aware I don't have all the facts, just a fraction of them, and must rely on officials lacking accountability and trust to make that call. And since I can't rely on that I have to wait and hope, and afford the riders the benefit of the doubt until I can be certain. There are others more certain than me, but I can't fault that, so its just an opinion.