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

[Krebs cycle]

Brilliant example. How many GTs did they win?

Hey everyone else can use gigantic strawman arguments but not me?

 

[Ferminal]

A little research and I find out that Wiggins beat Maxime Monfort and Tony Martin by nearly 1min in a 22km road ITT in 2005 in the Tour de L'Avenir.

Distance: 22 km
Road – Individual Time Trial
Departure: Leignes-sur-Fontaine, France
Arrival: Montmorillon, France

1 Christian Müller (Ger) Team CSC 26.49
2 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Credit Agricole 0.16
3 Kai Reus (Ned) Rabobank 0.17
4 Lars Bak (Den) Team CSC 0.31
5 Emilien-Benoît Berges (Fra) R.A.G.T. Semences 0.44
6 Christophe Riblon (Fra) Ag2r Prevoyance 0.59
7 Mathieu Heyboer (Ned) Rabobank
8 Jose Joaquin Rojas (Spa) Liberty Seguros-Würth Team 1.07
9 Maxime Monfort (Bel) Landbouwkrediet-Colnago 1.09
10 Tony Martin (Ger) German National Team 1.10


Wiggins beat Monfort by 2:15 last week in an ITT twice the distance.

A 25 year old fourth year pro beating up on a 20 year old Martin.

At the same stage of his career, Tony established himself as the second best TT'er in the world.

 

[slowspoke]

This is a good strategy, maybe we can get Wiggins top100 in a mountain stage too.

Tour de France, Stage 8 : Le Grand-Bornand - Tignes (165 km)

1. [DEN] RASMUSSEN Michael RAB 4h49'40" (Humanplasma)
2. [ESP] \
142. [ESP] ISASI FLORES Iñaki EUS 39'07"
143. [GBR] WIGGINS Bradley COF 39'07"

100th now.

This is a good game to play with Froome too.

 

[Krebs cycle]

A 25 year old fourth year pro beating up on a 20 year old Martin.

At the same stage of his career, Tony established himself as the second best TT'er in the world.

Yawn. Totally ignoring yet again the fact that Wiggins chose to focus on track endurance until he was 28yrs old. As far as I am concerned, Wiggins only seriously began his road racing career at that point in time. So no, he didn't have the "same stage of career" at the same age as Tony Martin.

When it suits your belief you invoke non-doping explanations for increases in performance. Martin is allowed to go from getting beaten up by someone who everyone says has no potential as a TT specialist (which means he must have been real crap at TT'ing when he was 20) to the best in the world in 5yrs because of his "stage of career", but over a 4yr period Wiggins has to be a doper for doing pretty much exactly the same thing.

I really hope that Tony Martin decides to become a GC rider and alter his physique in exactly the same way that Rogers and Wiggins have done because he could potentially be a real threat. But if that were to happen and he started climbing with the best, then you'd all accuse him of doping instead of accepting that maybe he just changed his focus and did what is required to become a better climber.

 

[sittingbison]

...Wiggins beat Maxime Monfort and Tony Martin by nearly 1min in a 22km road ITT in 2005

2 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Credit Agricole 0.16
9 Maxime Monfort (Bel) Landbouwkrediet-Colnago 1.09 (53 seconds)
10 Tony Martin (Ger) German National Team 1.10 (54 seconds)

Wiggins beat Monfort by 2:15 last week in an ITT twice the distance...

Martin was 20, and not even a professional for another three years. Montfort was 22, in his first year.

Perhaps of more interest is that in the intervening years Monfort went on to be National ITT champion 2009, and won an ITT stage in Veulta 2011, while Martin went on to be National ITT champ in 2010 and 2012 and World ITT champion 2011 and has won numerous ITT stages in grand tours and other stage races. Yet Wiggans, who in the intervening years did nothing on the road, beat Montfort by 2:15 last week.

 

[Ferminal]

Yawn. Totally ignoring yet again the fact that Wiggins chose to focus on track endurance until he was 28yrs old. As far as I am concerned, Wiggins only seriously began his road racing career at that point in time. So no, he didn't have the "same stage of career" at the same age as Tony Martin.

When it suits your belief you invoke non-doping explanations for increases in performance. Martin is allowed to go from getting beaten up by someone who everyone says has no potential as a TT specialist (which means he must have been real crap at TT'ing when he was 20) to the best in the world in 5yrs because of his "stage of career", but over a 4yr period Wiggins has to be a doper for doing pretty much exactly the same thing.

I really hope that Tony Martin decides to become a GC rider and alter his physique in exactly the same way that Rogers and Wiggins have done because he could potentially be a real threat. But if that were to happen and he started climbing with the best, then you'd all accuse him of doping instead of accepting that maybe he just changed his focus and did what is required to become a better climber.

Where did I mention doping?

 

[Krebs cycle]

Where did I mention doping?

I dunno, what was the point of your post then if not to perpetuate the idea that Wiggins showed no potential as a road TT'ist before 2009?



Nb: Please bear in mind that I am not diametrically opposed to much of what some of you guys are saying. I think that we all have a right to be skeptical about winning performances in the TdF due to history, but I think pro-cycling has entered (or is entering) a new era which is not squeaky clean, but cleaner in general and harder to get large performance increases. Ashenden and other anti-doping experts have discussed this much. 5 or 10yrs ago, IMO it was guilty until proven innocent, these days the balance has shifted, so I am prepared to give TdF winners the benefit of the doubt when they aren't actually doing anything that isn't physiologically possible.

 

[rata de sentina]

A little research and I find out that Wiggins beat Maxime Monfort and Tony Martin by nearly 1min in a 22km road ITT in 2005 in the Tour de L'Avenir.

Tut tut Krebs, I'm not inherently adverse to your point but this is clutching at straws man. It's 2005, that's bloody eons ago, Martin had only just swapped nappies for nicks.

Furthermore, Wiggins specifically targeted that stage and was 12min behind Martin and and 23min behind Monfort on GC at that stage. Furthermore, while Martin and Wiggins rode in the dry it was raining when Monfort rode. So a "little" research is OK but a "little" more research is better

 

[xcleigh]

In which parallel universe does this occur???

I'll be gentle here and break you the facts.

1. Sky has no strong anti-doping stance.
2. Sky hired dodgy persons who had very much connections with doping. To drive this one home: check out Sean yates before you embarrass yourself even more. And let's not get started about Leinders.
3. Bradley is not very consistent due to his immense love for Lance even though the amount of evidence is beyond hilarious.

Now this was the foundation of your argument. So all what is left is that you are a believer who denies the facts. Not the best position in a discussion.

Can i say that this thread is about opinion and not facts! There are no facts that definitively prove any doping program happening at team Sky. Just thought I'd mention that. Lots of opinions are being bandied about mascarading as fact.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Martin was 20, and not even a professional for another three years. Montfort was 22, in his first year.

Perhaps of more interest is that in the intervening years Monfort went on to be National ITT champion 2009, and won an ITT stage in Veulta 2011, while Martin went on to be National ITT champ in 2010 and 2012 and World ITT champion 2011 and has won numerous ITT stages in grand tours and other stage races. Yet Wiggans, who in the intervening years did nothing on the road, beat Montfort by 2:15 last week.

OMG yet another person who is ignoring the track focus as opposed to road focus. That is like 5 or 6 of you that have repeated the same flawed argument over and over again. And besides are prologues not on the road? Wiggins either won or placed highly in every short TT on the rod that he entered in that period.

I really don't think any of you understand what sort of physiology is required to be the fastest man on the planet over 4km and how that same physiology could possibly be suitable for road TT ability at some later stage in one's cycling career. I also don't think you understand the level of cross over vs differences in training that are required to perform at world class level in each discipline.

 

[Ferminal]

I dunno, what was the point of your post then if not to perpetuate the idea that Wiggins showed no potential as a road TT'ist before 2009?

I do not think it's fair to compare a 25 year old pro to a 20 year old amateur, that is all. l'Avenir was open to pros and u25 or u27 back then, not as it is now. Monfort I do not know well enough. Of course Wiggins showed some chrono potential, that has to be the case when you are winning them, even if they are lesser races. Then again, showing potential does not answer all questions of what changed between the pre/post-Beijing Wiggins. The way I see it there are only really two answers, and they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

I believe doping is the most likely explanation, whilst others see it a change in his commitment to road cycling (actually I believe both). But believing in different answers to that question shouldn't limit anyone from analysing his career. I may never change my mind on the ultimate question but I hope I can still look at events either side of Beijing for what they are, not always resorting to big D.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Tut tut Krebs, I'm not inherently adverse to your point but this is clutching at straws man. It's 2005, that's bloody eons ago, Martin had only just swapped nappies for nicks.

Furthermore, Wiggins specifically targeted that stage and was 12min behind Martin and and 23min behind Monfort on GC at that stage. Furthermore, while Martin and Wiggins rode in the dry it was raining when Monfort rode. So a "little" research is OK but a "little" more research is better

Its a minor point which simply disputes the contention that Wiggins showed zero potential on the road as a TT specialist. Yes I agree he was not world class over 40km but he was undisputedly the fastest man on the planet over 4km and he won or placed highly in virtually every road TT less than 10km that he entered.

Besides, its funny how you are all jumping up and down regarding that result but are all conspicuously quiet regarding Albi 2007. What say you about that result amigo rata?

 

[nuggs1]

The quote of this whole thread so far is "if you think Wiggins is doping then you really are thick or have some kind of autism"

Pretty much sums up most of what I have read in here.

 

[rata de sentina]

OMG yet another person who is ignoring the track focus as opposed to road focus.

Hullo? Do you read your own posts? People are responding to your post about Wiggins relative performance to other people in a road TT. Since you made absolutely no mention of "track" in your post it is hardly surprising that people aren't referring to it either. Sheesh, you have no right to be exasperated.

 

[sittingbison]

Can i say that this thread is about opinion and not facts! There are no facts that definitively prove any doping program happening at team Sky. Just thought I'd mention that. Lots of opinions are being bandied about mascarading as fact.

xcleigh of course this is opinion based.

"Fact" such as an actual failed drug test has become completely irrelevant since the plethora of sanctioned athletes and cyclists who have admitted to doping or been implicated through other means yet never failed a test

"Fact" such as a biopassport irregularity has also become completely irrelevant since the UCI started covering up, or turns a blind eye to cases that are 99% positive.

 

[sittingbison]

...I really hope that Tony Martin decides to become a GC rider and alter his physique in exactly the same way that Rogers and Wiggins have done...

Krebs the only cyclists to have ever changed their physique as you describe yet not lose power (in fact gain it) are Armstrong, Wiggans, Froome and Rogers. The last three in the past year, and all on the same team.

I for one desperately hope Tony Martin keeps doing what he is best at (physiology included) and remains an ITT par extraordinaire. If he suddenly drops 10kg and starts climbing, I and others will be suspicious.

 

[Krebs cycle]

I do not think it's fair to compare a 25 year old pro to a 20 year old amateur, that is all. l'Avenir was open to pros and u25 or u27 back then, not as it is now. Monfort I do not know well enough. Of course Wiggins showed some chrono potential, that has to be the case when you are winning them, even if they are lesser races. Then again, showing potential does not answer all questions of what changed between the pre/post-Beijing Wiggins. The way I see it there are only really two answers, and they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

I believe doping is the most likely explanation, whilst others see it a change in his commitment to road cycling (actually I believe both). But believing in different answers to that question shouldn't limit anyone from analysing his career. I may never change my mind on the ultimate question but I hope I can still look at events either side of Beijing for what they are, not always resorting to big D.

Well said and a fair and balanced appraisal. I definitely agree that doping could be involved, but perhaps now that Cadel finally won the TdF, I have some faith that it is possible to win clean (or "cleaner").

At present I'm probably sitting somewhere around 70/30 (clean/doping), but if he starts doing really ridiculous stuff like beating Andy Shleck and Contador up climbs next year, then that ratio would quickly reverse.

 

[rata de sentina]

Besides, its funny how you are all jumping up and down regarding that result but are all conspicuously quiet regarding Albi 2007. What say you about that result amigo rata?

I was specifically addressing your post and not leaping off at a tangent which seems to be your modus operandi. This: "simply disputes the contention that Wiggins showed zero potential on the road as a TT specialist" is a strawman because I haven't actually seen anyone say that. Furthermore, the stucture and wording of your post didn't imply anything of the sort. Most people seem to think the gist of it was: 'look, Wiggins belted Monfort and Martin by 1min over 20Km back in 2005 now he beats them by 2min over 40km in 2012 so what's the issue?'.

 

[sittingbison]

OMG yet another person who is ignoring the track focus as opposed to road focus...I really don't think any of you understand what sort of physiology is required to be the fastest man on the planet over 4km and how that same physiology could possibly be suitable for road TT ability at some later stage in one's cycling career. I also don't think you understand the level of cross over vs differences in training that are required to perform at world class level in each discipline.

Krebs you are defeating yourself. We ALL understand exactly the physiology required to be a track pursuit gold medallist, and road ITTer capable of beating world and national champions, and a GC contender capable of beating the worlds best climbers and previous or current Tour/Giro/Veulta winners. And despite your arguments to the contrary, in the entire history of cycling there has NEVER been anyone capable of all three (in fact not even two of three).

 

[Krebs cycle]

Krebs the only cyclists to have ever changed their physique as you describe yet not lose power (in fact gain it) are Armstrong, Wiggans, Froome and Rogers. The last three in the past year, and all on the same team.

I for one desperately hope Tony Martin keeps doing what he is best at (physiology included) and remains an ITT par extraordinaire. If he suddenly drops 10kg and starts climbing, I and others will be suspicious.

If your watts/f.s.a goes down as a result of losing weight (which is almost certain to occur) but your watts/kg goes up, then in a GT, in all likelihood you will be better off overall.

Evans watts/kg went up when he did it as a mtn biker and Rogers watts/kg went up when he lost weight somewhere around 2005/06. The AIS has the data. I think Evans' watts/kg actually went down again when he gained weight but that helped him become a better time trialist. You'll notice that after Rogers changed he started performing pretty well in stage races having been the ITT world champion in 2005.

 

[Franklin]

Can i say that this thread is about opinion and not facts! There are no facts that definitively prove any doping program happening at team Sky. Just thought I'd mention that. Lots of opinions are being bandied about mascarading as fact.

Oh my, someone has trouble with those pesky things called facts..

Facts
1. Wiggins wanted teams that have a 1% suspicion of hiring doped doctors to be banned.

=> Sky hired Leinders

2. Michael Rogers happily blurts out power numbers beating those of his Freiburg years.

3. Wiggins denounces dopers and implicates Sastre... and adores Armstong. The amount of evidence against lance certainly dwarves that against Sastre.


I could drag up more facts, but this will do.


Now if we look at the facts of defense:

Facts:
1. Power numbers are humanly possible.

=> We know the midlevel also dopes, so power numbers are no indication either way.

2. he was never tested positive.

=> Enough has been said about this one

So there we have it. We have undeniable fact that show inconsistency and doublespeak. the defensive facts on the other hand have been shown many times to be absolutely non indicative.

Xcleigh, as a believer facts hurt like hell and all you can do is troll about it.

 

[taiwan]

If your watts/f.s.a goes down as a result of losing weight (which is almost certain to occur) but your watts/kg goes up, then in a GT, in all likelihood you will be better off overall.

Evans watts/kg went up when he did it as a mtn biker and Rogers watts/kg went up when he lost weight somewhere around 2005/06. The AIS has the data. I think Evans' watts/kg actually went down again when he gained weight but that helped him become a better time trialist. You'll notice that after Rogers changed he started performing pretty well in stage races having been the ITT world champion in 2005.

Where's the dip in prologue/TT performance you might expect when Wiggins drops the weight?

 

[blackcat]

Yawn. Totally ignoring yet again the fact that Wiggins chose to focus on track endurance until he was 28yrs old. As far as I am concerned, Wiggins only seriously began his road racing career at that point in time. So no, he didn't have the "same stage of career" at the same age as Tony Martin.

When it suits your belief you invoke non-doping explanations for increases in performance. Martin is allowed to go from getting beaten up by someone who everyone says has no potential as a TT specialist (which means he must have been real crap at TT'ing when he was 20) to the best in the world in 5yrs because of his "stage of career", but over a 4yr period Wiggins has to be a doper for doing pretty much exactly the same thing.

I really hope that Tony Martin decides to become a GC rider and alter his physique in exactly the same way that Rogers and Wiggins have done because he could potentially be a real threat. But if that were to happen and he started climbing with the best, then you'd all accuse him of doping instead of accepting that maybe he just changed his focus and did what is required to become a better climber.

Krebs, did you see Martin in his first Tdf. He was climbing very well. Sure showed GC potential.

Can climb
Can tt.

 

[red_death]

Ermm, we're talking before his transformation. Again, he had shown he was a pretty good time-trialist, but not world class. Now he's world class, and also a vastly improved climber. That's the whole point.

You keep saying this but a reasonably consistent set of top 10 finishes is world class in my book! Again look at the context of this year - BW has done very well, but the two riders who I would say are better TTers (FC and TM) have had awful seasons.

So if Brailsford's so anti-doping, why has he appointed Millar to ride in the Olympics? The CAS ruling says that a blanket ban is 'illegal', but I'm sure that Brailsford could find a reason not to appoint him if he didn't want to.

For the same reason he picked him for the world champs last year - expediency to give Cav the best chance. There isn't that many world class road riders in the UK, whereas with Sky he can afford the luxury of splurging some of Murdoch's millions on someone like Porte etc.

 

[hrotha]

So ignore the strawman and focus on the important bit ie: a plausible explanation that Wiggins was not a strong climber up to 2008 is that he was training for track. Starting a doping program after the Olympics could be another reason, but its not the only reason. I suppose you could argue that he was doping all along but then you'd have to accept my (ZOMG bizarro) reasoning that if you train differently you get different performance outcomes.

I'll repeat something very important.... I do not believe it is possible to be world class on the track and on the road at the same time. Therefore comparing hill climbing performance pre and post the Beijing Olympics is a failed approach because his training and preparation would have been different.

If you say he didn't show any potential in road TTs well then you're just being selective in choosing which results to look at, because pure physics dictates that you can never even have one good result if you have no potential, however the ITT from Albi in 2007 beats that argument down with a wet trout.

I didn't say he hadn't shown time-trialing potential - of course he had. That's pretty much the only thing he had shown. I've never said specific track training won't hurt your climbing either - we have Thomas as the most recent example. But, coincidentally, Thomas has also been putting out some of his best ITTs yet.

I repeat: Wiggins was first a prologue specialist, and by 2007 he had become a very good and solid time-trialist, but not world-class. By world-class, I mean consistently up there with the very best. He was, dunno, like Pinotti?

You keep saying this but a reasonably consistent set of top 10 finishes is world class in my book! Again look at the context of this year - BW has done very well, but the two riders who I would say are better TTers (FC and TM) have had awful seasons.

Obviously our definitions of "world class" differ. I'll put it in plainer terms then: he's become a much, much better time-trialist ever since he dropped massive amounts of weight. That doesn't make sense.