Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[thehog]

Asked if he was surprised that none of his rivals had attacked, Wiggins said: "I was little bit. I knew I was dictating the pace and that I wanted to keep it high threshold and not go too much into the red and I knew that if someone wanted to attack off that pace they’d have to be going quite a bit more, which I know is not really sustainable if we’re riding at 470 to 480 Watts. Someone is going to have to go a lot harder to sustain that. As long as we gauge it like that I knew we’d be alright.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-and-sky-surprised-at-stage-7-damage

 

[Parrot23]

Indeed, we know nothing about Yates being a doper or him being a DS of USPS. Nor do we only have the odd history of Leinders to go on.

Throwing Yates' name around as "evidence" for Sky doping is ridiculous. Throwing everything but the kitchen sink at them is pretty puerile by way of explanation.

Again, I don't quite believe Sky.

 

[Mr Pumpy]

Indeed, we know nothing about Yates being a doper or him being a DS of USPS.

Find me an ex-pro DS/Manager who wasn't a doper.... Vaughters? Ha ha ha. Riis?

So all Garmin, radio Shack and Saxo Bank riders are dopers simply because their managers were. Indeed anybody that has ever ridden on these teams is a doper by your logic.

 

[Franklin]

Then there's much less room for the catharsis of umbrage first, and evidence second.

Frankly, I don't think Yates will feel a lot of enthusiasm for doping, after nearly wrecking his heart, it seems from doping. He's had multiple strokes from his heart condition. He talks slurred now from them. Listen to him on Eurosport. He's lucky to be alive.

Playing the odds, he's an unlikely doping enthusiast now.

Again.. if you want a clean team you could at least try. No tainted DS's (USPS), no tained assistants (Leinders, Kerrison). There is no indication beyond rethoric that they are clean. In fact the key positions are filled with tainted people.

And this isn't talked about : We acknowledge our past but we want to start afresh. It's all unspoken.

And sorry, a near death experience does not stop someone from being a doper. Yates has his past against him and should not belong there. And yes, that goes for the majority of DS'es.

I'm not singling out Sky. And looking at the posters here there is a broad consensus that dope is wrong in any setting and in any team. This is not the Sky bashing forum.

 

[hrotha]

Find me an ex-pro DS/Manager who wasn't a doper.... Vaughters? Ha ha ha. Riis?

So all Garmin, radio Shack and Saxo Bank riders are dopers simply because their managers were. Indeed anybody that has ever ridden on these teams is a doper by your logic.

You're missing the crucial point that Yates was also a doping DS. What's wrong with Riis is not what he did at Ariostea, Gewiss and Telekom, but what he did at CSC.

 

[Parrot23]

There are many possible explanations besides he doped at Lotto but is clean at BMC, if that's what you're suggesting.

I was wondering more about BMC with their pedigree, actually.

 

[Franklin]

Find me an ex-pro DS/Manager who wasn't a doper.... Vaughters? Ha ha ha. Riis?

So all Garmin, radio Shack and Saxo Bank riders are dopers simply because their managers were. Indeed anybody that has ever ridden on these teams is a doper by your logic.

Actually.. yes. not simply because of their DS, but because the rot goes through all divisions. You do not hire these (medical) staff-members to play bridge (goes for a lot of teams).

And what you smoothly deny is that it's the amount of "coincidences" surrounding Sky that make the Odds bad.

One tainted DS with a clean medical staff could be believable. A tainted DS, with a tainted staff turning out a team that crushes the competition... now we are talking a lot of "coincidence".

 

[Parrot23]

Again.. if you want a clean team you could at least try. No tainted DS's (USPS), no tained assistants (Leinders, Kerrison). There is no indication beyond rethoric that they are clean. In fact the key positions are filled with tainted people.

And this isn't talked about : We acknowledge our past but we want to start afresh. It's all unspoken.

Show me anybody without a past and I will see God. Simple.

Yates has nearly killed himself with his doping past. He's not going to be doing it with others now. No way.

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

Man I would have loved this if they where attackers. But when they are just grinding up the hills I just gget very tired....

 

[Franklin]

Show me anybody without a past and I will see God. Simple.

Yates has nearly killed himself with his doping past. He's not going to be doing it with others now. No way.

Besides that the connection between his health and doping is speculative, have you read the memoirs of Riis and what Epo did to him?

No way that someone who went through constant appendical pain would run a dirty team

And about the past... BS. Getting a competent Brittish DS and getting an ex-doper schooled in the USPS cradle is quite a decision. Getting a competent team doctor and getting Geert Leinders is quite a decision. if you choose Geert Leinders you aren't even trying to look clean.

 

[Square-pedaller]

Show me anybody without a past and I will see God. Simple.

There are pasts and pasts, though.
Your argument is akin to saying that I have no right to expect that murderers be prosecuted because I shop-lifted something worth 5 bob when I was at primary school.

 

[Fergoose]

Only deniers argue doping in the top-5 in the GT's is unlikely. The Sky train and the apparent lack of effort tells the whole story. There should be four Sky riders in the GC top-ten if it weren't for a flat tire earlier this week!

A bit harsh. I don’t think you have to be a denier to give the riders I mentioned (Evans, Nibali, Taaramae) the benefit of the doubt. At least not for us those that think climbing times indicate there is less severe doping in the sport now, which opens the door a touch for clean riding to get the occasional result.

I think a good comparison is with Leopard-Trek. They had a good strong squad supporting the Schlecks and looked in great shape in recent TdFs with the likes of Monfort & Fuglsang – riders easily comparable to Rodgers, Porte & Froome in terms of long term, historic ability. Leopard-Trek tried to do a USPostal, blew up on the slopes and everyone laughed at them. Then last year they come back and on Andy’s amazing solo-attack they again muck it up because Fuglsang (a decent rider) couldn’t get over a summit quick enough to lend Andy & Monfort support. These incidents stuck in my mind at the time as a brilliant examples of how cleaner racing would look. Master plans failing, or only being 70% successful. I think consistently pulling off such a feat as Sky did today would take an incredible effort for a clean team.

Dodgy doctors etc only give a suggestion of misbehaviour. The calculation on the power data estimate page suggests a decent perfomance, but not eye-popping given it was the first proper climb of the tour on a gentle stage. But on each stage that such performances are repeated without any sign of weakness or fallibility from the entire team, the suspicions can only rise further.

Now I do agree it was a bit hysterical... but in truth, what has changed since the Postal years?

Speed and power have reduced throughout the field and particularly at the upper echelons. USPostal would have ripped up the hill quicker than Sky did today and they successfully dropped top riders who were later proven to be doping at the time. Sky's performance, though impressive, wasn't quite comparable.

Cleanest team? I think post-Contador and in the current climate none of them are going to take outrageous risks with doping.

What? Incase they get a modest backdated suspension that makes them miss only two GTs in the calendar and leaves the door open for them to be DSes later in their career? The penalties are laughable and cheats will always be tempted as long as the penalties remain utterly toothless.

I don’t agree with the majority of posts in this thread but Sky put themselves up on a pedistal the day they said they backed out of signing an unnamed rider after studying his biological passport and finding it to be “all over the place”. If a team is going to do that they deserve all the scrutiny they get. As I say though, I'm of the opinion that at least one rider on Sky is probably doping, but that the entire team isn't. I don't know how practically feasible that would be though.

 

[asdfgh101]

Does anyone have concrete information regarding the 'programme' Wiggins used to drop 12kgs?

 

[therhodeo]

There are many possible explanations besides he doped at Lotto but is clean at BMC, if that's what you're suggesting.

There has been some speculation that he and Thor spent the winter having way too much fun and are paying for it now.

 

[The Hitch]

I dont have anything against you but you are a huge fan of a suspended rider(I know that you dont believe him doping)
Just saying that its weird to accuse a team with no proper evidence

Wiggins had no problem accusing Sastre of doping. I have no problem therefore accusing Wiggins of doping.

Contador doesn't go round declaring all Latin speakers to be clean, all anglophone riders to be dirty, and claiming all of Ricardo Riccos haters have benefited from him.

Which is the parallel of what wiggins is doing.

 

[Ripper]

So in other words this happened because Sky is the cleanest team out there.

Hmm.
Nope, not buying it. I'd sooner join the Scientologists.

This - funny sh!t

 

[Dr.Sahl]

Essentially, on this board, if somebody wins a race they are a de facto doper.

Thats not true at all... the reason why the majority thinks this is suspect, is the way the whole team trashed all others, its like mediocre people just turned into supermens after 1 year, with several years being mediocre..

Now, I for one am not claiming they dope, but I do suspect fault play... mostly because it looked like USP times.. but I will give them the benefit of doubt... but if this happens the whole tour... then its pretty obivous

 

[The Hitch]

Wiggins being up there isn't surprising or shocking or suspicious.

Froome, well, when he's on form you could expect it, after all he won a similar but steeper stage in the Vuelta last year. However, he is suspicious full stop.

Porte, now we're onto shaky ground. The guy has shown he's decent in the past, but last time we saw him climbing in a GT he was a useless domestique to Contador, and before that it was losing several minutes to the likes of Scarponi and Basso (who he shelled out the back door today), however they have a Giro in their legs and he doesn't. You start to be suspicious when, when he drops, there's only about four other riders in the group, and Rogers is chasing back up.

Rogers... now you're just taking the p*ss.

I fail to see how Froome is more suspicious than Wiggins. They both had out of the blue breakout performances. Wiggins's came at 29, Froome's at 25.

 

[wannab]

Asked if he was surprised that none of his rivals had attacked, Wiggins said: "I was little bit. I knew I was dictating the pace and that I wanted to keep it high threshold and not go too much into the red and I knew that if someone wanted to attack off that pace they’d have to be going quite a bit more, which I know is not really sustainable if we’re riding at 470 to 480 Watts. Someone is going to have to go a lot harder to sustain that. As long as we gauge it like that I knew we’d be alright.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-and-sky-surprised-at-stage-7-damage

wtf! I wanna cry

 

[Mr Pumpy]

I'm beginning to wonder if some posters here have ever ridden a bike up a big hill, let alone in a competitive situation.

As for trashing everybody, they didn't. Evans was crossed the line in front of Wiggins.

 

[The Hitch]

I am aware that he doesnt have the best reputation in the world but still lets wait for a while, If they are doping, something will come out sooner or later

Not if they are doing it the Armstrong way, with everything already set in stone before the exact programme has even been agreed.

 

[zapata]

I'm beginning to wonder if some posters here have ever ridden a bike up a big hill, let alone in a competitive situation.

That's genius. Did you just come up with that line? That should silence some people.

 

[happychappy]

At least Saunier - Duval made their doping-exploits fun to see.

Yes, it's okay if they can't speak English. British riders smashing the euros doesn't go with the romanticism of cycling does it.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I fail to see how Froome is more suspicious than Wiggins. They both had out of the blue breakout performances. Wiggins's came at 29, Froome's at 25.

Wiggins' was now three years ago and we're used to the "new" Wiggins. Yes, that transformation was suspicious, but in respect of today's performance, that he was there at the end wasn't suspicious in any way other than Wiggins' improvements generally being suspicious. Froome is more suspicious only in that his breakout period of about six weeks last year was to date his only period of good results and therefore he could have been seen as a flash in the pan.

That post you quoted was referring solely to the antics of today's stage rather than the riders in general.

 

[classicomano]

Asked if he was surprised that none of his rivals had attacked, Wiggins said: "I was little bit. I knew I was dictating the pace and that I wanted to keep it high threshold and not go too much into the red and I knew that if someone wanted to attack off that pace they’d have to be going quite a bit more, which I know is not really sustainable if we’re riding at 470 to 480 Watts. Someone is going to have to go a lot harder to sustain that. As long as we gauge it like that I knew we’d be alright.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-and-sky-surprised-at-stage-7-damage

The good old air of doper's arrogance. Ive missed that for a while.