The Sky-Con-O-Meter. Predictions on how much more ridiculous they can get

[SundayRider]

Welcoming Wiggo Warrior and Sunday Rider....Sky keep trotting out the sockpuppets. Yawn.

I am about as anti Sky as you can get, what made you think otherwise?

 

[xcleigh]

Welcoming Wiggo Warrior and Sunday Rider....Sky keep trotting out the sockpuppets. Yawn.

And you are what exactly? And the Sunday Rider, we may disagree but saying he's a sock puppet!? That's funny.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

Ever heard the expression 'those who protest too much'.

Obviously, that is not the expression, but then it's only Twelfth Night today so we might as well be loose with our quotations.

 

[Cycle Chic]

And you are what exactly? And the Sunday Rider, we may disagree but saying he's a sock puppet!? That's funny.

Add XCLeigh to the quota...they,re as stoopid as Wiggins.

 

[xcleigh]

Add XCLeigh to the quota...they,re as stoopid as Wiggins.

Phew thanks for the add. I was getting worried for a while. May I kindly enquire as to what makes one a sock puppet? Contrary point of views or opinions to one's own?

 

[SundayRider]

Welcoming Wiggo Warrior and Sunday Rider....Sky keep trotting out the sockpuppets. Yawn.

Look back a few pages, in the thread. My position on Sky and Wiggins is very clear.

 

[Cycle Chic]

Look back a few pages, in the thread. My position on Sky and Wiggins is very clear.

yes we have all noticed your anti-Sky campaign

 

[ferryman]

Hi, cut out the personal stuff please guys. Plenty to discuss here other than other posters Cheers.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I am about as anti Sky as you can get, what made you think otherwise?

Well, the ones who read this thread have noticed.

 

[Wiggo Warrior]

Inviting comparisons to US Postal is still a dangerous game with the various goings-on since May 2010. If they had drawn more attention to how the template had been used for longer than that they might have got more of a pass on it (not that Miguel Indurain, the previous benefactor of such tactics, was clean of course). How does a team that prides itself on its attention to detail not spot that inviting comparisons to US Postal and then riding like them might not have been the smartest thing to do while the biggest doping investigation in the history of the sport is going on into that very team? Even if Sky are clean, it makes it very difficult for the jaded cycling fan that has seen 20 years of false dawns to accept.

And then, the rider at the centre of it considers that cynics are all people who will never achieve anything in their lives, despite the fact that all but the most loyal fans and newcomers to the sport have had a healthy level of cynicism imbued upon them by several years of being lied to - not necessarily Clinic conspiracy theorist cynicism, but simply the level of "I hope they're clean but you can never be sure, especially when they dominate a race like that" - he's basically taking a pot shot at most of the sport's loyal fans. Maybe he's okay with that, after all, he can be marketed to that audience of brand new fans who've only been sold on cycling since Britons started winning regularly at it, but it doesn't sit well with people who've been supporting the sport - and him - since he was a youthful track specialist who couldn't keep up with the grupetto. Which increases antipathy towards him for his attitude, and to his team for their boring riding which keeps him at the centre of attention.

The Postal comparisons were made, by Sky. They were then made, by cynical fans who knew Postal were more than likely dirty and attributed the same characteristics to Sky.

I agree (as seems to be common with your posts), but do you personally think, as presumably one of these cynics who took his words personally that you have to be doped up to win the Tour? That Cadel and Sastre were?

 

[Netserk]

I agree (as seems to be common with your posts), but do you personally think, as presumably one of these cynics who took his words personally that you have to be doped up to win the Tour? That Cadel and Sastre were?

Just because I think that the winners of the last MANY years (since Lemond) have doped, doesn't mean that I think it is impossible

 

[sniper]

I agree (as seems to be common with your posts), but do you personally think, as presumably one of these cynics who took his words personally that you have to be doped up to win the Tour? That Cadel and Sastre were?

as for sastre, only a fool would think he was clean. don't ask me or anybody to provide arguments. do some searching first.
plenty arguments have been provided in different threads over the past months/years.

as for cadel the same.

 

[ferryman]

as for sastre, only a fool would think he was clean. don't ask me or anybody to provide arguments. do some searching first.
plenty arguments have been provided in different threads over the past months/years.

as for cadel the same.

Yep, maybe, but as you say plenty of other threads to discuss both.

 

[The Hitch]

I agree (as seems to be common with your posts), but do you personally think, as presumably one of these cynics who took his words personally that you have to be doped up to win the Tour? That Cadel and Sastre were?

I think that its possible to win the TDF clean. Ironically id look to some of the guys who have doped as the best able to do it. I think Contador could win the Tour clean if the Tour is cleaner. I think Basso could have done it. but these are once in a generation talents who achieved amazing results when doped (so even if you took away a big layer for doping you might - and i use the word might, be left with something)

Then there are people who were fighting for previous Tours, so Sastre or Evans, who in theory stay the same while others decline, due to doping becoming less of a force. But that is of course making the assumption that they are clean (and i dont think either Evans nor Sastre were).

Its a bit harder to make a case for someone who struggled greatly with climbing and stage races, that they could accomplish the astonishing achievement of not just winning the Tour but winning it clean.

So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)

 

[Froome19]

So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)

And if Contador was marginal gaining he would be winning Giro, Tour, Vuelta. And carrying out Fuent De's in his sleep
And then Lance.. now if Lance had been marginal gaining

 

[The Hitch]

And if Contador was marginal gaining he would be winning Giro, Tour, Vuelta. And carrying out Fuent De's in his sleep
And then Lance.. now if Lance had been marginal gaining

Contador under Brunyeel was imo actually better than Lance under Brunyeel.

 

[the sceptic]

So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)

Not to mention Froome would be even better! at least on the climbs. If Sir Wiggins can beat Contador comfortably then imagine what Froome could do.

 

[Wiggo Warrior]

I think that its possible to win the TDF clean. Ironically id look to some of the guys who have doped as the best able to do it. I think Contador could win the Tour clean if the Tour is cleaner. I think Basso could have done it. but these are once in a generation talents who achieved amazing results when doped (so even if you took away a big layer for doping you might - and i use the word might, be left with something)

Then there are people who were fighting for previous Tours, so Sastre or Evans, who in theory stay the same while others decline, due to doping becoming less of a force. But that is of course making the assumption that they are clean (and i dont think either Evans nor Sastre were).

Its a bit harder to make a case for someone who struggled greatly with climbing and stage races, that they could accomplish the astonishing achievement of not just winning the Tour but winning it clean.

So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)

Thanks for the response.

Regarding the bolded bit above, I agree of course from the point of view of Wiggo's pre-2009 road career it is a lot to swallow, which is why I am not trying to change anyone's mind here. I may personally believe he is clean and have made that quite clear in my earlier posts on the proper Sky thread but that was not the point of my post in this thread. Virtually everyone in this forum has far more experience in road racing than me even if I have been trying to read and watch loads to try to catch up since catching the bug. I was simply trying to clarify what I believed Brad was responding to in his interview, in other words the actual question.

I do take issue with the people who seem to believe it can never be done however. What about Pinot then? No track/road confusion there and a top ten in the Tour in his early twenties. If in three or four years time he hits the top step of the podium would anyone then automatically suspect he'd sold out to the dark side?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So if Wiggins is clean, then what do you think would one get if one added the doping layer to Wiggins? Hed be winning the 40k tts by the same margins Indurain was winning the 60k ones, and thats assuming hes a poor responder. Wortking off the fact that he was a minute behind Contador on Verbier then if you add a(/another) doping layer to Wiggins thered be no climb in the Tour de France he couldnt challenge the record for. In short if you assume Wiggins 2012 isnt on a doping programme and you put him on one, he would be better than any doper ever (indurain lance pantani contador basso ullrich vino, none of them could touch him)

Certainly a very different perspective - I have not seen this angle of hypothesis before, and it makes you sit up and think.

I concur with the poster above who asked how well Froome would go if 2012 TdF Froome was in fact clean, and added a layer of 10% Hgb increase as proven possible by Dr Ashenden. Ai carumba!

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Ever heard the expression 'those who protest too much'. For example someone challenges you on something if you really in your heart of hearts know you are right then your unlikely to react with anger and spite in that way.

I find it curious that Sky spent 1M GBP on PR in 2011, and noone thought to coach Brad in how to handle press conferences.

Or did they?

We have often seen here the reuse of the "idle w*nker" moniker being applied to anyone who questions Sky or their performances, whether individually or as a group.

What if it was a setup? Get the question out there and, given their target market is NEW fans, set up a hook for those new fans to hang any nay sayers on.

PR furphy or PR brilliance?

 

[taiwan]

Good posting, Hitch.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I do take issue with the people who seem to believe it can never be done however. What about Pinot then? No track/road confusion there and a top ten in the Tour in his early twenties. If in three or four years time he hits the top step of the podium would anyone then automatically suspect he'd sold out to the dark side?

When a guy breaks out at 21, you assume that the guy is a top talent and therefore if in three or four years time he wins the race, it's because he was that damn good. Whether he doped or not. That's part of Hitch's call on Contador or Basso as being guys who doped who might have contended clean.

With Wiggins, however, he broke out at a very late age (29, 31 even if we take the 2009 result as a sign of things to come and factor in 2010). Therefore, we have years of data to deal with where he was on the pro scene but not achieving what we would expect a guy of the talent level required to win the Tour to be achieving. The fact that he was a track specialist might account for most of that, but we can't un-see that this was a guy who came from struggling to stay with the grupetto to breathing through his nose behind 3 teammates while GT winners suffer like animals a minute down the road. That's going to look suspicious any time it happens, let alone when it comes from a guy who, at age 28, supposedly the start of peak age for a cyclist, hadn't shown even the remotest sign that it was a possibility on a hill in any race, let alone the Tour de France.

Comparing Wiggins to Pinot is therefore unfair. Pinot is a young prospect who has been talked up as having climbing potential from the word go. If he goes on to win GTs, that's just part of what people thought he might be capable of. Show me somebody who, at the time of the Beijing Olympics, thought that Bradley Wiggins would win the Tour within four years, and I'll show you a liar. Or maybe Pat McQuaid. Oh wait: tautology.

 

[Wiggo Warrior]

When a guy breaks out at 21, you assume that the guy is a top talent and therefore if in three or four years time he wins the race, it's because he was that damn good. Whether he doped or not. That's part of Hitch's call on Contador or Basso as being guys who doped who might have contended clean.

With Wiggins, however, he broke out at a very late age (29, 31 even if we take the 2009 result as a sign of things to come and factor in 2010). Therefore, we have years of data to deal with where he was on the pro scene but not achieving what we would expect a guy of the talent level required to win the Tour to be achieving. The fact that he was a track specialist might account for most of that, but we can't un-see that this was a guy who came from struggling to stay with the grupetto to breathing through his nose behind 3 teammates while GT winners suffer like animals a minute down the road. That's going to look suspicious any time it happens, let alone when it comes from a guy who, at age 28, supposedly the start of peak age for a cyclist, hadn't shown even the remotest sign that it was a possibility on a hill in any race, let alone the Tour de France.

Comparing Wiggins to Pinot is therefore unfair. Pinot is a young prospect who has been talked up as having climbing potential from the word go. If he goes on to win GTs, that's just part of what people thought he might be capable of. Show me somebody who, at the time of the Beijing Olympics, thought that Bradley Wiggins would win the Tour within four years, and I'll show you a liar. Or maybe Pat McQuaid. Oh wait: tautology.

At the time of the Beijing Olympics I didn't even expect him to win a gold in Athens in four years, I just rather liked the odd looking skinny ginger kid who looked out of place in an older team

I wasn't comparing Wiggins with Pinot per se, I think he's a great talent and would like to see him one day on that top step but not if he's going to get the sort of hard time that some people seem to be dishing out to all winners.

 

[The Hitch]

I do take issue with the people who seem to believe it can never be done however. What about Pinot then? No track/road confusion there and a top ten in the Tour in his early twenties. If in three or four years time he hits the top step of the podium would anyone then automatically suspect he'd sold out to the dark side?

That depends on a lot of things. How fast his times are. What he says. How he rides. How he improves. Who his doctors are. Who his ds's are, who his teammates are. Who his idols are. Who his friends in the peloton are etc, lots of small things.

And lots of things not in his control either. Like how fast other peoples times are. Who wins the other gts. How many positives there are.

What his teammates and ds's say. Is Thomas Dekker 5 years from now going to be superdomestique for Pinot at the Tour and declare that he is achieving his best numbers ever at FDJ

Who is in charge at the UCI is also a big one. If its someone new without ties to the UCI doping mafia, then that would play into Pinot's favour a lot more than if Mcquaid is still in the hotseat.

btw personally i hope it will be Quintana not Pinot making that top step. Of course one thing Quintana has in his favour is the perception that Colombians, who were a force in the 80's fell off in the 90's because of doping. Not entirely true that Colombians didnt dope, but the perception is there that they didnt have the same access, and will increase if him and maybe Chavez start to compete for the Tour after some limits on doping have been placed.

Also Quintana is from Boyaca where the highest Tour de France peaks would be considered lowlands, so perfectly explainable natural advantages would be far more persuasive explanations than the traditional go to argument accross all sports when doping is suggested - we train hard.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

...we can't un-see that this was a guy who came from struggling to stay with the grupetto to breathing through his nose behind 3 teammates while GT winners suffer like animals a minute down the road.

Was this a regular occurrence? Was it even a singular occurrence? And did it involves GT winners who weren't palpably out of form and being beated by their team-mate and others (Evans) or "benefitting" from a hard Giro in their legs (Basso)?