nslckevin said:
Yes.
I'm all for having an opinion on the subject. I am just against this certainty that I see so much of. And that goes both ways. I think it is just as dumb to be certain that Sky is clean as it is to be certain that Sky is doping. I think it's fine to say "I think that Sky is dirty because..." or "I think that Sky is clean because...". I am just turned off by the certainty of so many people.
I think what really is "dumb" is that you hold such a extremely high opinion of yourself that you believe everyone else MUST reach the same conclusion you have.
I have my own standards thank you very much, no, I'm not going to use yours. I think when a team scores off the charts on every suspicion metric there is and creates some new ones which it also scores off the charts on, then gets caught lying and being dishonest at every turn and is contradicting themselves from year to year, all while offering performances and transformations that require mental summersaults to even be considered clean, then it is simply not possible for that team to be clean.
I'm not going to pretend I don't know because someone like you thinks everyone should play by your rules and reach your conclusion.
I am certain. And so are most people, one way or the other. Thankfully most its the one way.
I don't believe that doping has been eradicated from cycling by any means. But I also don't believe that it's impossible to win big races clean.
Nor do I.
So?
That has nothing to do with Sky. They didn't with a bit of luck win 1 big race. They destroyed the entire TDF warmup programme 2 years in a row, following it up both times by making every non sky rider in the world look like first year pros at the biggest race in the world.
Please don't use "i think its possible to win a race clean", in an argument for sky. That's dishonest. If you think Sky could be clean then what you actually believe is that its possible for clean riders to dominate the sport and ride faster than 99% of dopers ever did, for longer than 99% of dopers ever did. Not the same as winning a big race cos you peaked for it and everything went well.
And considering in the same sentence you say you think doping hasn't been erradicated, what you essentially believe is that doping has 0 impact on performance, since the guys who are doping are several levels bellow the guys who are doing it clean .
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm right. For the sake of the sport I hope I'm right, but I don't KNOW. And that's my main point, I don't think that anybody here really does KNOW.
Good for you. And me, I do KNOW.
Pleased to meet you