Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[sittingbison]

When every post results in a complaint... From both sides... It's time to stop DrMas.

And this particular convo is about another (personal) agenda entirely, zilch to do with Sky.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

When every post results in a complaint... From both sides... It's time to stop DrMas.

And this particular convo is about another (personal) agenda entirely, zilch to do with Sky.

You're right it has nothing to do with Sky and it should stop and it is not confined to this thread.

However, if you were getting complaints, from "both sides" why do we the members have to wait for you to come along? Where are the rest of the mods? What are they doing?

 

[Race Radio]

When every post results in a complaint... From both sides... It's time to stop DrMas.

And this particular convo is about another (personal) agenda entirely, zilch to do with Sky.

Cool to hear we can reveal, and intentionally distort, the contents of PM's now

This is going to be fun

 

[42x16ss]

Not directly, but it builds another layer on what is already a crazy livelihood, especially if you don't have the personality for it.

Thorpe was being built up into a world beater and told the sun shines out of his backside when he was 14 years old. He was by far and away the most well known athlete in the country by the time he was 16-17. At one stage he couldn't wipe his backside without the media trying to report it.

Then you add in the fact that he's known he was gay since his mid teens, but wanted to keep his personal life close to his chest and it's no wonder that the poor guy was a ticking emotional time bomb. He didn't get to live his own life until his mid 20's and even now, still gets too much attention in public. All the dope did was make a naturally incredible swimmer (perfect technique and physique) get even better.

 

[Franklin]

My explanation has not changed - the exact same reason you lie. Interpreting what was written differently to others.

Readng RR's message I can not conclude other than that you are at the wrong side of the line by a wide margin.

Yes, there are red flags, but RR certainly does not deny this. That he says there's no smoking gun is of course 100%+ correct. There's nothing that remotely pointed to a criminal investigation. And that ws even more so back when he messaged you. And his hesistation to just blabber around when he has no sources is laudable. That you are angry about this is rdiculous.

You simply are erectng a very ugly strawman over a PM that someone wrote to you. Putting aside the behavior to slam an opinion given in a PM, your interpretation is just wrong on a fundamenta level.

To the mods/admins: read Dr. mas. reply and think about it.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Readng RR's message

I've read your posts, you're not ***. Where did this particular arc of the thread start? Do you know? Can you link to the post?

 

[Franklin]

Well, we have this one:

This is exactly how I feel, watching Brad climb in 2009 or 2011 or 2012.

RaceRadio, however, believes Sky's riders and performances are all clean.

And we are told over and over that you can't judge doping on performance.

So confusing.

As that is clearly shown to be a very ugly strawman and a direct attack on another poster I'd say you are far out of line.

Yeah, strawmen really bug me, probably because of the amount of idiocy I called upon myself last month. And I really see no grounds for this spite match. RR is hardly a pro-doping apologist.

 

[thehog]

Well, we have this one:



As that is clearly shown to be a very ugly strawman and a direct attack on another poster I'd say you are far out of line.

Yeah, strawmen really bug me, probably because of the amount of idiocy I called upon myself last month. And I really see no grounds for this spite match. RR is hardly a pro-doping apologist.

I agree. Race Radio is not a representative of a Sky or how they perform.

There is not point chastising him for whatever Sky do. He's also entitled to his opinion good, bad or indifferent. As we all are.

My belief is Sky just make people angry with their performances and Walsh etc. Additionally it is infuriating with their lack of transparency and evasive media relations.

This year will be interesting.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Well, we have this one:

People like to use words like : angry, strawman, "why do you lie" etc. Emotive words or questions to deflect or misdirect. As for attacking RR? WTF are you talking about :?

RR posts a comment by Betsy - Frankie was climbing and he ain't no climber. So immediately she judged him to be doping.

There are countless examples of posters here watching Brad, a non-climber, climb rings around everyone except Chris Froome in 2011 and 2012, and climbing in 2009 with the dopers of the peloton.

RR has no problem at all posting Betsy's logic - totally devoid of smoking guns - she herself says

“I knew it without having proof because he’s not a climber,” she says.

The primary defense of Wiggins and Sky et al is : THERE IS NO PROOF.

Race Radio says - I see no smoking gun. ie there is no proof. That's it. He says nothing else. The Sky rider's performance - which for a lot of people was enough to believe Wiggins and Froome were doped - is the same thing as Betsy looking at Frankie performance and concluding he is doping.

I don't know how I can make it any simpler for you.

I asked how else it ("I see no smoking gun") could be interpreted, but he didn't answer. Again. Like when I asked for proof of what he claimed LA has been doing for months.

But to me that sounds like, "nothing is going on". And if nothing is going on, what's the logical conclusion from there?

 

[Race Radio]

People like to use words like : angry, strawman, "why do you lie" etc. Emotive words or questions to deflect or misdirect. As for attacking RR? WTF are you talking about :?

RR posts a comment by Betsy - Frankie was climbing and he ain't no climber. So immediately she judged him to be doping.

There are countless examples of posters here watching Brad, a non-climber, climb rings around everyone except Chris Froome in 2011 and 2012, and climbing in 2009 with the dopers of the peloton.

RR has no problem at all posting Betsy's logic - totally devoid of smoking guns - she herself says



The primary defense of Wiggins and Sky et al is : THERE IS NO PROOF.

Race Radio says - I see no smoking gun. ie there is no proof. That's it. He says nothing else. The Sky rider's performance - which for a lot of people was enough to believe Wiggins and Froome were doped - is the same thing as Betsy looking at Frankie performance and concluding he is doping.

I don't know how I can make it any simpler for you.

I asked how else it could be interpreted, but he didn't answer. Again. Like when I asked for proof of what he claimed LA has been doing for months.

But to me that sounds like, "nothing is going on".

Can't believe I am responding to your nonsense....

In my Private Message from 2 years ago I clearly say that I had not been following Wiggins and was not the person to ask about it. You may not have a life outside of this forum but I do. There are periods of time where I travel extensively, don't expect me to have calculations for every climb. I rely on Veetoo for that

RaceRadio, however, believes Sky's riders and performances are all clean.

This is lie, you know it is a lie, the mods know it is a lie, but you still spew it.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

This is lie, you know it is a lie, the mods know it is a lie, but you still spew it.

Still spew it? What an idiotic way to say I have written it once.

So you do think Wiggins doped?

What's your stance?

Still "there's no evidence"?

Or are you taking the Krebs Cycle tack and claiming "I am not saying they don't dope"?

Deign to clear up the obvious confusion?

Betsy can spot a doper when a non-climber climbs. No calculations necessary. Can you?

 

[Parker]

St
Betsy can spot a doper when a non-climber climbs. No calculations necessary. Can you?

But Betsy's ability to spot a doper due to a performance seems solely restricted to people she is married to. She is not judging purely on that performance, but on that performance in the context of all that she knows about that rider from several years of marriage.

I'm fairly sure that none of those judging Froome/Wiggins in the same way have anything like the same level of knowledge of their subject, so comparisons are ridiculous.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

But Betsy's ability to spot a doper due to a performance seems solely restricted to people she is married to. She is not judging purely on that performance, but on that performance in the context of all that she knows about that rider from several years of marriage.

So when Betsy says,

“I knew it without having proof because he’s not a climber,” she says.

that means nothing?

All she says is: Frankie is not a climber.

Trust me, before magical unicorn 2009, neither was Wiggo.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

But Betsy's ability to spot a doper due to a performance seems solely restricted to people she is married to. She is not judging purely on that performance, but on that performance in the context of all that she knows about that rider from several years of marriage.

I'm fairly sure that none of those judging Froome/Wiggins in the same way have anything like the same level of knowledge of their subject, so comparisons are ridiculous.

You missed the point - dear Wiggo is clearly stating that RR is in fact Cath Wiggins.

 

[BroDeal]

Betsy can spot a doper when a non-climber climbs. No calculations necessary. Can you?

Things have changed. There were no tailwinds back then.

 

[ebandit]

calm down

So you do think Wiggins doped?

What's your stance?

Still "there's no evidence"?

Or are you taking the Krebs Cycle tack and claiming "I am not saying they don't dope"?

Deign to clear up the obvious confusion?

Betsy can spot a doper when a non-climber climbs. No calculations necessary. Can you?

d wiggo RR has nothing to defend thread and concern is whether team

sky dope and right now none of us know 100% that they are less

than clean

please challenge team sky not RR

Mark L

 

[Bexon30]

d wiggo RR has nothing to defend thread and concern is whether team

sky dope and right now none of us know 100% that they are less

than clean

please challenge team sky not RR

Mark L

I agree, but how is it possible to challenge Team
Sky? I can't see how. The reporters and current journalists are not capable so why would Sky need to answer to Jo Public? There's no way to ask, therefore there's nothing to see.

 

[ebandit]

doh!

I agree, but how is it possible to challenge Team
Sky? I can't see how. The reporters and current journalists are not capable so why would Sky need to answer to Jo Public? There's no way to ask, therefore there's nothing to see.

doh! how is any team challenged? if there is anything to see it will be spotted

if that information has merit it will not 'just vanish'

recent posts in the sky thread show that members are still clutching at straws

Mark L

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

d wiggo RR has nothing to defend thread and concern is whether team

sky dope and right now none of us know 100% that they are less

than clean

please challenge team sky not RR

Mark L

He is not challenging, he is making an analogy, nothing more nothing less.

Betsy Andreau played the 'spot the doper by performance', can we too?

 

[gooner]

As Team Sky's plan for a hub in the south of France progresses, it seems likely that the proposal may be expanded to offer services to non team members and possibly to sports other than cycling.

"We've got good plans for developing the Nice/Monaco base," Sky's head, Sir Dave Brailsford, said this week at the team's training camp in Mallorca.

"There's a human performance centre, a team house and 14 riders living down there now.

"We've started thinking about a knowledge-based operation, which will be a bit more external and will look out to all walks of life."

In other words, eventually the services offered by the base won't be just about cycling.

Nice was chosen due to its centrality within Europe, its international airport, the quality of the roads and the weather.

"There's no reference point so there's an opportunity to collate, to have a horizon scan," said Brailsford, who over the years has made a point of networking with senior managers from other sports. For example he welcomed Sir Alex Ferguson to the Manchester velodrome and set up an informal thinktank with the England rugby coach Stuart Lancaster. More recently, he has been visiting ice hockey and basketball managers in the USA.

Brailsford has subtly altered Team Sky's buildup to the 2014 season by extending the squad's rest period in the autumn and having their first get-together later in the off season, because his feeling was that in 2012-13 the team did not have time to regroup before getting on the road again.

"[In 2012] the whole Armstrong thing hijacked our one occasion of getting everyone together. This year we tagged three days on to our team meeting, went to a local theatre and talked about what it's all about.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/feb/05/team-sky-hub-france-nice-monaco

 

[Franklin]

He is not challenging, he is making an analogy, nothing more nothing less.

Betsy Andreau played the 'spot the doper by performance', can we too?

You realize there's a difference on several levels between Betsy, the spouse of Andy and RR judging a team he has no info about?

I certainly can spot it if my wife becomes much stronger. I can also speak about this with no moral qualms as it's something I'm certainly an expert about.

I can not speak about you getting stronger as I do not know you, don't know your training regimen etc. I would be quite presuming if I went to judge you about this. All i can say is "that's surprising".

Note that RR did not claim "all looks normal". He said "I don't know the team, have not heard rumors and don't see a smoking gun".

 

[SundayRider]

You realize there's a difference on several levels between Betsy, the spouse of Andy and RR judging a team he has no info about?

I certainly can spot it if my wife becomes much stronger. I can also speak about this with no moral qualms as it's something I'm certainly an expert about.

I can not speak about you getting stronger as I do not know you, don't know your training regimen etc. I would be quite presuming if I went to judge you about this. All i can say is "that's surprising".

Note that RR did not claim "all looks normal". He said "I don't know the team, have not heard rumors and don't see a smoking gun".

It is a bit different when all the performances are in the public eye, no? Wiggins never showed an ounce of climbing ability before 2009 then bang. Andreu was leading the peloton up climbs and he was a flatlands guy.

 

[bobbins]

Wiggins goes well in 09 - signs for Sky
not so good in 2010, Sky give Dave B a kick up the **** which Dave B relays to Brad and gives him the 'be more professional' talk
Wiggins goes well in 2011 crashes, DNS, back for the Vuelta, climbing revelation once more, 2012 wins lots.

Doesn't take a genius to work out what happened.

The naive paymasters at BSkyB might think that marginal gains and altitude training made the difference but anyone with half a brain knows the real situation.

 

[SundayRider]

Wiggins goes well in 09 - signs for Sky
not so good in 2010, Sky give Dave B a kick up the **** which Dave B relays to Brad and gives him the 'be more professional' talk
Wiggins goes well in 2011 crashes, DNS, back for the Vuelta, climbing revelation once more, 2012 wins lots.

Doesn't take a genius to work out what happened.

The naive paymasters at BSkyB might think that marginal gains and altitude training made the difference but anyone with half a brain knows the real situation.

This, basically. The Sky/Wiggins thread condensed into a few sentences. The above scenario has happened so many times in cycling.

 

[Race Radio]

He is not challenging, he is making an analogy, nothing more nothing less.

Betsy Andreau played the 'spot the doper by performance', can we too?

Nah, he is lying.

He wrote that I think all of Sky performances are clean, when I have made it clear several times they are not.

Why intentionally post a lie like? I don't know what motivates several posters here to write such nonsense