Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Benotti69]

He didn't 'align'. It's not politics or war - he joined a sports team - one I would MUCH rather he hadn't. But Nico has given me no reason to doubt him so far in his career. And the idea that he answers for Krueziger's past, or has some duty to discuss something he has no reason to know the details of, is twaddle squared.

To remind you this is pro cycling, not tiddlywinks. Doping is endemic last i heard. Check here for how much in Europe alone

http://www.dopeology.org/

Quite likely. And Kimmage's fury moved the dial not a flicker. And if you think I'm happy about that, you don't have a clue. I want him to win.

But I sincerely believe that some of the recent stuff actively makes that less likely, because it undermines him in the wider discussion.

It aint hard when a whole sport is ignoring him. Where is the rest of the media?

If one man was in a position to truly put McQuaid in difficulty, it was Kimmage. Also Irish, so could undermine the homer vote. Reputation burnished by complete Armstrong vindication. Seen as a completely innocent victim of the ridiculous UCi lawsuit. And he took all that, and achieved precisely ...nothing.

Cycling Ireland were never not going to endorse McQuaid, not with the free bidons, gillets and mitts they will find coming their way.

It was Betsy Andreu that convinced Anto Moran, she failed on the others. All the information about UCI and McQuaids role in enabling Armstrong is in the public domain. Not amount of leading those ****s to water could make them drink it in.

24 submissions were received on the subject by Cycling Ireland. 24. I assume I was one of them.

Chapeau.

Where was Kimmage's files and evidence? Where was all the stuff that would have made it harder yet to back McQuaid?

The evidence is there for all to see who want to see it. CI were not interested. Self interest and backing their own horse to be top dog, a dirty as he is was always going to get McQuaid the endorsement.

Kimmage chose to yell from beyond the city wall, rather than the dirty boring work of making some alliances to get something done. And now we're stuck with the b^stard.

And You wonder why I'm frustrated.

Plenty have been pointing out McQuaid's failing, FFS the c**t does a pretty decent job of showing how dirty he is with his press releases.

We are all frustrated about it. But Roche is not on the side of change. He is firmly in the camp of omerta not matter what wearing a bike pure wrist band says.

 

[King Of The Wolds]

I simply said Wiggins and Sky were lying about him having multiple mechanical's. Ask the cyclingnews reporter...they showed them the bikes. Was there anything wrong? The report said nothing on it. Wiggins choked mentally and threw in the towel. Same crap LA did when he returned. Thought he was entitled to the win. The fall is coming. Writing is on the wall. How hard? That's the exciting part.

In fairness, early last July you said Wiggins couldn't win a GT because he 'rides like a chump' and that the Wiggins deliberate steer into a crash was a sign that the Brits were choking. As such, I'm sure you'll understand when people completely disregard everything you say about the guy, because, quite evidently, you lack any degree of objectivity when it comes to Brits and Wiggins especially.

Not sure what you mean either on the LA return thing? Where's Wiggins returned from and how is that comparable to LA?

All said, Wiggo's lack of desire to take on a similar programme and have a similar degree of ambition as during last year, does suggest that he isn't quite in the same place mentally as he was before the Tour last year, when he'd already swept all before him.

 

[ferryman]

In fairness, early last July you said Wiggins couldn't win a GT because he 'rides like a chump' and that the Wiggins deliberate steer into a crash was a sign that the Brits were choking. As such, I'm sure you'll understand when people completely disregard everything you say about the guy, because, quite evidently, you lack any degree of objectivity when it comes to Brits and Wiggins especially.

Not sure what you mean either on the LA return thing? Where's Wiggins returned from and how is that comparable to LA?

All said, Wiggo's lack of desire to take on a similar programme and have a similar degree of ambition as during last year, does suggest that he isn't quite in the same place mentally as he was before the Tour last year, when he'd already swept all before him.

And coincidentally avoid the three that he hadn't and couldn't, Contador, Schleck and Froome.

 

[Wiggo Warrior]

It begins. Wigan will be the downfall. Trentino has set the scene. Nibali has his number. Props to Michele Ferrari for that one and Vino for signing him.

I have to laugh at all the Skybots who believed the lies from Sky regarding Wigan's fail. There was one mechanical. I'll repeat that. ONE LEGIT MECHANICAL. On the lighter section of the climb. Wigans had the power to catch back up but took his time having a tantie like the cry baby he is. Thanks for the video Greg. Wigan was close to catching back up and Nibali dropped the hammer and Wigans mentally cracked. He did not suffer another issue or lack of a power meter. It was pure lack of power. He did not have it. But he's a crybaby McCrap eater and whinges...so Sky cover for him and make up a convenient lie of 'additional' mechanical's. Deflection 101. The aim is to divert attention away from what REALLY HAPPENED. He choked. Big time. Nibali has the extra leg this year. Go Ferrari! WOOW!

Seriously, who out there is dumb, naive and gullible enough to believe Sky incorrectly geared not one, but two bikes? It has started. The downfall of Sky. It was always going to be EGO and it will spread like wildfire. Always is with ******nozzles with over inflated senses of self entitlement. Wigans has this happen at the Giro, he'll go full *** like Froome and Porte have done. Or better, he'll give in. Throw in the towel and switch focus to the Tour. Now that is what I hope happens.

To the person crying a page back about mechanicals determining races. Wake up and examine history. Carlos Sastre said nobody ever waited for him when he had a mechanical. Did he chuck a tantrum? Nobody waited for Evans in the 2009 Vuelta. He kept riding didn't he? Throw a bike or have a hissy fit and refuse to talk to people? Nope. Get over it and move on and build a bridge. The best rider won and your boy CHOKED.

Marginal gains...yeah right. When Andy Schleck dropped his chain in the 2010 Tour he was blamed for it on this forum. Only the fanboys believed he wasn't at fault. How about people stop accommodating the Skybots and trolls who are too dense to wake up to reality. Wigans did a Wigan. Nibali played like Man Utd. Call it what it is, don't make BS excuses for a team who are doping to their eyeballs and excusing it with marginal gains. That doesn't cut it here. Least of all when they supposedly cannot setup two bikes for their big gun. They be lying to you all.

As I said. It has begun. Sky are going down. Down down down down down down and down some more. Might as well start calling them team Dirt. The cause? EGO. Was always gonna be ego. I've said it before...too many Roosters in the hen house. It's what happens when the whole team goes full ***. Sky riders are the poster children for adult insecurities in a sporting environment. This fall will be hard on some.

Mechanical one;

Giro del Trentino:
KM 125

LEADERS: Serpa Perez (Lampre, 46), Bongiorno (Bardiani, 87), Pantano (Colombia, 94), Txurruka (Caja Rural, 113), Huzarski (NetApp, 152) Taciak (CCC, 124), Zardini (Bardiani, 86)

PELOTON: <3.00>
14:09

Giro del Trentino:
Zardini back at the front / Zardini rientra sui primi.
14:10

Giro del Trentino:
Average speed after 3h / velocità media dopo 3h di corsa: 40.300 km/h
14:11

Giro del Trentino:
Mechanical issue for Bradley Wiggins / Problema meccanico per Wiggins
14:11

This one was probably not race result significant since he didn't seem to have any particular problem chasing back on, on the penultimate climb and Sky were in control of the peloton speed at least partially at the time with the break still at three minutes, but still, accusations above of the team lying and people claiming false mechanicals to make excuses seem out of place given the actual evidence to the contrary.

Mechanical two of course we all saw as it was actually on TV (and now You Tube )

I agree he could have taken the repeated misfortune better and accept that incorrect gearing IF the bike was one set up for him was an unforgivable error given the teams claims to attention to detail, which is why I have been trying to find out what happened at the pre TV 125km mechanical and whether a bike change was involved. No one seems to know as far as I can tell so it remains speculation on my part that the earlier mechanical and chase also involved a bike change, which meant the second spare was someone elses.

If there are any problems with my logic on this, please let me know.

 

[ianfra]

GH posts with intensity for effect. If you don't like it so much, then ignore.

The old lack of reasoning award more easily fits the chronic Sky defenders and the whole "you must hate the sport" mentality. Funny how both remind one of pharmstrong/USPS defenders.

Right now bike racing/racers really don't get much benefit of the doubt ... and that is normal given all that has come to light.

You seem far too upset about other people's posts on Sky and Brads. I will not bother making assumptions why, but you really should start working on whatever it is that is truly bugging you.

Yes. What bugs me is the lack of respect, humanity and decency towards other people. What bugs me is posting assumptions as truth. What bugs me is his disgusting attitude towards people and his horrible language. What bugs me is people who snipe and NEVER (shouted) contribute. Those of us who have worked hard for our sport over many years do not want people like that around. If he was in my sphere he would be thrown out immediately. He comes over as an ignorant and mean and nasty piece of work. He claims a monopoly on truth through his words but in reality he knows nothing. He's a nasty little wind up artist and to use his own vernacular he should FO. On the other hand he sounds somewhat autistic so perhaps we could feel sorry for him. There is no need to post these lies about Brad or other decent people.

 

[thehog]

Yes. What bugs me is the lack of respect, humanity and decency towards other people. What bugs me is posting assumptions as truth. What bugs me is his disgusting attitude towards people and his horrible language. What bugs me is people who snipe and NEVER (shouted) contribute. Those of us who have worked hard for our sport over many years do not want people like that around. If he was in my sphere he would be thrown out immediately. He comes over as an ignorant and mean and nasty piece of work. He claims a monopoly on truth through his words but in reality he knows nothing. He's a nasty little wind up artist and to use his own vernacular he should FO. On the other hand he sounds somewhat autistic so perhaps we could feel sorry for him. There is no need to post these lies about Brad or other decent people.

What about the Dawg?

Can we tell truth about him? Sideways to up the mountain in one easy step.

 

[Ripper]

Hey!

Did a fair number of posts just get deleted?

 

[sittingbison]

Did a fair number of posts just get deleted?

keeping the sweep for the 20000th post in suspense

And no cheating by deleting your OWN prior posts like the shenanigans in the Lance thread last year

 

[Trudgin]

Just to say on this Walsh / Kimmage discussion... I would not trust either Walsh or Kimmage... they are journalists and therefore open to payment (or charity)

Walsh being imbedded probably means he is now within the Murdoch/Braidlsford thrall - so we will get nothing from him.

Kimmage comes across as annoyed that he didnt get to be there - toys out the pram much Paul?

if Kimmage had been imbedded, as long as they paid him - why would any of us expect a different result?

Seriously does anyone believe that IF UKPS were doping and were inviting a journo into their mists that they wouldnt ensure silence before they opened the doors..

Did anyone really think the headlines were going to be "SYSTEMATIC DOPING AT SKY" "MARGINAL GAINS, SMARGINAL GAMES"

no we did not.

This is just another thing we can go on about Ad Nauseum in the Clinic...

 

[Benotti69]

Just to say on this Walsh / Kimmage discussion... I would not trust either Walsh or Kimmage... they are journalists and therefore open to payment (or charity)

Walsh being imbedded probably means he is now within the Murdoch/Braidlsford thrall - so we will get nothing from him.

Kimmage comes across as annoyed that he didnt get to be there - toys out the pram much Paul?

if Kimmage had been imbedded, as long as they paid him - why would any of us expect a different result?

Seriously does anyone believe that IF UKPS were doping and were inviting a journo into their mists that they wouldnt ensure silence before they opened the doors..

Did anyone really think the headlines were going to be "SYSTEMATIC DOPING AT SKY" "MARGINAL GAINS, SMARGINAL GAMES"

no we did not.

This is just another thing we can go on about Ad Nauseum in the Clinic...

Kimmage said that the Sunday Times wouldn't print his articles about Sky and his questions of their cleanliness and it ultimately cost him his job. Walsh said he has zero doubt whether they would publish his stories if he wrote similar articles about Sky like that he did on Armstrong. Kimmage said there is no way they will, but Walsh again said he no doubt that the Sunday Times would publish.

It will be very difficult to find another Stephen Swart, Betsy Andreu and Emma O'Reilly who after reading what Betsy, Emma and to a less extent Swart went through and be prepared to risk similar from Sky/Murdoch.

 

[weeniebeenie]

Just to say on this Walsh / Kimmage discussion... I would not trust either Walsh or Kimmage... they are journalists and therefore open to payment (or charity)

Walsh being imbedded probably means he is now within the Murdoch/Braidlsford thrall - so we will get nothing from him.

Kimmage comes across as annoyed that he didnt get to be there - toys out the pram much Paul?

if Kimmage had been imbedded, as long as they paid him - why would any of us expect a different result?

After all Walsh and Kimmage have been through you are seriously questioning their integrity?

 

[DirtyWorks]

It will be very difficult to find another Stephen Swart, Betsy Andreu and Emma O'Reilly who after reading what Betsy, Emma and to a less extent Swart went through and be prepared to risk similar from Sky/Murdoch.

To the bolded, talk about a bully pulpit! Not only is the amount of resources dwarf Armstrong's at the time, but SKY's got media outlets to REALLY sell their myth. The libel?/slander? law in the UK works towards Sky/Murdoch too.

 

[DirtyWorks]

After all Walsh and Kimmage have been through you are seriously questioning their integrity?

The topic of Walsh and Kimmage's credibility will be revisited like Lemond's doping. Like allegations of Lemond doping, the ridiculous challenges will be torn to shreds.

 

[JimmyFingers]

To the bolded, talk about a bully pulpit! Not only is the amount of resources dwarf Armstrong's at the time, but SKY's got media outlets to REALLY sell their myth. The libel?/slander? law in the UK works towards Sky/Murdoch too.

This is where the arguments separate from reality and go into tin foil hat territory. Armstrong was borderline psychotic, machismo incarnate, and he was a one-of-a-kind, despite attempts to paint Wiggins in the same light. He bullied and intimidated people, and even grassed up his own teammates if the stories are true.

But he was also careless, he did doping so brazenly he let a lot of people know and see, and so the mouth-of-mouth started to trickle through. That's not the case with Sky, and if they are doping they are doing in a very different way. They're not going to let people know they are doping, and then bully or sue that person or media source into silence.

If Sky are doping the likelihood is you'll never hear about it, and not because they are silencing people, but because people won't know in the first place.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Suggesting to plot it on a scattergram is as useful as the last guy who banged on about being a data results analyst in a lab. ?

Now I'm at a computer with some data, I'd like to go back to this

Do you think this scatter diagram suggests suspicious behavior ?

Ret% is at best invariant with HGB, or more realistically shows a positive correlation (instead of the expected negative correlation).

 

[DirtyWorks]

... he was also careless, he did doping so brazenly he let a lot of people know and see, and so the mouth-of-mouth started to trickle through. That's not the case with Sky, and if they are doping they are doing in a very different way. ...

All true. It just goes to show you how much of an impact Armstrong/Wiesel/Hein's corruption has. I mistakenly treat Sky's case like Wonderboy's! I absolutely agree it is not the same thing.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

To remind you this is pro cycling, not tiddlywinks. Doping is endemic last i heard. Check here for how much in Europe alone

http://www.dopeology.org/

Are you actually quoting that site as a legitimate source for your conclussion?

If you are you might want to rethink your decision.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Are you actually quoting that site as a legitimate source for your conclussion?

If you are you might want to rethink your decision.

I would say that site is a legitimate source

 

[Le Baroudeur]

I would say that site is a legitimate source

Unfortunately not. It has no official capacity, is laiden with errors and false aspersions, and is contextually grossly misleading.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Unfortunately not. It has no official capacity, is laiden with errors and false aspersions, and is contextually grossly misleading.

How? can you give an example?

 

[The Hitch]

is laiden with errors and false aspersions, and is contextually grossly misleading.

I think you are confusing dopeology with cycling news.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I think you are confusing dopeology with cycling news.

Lol good one

How? can you give an example?

yes! Give an example.

 

[Caruut]

Unfortunately not. It has no official capacity, is laiden with errors and false aspersions, and is contextually grossly misleading.

Au contraire - you have no official capacity, are laden with errors and false aspersions and are contextually grossly misleading!

 

[DirtyWorks]

Unfortunately not. It has no official capacity, is laiden with errors and false aspersions, and is contextually grossly misleading.

No official capacity? We are going to rely on the UCI and other Olympic federations to publish their own dirty laundry? WADA certainly can't do it.

If it's laden with errors and false assumptions, then how about helping by editing? Otherwise, this is a replay of the wikipedia.org vs. Encyclopedia publication industry arguments. Nothing is perfect.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

No official capacity? We are going to rely on the UCI and other Olympic federations to publish their own dirty laundry? WADA certainly can't do it.

In my experience most Federations, and sports bodies publish lists of sanctions etc.

If it's laden with errors and false assumptions, then how about helping by editing? Otherwise, this is a replay of the wikipedia.org vs. Encyclopedia publication industry arguments. Nothing is perfect.

How about not publishing erroneous data, provide reference for all lisings, stop making irrelivant associations out of context and without explanation, and attempt to distinguish between allegations and facts. Even wikipoxipedia has editorial controls and standards.

Simple fact checking would help and editing should happen before publication.