Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Bexon30]

I'm not even convinced there is a large body of loyal Sky fans. I don't think I've ever met one. I view them as opportunist fans latching onto the most accessible and heavily promoted team in the UK, in the context of a rapidly growing leisure market. Sky is a media organisation ferrchrissakes, we'd expect some sort of media schtick.

There definitely is a loyal base across not just England but the UK and even Europe, how big this is compared to better established teams would be interesting to know. Hell it wouldn't surprise me if there were many US fans also. Just wait for next summers Tour they'll be many more Sky fans there than there ever has been. A lot will believe the guff that's been fed for sure.

 

[the sceptic]

It's also obvious that there is no difference between Sky and other teams in this regard, making their statements that these are "gains", marginal or otherwise, laughable.

And because it's so laughable, it makes people wonder why they would make such claims other than to provide a false explanation of actual gains to people who don't know anything about the sport.

"The aggregation of marginal gains," is Brailsford's catchphrase. When he first explained it, he was discussing the thorny topic of doping. "My personal take on it is that a lot of the guys who dope actually use it as such a crutch that they stop doing other things," said Brailsford.
Read more at http://www.teamsky.com/article/0,27290,17547_5792058,00.html#sUSJjRtp5c26AR2F.99

Here Brailsford is even spelling it out for us.

 

[laurel1969]

Maybe "people who don't know anything about the sport" wasn't the right phrasing. "Casual fans who might want to be able to provide some kind of explanation when someone who does understand the history of the sport asks them how former pack-fodder are now dominant" might have been better.

Whatever the case, when transformations are unbelievable they require explanations, whomever the constituency.

People who don't know much about the sport will swallow these explanations. As will people who have put on blinders due to nationalistic or other bias. It's been done over and over again, and Sky are simply the latest.

People who understand the sport get that all teams have busses and pillows and nice hotel rooms and warming down, and will see that it's a smoke screen meant to distract and cover up the obvious.

I thought that was all pretty obvious from my first post, but hope that clears it up.

Right so it isn't casual fans then, it is casual fans who happen to come across somebody with your particular pecadillo.

It isn't happening. Casual fans wouldn't know about or understand the controversy of sudden progress. I'm sitting here right in the epicentre of the Sky fanbase and I've never heard what you describe occurring, but of course you know best.

I think you are contorting this to fit your own particular obsession. I don't think the marginal gains schtick is about providing excuses that aren't being asked for, its about attracting fans by showing that Sky are worthy of fandom. Its marketing. Its PR. Its exactly what one would expect from a team sponsored by a media company.

 

[pastronef]

I'm not even convinced there is a large body of loyal Sky fans. I don't think I've ever met one. I view them as opportunist fans latching onto the most accessible and heavily promoted team in the UK, in the context of a rapidly growing leisure market. Sky is a media organisation ferrchrissakes, we'd expect some sort of media schtick.

what is a loyal fan?

 

[Electress]

Right so it isn't casual fans then, it is casual fans who happen to come across somebody with your particular pecadillo.

It isn't happening. Casual fans wouldn't know about or understand the controversy of sudden progress. I'm sitting here right in the epicentre of the Sky fanbase and I've never heard what you describe occurring, but of course you know best.

I think you are contorting this to fit your own particular obsession. I don't think the marginal gains schtick is about providing excuses that aren't being asked for, its about attracting fans by showing that Sky are worthy of fandom. Its marketing. Its PR. Its exactly what one would expect from a team sponsored by a media company.

I agree about the media but I also happen to think there is a certain amount of pre-emption of the thorny issue of doping, by providing what seems like a rational explanation for Sky's successes. (I too am in the thick of fandom).

I'd say what even the most newbie cycling fans are extremely aware of is doping - they probably know more about it than cycling courtesy of LA - and any sudden performance (as it, suddenly GB/Wiggo/Froome/ SKy won the TdF) will invite some scepticism even in the totally disinterested. Marginal gains kind of helps link Sky to the Olympic Team and the 'cleaner' reputation of track cycling and the Olympic movement compared to road racing. It's a genius choice in some way, because marginal gains sounds so terribly terribly dull and methodical that it a world away from 'inhuman' performances spurred on by men doped up to their eyeballs.

It also helps sell books about monkey-brain training theories involving 'tribes' and 'moons' and all sorts of other unintelligible mental models to help you 'manage the process'...

 

[laurel1969]

Many other sports offer up similar ideas such as marginal gains. Formula 1 teams, who's cars are presumably dope-free will present themselves as technologically superior in order to boost the brand image of their sponsors.

Of course, the hammer blow to Red Flanders argument is that the marginal gains schtick pre-dated the magical transformations in Sky. What was it explaining away at that point then....

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Best marginal gain in this forum is the ignore button.

 

[del1962]

Well i bet Coppi didn't put pineapple juice in his water bidon

What it does prove is that the idea that other teams are not into training, diet and technique like Sky are is utter BS. Teams were considering it back in the 50s and have been improving since.

That Sky are using methods from the 80s and 90s and calling them innovative proves they are full of BS.

Keep buying the rapha gear del, you look marvellous

As I suspected, you have no proof of anything but posted a complete load of drivel

 

[sittingbison]

Many other sports offer up similar ideas such as marginal gains....

In Aussie Rules its called one percenters (1%). Doing the smallest things makes can make a difference - said smallest things being that tiny little bit of extra effort in a forlorn chase etc etc that can be the difference between winning and losing

round wheels 1%
warming down 1%
pineapple juice 1%
etc
etc

boosting hct from 39% to 50% (Lance) with hot sauce is a 28% improvement

 

[nomapnocompass]

osting hct from 39% to 50% (Lance) with hot sauce is a 28% improvement

28% improvement in hct, not necessarily in performance.

 

[the sceptic]

 

[TailWindHome]

all teams have busses and pillows and nice hotel rooms and warming down

Even the most casual observer, when wandering through the teams area before the Giro start in Belfast would have noticed a huge variation in the resources available to each team.

 

[the sceptic]

Even the most casual observer, when wandering through the teams area before the Giro start in Belfast would have noticed a huge variation in the resources available to each team.

hate to break it to you, but sky are doping. Deal with it.

 

[TailWindHome]

hate to break it to you, but sky are doping. Deal with it.

Well that settles it then.

Close the thread.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Sky's new bus, coming in 2015.

 

[laurel1969]

hate to break it to you, but sky are doping. Deal with it.

We all know that. Me, you, probably the poster you quote. But the discussion being had in this thread at this moment is not whether Sky dope. Its about mistakenly attributing other aspects of Sky's activity to doping.

 

[TailWindHome]

hate to break it to you, but sky are doping. Deal with it.

Excellent contribution.
Well done.

 

[the sceptic]

We all know that. Me, you, probably the poster you quote. But the discussion being had in this thread at this moment is not whether Sky dope. Its about mistakenly attributing other aspects of Sky's activity to doping.

What made you change your mind? You never said sky were doping on any of your previous accounts.

 

[laurel1969]

Ah, the standard Sceptic response when challenged.

I knew it was a mistake to respond to you.

 

[ebandit]

Ahhh the sceptic........the forums very own Heinrich Himmler wannabe............quit hassling other posters with your stupid endless sock puppet accusations..........either engage in the question or do one.

Mark L

 

[laurel1969]

Thanks, but I really don't need anybody to defend me. Its my fault, I rubbed the lantern and out he popped

Everyone else ignores him and so should I. Every forum has one.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Even the most casual observer, when wandering through the teams area before the Giro start in Belfast would have noticed a huge variation in the resources available to each team.

Most of the teams had their primary buses in Italy, not in Belfast.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Most of the teams had their primary buses in Italy, not in Belfast.

Marginal gain, having several primary buses.

Or something like that.

Had forgotten Sky even contended in the Giro.

 

[laurel1969]

Marginal gain, having several primary buses.

Or something like that.

Had forgotten Sky even contended in the Giro.

Indeed. I expect it has been a while since the peloton referred to the Sky bus as The Death Star. Saxo are the new Sky, but their bus doesn't look menacing enough. Marginal loss

 

[the sceptic]

Ahhh the sceptic........the forums very own Heinrich Himmler wannabe............quit hassling other posters with your stupid endless sock puppet accusations..........either engage in the question or do one.

Mark L

Thanks Mark L, very nice.

Call me a nazi for correctly pointing out that this guy is an obvious troll that has been banned many times before.