Re: Sky
Yes it's quite interesting that, isn't it? What was the logic behind Sky choosing such poor quality riders to bump up to solid, outstanding winners when they could obviously have afforded much better raw material with which to work? Presumably these required a much higher quantity of whatever is being used than would a more talented rider making a smaller increase in performance. Seems strange to have taken the extra risk of detection in using total nobodies who look more suspicious than the more obvious talented riders they could have chosen.
Jakub said:LaFlorecita said:You just ensured it won't be quiet.JRanton said:Now the children's doping hero has got his first win this thread should be a lot quieter for a while.
yes, it was nice to see Dylan Thomas win Algarve, I am sure that all children are happy. Just some older blocks who also rememeber the famous Postal era haven't enjoyed it so much.
I am actually wondering what's Landa's and Kwiat's season gonna be like. Usually pre-sky donkeys are solid - for example Porte, pre-sky tragic donkeys are extremely solid: Froome, track riders are GCs - Wiggins, but who was top before is suffering: Cavendish. It's not enough examples though and also I believe that Landa had simply a magic season in 2015, that's all. But still if they both fail, I would really like to hear a scientific explanation
Yes it's quite interesting that, isn't it? What was the logic behind Sky choosing such poor quality riders to bump up to solid, outstanding winners when they could obviously have afforded much better raw material with which to work? Presumably these required a much higher quantity of whatever is being used than would a more talented rider making a smaller increase in performance. Seems strange to have taken the extra risk of detection in using total nobodies who look more suspicious than the more obvious talented riders they could have chosen.