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

[BroDeal]

bravo

This is the clinic modus operandi it seems. When you're owned in a debate about doping and cycling, you just revert to idiotic trolling. How very mature of you.

It's a real shame that you guys have ruined this forum because there are some decent people and knowledgeable posters in here, and many of us hope for the day when pro-cycling is clean. I came here to discuss what is going on and along the way highlight the multiple lines of evidence which indicate that maybe, just maybe, in the past few years pro-cycling is beginning to see a light at the end of a long dark dope tunnel. But its like you guys WANT there to be cheats just so you've got something to whine about in here. It's a real shame that you just cannot accept any strong performance is clean (or cleaner) anymore. I guess you want the top team to be crawling up climbs at cat 2 or 3 level before you'll accept pro-cycling has gotten cleaner.

Take a look in a mirror. You have repeatedly misconstrued people's positions, dodged counter arguments, and denigrated others. You refuse to deal with the chief reason for people's skepticism, which is the body of suspicious things around Sky. In short, you continue to focus on the trees while refusing to acknowledge the forest. Your repeated posting of old race results is unconvincing. Using time loss of Porte and Rogers, who are working as domestiques, shows either a complete failure to understand racing or a dishonest attempt to use obviously useless data.

"Mr. Venkman, you are a poor scientist."

 

[Franklin]

Take a look in a mirror. You have repeatedly misconstrued people's positions, dodged counter arguments, and denigrated others. You refuse to deal with the chief reason for people's skepticism, which is the body of suspicious things around Sky. In short, you continue to focus on the trees while refusing to acknowledge the forest. Your repeated posting of old race results is unconvincing. Using time loss of Porte and Rogers, who are working as domestiques, shows either a complete failure to understand racing or a dishonest attempt to use obviously useless data.

"Mr. Venkman, you are a poor scientist."

Add the "special" claims which are surprising to come of a scientist.

 

[doolols]

But its like you guys WANT there to be cheats just so you've got something to whine about in here.

I wonder this too. Are Sky racing up mountains miles ahead of everyone else? Are they achieving W/kg figures well over 6.0, like dopers in the past? Are they racing up known climbs in record times?

Answers? No. They are riding in a certain style - efficient, not chasing down everyone who races up ahead of them. Watch what happens when Nibali / Evans kick and dash up. Do they also kick hard and chase them down? No, they ride at an efficient, consistent pace, without all the dashing off and falling back that we're used to seeing. They bring people back to them who can't stay with them at their 'normal' (and slow, by previous year's standards) pace, and who also then kick with surges of power and speed.

Let's look at some results:
Prologue. Wiggins 2nd, Froome 10th, Porte 36th, Rogers 61st
ITT Wiggins 1st, Froome 2nd, Rogers 27th, Porte 95th

I look at TTs because they negate the effects of team support and tactics and response to other riders.

Wiggins is a time trialler, always has been. Froome is a prodigious young talent, with a short proven history. Most of the complaints have been about Rogers (particularly) and Porte. The Hog has said that TTs are all about speed, and power = speed. There's not much sign of excessive power figures in those results. So why the poor showing from those two? Bike handling? Aerodynamics? Both dismissed by others.

 

[BroDeal]

I wonder this too. Are Sky racing up mountains miles ahead of everyone else? Are they achieving W/kg figures well over 6.0, like dopers in the past? Are they racing up known climbs in record times?

Answers? No. They are riding in a certain style - efficient, not chasing down everyone who races up ahead of them. Watch what happens when Nibali / Evans kick and dash up. Do they also kick hard and chase them down? No, they ride at an efficient, consistent pace, without all the dashing off and falling back that we're used to seeing. They bring people back to them who can't stay with them at their 'normal' (and slow, by previous year's standards) pace, and who also then kick with surges of power and speed.

Let's look at some results:
Prologue. Wiggins 2nd, Froome 10th, Porte 36th, Rogers 61st
ITT Wiggins 1st, Froome 2nd, Rogers 27th, Porte 95th

I look at TTs because they negate the effects of team support and tactics and response to other riders.

Wiggins is a time trialler, always has been. Froome is a prodigious young talent, with a short proven history. Most of the complaints have been about Rogers (particularly) and Porte. The Hog has said that TTs are all about speed, and power = speed. There's not much sign of excessive power figures in those results. So why the poor showing from those two? Bike handling? Aerodynamics? Both dismissed by others.

Jeebus! This is the same crap that Krebs is spewing. Rogers and Porte are working as freakin' domestiques. They are ordered to conserve energy when possible. They are not trying to do a good time.

 

[Franklin]

Most of the complaints have been about Rogers (particularly) and Porte. The Hog has said that TTs are all about speed, and power = speed. There's not much sign of excessive power figures in those results. So why the poor showing from those two? Bike handling? Aerodynamics? Both dismissed by others.

Doolols, a completely strange idea just popped up. Maybe, just maybe is it a good idea if domestiques take it easy in ITT's and save their strength for the mountains. You know what?!?!? I think we are one to yet another innovation key to Sky's performance:

Our TT specialist Rogers is posting the best numbers ever because he took a break in the ITT. Other teams let all their racers just go full blast in the ITT and that's why we shell everyone in the mountains.

Brilliant!

 

[sittingbison]

... they ride at an efficient, consistent pace, without all the dashing off and falling back that we're used to seeing...

Prologue. Wiggins 2nd, Froome 10th, Porte 36th, Rogers 61st
ITT Wiggins 1st, Froome 2nd, Rogers 27th, Porte 95th...they negate the effects of team support and tactics and response to other riders.

Wiggins is a time trialler, always has been. Froome is a prodigious young talent, with a short proven history. Most of the complaints have been about Rogers (particularly) and Porte...

Sorry to disagree with you doolols. Rogers, Porte and Froome have turned on the gas and immediately chased down Evans, Nibali and VDB2. In doing so they have consistently immediately destroyed the yellow jersey group leaving only themselves and the usual suspects - all the other noted climbers and GCs from past years immediately cracked and dropped. Once the rabbit is gathered in, the pace declines a bit and some of the others are able to regather. As to the ITT, Rogers and Porte are domestiques with instructions to save energy as apparent from their strong alps efforts on stage 10 and 11. As to Wiggo being a TTer, he has never squashed the field like this before, and well lets not forget Rogers was 3 times World Champion. As to Froome, "a prodigious young talent, with a short proven history"? Give me a break, he has done precisely nothing except for last years Veulta

Sheesh! When will you guys ever get it, the point is not overwhelmingly ridiculous EPO era power levels etc it is COMPARATIVE performance between them and the other contenders, and to their own previously established levels of performance.

 

[red_death]

lets not forget Rogers was 3 times World Champion.

So why hasn't Rogers been winning (or at least top 5) the TTs if your theory is correct?

Sheesh! When will you guys ever get it, the point is not overwhelmingly ridiculous EPO era power levels etc it is COMPARATIVE performance between them and the other contenders, and to their own previously established levels of performance.

You are being entirely inconsistent - you say "not overwhelming EPO era power levels" (in which case physiologically credible power levels) but then scream that they are performing so much better than before (without any power data to back that up). What you need is not comparative data with other riders but comparative data (not placings) with past performances that Sky riders have done then you have to assess whether any improvement is plausible.

If they were riding off the front on mtn stages I might buy it, or if the average speed of the TTs was astonishing, but neither of those things has happened...

 

[sittingbison]

Sorry RR, I can't be bothered responding in full, you are purposely cherry picking then misconstruing and obfuscating what I'm saying.

if you want to believe Rogers Porte Froome performance through the mountain stages is perfectly normal, and more importantly consistent with past performance, good for you. If you want to be obtuse and not acknowledge Rogers rode the ITT to orders, conserving energy for the mountains, then good for you. If you want to believe the core Sky group have not decimated the yellow group at will, good for you.

Nothing to see here, carry on

 

[Corona]

Never read so much bullsh1t in all my life. The most important variable is speed.

Riding the distance in the fastest time possible.

That will never change.

And for that you need power. Nothing else. And that comes from one place.

Maybe that's the next prediction for how much more ridiculous Sky can get then.

Wiggins to ride the next ITT on the local butchers bike wearing an oilskin cape

After all, he'll still be able to generate the same power so it won't affect his time in any way

 

[Parrot23]

bravo

...you guys WANT there to be cheats just so you've got something to whine about in here.

+1. That is true. Self-evident here.

The worst thing that could happen would be a clean peloton for some of the "stoners" here (see the "boring" racing at the Giro this year); and they know it. To each his own....

Sure, some teams/riders may be doping in very sophisticated ways, but that doesn't explain some rather extreme fixations here masquerading as virtue. Massive circumstantial case amounting to a slam dunk.

 

[taiwan]

Fortunately a clean peloton is still sort of unrealistic so the h8ers will have something to work with fora while yet

 

[Turner29]

Fortunately a clean peloton is still sort of unrealistic so the h8ers will have something to work with fora while yet

I would not use the word "h8ers" -- perhaps some actually are concerned with a clean sport. Also, many of us are tired, year in and year out, of doped riders insulting our intelligence with "cleanliness" lectures and ridiculous responses to dope accusations, be they from positive test results to press inquires. Chimeric twins, Colombian cocaine cough drops, tainted meat, poisoning -- what next?

 

[taiwan]

I would not use the word "h8ers" -- perhaps some actually are concerned with a clean sport. Also, many of us are tired, year in and year out, of doped riders insulting our intelligence with "cleanliness" lectures and ridiculous responses to dope accusations, be they from positive test results to press inquires. Chimeric twins, Colombian cocaine cough drops, tainted meat, poisoning -- what next?

Yeah sorry the use was ironic. If there wasn't some informed cynicism about clean cycling like on this forum, then dodgy practises throughout the peloton would be guaranteed.

 

[mastersracer]

Interesting that control has shifted to Liquigas the last 2 stages. Rogers and Porte are fading, leaving Wiggins and Froome to cover Liquigas moves. Here's a scenario: Liquigas have waited to the Pyrenees to attack Sky as a planned team strategy.

 

[Caruut]

+1. That is true. Self-evident here.

The worst thing that could happen would be a clean peloton for some of the "stoners" here (see the "boring" racing at the Giro this year); and they know it. To each his own....

Sure, some teams/riders may be doping in very sophisticated ways, but that doesn't explain some rather extreme fixations here masquerading as virtue. Massive circumstantial case amounting to a slam dunk.

Are you drunk?

 

[Paco_P]

It seems to me that those who can't see what is bothersome about Friggins and company are just like those who couldn't see what was bothersome about Lance and company.

I think part of what happens is that so many professional athletes in so many different sports are on such complete doping/drugging regimens that many spectators have lost perspective on what natural performance profiles look like. There are so many cases in so many venues of stars who appear to come out of nowhere, and the media so cultivates their stories, that such things come to seem normal, and even though occasionally some of them may have something to them, most of them don't.

In sports like cycling or track and field so many of the recent (last three decades) champions (all?) have tested positive or admitted doping that it seems unlikely that the current champions are not doing the same. One wants to hope that Usain Bolt is just something special, and at least in his case his talent was evident when he was a teenager - but almost all the guys he is beating - Gay, Blake, Gatlin, etc. - have actually been caught already, and this ought to generate skepticism in even the most uncynical observer. In cycling even one of the most naturally talented cyclists in recent memory - Contador - was doping in order to win the big tours (I say it so confidently not because I am some clinic hater who wants it to be so, but because he was caught) - and so it is reasonable to question riders like Froome and Wiggins whose history does not indicate talent at the Contador level, but whose current dominance is reminiscent of Lance Armstrong.

Of course there are still those who believe Armstrong never tested positive, but this is really willful blindness to a mountain of evidence, some of it direct, some of it circumstantial.

Why some of us care - to read Wiggins's jingoistic "I don't dope because I'm British" piece in the Guardian made me very tired - I'd like to believe that someone who takes such a self-righteously bigotted attitude would never dope, but after having watched pro sports for decades, I doubt very much that it is so.

 

[Franklin]

Interesting that control has shifted to Liquigas the last 2 stages. Rogers and Porte are fading, leaving Wiggins and Froome to cover Liquigas moves. Here's a scenario: Liquigas have waited to the Pyrenees to attack Sky as a planned team strategy.

I'm not sure if I have to laugh or log off...

Liquigas couldn't drop anyone, not even the Sky domestiques and then Liqui imploded due to Sky's efforts.

Truly master, I know you love Sky and I congratulate you with the first UK winner, but leave it at that. Don't make up stuff, ok?

 

[alberto.legstrong]

It seems to me that those who can't see what is bothersome about Friggins and company are just like those who couldn't see what was bothersome about Lance and company.

I think part of what happens is that so many professional athletes in so many different sports are on such complete doping/drugging regimens that many spectators have lost perspective on what natural performance profiles look like. There are so many cases in so many venues of stars who appear to come out of nowhere, and the media so cultivates their stories, that such things come to seem normal, and even though occasionally some of them may have something to them, most of them don't.

In sports like cycling or track and field so many of the recent (last three decades) champions (all?) have tested positive or admitted doping that it seems unlikely that the current champions are not doing the same. One wants to hope that Usain Bolt is just something special, and at least in his case his talent was evident when he was a teenager - but almost all the guys he is beating - Gay, Blake, Gatlin, etc. - have actually been caught already, and this ought to generate skepticism in even the most uncynical observer. In cycling even one of the most naturally talented cyclists in recent memory - Contador - was doping in order to win the big tours (I say it so confidently not because I am some clinic hater who wants it to be so, but because he was caught) - and so it is reasonable to question riders like Froome and Wiggins whose history does not indicate talent at the Contador level, but whose current dominance is reminiscent of Lance Armstrong.

Of course there are still those who believe Armstrong never tested positive, but this is really willful blindness to a mountain of evidence, some of it direct, some of it circumstantial.

Why some of us care - to read Wiggins's jingoistic "I don't dope because I'm British" piece in the Guardian made me very tired - I'd like to believe that someone who takes such a self-righteously bigotted attitude would never dope, but after having watched pro sports for decades, I doubt very much that it is so.

+1 TO THE 10th power. (that's a little math joke) not much to add.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Predictions:

- 1-2 in the remaining time trial.

- Froome to ride up to breakaway attempts by top tier climbers and then attack himself, slowdown and then ride on the front again.

- Sky doms to pace set for 50km’s at a time up HC mountains

- Cav to win one or more stages before Tour end.

- The grupetto to finish outside the time limit day after day.

- Known climbers being chased down by Sky doms.


Anything else I missed?

In 44 pages of posts this must have been mentioned, but next year Froome to lead Sky with Wiggins as domo.

 

[Caruut]

In 44 pages of posts this must have been mentioned, but next year Froome to lead Sky with Wiggins as domo.

Rewind 14 years..

I hear next year Ullrich is going to lead T-Mobile with Riis as domo.

 

[thehog]

My next prediction is Froome will win the next ITT over Wiggins. He won't hold back.

I still think something going to go bang.

 

[moonstation2000]

My next prediction is Froome will win the next ITT over Wiggins. He won't hold back.

I still think something going to go bang.

He didn't seem too happy or convincing in the post stage interview. What do you think all the conversation was that he was having with Wiggins on the way up the hill? "Can I go yet? Now can I go? How about now? Please?"

Would love to know what's going on in his head. Obviously by now Wigs knows that Froome was the only true competition, but it's too late now for Froome. Situation is kinda like Lance/Contador on Astana... except Contador rightly said F u and rode for himself.

 

[BroDeal]

He didn't seem too happy or convincing in the post stage interview. What do you think all the conversation was that he was having with Wiggins on the way up the hill? "Can I go yet? Now can I go? How about now? Please?"

Would love to know what's going on in his head. Obviously by now Wigs knows that Froome was the only true competition, but it's too late now for Froome. Situation is kinda like Lance/Contador on Astana... except Contador rightly said F u and rode for himself.

This situation reminds me of team orders in Formula 1. The racing is phony. The results are fixed.

BMC should buy out Froome's contract.

 

[yourwelcome]

This situation reminds me of team orders in Formula 1. The racing is phony. The results are fixed.

Yes, adding insult to injury.

 

[thehog]

He didn't seem too happy or convincing in the post stage interview. What do you think all the conversation was that he was having with Wiggins on the way up the hill? "Can I go yet? Now can I go? How about now? Please?"

Would love to know what's going on in his head. Obviously by now Wigs knows that Froome was the only true competition, but it's too late now for Froome. Situation is kinda like Lance/Contador on Astana... except Contador rightly said F u and rode for himself.

Well worse. Without Wiggins Froome wouldn't have the A1 super elite program he's on. Go elsewhere and he might have risk and find his own doctors and suppliers.