Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Dear Wiggo]

Gotcha. Kerrison is but merely a front for Sky's doping. Got there in the end. Thank you.

Ah so quick to jump to conclusions.

Perhaps you can explain why someone would be able to turn ordinary riders like Wiggins, Froome, Porte and Rogers into 2012-dominating forces of nature and not try to make some real money out of it?

You think they're paying him $2M pa? el oh el.

 

[mikehammer67]

So Wiggins is training solo - no team mates. Good for morale no doubt.

Kerrison is there as his dedicated trainer. Wonder how the other guys are training without Kerrison's breakthrough training protocols...

I mean. Kerrison either does daily modifications to their training programs, or it's more generic and Rogers can take it with him to another team like Saxo.

Anyway moving swimmingly along...... I suppose Walsh has been up close and personal with BradTim on their personal sessions. At least I hope so

he's too busy talking to the doctors............

Brailsford: “You speak to who you want, when you want, but try not to p*** them off. That’s my only issue. Link up with the team any time you like; when we’re on a training camp, when we’re at a race, we’ll find a room. If we’re short of a room, our doctor says you can share with him, and we will carry on doing exactly what we’d normally do. Who you want to talk to, that’s entirely up to you.”

oh wait...

They come to this training camp in Tenerife without a doctor, as Kerrison likes to strip things down when they’re in Teide. “There’s a time for giving the riders all the support and a time for focusing them on the things that matter. Up here we try to eliminate all the distractions.”


who's looking after saddle sores?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Porte was saying there was no Internet access in Tiede.

What gives?

Good catch.

Although xcleigh / Sky has some interwebnetwide thingy that transcends email. It's like email on steroids or something apparently.

Who knows?

The further we go down this road the more convoluted the story becomes. A sure sign of an above board, transparent operation, no doubt.

 

[armchairclimber]

" ordinary riders like Wiggins, Froome, Porte and Rogers"

You think they're paying him $2M pa? el oh el.

Eeeeeeeeeooooooosshhhhhh

 

[armchairclimber]

"who's looking after saddle sores?"

Richard Usher?

 

[JimmyFingers]

So the we're discussing Sky's use of email.

Why?

 

[armchairclimber]

It'll be phones next I tells ya.

 

[the sceptic]

So the we're discussing Sky's use of email.

Why?

only 10% of the peloton uses email. But even sky havent figured out how to use email on Teide yet. When they do, i expect the rest of the peloton to lose another 10% of power.

 

[JimmyFingers]

only 10% of the peloton uses email. But even sky havent figured out how to use email on Teide yet. When they do, i expect the rest of the peloton to lose another 10% of power.

Ah. Well that's as clear as mud

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Anyway moving swimmingly along...... I suppose Walsh has been up close and personal with BradTim on their personal sessions. At least I hope so

It would certainly be a valuable exercise if Wiggins wins the Giro. Too bad there's no google app for locating where people are right now.

Twitter feed says he's covering the golf, so that's a no.

 

[RownhamHill]

He coaxed a better performance out of Rogers than Ferrari ever did, and Rogers should be on the backside of the hill. He should be making more money than Ferrari.

That tells you something right there. If his methods are legit then with no risk he could be making millions by charging riders 20% of their gross. Why stick with Sky and make less money?

Right.

So. Let me get this straight.

One coach, who's name is synonymous with successfully doping riders, operates on a free-lance basis, and makes lots of money.

Another coach, who has had some success in the last couple of years working full time for an individual team, and you suspect of doping, makes a bit less money.

And so therefore, we can conclude, that your suspicions must be correct, and he must be doping his riders, because if he wasn't doping them, then he would go freelance and make lots more money, exactly like the other coach who very much was doping anyway. And what's more, the only reason he doesn't go freelance is because of the doping.

Is that about the long and the short of it?

 

[Ferminal]

I'm not sure anyone has said he's doping.

It's simply the idea that he can provide something no other person in cycling can. I do not think Sky being better than others is down to Kerrison at all. But if it is, why is he restricting himself to a BC salary when he could be working for himself charging clients 6 figures to help them win GTs.

If people keep pretending Sky are good because of Kerrison then others will link his name to doping even though it's probably not true.

 

[SundayRider]

Occam's Razor - they're doping.

 

[The Hitch]

July is going to be so boring and ridiculous all at once.

You don't know that.

I was thinking May might make up for it? Giro I mean.

Nibbles is clearly on the Sky program now: Tenerife training = weight down and power up. All he needs is a saddle sore and he'll look like Wiggo 2.0.

isnt that lance 4.0?

 

[The Hitch]

So Rogers has these same emails, describing what to change about his program based on current data? 2 years worth of this sort of communication?

But can't take it and the lessons learnt to Saxo?

Or did it only happen in 2013?

You guys can try to have it both ways, I am just going to keep pointing out the inconsistencies.

You don't know that Rogers isnt saving himself for the tour.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Right.

So. Let me get this straight.

One coach, who's name is synonymous with successfully doping riders, operates on a free-lance basis, and makes lots of money.

Another coach, who has had some success in the last couple of years working full time for an individual team, and you suspect of doping, makes a bit less money.

And so therefore, we can conclude, that your suspicions must be correct, and he must be doping his riders, because if he wasn't doping them, then he would go freelance and make lots more money, exactly like the other coach who very much was doping anyway. And what's more, the only reason he doesn't go freelance is because of the doping.

Is that about the long and the short of it?

Um no. Way to miss the point. el oh el. It's really, really simple. We are in fact suggesting the complete opposite of your post. Let me try and spell it out really simply for you...

Kerrison is wringing performances out of the Sky multi-stage riders that makes pretty much every other team and rider look like B graders.

All dope-free.

No drugs involved at all.

Just Acoggan's CTL and trainingpeaks software and some swimming training protocols.

Completely clean.

It's an absolutely mind-boggling situation, however, as he is doing such a good job he is getting riders like Michael Rogers to the same level, or even above that level afforded Rogers by a doping doctor - Michele Ferrari.

So on the one hand you have a doping doctor recommending testosterone and EPO, getting a rider to level X with training programs revolving around PEDs.

And on the other hand, you have a swimming coach getting the same rider, clean, to level X or even higher.

So Tim's coaching is worth at least the benefits of the PEDs of yesteryear, without the possibility of going positive, getting cancer, or even spending money to buy those PEDs.

Ferrari earned / earns millions of dollars a year doing this.

Kerrison is on 100-200K max, guaranteed.

Now, are you going to tell us, that a guy who can get riders to a (relative to the rest of the peloton) Ferrari-trained level of performance, clean, no drugs at all, couldn't generate significantly more money than Sky are paying him?

Or are you suggesting Sky are paying him 2M GBP a year?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

isnt that lance 4.0?

I do believe you are correct.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

You don't know that Rogers isnt saving himself for the tour.

The suspense is killing me. I'm planning on taking July off to watch. Ok I'm planning on taking July off to get away from the cold and do lots of training. But the Tour is worth watching for the scenery alone.

 

[Ferminal]

You don't know that Rogers isnt saving himself for the tour.

I think he's doing this, but he was pretty consistent last year. So he'd either want to start performing, or be Alberto's top man in July

 

[JimmyFingers]

snip Ferrari v Kerrison

A heady mix of exaggeration, conjecture and flawed logic. Wow.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

A heady mix of exaggeration, conjecture and flawed logic. Wow.

I notice that apart from this final conclusion, there is no content in your post. NO example of what the conjecture is. No example of flaws in the logic. No examples of the exaggeration.

This is exactly what people do when they are incapable of expressing themselves, when they themselves don't know.

No wow for you. It's what I expect.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Giro del Trentino (ITA), Stage 1B [14.1 km, TTT]: Team Sky 15 min 20 sec = 55.17 Kph.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I notice that apart from this final conclusion, there is no content in your post. NO example of what the conjecture is. No example of flaws in the logic. No examples of the exaggeration.

This is exactly what people do when they are incapable of expressing themselves, when they themselves don't know.

No wow for you. It's what I expect.

Well you haven't replied to anything I have said for so long I thought you had me on ignore. Also since it was utter conjecture, I didn't really want to debate the finer details, else I'd fall into the same trap.

Ok the exaggeration:

Kerrison is wringing performances out of the Sky multi-stage riders that makes pretty much every other team and rider look like B graders.

Conjecture:

So Tim's coaching is worth at least the benefits of the PEDs of yesteryear, without the possibility of going positive, getting cancer, or even spending money to buy those PEDs.

Ferrari earned / earns millions of dollars a year doing this.

Kerrison is on 100-200K max, guaranteed.

Now, are you going to tell us, that a guy who can get riders to a (relative to the rest of the peloton) Ferrari-trained level of performance, clean, no drugs at all, couldn't generate significantly more money than Sky are paying him?

Flawed logic:

All of the above. You put forward a completely hypothetical situation, draw a very questionable conclusion from it, and try to hold it up as some sort of reasoning for suspecting Sky.

And you do this a lot. Take snippets, exaggerate them and try to twist into something that has some relevance. Newsflash: it doesn't work beyond people that like to debate total flights of fancy.

Tell me different, tell me any of that is based on facts. Real facts, not the facts in your head.

 

[Spencer the Half Wit]

Um no. Way to miss the point. el oh el. It's really, really simple. We are in fact suggesting the complete opposite of your post. Let me try and spell it out really simply for you...

Kerrison is wringing performances out of the Sky multi-stage riders that makes pretty much every other team and rider look like B graders.

All dope-free.

No drugs involved at all.

Just Acoggan's CTL and trainingpeaks software and some swimming training protocols.

Completely clean.

It's an absolutely mind-boggling situation, however, as he is doing such a good job he is getting riders like Michael Rogers to the same level, or even above that level afforded Rogers by a doping doctor - Michele Ferrari.

So on the one hand you have a doping doctor recommending testosterone and EPO, getting a rider to level X with training programs revolving around PEDs.

And on the other hand, you have a swimming coach getting the same rider, clean, to level X or even higher.

So Tim's coaching is worth at least the benefits of the PEDs of yesteryear, without the possibility of going positive, getting cancer, or even spending money to buy those PEDs.

Ferrari earned / earns millions of dollars a year doing this.

Kerrison is on 100-200K max, guaranteed.

Now, are you going to tell us, that a guy who can get riders to a (relative to the rest of the peloton) Ferrari-trained level of performance, clean, no drugs at all, couldn't generate significantly more money than Sky are paying him?

Or are you suggesting Sky are paying him 2M GBP a year?

I'm confused. So are you saying that Kerrison is clean and you can't understand why he is not freelance (has he not got a contract)? Or are you saying that he must be doping the riders because if he was clean he would be earning millions freelance? Or something else?

Is it not a case of when did you stop beating your wife?

 

[Cavendash]

Ok, I do apologize if you took my post as obnoxious.

However, you jumped in on a post that did not mention you and introduced yourself in to it. You are not the Sky representative here. No need to take something that was not about you personally.
I don't know you, and quite frankly dont need to, so in that context I don't really care about you, I do like and appreciate your input even if at different times I agree of disagree.

You expect strangers on the internet to think you care about them? , who cares about any random stranger on the internet?, strange.

The relevant thing here is that Jimmy offers so much more than you to the discussion in here, he brings much needed balance to this thread, it would be boring if everyone was in snidey, obnoxious pitchfork brigade wouldn't it?