Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[martinvickers]

Sky arent a member of MPCC are they?

If they are willing to use this, what else are they willing to use?

Its interesting stuff really.

It's interesting, and unpleasant, but not terribly indicative. One could easily make the argument from this Tramadol use that this shows Sky don't give a damn, believe competely in Pharma, and illegally dope to the eyeballs. One could pretty much as easily argue this shows Sky are pushing every legal button they can, but not the illegal ones. In short, if Sky were dirty, I can see them using Tramadol. If they are basically clearn, I can see them using Tramadol. They use Tramadol. It's not really helping eliminate one of the possiblities.

The Tramadol use alone is IMHO unsavoury, but not of itself indicative of anything except Tramadol use.

All that said. the sooner it's banned the better IMO

 

[Mellow Velo]

Sky arent a member of MPCC are they?

If they are willing to use this, what else are they willing to use?

Its interesting stuff really.

Why is being a member of MPCC important when both are calling for the same thing: a ban on Tramadol use?

In case you have forgotten:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-calls-for-tramadol-ban-in-peloton

It's use is widespread throughout the peloton, including MPCC teams.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Yeah I kinda wondered about that - that's 30 samples a day for 20 days. dafuq?

Considering in the 2012 Giro Ryder was in pink for 5 days, but only BP blood tested on 2 of those days in pink, plus one other day when not in pink, despite the number of tests at the Tour, they don't necessarily prove that the goal is to catch people with boosted blood parameters.

~200 pre competition.
Two sets of rest day samples for Bio passport, probably accounts for most of the remaining 400. (most/all riders are tested each rest day)

I'd say that level of testing is really only the bare minimum.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

~200 pre competition.
Two sets of rest day samples for Bio passport, probably accounts for most of the remaining 400. (most/all riders are tested each rest day)

I'd say that level of testing is really only the bare minimum.

rest day testing - is that for BP? but doesn't happen at the Giro?

 

[nomapnocompass]

The Tramadol use alone is IMHO unsavoury, but not of itself indicative of anything except Tramadol use.

The problem is that things are not black and white. The area between clean cycling and doping is very grey and using substances or methods that are borderline legal just makes it easier for the athlete to justify doping. This is why, for example, there has been a push recently for a 'no needles' policy by some teams even if the IV products being administers are perfectly legal.

Agree with you completely that Tramadol should be banned as soon as possible.

 

[mikeoneill]

sky said before that it's used minimally

so this contradicts that


what's the situation with sky and TUEs?

brailsford previously called for all the info to be made public

 

[Catwhoorg]

rest day testing - is that for BP? but doesn't happen at the Giro?

Ryder, and Wiggo, when they released their partial BP information through Garmin both showed testing on/around the rest day at the Giro (and for Wiggo the tour)

 

[lllludo]

the grey zone: to go or not to go

So Tramadol is in a grey area. Interesting that some teams like SKY and Garmin (where Prentice Steffen consider "legal doping" as something usable) authorize the use of products to boost the physiology of their riders because it's not illegal. And they don't see the problem voicing it.
You can go for a no needle policy and they will try to use gas or pills such as the ones found on Paris-Roubaix. No problem.

Imo it depends on the culture: for the majority of the anglos no questions to be asked. There's a limit (is it legal or not). You can can go in the grey zone because it's on the good side of the limit. No questions to be asked.

In other cultures the limit would be: is it moral or not ? If you go in the grey zone you're doing it less frankly, less openly because you don't know where you stand. So going in the grey zone will not be a solution or won't be as efficient because not every body is on the same agenda.
So these teams will not reach the results of the anglo-teams which are nowadays considered as the most successful in particular by sir Oleg Tinkoff last year.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Ryder, and Wiggo, when they released their partial BP information through Garmin both showed testing on/around the rest day at the Giro (and for Wiggo the tour)

JV released Ryder's BP info from the 2012 Giro, and the data was from dates nowhere near the rest day.

 

[MartinGT]

Why is being a member of MPCC important when both are calling for the same thing: a ban on Tramadol use?

In case you have forgotten:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-calls-for-tramadol-ban-in-peloton

It's use is widespread throughout the peloton, including MPCC teams.

Once again Team Sky contradicting themselves.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

This is blatantly false and trolling. It's been covered over and over. Your refusal to accept the simple, factual definition of the word is absurd.

Look if you had strong arguments, and the doping would have been "covered over and over" you would not call me trolling when instead you just could put a few quick links of the overwhelming evidence of Sky doping. Further Sky riders would have been banned. Right?
Since you don´t do that, and Sky riders are not banned, sorry to say, you are trolling, crying out b/c I don´t convert your opinions into doping evidence.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Who said that?

I would like to know that too...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

If only people understood the difference between evidence and proof. If only there was a thread exhaustively explaining this difference.

If only.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Ok, just have to pull you up a bit here - i don't know if this was a willful misreading, or inadvertant, but this is not what i wrote or meant.

If something is an "illegal method" it is not grey, it's black. Illegal methods are in the WADA documentation.

What are being discussed is not methods that are illegal by reason of meating a category description in the WADA code but not explicitly named. We are talking about things that ARE currently legal, but ETHICALLY dubious - i.e. INSIDE the LETTER of the rules, but arguably not inside the spirit. Legal painkillers being overused to dull exertion pain, rather than treat injury meets this description to a tee.

Perhaps it would be best to highlight "grey area" could have two meanings in this context.

1. Legally dubious or unclear.
2. Ethically dubious or unclear.

Tramadol seems to fit 2, unless someone can advise me otherwise.

To the bolded: He is literally always doing that...
Anyway, besides this, I fully agree with your post, I just would add 3.) that Sky may uses illegal weight reducing drugs, but inside thresholds. Or they simply use legal weight losing drugs. The grey area is wide.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

The problem is that things are not black and white. The area between clean cycling and doping is very grey

Thats what Martin and I tried to explain redflanders for circa 3 pages. He just refuses to accept this simple fact... I think everybody else, including you got it.

 

[The Hitch]

BC = British Cycling

LOL. Major mess by me...

On that note, maybe sentences involving Tony Martin and GC, will start to make sense now.

 

[thrawn]

To the bolded: He is literally always doing that...
Anyway, besides this, I fully agree with your post, I just would add 3.) that Sky may uses illegal weight reducing drugs, but inside thresholds. Or they simply use legal weight losing drugs. The grey area is wide.

What weight loss drugs have thresholds?

 

[The Hitch]

Thats what Martin and I tried to explain redflanders for circa 3 pages. He just refuses to accept this simple fact... I think everybody else, including you got it.

Is Horner also grey are in your opinion?

 

[sniper]

Thats what Martin and I tried to explain redflanders for circa 3 pages. He just refuses to accept this simple fact... I think everybody else, including you got it.

you still gotta explain to me: if Sky were using legal (viz. non-banned) products only, why does Froome need a BS badzilla excuse, why did Sky need Leinders, why are they having issues such as the JTL/Henao cases, why aren't they publishing Froome's pre-2011 data. Etc.

I don't see much of a grey area there.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Once again Team Sky contradicting themselves.

Very weak rebuttal.
They chose to "contradict themselves" on Tramadol a couple of weeks before the MPCC made their similar announcement.
Both statements were made a year after Barry had departed the peloton.
Why they made them only 6 months ago, is open to speculation.

You are free to choose a nefarious reason, but it encompasses all teams, not just Sky and being currently legal, falls outside the bounds of any ZTP .

I would suggest that the most likely reason is that over time, the side effects have become evident, such as those outlined by the Lotto doctor, last month.

 

[martinvickers]

Is Horner also grey are in your opinion?

Are you suggesting taking Horner by ingestion, inhalation or injection? Or is it a cream form?

 

[The Hitch]

Yeah I am struggling with the concept that Tramadol et al - useable by anyone - is providing such a significant difference in 2012 / 2013 for team Sky vs everyone else in the peloton from February to August for those years.

This.
This, it ain't the barely legal **** we talk about when we say sky dope. If froomes programme costs less than 6 figures, I'll aknowledge he's a good rider who could have top 10d some stages in a clean peloton.

Hell I'll give y'all "grey area" as clean even.

 

[Benotti69]

So Sky dope, albeit legally!

As Brailsford said before

'If you’re a cheat, you're a cheat, you're not half a cheat. You wouldn't say, 'I'll cheat here but I'm not going to cheat over there; I'll cheat on a Monday but not on a Tuesday.'

So using copius amounts of Tramadol that Barry calls performance enhancing really does fly in the face of Sky's ZTP, IMO.

But no surprise really. Sky aren't half cheating..........

 

[martinvickers]

you still gotta explain to me: if Sky were using legal (viz. non-banned) products only, why does Froome need a BS badzilla excuse, why did Sky need Leinders, why are they having issues such as the JTL/Henao cases, why aren't they publishing Froome's pre-2011 data. Etc.

I don't see much of a grey area there.

I fear you are trying to squeeze into a conversation you aren't really part of. And you're thowing around the phrase "grey area" in a fairly meaningless way.

Look if you want to say "Hey, this Tramadol stuff isn't sexy enough. It ain't getting Froome banned. Enough already, I want to talk about REAL doping!!", that's fine, honestly. Don't shoehorn it into a conversation it's not really part of. It's rare enough this thread actually discusses something real in any detail.

Be better than the Hut.

 

[doolols]

The problem is that things are not black and white. The area between clean cycling and doping is very grey and using substances or methods that are borderline legal just makes it easier for the athlete to justify doping.

I'd be interested to know (as would, I am sure, many legal people) what the definition of "borderline legal" was. Something is either legal, or it isn't. There is a very thin, less than one nanometre line, which differentiates legal and illegal. Tramadol is not illegal, ergo it is legal.

Ethical? That's a different matter, and much more subjective. There are all sorts of pills and potions ingested by the peloton in the form of energy gels, drinks, electrolytes, and who knows what else. Taking a paracetamol if you have a headache? Fine. Taking paracetamol (or, indeed, Tramadol) to reduce the pains induced from cycling hard and fast? Ethically touch and go, but I'm sure many teams have been doing this. Ban Tramadol? How long before someone finds another strong painkiller not on the banned list?

This is why, for example, there has been a push recently for a 'no needles' policy by some teams even if the IV products being administers are perfectly legal.

The UCI does already have a no needles policy.