Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[hulkgogan]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/201...-froome-criterium-international?commentpage=1

You know what's sad? Nothing has been learnt from Armstrong. I mean sad for the human condition, like we're doomed to repeat our mistakes over and over.

There were a few mild, and I mean mild, Sky not normal posts over there - all deleted. How can a serious newspaper burned completely on their uptake on Lance, not learn anything? Makes me sad, I used to like the Guardian.

 

[blackcat]

froome always had talent folks.

opportunities otoh

 

[blackcat]

I have tried to stay out of this thread for as long as possible and I would also say that I am far open-minded on the issue of non-doping than your average SKY basher.

However it is frankly amazing to think that anyone can watch what SKY are currently doing and just regard it as normal. I have been seriously trying to think of another team that dominated races like SKY and the closest I can come up with is ONCE(90s era) who dominated countless stage races during the season but never performed in the Tour like SKY 2012.

The SKY defenders are trying to deflect focus by trying to drag Dan Martin into this but look at Martin's career, it looks completely normal. His winning a climbing stage from a break is hardly earth-shattering stuff especially when he has a 2nd, 2nd and 4th previously in this very race.

If you had asked anyone in 2008, who out of Martin, Wiggins and Froome was most likely to become a star, the answer would undoubtedly have been Martin and I think that is what SKY thought as well. Now even Porte is miles in front of Dan Martin. If Martin suddenly morphs into a TTer the way Wiggin's, Froome and Porte have morphed into their current guise's, then I will ask question's of Martin.

Frankly I have tried to give SKY as much leeway as possible but I find myself slipping towards the cynicism of many poster's who I normally would disagree with on the subject of doping. SKY just seem too good to be real. I await with baited breath to see what JTL pulls out of the hat when the Ardennes classics roll around.

Not alone are they just crushing races, they are making the racing thoroughly boring and this is something that would turn me off watching pro cycling in future. Mountain trains until a few Km's remaining, no thanks.

People can defend SKY all they want but at least have the decency to admit that this is not normal and has not really happened in pro cycling previously to this degree.

tony martin

tony martin


he was the man with the mostest (sic)

 

[blackcat]

Ricco has a personality.

Porte? Ummmmm, not so.

porte has yet to give himself a nickname

bow down before ricky riccio

/respect

 

[ultimobici]

max, u reckon if Cancellara, or Phinney was one year older, Sky would have won any gold in the pursuit. If other countries like germany had their best athletes on the track instead of the road, they would have creamed u brits.

2008, would clancy wiggins thomas and manning with burke as 5th, beaten germany with bartko (younger than manning), ciolek, greipel, gretsch (martin/degenkolb).

no chance u guys beat the germans. and if australia had their best, they would have pantsed the poms too.

You really need to think thus through. Ciolek & Greipel as part of the pursuit? Get real! Neither has any track history, and no amount if help from Bartko would have changed that.

As for Australia beating Britain, up until 1998 there was no equivalent of AIS in the UK. Yet in the 10 years up to that Australia's record is lacklustre to say the least. Not a single individual title v 5 for Britain with zero funding and no indoor track for much of that time.

 

[will10]

Sorry, do i know you?

What has this got to do with me?

Apologies, I meant mastersracer.

 

[will10]

there's nothing wrong with the logic - if you followed the argument. These VAM's, power outputs, etc., that we've seen for the last few years are taken by many as indicative of a cleaner peloton. And, there's some displaced outrage here regarding 2013 performances, as though yet another quantum leap has taken place, which is not consistent with the absolute performances.

I don't think that's true at all.

We are told repeatedly by certain members of the peloton and press that the peloton is much cleaner as people are climbing slower than they were in the 2000s.

Yet Froome, Wiggins, Porte have all undergone impressive improvements over the last few seasons and now win stage races with ease, with climbing speeds comparable to those from 2007 onwards. We now know that those achieving such performances in 2007, 2008, 2009 etc. were doping. QED we are supposed to believe that Froome and Porte are now winning clean with the same w/kg that "won" Rasmussen the Tour in 2007. OK so Criterium International, Tirreno Adriatico, Paris Nice - these races are not the Tour de France. But we're also lead to believe (and have last year as testament to this) that Sky are not peaking in March, the target races are the Grand Tours.

If it's true that we now have a clean peloton then Chris Froome, Richie Porte and Bradley Wiggins are the most talented guys in the peloton and deserve to dominate other clean, talented riders. I'm personally willing to concede on Wiggins, for sake of argument. Porte, well it's not beyond the realms of possibility that he has developed as a rider since he pretended to climb well in 2010. But seeing Chris Froome winning consistantly at 5.8w/kg - 6.0w/kg, considering his background and performances prior to August 2011, should set alarm bells ringing in most heads. It doesn't look right, because it probably isn't. If they are up to no good, it wouldn't be the first false dawn and almost certainly wouldn't be the last, unfortunately.

 

[blackcat]

You really need to think thus through. Ciolek & Greipel as part of the pursuit? Get real! Neither has any track history, and no amount if help from Bartko would have changed that.

As for Australia beating Britain, up until 1998 there was no equivalent of AIS in the UK. Yet in the 10 years up to that Australia's record is lacklustre to say the least. Not a single individual title v 5 for Britain with zero funding and no indoor track for much of that time.

it was a hypothetical.

of the best sprinters the Germans had track legs.

we know Zabel used to ride the legs off all the trackies when he did the 6es.

talent went to the road. clancy and manning and burke, far inferior to ciolek, greipel, and bartko on raw talent stakes.

 

[blackcat]

If it's true that we now have a clean peloton then Chris Froome, Richie Porte and Bradley Wiggins are the most talented guys in the peloton and deserve to dominate other clean, talented riders. I'm personally willing to concede on Wiggins, for sake of argument. Porte, well it's not beyond the realms of possibility that he has developed as a rider since he pretended to climb well in 2010. But seeing Chris Froome winning consistantly at 5.8w/kg - 6.0w/kg, considering his background and performances prior to August 2011, should set alarm bells ringing in most heads. It doesn't look right, because it probably isn't. If they are up to no good, it wouldn't be the first false dawn and almost certainly wouldn't be the last, unfortunately.

so what should the sport and its administrators do if your intuition is on the money.

Charles Yesalis is not a professor of Sociology, he is Health Science prof at Penn State. He has written before on PEDs and the norms that a sport develops. more sociology/psychology, but he has posited that it is not plausible, you have the bade apple trope that the sport likes to hang out Ricco to be. If it is not one athlete, this becomes injust to make individuals pay a disproportional penance, when everyone is skirting free.

if polymaths like savulescu and yesalis are not brought into the tent, you have the SSDD. As much as jonny vee will play both sides, and use weasel words and kant(cant) and doublespeak and talking points, the guy leaves the sport dead for brain power, when it struggles to accumulate a collective g e d .

to think a solution exists within the sport, is just blue sky. not gonna happen. ssdd
to assume the sport is, can be, will be, without performance enhancement, gene doping or chemical/pharmaceutical, is naive. but what is the objective of doping.

at the moment, i struggle to see it anything other than a marketing ruse so the soccer mom constituency are still consumers. athletes? health? nah. just keep the revenue spigot flowing dudes.

 

[Bexon30]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/201...-froome-criterium-international?commentpage=1

You know what's sad? Nothing has been learnt from Armstrong. I mean sad for the human condition, like we're doomed to repeat our mistakes over and over.

There were a few mild, and I mean mild, Sky not normal posts over there - all deleted. How can a serious newspaper burned completely on their uptake on Lance, not learn anything? Makes me sad, I used to like the Guardian.

I see whenever I post on the Guardian site about anything Geert related is disappears. I post as Neville Bartoss and every time my posts disappear. Completely gave up on them as well. I mean I do like to read the newspaper but any negative or questioning or probing related to team Sky and its bye bye. It's sad really, as they did work with Geert and performances have improved for certain riders a little bit more than marginally. There is a deeper agenda going on at the Guardian right now and it's a shame...

 

[spalco]

I honestly think the Sky domincance in cycling is vastly exaggerated here. Clearly they found some "formula" to win the short stage races, but so far, they have managed to win only one GT, and that was an unusual Tour with a bunch of top contenders missing or out-of-shape.

If they have such an edge on the competition, why aren't they winning one-days and GTs as well? I'm asking this specifically because there's actually been a lot of mocking of Sky going on in the Race forum recently in regards to their performance and tactics in the one-day races, which seems kind of contradictory to the way they are commented on in stage races.

 

[LesCombes]

I can believe the story of Froome.

I can believe the story of Wiggins.

I can believe the story of Porte.

I can believe the story of Kyrienka/Uran/Henao/Thomas

Can I believe all these stories combined? That's where it gets tough for a dedicated cycling fan.

I want to be naive but I'm afraid it's being made too difficult.

 

[Ferminal]

I honestly think the Sky domincance in cycling is vastly exaggerated here. Clearly they found some "formula" to win the short stage races, but so far, they have managed to win only one GT, and that was an unusual Tour with a bunch of top contenders missing or out-of-shape.

If they have such an edge on the competition, why aren't they winning one-days and GTs as well? I'm asking this specifically because there's actually been a lot of mocking of Sky going on in the Race forum recently in regards to their performance and tactics in the one-day races, which seems kind of contradictory to the way they are commented on in stage races.

Not much of a sample size.

2011 Vuelta: In performance terms they won, but poor tactics cost them the race (marginal gains huh).

2012 Giro/Vuelta: Didn't target the win (unless they actually believed Froome going for the double could compete).

In any case I'm not sure how winning GTs is some absolute measure of success. They are easier to lose than win, just ask Purito and Evans. First you have to assume that they are actually the best riders (putting doping aside) and get to the race unscathed, secondly they make no mistakes and then there are other problems like the favourability of the parcours, whether the team has enough depth to cover tactical moves by rivals. They may not turn out to be Contador/Armstrong/Indurain entering a GT knowing they will win, but that is hardly a measure of underachievement. Going back a few years Saxo have two wins with Contador, Liquigas managed two in one year but aside from that there aren't really any stories of dominance. I mean Katusha and Astana (sans Contador) for all their money and deep squads haven't won a single GT, it's not that easy.

Looking at the current teams:

Sky 2010-2012: 1 (2012 Tour)
OP/QS forever-2012: 0
Katusha 2010-2012: 0
Movistar: 1 (2009 Vuelta, not sure when they won one before that).
BMC 2010-2012: 1 (2011 Tour)
Astana 2010-2012: 1 (2010 Tour)
Blanco: 3 (none since Giro 2009)
Leopard: 0
Saxo 2004-2012: 4
Liquigas 2005-2012: 3
Lampre: 0 (in current form)

USPS/Discovery won what, 12 in 11 years?

 

[xrayvision]

XRay is an intellect-tool.

Sure is, anything else you wanna share? And thanks for displaying your lack of intelligence in a public forum.

 

[spalco]

Not much of a sample size.

2011 Vuelta: In performance terms they won, but poor tactics cost them the race (marginal gains huh).

2012 Giro/Vuelta: Didn't target the win (unless they actually believed Froome going for the double could compete).

In any case I'm not sure how winning GTs is some absolute measure of success. They are easier to lose than win, just ask Purito and Evans. First you have to assume that they are actually the best riders (putting doping aside) and get to the race unscathed, secondly they make no mistakes and then there are other problems like the favourability of the parcours, whether the team has enough depth to cover tactical moves by rivals. They may not turn out to be Contador/Armstrong/Indurain entering a GT knowing they will win, but that is hardly a measure of underachievement. Going back a few years Saxo have two wins with Contador, Liquigas managed two in one year but aside from that there aren't really any stories of dominance. I mean Katusha and Astana (since 2011) for all their money and deep squads haven't won a single GT, it's not that easy.

All true, but what overalls in stage races have they won?
2010: Tour de Picardie, Wallonie
2011: Dauphine, Danmark Rundt, Eneco
2012: Algarve, P-N, Romandie, Norway, Bayern, Dauphine, TdF
2013: Oman, P-N, Criterium

Maybe I missed something, but nothing important I think.
That's really otherworldly level, inexplicable dominance?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/brailsford-doping-is-addictive-like-going-from-marijuana-to-cocaine

"If people want the entertainment value of riders attacking each other, stopping, attacking each other again and again, then go back to 'old cycling', which will give you the capability to do that," he told Cyclingnews.

"If you want clean sport and clean cycling, then it's going to be different. You can't have it both ways. There's an element of reality about what were doing."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=LwzfWal4kE4#t=83s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=LwzfWal4kE4#t=603s

I think the Dawg and the Devil did not get the memo. That gearing of Porte is just insane.

But to be fair to team SKY, the opposition was weak, not in form, blablabla.

SOSDN

I see whenever I post on the Guardian site about anything Geert related is disappears. I post as Neville Bartoss and every time my posts disappear. Completely gave up on them as well. I mean I do like to read the newspaper but any negative or questioning or probing related to team Sky and its bye bye. It's sad really, as they did work with Geert and performances have improved for certain riders a little bit more than marginally. There is a deeper agenda going on at the Guardian right now and it's a shame...

You shall not tarnish the Great Brits!

 

[ebandit]

tricky

The Hog doesn't miss a trick.

is that the trick that porte would come clean and spill the beans as to the truth at team sky?

while porte / froomes performances raise eyebrows remember that it's not just team sky

this is cycling.........spartacus holds off a chasing group of talented riders at e3

sagan forges on

............................where is the truth? will fans ever truly know?

 

[armchairclimber]

Poor Bradley Wiggins and the Sky train couldn't even beat a clean Dan Martin this week.

I think some people have been sucking on the super-sour sweeties.

 

[Cimber]

I can believe the story of Froome.

I can believe the story of Wiggins.

I can believe the story of Porte.

I can believe the story of Kyrienka/Uran/Henao/Thomas

Can I believe all these stories combined? That's where it gets tough for a dedicated cycling fan.

I want to be naive but I'm afraid it's being made too difficult.

Yeah thats what makes you wonder. That any rider who goes to Sky really steps up a whole league or two. I would like to think its just due to the fact that they are way more proffesionel and revolutionizing how you train and recuperate. But that was what they said about CSC too back then, so I am a little sceptical.

 

[hrotha]

Poor Bradley Wiggins and the Sky train couldn't even beat a clean Dan Martin this week.

I think some people have been sucking on the super-sour sweeties.

It's not doping if you don't win ALL the races? Is that what you're trying to say?

 

[wannab]

I would like to think its just due to the fact that they are way more proffesionel and revolutionizing how you train and recuperate. But that was what they said about CSC too back then, so I am a little sceptical.

The bold part really annoy's the heck out of me whenever I hear it on telly or interview

The entire pro peloton are actually total mongoloids when it comes to training and only sky knows how it's done ... well yeah, they surely know how "it's" done!

 

[spalco]

The bold part really annoy's the heck out of me whenever I hear it on telly or interview

The entire pro peloton are actually total mongoloids when it comes to training and only sky knows how it's done ... well yeah, they surely know how "it's" done!

No, they are not, but there are always ways to improve and professionalise training, and some people will know more about this than others.

I bet, if Manchester United picks at random 20 boys off the street and trains them to become football players and my club in Vienna does the same, 10 years later the former kick the ****ing **** out of the latter in any match anywhere.

Cycling's been around a long time, but that doesn't mean what's always been done is the best way.

 

[Ferminal]

All true, but what overalls in stage races have they won?

Maybe I missed something, but nothing important I think.
That's really otherworldly level, inexplicable dominance?

2013: 1st Oman, 1st P-N, 2nd T-A, 1st/2nd Crit Int.
2012: 1st/3rd Algarve, 1st P-N, 3rd/4th Crit Int, 1st/2nd/4th Dauphine, 1st/2nd Tour, 2nd Burgos, 4th Vuelta,
2011: 2nd/3rd Vuelta

That is a pretty impressive 18 or so months, I don't know if it's the best because no one has looked at other teams, but at least rankings wise whatever way you pick they have been by far the best. Of course this may not be to doping, Sky could just be better at identifying and harnessing talent (they don't have more money than BMC/Katusha/Astana).

BMC:

2013: 2nd San Luis, 3rd Crit Int, 3rd Oman
2012: 1st Crit Int, 2nd Austria, 3rd Dauphine, 5th Tour, 1st Utah, 2nd Colorado
2011: 1st Tour

Katusha:

2013: 2nd Catalunya
2012: 2nd Pais Vasco, 2nd Giro, 1st Burgos, 3rd/5th Vuelta

Liquigas:

2013: -
2012: 2nd Oman, 1st T-A, 3rd Trentino, 5th Giro, 3rd Tour, 1st Padania
2011: 1st Padania

Movistar:

2013: 1st Andalucia, 4th Catalunya
2012: 1st Andalucia, 1st Murcia, 3rd P-N, 1st Castilla y Leon, 1st Asturias, 3rd Romandie 1st Suisse, 1st Route du Sud, 2nd Vuelta

Where is the Unzue thread?

 

[will10]

It's not doping if you don't win ALL the races? Is that what you're trying to say?

Lance didn't dope, as he never won Paris Nice, Criterium International or Catalunya.

 

[Cimber]

No, they are not, but there are always ways to improve and professionalise training, and some people will know more about this than others.

I bet, if Manchester United picks at random 20 boys off the street and trains them to become football players and my club in Vienna does the same, 10 years later the former kick the ****ing **** out of the latter in any match anywhere.

Cycling's been around a long time, but that doesn't mean what's always been done is the best way.

I agree that the first mover advantage of something like that would give you a short term advantage, but the other teams would be copy it rather fast if that was the case.

But then again, if it is dope and they arent being caught, (som) other teams might copy it still. I remember Tyler describing how Riis was eager to know how they did it at USP. Maybe Riis is having simlar talks with Rogers, and in a year or two we will see some some Saxoborgs.

That just the cynic in me talking, but sadly he has been proven right far to often. I have often been the one given riders and managers the benifit of the doubt but have becoming a tad more cynical over the years.