Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[pugdog]

For those that don't stray from the sanctity of the clinic, over in Pro-cycling their debating Knighting Wiggins & Brailsford...



Personally, I'd start with Cavendish - who just received (in my opinion deservedly) the L'Equipe Best Tour Sprinter of All Time last week, preceding 22.

Sir Wiggins

They won't be the first pirates to have been knighted.

 

[Cerberus]

Well this is the whole crux of the debate isn't it? The transition that we've seen Wiggins go through could indeed be the result of doping, but my point (and those of Dr Ross Tucker evidently) are that it doesn't have to be. It can also be explained by realistic elite cyclist physiology, but quite a few people in here are vociferously rejecting that possibility and so they are convinced it is impossible to achieve naturally, and hence Sky must be doping.

This is the big difference between Sky and USPS. The feats of LA could not be explained by realistic physiological limits to human performance, those of Wiggins and Froome can.

I don't know if this is meant to include me, but for the record, I stated from the start that it's possible that Wiggins is clean. I just think it's by a large margin more probable that he isn't.

 

[SilentAssassin]

When did Wiggins become a pure climber? This is a question that must be asked.

 

[sniper]

When did Wiggins become a pure climber? This is a question that must be asked.

does the peloton still have any pure climbers? Or just doped up working horses?
but i get your point of course. wiggo and froome beating the few pure climbers that are left by miles.

 

[TubularBills]

Yeah, I noticed that myself. He caught up with and passed the others in the sprint like they were on a recovery ride. It was beyond even what he normally does.

Yes. & and at the end of the longest stage in the tour 2012...

Yep it was up an down and low altitude. But this is week three?

I get it. Only one answer.

Guilty as charged. Time will tell.

Sir Wiggins.

(Caveat, even with the performance of SKY - it is conceivable that Cavendish is simply a Rock Star.)

...beneffited by a toasted to the gills Armstrong wannabee with an Olympic pedigree?

 

[Stueyy]

Looks like they've got away with it for now anyhow. The hypocrisy of Wiggins does my head, sure you're clean mate, keep telling yourself that one...

 

[TubularBills]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5a0OAtzrXE

 

[lemoogle]

does the peloton still have any pure climbers? Or just doped up working horses?
but i get your point of course. wiggo and froome beating the few pure climbers that are left by miles.

Rolland is definitely a pure climber, he and pinot are the kind of riders that fear TTs because unlike wiggins and (even more so ) froome, they do not defy the rules of cycling and become unbeatable on both climbs and TTs.

 

[biker jk]

umm der, he obviously put a motor in his frame today just like cancellara did that time.

No, he's an ex-track cyclist so can do everything, climb, sprint, do leadouts, chase breakaways, etc.

 

[TubularBills]

It's all history now... lets just hope Vroome goes pure bionic... and accidentally toasts the field.

Oops.

Sir Froome.

 

[Nocontest]

OK.

characters.

What??!!

Talk about selective posting!!! Shame on you.

Krebs was talking about team orders, I was talking about him progressing as a climber in general.

I will let you in on a little known secret. In between races and particularly in the off season competitive cyclists train and work on their weak areas. While they may not be able to fully exploit that training due to the role expected of them in the team, they can continue to work on these areas over time and thus become better if they have the ability to do so.

History lesson: Peter Snell was ranked 25th in the world in 1960. He had recently came under the under the coaching of Arthur Lydiard in the late 50's. Entering the Olympics in 1960 he was given little chance because how could you progress to any extent just by changing your training?? I guess by winning gold in the 1500m (backed up in 1964) he would have been perfect fodder for this clinic and people using a similar rationale to yours.

 

[Nocontest]

No, he's an ex-track cyclist so can do everything, climb, sprint, do leadouts, chase breakaways, etc.

Give me your address, I will send you a box of tissues

 

[Nocontest]

Yes. & and at the end of the longest stage in the tour 2012...

Yep it was up an down and low altitude. But this is week three?

I get it. Only one answer.

Guilty as charged. Time will tell.

Sir Wiggins.

(Caveat, even with the performance of SKY - it is conceivable that Cavendish is simply a Rock Star.)

...beneffited by a toasted to the gills Armstrong wannabee with an Olympic pedigree?

Yep, Cav was stunning today, plus what a great leadout by Brad; it was awesome to watch. Just a great day for British cycling.

 

[Nocontest]

He was well rested from riding tempo on the front for the first 2 climbs in the last few mountain stages. He burned off most of the other sprinters, but I am sure that is normal for a pudgy little sprinter because I remember watching Zabel do it and he wasn't even pudgy.

Yeah and he wasn't as fast either. Why are you people so nasty??

 

[Maxiton]

Yeah and he wasn't as fast either. Why are you people so nasty??

You call this nasty? Stick around.

 

[Maxiton]

Yes. & and at the end of the longest stage in the tour 2012...

Yep it was up an down and low altitude. But this is week three?

I get it. Only one answer.

Guilty as charged. Time will tell.

Sir Wiggins.

(Caveat, even with the performance of SKY - it is conceivable that Cavendish is simply a Rock Star.)

...beneffited by a toasted to the gills Armstrong wannabee with an Olympic pedigree?

The thing is, I like Cavendish. I like to watch him sprint. I watched the last k of the stage today just to see that sprint win. But when you ride with a dirty team, you get tarred with the same brush. Does he deserve it? Who knows. That's the problem.

 

[TubularBills]

The thing is, I like Cavendish. I like to watch him sprint. I watched the last k of the stage today just to see that sprint win. But when you ride with a dirty team, you get tarred with the same brush. Does he deserve it? Who knows. That's the problem.

Agreed and unfortunate.

He is a marvel, great to watch regardless.

 

[Nocontest]

Rolland is definitely a pure climber, he and pinot are the kind of riders that fear TTs because unlike wiggins and (even more so ) froome, they do not defy the rules of cycling and become unbeatable on both climbs and TTs.

Actually Rolland is usually pretty good at ITT for a non specialist. Also, have you heard of a guy called Alberto Contador? Guess he is another one of those rule defiers, along with Anquetil, Hinault, Fignon, LeMond, etc etc etc.........LA (wince)

 

[biker jk]

Give me your address, I will send you a box of tissues

1 2 Sky via Cheating Way
Doping Central

 

[andy1234]

Actually, to all this I agree with you and I cannot dismiss the possibility that due to a combination of very high VO2 max, weight loss, targeted training and reduced doping by adversaries that possibly Wiggins did not "dope" to achieve his current level of success.

Has he done so on water and Hammer Gel? NO.

Good to see you have corrected your earlier nonsense.
It would appear you went away and read up on pursuiting physiology and adaptation to endurance training.
Good for you.

To your last point, you are on a roll using facts instead of fiction, so links please?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

does the peloton still have any pure climbers? Or just doped up working horses?
but i get your point of course. wiggo and froome beating the few pure climbers that are left by miles.

Igor Antón
Domenico Pozzovivo
José Rujano
André Cardoso
Dan Martin
Mikel Nieve
Thibaut Pinot

All pure climbers to a variety of extents.

Actually Rolland is usually pretty good at ITT for a non specialist. Also, have you heard of a guy called Alberto Contador? Guess he is another one of those rule defiers, along with Anquetil, Hinault, Fignon, LeMond, etc etc etc.........LA (wince)

Anquetil, Hinault, Fignon, Lemond and Armstrong were not 'pure climbers' in the way that is meant though. Contador you could argue is. We're talking pure climbers like Bahamontes, Fuente, van Impe, Herrera.

 

[taiwan]

What??!!

Talk about selective posting!!! Shame on you.

Krebs was talking about team orders, I was talking about him progressing as a climber in general.

I will let you in on a little known secret. In between races and particularly in the off season competitive cyclists train and work on their weak areas. While they may not be able to fully exploit that training due to the role expected of them in the team, they can continue to work on these areas over time and thus become better if they have the ability to do so.

History lesson: Peter Snell was ranked 25th in the world in 1960. He had recently came under the under the coaching of Arthur Lydiard in the late 50's. Entering the Olympics in 1960 he was given little chance because how could you progress to any extent just by changing your training?? I guess by winning gold in the 1500m (backed up in 1964) he would have been perfect fodder for this clinic and people using a similar rationale to yours.

So when you said steady improvement to climbing, you also meant between the 2008 and 09 seasons. OK.

 

[lemoogle]

Actually Rolland is usually pretty good at ITT for a non specialist. Also, have you heard of a guy called Alberto Contador? Guess he is another one of those rule defiers, along with Anquetil, Hinault, Fignon, LeMond, etc etc etc.........LA (wince)

Erm , just check Rolland's last ITT in the tour, he came 73rd 5'34'' behind. He's supposed to be a top 5 contender. You can't tell me that losing 5 and half minutes on a ITT is being pretty good at ITT. Sorry, just no.

Also I never said a pure climber can't be good at ITT. I just stated that Rolland and Pinot are primarily climbers , and simply compared with Froome and Wiggins, but yeah sure let's all not question froome's TTing and compare him with the likes of Anquetil, Hinault etc.

Also you're contradicting yourself completely in your post. Telling me that rolland is pretty good for a pure climber at ITT coming 5'34 behind, and then telling me how loads of climbers would be up there with wiggins on the ITT times

 

[Nocontest]

Igor Antón
Domenico Pozzovivo
José Rujano
André Cardoso
Dan Martin
Mikel Nieve
Thibaut Pinot

All pure climbers to a variety of extents.

Anquetil, Hinault, Fignon, Lemond and Armstrong were not 'pure climbers' in the way that is meant though. Contador you could argue is. We're talking pure climbers like Bahamontes, Fuente, van Impe, Herrera.

I think the term 'pure climber' has become a cliché and relatively meaningless these days. If you use the term in its natural sense it would mean someone who has a strength to the exclusion of everything else but there are very few riders like this and I am not sure Pinot would fall into this category. I am sure that he would not like to be referred to in this sense.

I was more being dismissive of the posters contention that to be able to both climb and TT broke some fundamental rule of cycling. My use of the guys I named was to show that is not true.

 

[Nocontest]

So when you said steady improvement to climbing, you also meant between the 2008 and 09 seasons. OK.

you are a classic! To avoid confusing you further...no, I am talking from 2005 till now