Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Benotti69]

You mean 2nd in WC ITT 2010 doesn't prove he is a world class TTer? Or was he doped then also?

Of course not, such a thought, he's GB, a world class moralist, a race above the rest of the doping heathen neanderthals.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I count three world class TTers, Froome, Wiggo, and Millar.

I must disagree with due respect.

On the other hand, when you take a look at who was in the attack all day:
* Westra - time trialler
* Pinotti - time trialler
* Brajkovic - TT
* Mensjov - TT
* Castroviejo - TT
* Schar - TT
* LL Sanchez - TT
* der Fabian - TT

etc etc

and they also didn't go much harder than the 42...

And this with more than 2 world class 'TT'ers', still have trouble classifying Vrrooom Vrrrooom to anything you see

 

[roundabout]

Yes, it isn't so much the average, but more the ability to keep a group close to a break that had better riders than your average Bernaudeau jr flat stage break.

 

[Sigmund]

I must disagree with due respect.

On the other hand, when you take a look at who was in the attack all day:
* Westra - time trialler
* Pinotti - time trialler
* Brajkovic - TT
* Mensjov - TT
* Castroviejo - TT
* Schar - TT
* LL Sanchez - TT
* der Fabian - TT

etc etc

and they also didn't go much harder than the 42...

And this with more than 2 world class 'TT'ers', still have trouble classifying Vrrooom Vrrrooom to anything you see

Cancellara was not in the original break, but yes it was a very strong break. Obviously they were not going all out in the break, corroborated by the fact that so many members of the original break was still there at the end.

I am little unsurenof you claim not to be world class, Millar or Froome?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Cancellara was not in the original break, but yes it was a very strong break. Obviously they were not going all out in the break, corroborated by the fact that so many members of the original break was still there at the end.

I am little unsurenof you claim not to be world class, Millar or Froome?

Both. I meant I am not sure what to call Froome, the man is too suspicious, but his bio passport must state he is clean...

 

[Sigmund]

I meant I am not sure what to call Froome, the man is too suspicious, but his bio passport must state he is clean...

This I agree with, but as has been posted above, Millar must surely count as world class given his silver in th WC. I also forgot Martin, although I imagine his efforts at the front were quite controlled.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Both. I meant I am not sure what to call Froome, the man is too suspicious, but his bio passport must state he is clean...

Not quite. His passport will show (until such time as a strike is identifed), that he is not, within the 99.9% confidence limit, carrying out blood alterations.


As Lance's leaked blood results demonstrate, one can not raise strikes, but still have a profile consistent with blood manipulation.

The doping bodies simply have to have a water-tight case before proceeding.

That is very different from stated as being clean.


(That aside I still think Sky is not doping)

 

[DirtyWorks]

Not quite. His passport will show (until such time as a strike is identifed), that he is not, within the 99.9% confidence limit, carrying out blood alterations.


As Lance's leaked blood results demonstrate, one can not raise strikes, but still have a profile consistent with blood manipulation.

The doping bodies simply have to have a water-tight case before proceeding.

That is very different from stated as being clean.


(That aside I still think Sky is not doping)

Let's not forget that the UCI can choose not to open a case. Just because WADA thinks they have a case doesn't mean the UCI has to open it.

Finally, there are three range of actual positives for some tests. Negative, suspicious and positive. A suspicious is not a positive, but sure is indicative of something.... Again, Marion Jones' "Never tested positive" sums it up nicely.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I think convincing evidence would be one or more of:

1) Positive test
2) Evidence of a covered up positive test
3) Admission
4) Eye-witness account
5) Performances outside estimated human physiological limits

Without any of that, it is just speculation.

As alliances change over the next few years, I think we'll see a couple of those things. At this point, we know the UCI suppresses positives. What incentive does the UCI have to burst the Sky myth?

When former Sky riders are popped in the seasons to come, does that qualify as a positive?

 

[DirtyWorks]

And this with more than 2 world class 'TT'ers', still have trouble classifying Vrrooom Vrrrooom to anything you see

Maybe I'm not understanding, but 3, maybe four riders were dragging the peloton around for 150K. That's indicative of vroom vrooom to me.

 

[Franklin]

Maybe I'm not understanding, but 3, maybe four riders were dragging the peloton around for 250K. That's indicative of vroom vrooom to me.

Fixed it for you. Wigggins was there until they hit the flamme.

 

[richtea]

As alliances change over the next few years, I think we'll see a couple of those things. At this point, we know the UCI suppresses positives. What incentive does the UCI have to burst the Sky myth?

When former Sky riders are popped in the seasons to come, does that qualify as a positive?

If there is any cover-up the evidence will emerge, just like it did for LA. On the latter point, it really depends on the circumstances doesn't it? On the other hand, if they don't test positive in the future, I wouldn't take that as evidence they are currently clean either.

However for now, I don't think there is anywhere near enough evidence to be anything more than a bit suspicious.

 

[King Boonen]

As alliances change over the next few years, I think we'll see a couple of those things. At this point, we know the UCI suppresses positives. What incentive does the UCI have to burst the Sky myth?

When former Sky riders are popped in the seasons to come, does that qualify as a positive?

Depends when it is. If it's within a year then that's highly suspicious. If it's longer then it becomes less indicative. I'd also say that there would need to be two to really heighten suspicion.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

When former Sky riders are popped in the seasons to come, does that qualify as a positive?

Good point. Hamilton, Heras, Landis. When did Livingston quit? The commemarable age of 29 I just read, must be a coincidence.

Back on Sky.

Where was Edvald BH in the Olympic Race? I missed him.

 

[Sigmund]

Good point. Hamilton, Heras, Landis. When did Livingston quit? The commemarable age of 29 I just read, must be a coincidence.

Back on Sky.

Where was Edvald BH in the Olympic Race? I missed him.

Since he was supposed to be as strong as possible, if and when the break was caught, he conserved as much energy as possible and hus stayed as anonymous as possible.

 

[Sigmund]

Fixed it for you. Wigggins was there until they hit the flamme.

That is incorrect. He may have hung with the peloton till the finnish, but they werent pulling alone for 250 km. First of all the break formed after 20 km and second there were extra men trying to catch the break.

The fact is, for the first 200 km, of which team Sky, I mean GB pulled for 180,mostly alone but with Martin putting in some distance and Kiriyenka (IIRC) helping out a little.

Whatever you think, 4-6 riders putting out 41,5 km/h just isnt that impressive and certainly not indications of doping.

They averaged 50 km/h for an hour, which is fast, and Probably a lot faster for the first part. Espescially since they probably only avereaged 43-45 km/h for the last 10 km. This based on the fact that Vinokourov and Uran got away with app 10 km to go (I may be wrong about this one, dont remember exactly when they broke away) and it did not look like They put any time into this pair.

Whether this last chase part leaves any ground for suspcion I just dont know because I dont have enough data.


The Sky riders may very well be doping, but there is nothing extra terrestrial about this performance.

 

[Montanus]

Since he was supposed to be as strong as possible, if and when the break was caught, he conserved as much energy as possible and hus stayed as anonymous as possible.

EBH was +9.19 after Vino, 107th place. Something must have happened, either he cracked or got an mechanical.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

EBH was +9.19 after Vino, 107th place. Something must have happened, either he cracked or got an mechanical.

Or he just didn't want to ride after Kristoff. He made a cycling mechanical schwalbe

 

[Sigmund]

EBH was +9.19 after Vino, 107th place. Something must have happened, either he cracked or got an mechanical.

In Norwegian live chat commentaries they claim EBH was still there a bit after passing box hill for the last time. He also appears to have been top 5 in the peloton crossing the last time check (on the top of Box hill) so I would imagine a mechanical.

 

[DirtyWorks]

The fact is, for the first 200 km, of which team Sky, I mean GB pulled for 180,mostly alone but with Martin putting in some distance and Kiriyenka (IIRC) helping out a little.

Whatever you think, 4-6 riders putting out 41,5 km/h just isnt that impressive and certainly not indications of doping.

The Sky riders may very well be doping, but there is nothing extra terrestrial about this performance.

While I agree that there's not that much evidence other than episodes like the Olympic road race and the TdF GC times, I see it the other way, extraterrestrial performances. Differing opinions is okay.

There are countless ways to imagine it will blow up. This is pro cycling and many, many people were involved. It's going to blow up. That's assuming Sky doesn't get the usual Olympic hangover and slash budget or just vanish next year.

 

[Jaco0505]

EBH was +9.19 after Vino, 107th place. Something must have happened, either he cracked or got an mechanical.

He cracked. The usual stomach problems. Didnt finish.
http://translate.google.com/transla...t/ol/sykling/sommer-ol_2012/22724697/&act=url

http://www.london2012.com/cycling-road/event/men-road-race/phase=crm012100/doc=results.html

 

[mastersracer]

What I and maybe others want to know what you feel would be "suitable evidence." What facts would lead you to believe that at minimum, some members of the Sky team doped to win the 2012 TdF.

As to the rest, it's not a personal attack. They don't add anything to the discussion.

For a minimum, there should be some consideration of parsimony and falsifiability. I have no idea if Sky is doping, but when doping theories are based on both team dominance (Tour theory) and team non-dominance (Olympics), one wonders if the doping theory isn't inconsistent. That is, the doping-dominance Tour theory predicts Olympics doping-dominance. Thus, the non-dominance at the Olympics should be disconfirming. Instead, it is treated here as confirming, so that implies the doping theory is not falsifiable.

Second, elements such as UCI/testing lab complicit in positive coverups is not parsimonious. That requires additional evidence, which is lacking (e.g., is there a financial trail, why did Schleck's positive get reported, etc).

 

[DirtyWorks]

...That is, the doping-dominance Tour theory predicts Olympics doping-dominance. Thus, the non-dominance at the Olympics should be disconfirming.

I see what you did there. So, three, maybe four guys grinding away at the front of a field for 150K+ isn't dominance? Really? A one-day event is comparable to a multi-day event....

I could discredit the rest of it, but it's been done to death already.

Enough with the pseudo science and flowery language already. None of it makes your arguments more persuasive.

 

[Sigmund]

I see what you did there. So, three, maybe four guys grinding away at the front of a field for 150K+ isn't dominance? Really? A one-day event is comparable to a multi-day event....

I could discredit the rest of it, but it's been done to death already.

Enough with the pseudo science and flowery language already. None of it makes your arguments more persuasive.

So it is your position that it should not be possible to do 41,5 km/h for 150 km+ for 4-6 top riders clean?

 

[mastersracer]

I see what you did there. So, three, maybe four guys grinding away at the front of a field for 150K+ isn't dominance? Really? A one-day event is comparable to a multi-day event....

I could discredit the rest of it, but it's been done to death already.

Enough with the pseudo science and flowery language already. None of it makes your arguments more persuasive.

You're missing the point. The Tour-dominance theory predicts they would catch the Olympic break. During the Tour, these threads were full of doping accusations based on Sky's ability to control the Tour day after day. Certainly, a team with that power would be able to control a single day race. Failure to control the Olympics should be disconfirming.

And no, grinding away at the front of the field for 150k tells you nothing in itself, especially considering the tactical decision of other teams/riders to force Sky to do this.