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

Page 62 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Re: Re:

Red Lobster said:
SlowFeet said:
Long time reader...first time poster because I had a thought today that I don't think I've seen mentioned yet. FWIW, I'm one of those heretics who thinks they should just allow doping openly...but that's a whole other discussion.

Anyway, it's a totally silly thought but I wonder if Sky broke the "oh my, we've had our data hacked" story yesterday because they had an inkling today would go so one-sided for them. Perhaps their data has not really been hacked, but if the world thinks it HAS been hacked but nothing comes out they can say, "Well, whoever got our data must have looked at it and realized we're clean." Or something to that effect...

Even as a person who isn't bother by doping in general, today just wasn't really all that much fun to watch. Get them ALL doped to the gills and let's see some fireworks! :)

OK, I'll crawl back into my den now...

Absolutely. It's called getting out in front of the story. Makes this all smell more than ever.

As for your suggestion about allowing open doping, yeah ... at least it would make the racing more interesting.

Getting out in front of the story... as if they had a media giant PR gurus behind... or?

As for the legalized doping, it's hard to say whether the current "Tour de Best Hidden Responder" would be that different to the "Tour de Best Open Responder".
 
Jul 14, 2015
24
0
0
Re: Re:

doperhopper said:
As for the legalized doping, it's hard to say whether the current "Tour de Best Hidden Responder" would be that different to the "Tour de Best Open Responder".

Fair point...although it'd be interesting to at least try it and see. I do think there's a fair chance that it'd even the playing field at least somewhat. The only thing we lose is the drama of wondering who is going to get busted this year.
 
Jul 10, 2015
37
0
2,580
Re:

SlowFeet said:
Long time reader...first time poster because I had a thought today that I don't think I've seen mentioned yet. FWIW, I'm one of those heretics who thinks they should just allow doping openly...but that's a whole other discussion.

Anyway, it's a totally silly thought but I wonder if Sky broke the "oh my, we've had our data hacked" story yesterday because they had an inkling today would go so one-sided for them. Perhaps their data has not really been hacked, but if the world thinks it HAS been hacked but nothing comes out they can say, "Well, whoever got our data must have looked at it and realized we're clean." Or something to that effect...

Even as a person who isn't bother by doping in general, today just wasn't really all that much fun to watch. Get them ALL doped to the gills and let's see some fireworks! :)

OK, I'll crawl back into my den now...

Refreshingly Honest Post...did think the same for a nanosecond!!
 
nothing to see

not seen this for awhile

images_CAPX5_NVQ_1.jpg


Mark L
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Re:

Jim2784 said:
How about people look at it this way,

Nibali: Everyone and their mom knew he'd go bang today.
Contador: The reason he did the Giro is because he knew he could'nt beat an inform and uninjured Froome & Quintana, plus he's not 100%
TJVG: He did better than I expected him too, honestly!!!!
Quintana: He will be seen to better effect in a proper mountain stage, a stage you generally associate with the Alps oh and in week 3.

Froome: Whens he's in alien mode he's unbeatable, deal with it people. Anyway in week 3 he'll be tiring and deft defending his position.
Porte: Is a fantastic GC rider in his own right, he just lacks consistency. It's not as though he did'nt do something similar in2013.


Gesink: I'm sorry now but his ride today was deft from out of the blue, in recent years anyway. Surely question marks about him too ??
Thomas: He has changed his physique to better suit the mountains but he'll pay for it tomorrow and Thursday, question marks still to answer though!!!!

Q abuse.....yawn
Sky won the Team comp by over 6 mins. The next 6-min gap was from 2nd-6th, next after that was 7th-12th. Sky alone did what it took 5-6 other teams to do. Now I have no problem believing that an individual rider, Froome or otherwise, can in fact be that dominant on a given climb or even over the length of an entire Tour but when there's such team dominance, esp after a rest day...that's too good to be true.
 
Jul 14, 2015
24
0
0
Because I'm a nerd and clearly have nothing better to do...

Some TdF riders have posted their rides to Strava for today with power (some of them with HR as well). Picking their weights from the TdF site and doing a little arithmetic for the final climb...

Gesink: 409W/68kg = 6.01 W/kg
ten Dam: 354W/67kg = 5.28 W/kg
Kruiswijk: 320W/66kg = 4.85 W/kg
M. Wyss: 311W/60kg = 5.18 W/kg
 
Re: Re:

Saint Unix said:
Eagle said:
Look at Indurain, Contador, Valverde countless others who have shown it is worth it
Riis, though. Blasting through the 60% barrier for one huge TdF win and working as a DS for years afterwards, even after admitting that the whole thing was a sham. He's now being paid by Danish television for his knowledge. The man's made a fortune from cycling, and I can be sure of one thing: Pre-EPO Riis was too much of a donkey to have a chance of making as much of a name for himself as post-EPO Riis.

Vaughters is the same to a smaller extent. Turns out you're allowed to make a healthy living in the sport as long as you say you're a changed man and the people believe you.
For anti-doping to work at all, they'll have to change the sanctions and make the dopers pay back all the money they made with interests. Now the risk vs reward is so heavily tilted towards the reward that it's a total no-brainer to dope. The risks are minimal while the reward huge. It should be the other way around.
 
Jun 8, 2015
306
0
0
Re:

JackRabbitSlims said:
inside the team sky motor home last night

sky attacks!!

6lVzw5Q.gif


:) thanks JackRabbitSlims. Came into the Clinic to find some comic relief for the fiasco that is TdF. Have not been able to stomach the race this year.

My questions are more about the responses to doping per individual. That there is corruption in UCI and the process of who gets caught is not in question but...

Seems from watching tennis and cycling that of course there are protected players/riders. And there are the English speaking Media darlings - no doubt money is involved big time.

But from a different perspective, one has to be curious what is being used and how an athlete responds or doesn't and why. Also does whatever it is not work some years? As in does the body need a time-out from doping? It's a known fact that a medication or treatment plan can work for a certain amount of time then the plan and treatment meets resistance and needs changing or a rest from it... I dunno. Maybe someone can help me out here.
 
Re:

JackRabbitSlims said:
lets start by actually catching the dopers first

shall we

before we decide how they should be punished

Surely you can do them both. It's not either or. They should have started the financial punishments decades ago. It's been so obvious for a looong time that doping is financially beneficial for the athlete. My guess is the powers-that-be don't even want to touch the financial side of things. Must be something in it for them too.
 
Doping IS professional cycling. Always has been. The quality of the dope has always driven the quality of the pro races. And it is only going to get more freakish with genetic doping. There is NO hope of cycling reforming itself! There is ZERO evidence of positive change.

If you're not convinced yet.....you will be.
 
Best titled thread in the Clinic, no doubt.

I've seen this movie before, and today was one of the most laughable days I've witnessed in some time. I'm reminded of USPS in about 2001-2004 when their train would just crush everyone, including some of the most elite climbers in the world being dropped by USPS domestiques, and riders like Hincapie were winning MTF stages.

The most amazing thing, is that since Froome is a relatively late bloomer like Chris Horner, we could feasibly see another 5+ years of this, easy.
 
Jun 8, 2015
306
0
0
Re:

MarkvW said:
Doping IS professional cycling. Always has been. The quality of the dope has always driven the quality of the pro races. And it is only going to get more freakish with genetic doping. There is NO hope of cycling reforming itself! There is ZERO evidence of positive change.

If you're not convinced yet.....you will be.

Very true. And I have been convinced since I started watching cycling. Watched tennis earlier in life because I played in college - I was never good enough to make a living from sport - went and got an RN instead. I need no convincing about how freakish sport will get when genetic doping arrives...has it already?...is more my question.

And how stupid + blind do the ones responsible for creating this spectacle in sports think the fans are? Can't we at least be allowed the information? Then we can enjoy the great wonder of science and the amazing responders in the light of day.
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Re: Re:

jalep said:
MarkvW said:
Doping IS professional cycling. Always has been. The quality of the dope has always driven the quality of the pro races. And it is only going to get more freakish with genetic doping. There is NO hope of cycling reforming itself! There is ZERO evidence of positive change.

If you're not convinced yet.....you will be.

Very true. And I have been convinced since I started watching cycling. Watched tennis earlier in life because I played in college - I was never good enough to make a living from sport - went and got an RN instead. I need no convincing about how freakish sport will get when genetic doping arrives...has it already?...is more my question.

And how stupid + blind do the ones responsible for creating this spectacle in sports think the fans are? Can't we at least be allowed the information? Then we can enjoy the great wonder of science and the amazing responders in the light of day.

They do not just think, they 100% know they are stupid, exactly the same way the politicians 100% know the mass of voters that matters is by definition stupid. You, the informed fan, or the informed voter, you do not matter, you're not a factor, nobody targets political or advertisment (=Tour broadcast) campaign at you, you are irrelevant... it's called democracy, rule of the stupid mass, whether you like it or not.
 
Honestly, this was a vomit-inducing spectacle. Every true cycling fan was slapped in the face today.

Thomas, who wins E3 by beating Stybar and Sagan and nearly wins G-W, is now disposing of the world's top climbers.
Porte, who dropped out of the Giro is now dropping Quintana, Contador, Niabali, you name it.

Pro cycling is to cycling what pro wrestling is to wrestling.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
Best titled thread in the Clinic, no doubt.

I've seen this movie before, and today was one of the most laughable days I've witnessed in some time. I'm reminded of USPS in about 2001-2004 when their train would just crush everyone, including some of the most elite climbers in the world being dropped by USPS domestiques, and riders like Hincapie were winning MTF stages.

The most amazing thing, is that since Froome is a relatively late bloomer like Chris Horner, we could feasibly see another 5+ years of this, easy.
Possibly, but one thing that (hopefully) has changed somewhat is that in the USPS days the UCI was complicit and simply closed their eyes to doping, and strenuously attacked anyone who dare suggest such a thing (Walsh, Kimmage, etc). Don't think that's the same attitude anymore.
 
Re: Re:

doperhopper said:
jalep said:
MarkvW said:
Doping IS professional cycling. Always has been. The quality of the dope has always driven the quality of the pro races. And it is only going to get more freakish with genetic doping. There is NO hope of cycling reforming itself! There is ZERO evidence of positive change.

If you're not convinced yet.....you will be.

Very true. And I have been convinced since I started watching cycling. Watched tennis earlier in life because I played in college - I was never good enough to make a living from sport - went and got an RN instead. I need no convincing about how freakish sport will get when genetic doping arrives...has it already?...is more my question.

And how stupid + blind do the ones responsible for creating this spectacle in sports think the fans are? Can't we at least be allowed the information? Then we can enjoy the great wonder of science and the amazing responders in the light of day.

They do not just think, they 100% know they are stupid, exactly the same way the politicians 100% know the mass of voters that matters is by definition stupid. You, the informed fan, or the informed voter, you do not matter, you're not a factor, nobody targets political or advertisment (=Tour broadcast) campaign at you, you are irrelevant... it's called democracy, rule of the stupid mass, whether you like it or not.
So true...unfortunately. The problem with democracy is that it needs an intelligent, well informed and attentive population to work. And that's just not possible with half of the population having an IQ under 100.
 
Re: Re:

VeloCity said:
Alpe d'Huez said:
Best titled thread in the Clinic, no doubt.

I've seen this movie before, and today was one of the most laughable days I've witnessed in some time. I'm reminded of USPS in about 2001-2004 when their train would just crush everyone, including some of the most elite climbers in the world being dropped by USPS domestiques, and riders like Hincapie were winning MTF stages.

The most amazing thing, is that since Froome is a relatively late bloomer like Chris Horner, we could feasibly see another 5+ years of this, easy.
Possibly, but one thing that (hopefully) has changed somewhat is that in the USPS days the UCI was complicit and simply closed their eyes to doping, and strenuously attacked anyone who dare suggest such a thing (Walsh, Kimmage, etc). Don't think that's the same attitude anymore.
Sure? What about Brailsford calling people like Vayer or Russ Tucker pseudoscientists !?
 
Re: Re:

doperhopper said:
jalep said:
MarkvW said:
Doping IS professional cycling. Always has been. The quality of the dope has always driven the quality of the pro races. And it is only going to get more freakish with genetic doping. There is NO hope of cycling reforming itself! There is ZERO evidence of positive change.

If you're not convinced yet.....you will be.

Very true. And I have been convinced since I started watching cycling. Watched tennis earlier in life because I played in college - I was never good enough to make a living from sport - went and got an RN instead. I need no convincing about how freakish sport will get when genetic doping arrives...has it already?...is more my question.

And how stupid + blind do the ones responsible for creating this spectacle in sports think the fans are? Can't we at least be allowed the information? Then we can enjoy the great wonder of science and the amazing responders in the light of day.

They do not just think, they 100% know they are stupid, exactly the same way the politicians 100% know the mass of voters that matters is by definition stupid. You, the informed fan, or the informed voter, you do not matter, you're not a factor, nobody targets political or advertisment (=Tour broadcast) campaign at you, you are irrelevant... it's called democracy, rule of the stupid mass, whether you like it or not.

doperhopper speaking truth to power.
 
Jun 8, 2015
306
0
0
Re: Re:

doperhopper said:
jalep said:
MarkvW said:
Doping IS professional cycling. Always has been. The quality of the dope has always driven the quality of the pro races. And it is only going to get more freakish with genetic doping. There is NO hope of cycling reforming itself! There is ZERO evidence of positive change.

If you're not convinced yet.....you will be.

Very true. And I have been convinced since I started watching cycling. Watched tennis earlier in life because I played in college - I was never good enough to make a living from sport - went and got an RN instead. I need no convincing about how freakish sport will get when genetic doping arrives...has it already?...is more my question.

And how stupid + blind do the ones responsible for creating this spectacle in sports think the fans are? Can't we at least be allowed the information? Then we can enjoy the great wonder of science and the amazing responders in the light of day.

They do not just think, they 100% know they are stupid, exactly the same way the politicians 100% know the mass of voters that matters is by definition stupid. You, the informed fan, or the informed voter, you do not matter, you're not a factor, nobody targets political or advertisment (=Tour broadcast) campaign at you, you are irrelevant... it's called democracy, rule of the stupid mass, whether you like it or not.

Hm...that's deep and thanks for your reply, doperhopper. Not sure I completely agree or that I am ready to toss democracy in the trash bin though the example that has evolved here gives it a bad name. You make a fair point. However, the average people, I believe still, can grasp the truth if it is presented to them and they have the facts before them. And leaders of a democracy or whatever governing mode you chose have a responsibility. If they are corruptible evil genius's and unaccountable, greedy, narcissistic, sociopathic...then it's not democracy any more. It's capitalism at it's worst, fascism, feudalism ect...and begs to be overthrown. There's a tipping point.

The two sports I follow have definitely reached the tipping point. More information is needed. It's not going in the direction of being believable any more that the politicians and leaders of my country are...

All I aim for watching sport is a bit of diversion - an escape from reality that can be plausible, not WWF. Instead I get Wimbledon and TdF 2015 :mad: :confused: :) Another year of not knowing the facts of how the athletes get this way. I don't doubt Nibali had help last year and I've already admitted my hypocrisy of enjoying TdF more last year than this - or if Contador was winning this year. That's a shallow personal flaw of which I'm aware: having a preference for which athlete/team is winning. Doesn't change the fact that I'd like some questions answered about how it all happens even if a favorite is winning ridiculously = hasn't been believable since I started watching.

And if the genetic modification in athletes has commenced...would just like to know. Is it safer and cleaner than dope, more close to the imperfect physiology that is naturally born? Can it be called a positive, legitimate and acceptable societal development - not doping? If so, no need for secrecy. Publish it. It's news.
 
Re:

Moose McKnuckles said:
Honestly, this was a vomit-inducing spectacle. Every true cycling fan was slapped in the face today.

Thomas, who wins E3 by beating Stybar and Sagan and nearly wins G-W, is now disposing of the world's top climbers.
Porte, who dropped out of the Giro is now dropping Quintana, Contador, Niabali, you name it.

Pro cycling is to cycling what pro wrestling is to wrestling.

Contador tired, Porte fresh. Nibali clearly cracked. G has been climbing very well all season, so it's no surprise that he was able to finish marginally ahead of the likes of Pierre Roland and behind Gesink.

Who am I kidding... Porte wants a new team and new contract, goes on to beat a Quintana who has made this his main goal. As much as there are possible explainations, I'm not a fool who's been watching cycling for 2-3 years. That was simply disgusting to watch (as a Sky fan)