Tim Kerrison

[The Hitch]

Looks he forgot the lines.bailsford had him.memorize.

Id be hesitant to argue anything based on body language but his responses to strike me as weird for someone who is supposed to be a) this once in a generation genius and b) the guy who defeated.doping in sports.

Delivered.with absolutely no.emotion and no.real expression the standard bland words everyone including the cyclists gives when answering these questions. And a lot.of mumbling. Compared to.other scientists I've heard talk about doping like ashenden and hoberman, kerrison definitely looks like an amateur.

Im not saying this in particular means anything. People act.in different ways. But when for 2 years we've been hearing about this great sports scientists who revolutionized 1 of the biggest sports in the world despite never before being involved with it or knowing anything about.it, and then you see that, it definitely feels.like a let down

 

[Ferminal]

Cadel Evans school of media training.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Cadel Evans school of media training.

I heard through a grapevine that Cadel is doing a degree (?) in media, with the aim of being involved in same once his career ends.

 

[blackcat]

I've so far resisted wading in to this Team Sky debate clustercuss but I found this fairly banal, PR puff piece/interview too amusing to pass unmentioned.

At 4:58 Tim Kerrison is asked a doping question...

http://video.cyclingnews.com/video/...&ns_source=cyclingnews&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0

Jesus! The guy goes bananas. Is it just me? Is anyone here well versed in the interpretion of body language? I'd love to hear a professional opinion. It made me think of The Chicken's super-slippery responses to questioning during the '07 tour in the days leading up to his ejection. Oozing with guilt. Comically so.

I could, of course, be mistaking a monarch for a giant lizard but this is The Clinic after all.

perception is important


heheheh


lets reverse engineer it and get it @rse backwards.

Achieve perception, dope til hearts content, bone idle w@nkers.

 

[blackcat]

Looks he forgot the lines.bailsford had him.memorize.

Id be hesitant to argue anything based on body language but his responses to strike me as weird for someone who is supposed to be a) this once in a generation genius and b) the guy who defeated.doping in sports.

gotta war for him to win in ****stan then. rory stewart putting an apb out for timmy K

 

[Tinman]

Looks he forgot the lines.bailsford had him.memorize.

Id be hesitant to argue anything based on body language but his responses to strike me as weird for someone who is supposed to be a) this once in a generation genius and b) the guy who defeated.doping in sports.

Delivered.with absolutely no.emotion and no.real expression the standard bland words everyone including the cyclists gives when answering these questions. And a lot.of mumbling. Compared to.other scientists I've heard talk about doping like ashenden and hoberman, kerrison definitely looks like an amateur.

Real question is who at Sky let him loose to do this video interview. Without drilling the media training beforehand. Another PR disaster.

Not Normal.

Australian swimming must be missing him.

 

[blackcat]

gotta war for him to win in ****stan then. rory stewart putting an apb out for timmy K

P A K I S T A N is censored? wtf?





We

AINT

WIKILEAKS

 

[sniper]

I've so far resisted wading in to this Team Sky debate clustercuss but I found this fairly banal, PR puff piece/interview too amusing to pass unmentioned.

At 4:58 Tim Kerrison is asked a doping question...

http://video.cyclingnews.com/video/...&ns_source=cyclingnews&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0

Jesus! The guy goes bananas. Is it just me? Is anyone here well versed in the interpretion of body language? I'd love to hear a professional opinion. It made me think of The Chicken's super-slippery responses to questioning during the '07 tour in the days leading up to his ejection. Oozing with guilt. Comically so.

I could, of course, be mistaking a monarch for a giant lizard but this is The Clinic after all.

He's clearly uncomfortable with the topic. Look how he swallows three times in a row, his eyes are all over the place, and he's stuttering like a farting horse.
To be sure, the body language can only signal physical/emotional discomfort with the topic, not necessarily proof of lying. But then it's not so difficult to imagine why he's so uncomfortable with the topic.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Australian swimming must be missing him.

And Vice Versa I guess, mmmmh, doping, mmmmmh, we run obviously mmmmmmh, a clean, mmmmmmh team.

That is bad media handling, he should just have said the rest of the riders are lazy bone idled w@nkers.

 

[Ride to forget]

"We want to be perceived as a clean team."

Hits the nail on the head, unintentionally.

 

[Cycle Chic]

Blinking

Now we know why Kerrison has been kept out of the public eye.

He is seriously strange....did he blink in that 6 minute interview ?

 

[will10]

I've so far resisted wading in to this Team Sky debate clustercuss but I found this fairly banal, PR puff piece/interview too amusing to pass unmentioned.

At 4:58 Tim Kerrison is asked a doping question...

http://video.cyclingnews.com/video/...&ns_source=cyclingnews&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0

Jesus! The guy goes bananas. Is it just me? Is anyone here well versed in the interpretion of body language? I'd love to hear a professional opinion. It made me think of The Chicken's super-slippery responses to questioning during the '07 tour in the days leading up to his ejection. Oozing with guilt. Comically so.

I could, of course, be mistaking a monarch for a giant lizard but this is The Clinic after all.

Like a rabbit in the headlights. For all the media training these guys supposedly have, Sky have dropped a clanger.

Why does he say "perceived" so often?

 

[sniper]

...
Why does he say "perceived" so often?

He must have been in Steffen's mailing list.

8 Jun 2008 06:08:01 -0700, "Prentice Steffen"

Riders and Staff,

There have been some questions and confusion about access to data
generated by the ACE testing. I'd like to clarify how this works and
then answer any questions that you may have.

First, the people who have access to the data are ACE, JV, and all
members of the team's medical/science staff. As part of our
transparency policy, we have offered to make data available to
journalists upon formal request... a couple of you have already been
involved in that process. That is a very limited and controlled
process, so don't worry that journalist have free access to the
numbers.

Second, please understand that this is about perception rather than
reality. Of course we all know the "perception is reality" thing, so
know too that while we trust everyone this issue is quite important.

The ACE data is not available to you directly because a major
criticism leveled against ACE is that it is a system put in place to
insure none of you test positive and is really a system that "aids
and abets" doping. ACE does sort of walk a fine line when you think
about it like that. If we gave you real time access to the data,
then it could of course actually be used in that manner which is
obviously not our desire or intent. So obviously much of this has to
do with perceptions outsiders may have.

It's worth pointing out here that you do have full access to your
quarterly UCI testing which I'll gladly provide to you in .pdf
format. That data is ostensibly for your health and is really quite
good in that regard.

All that said, JV and I don't have a problem if asked to look at your
ACE data and tell you whether or not all looks good. We might go as
far as to tell you some specific results to reassure you that all is
well from a lab numbers perspective. So there will be some degree of
discretion involved, but this will be our general approach/philosophy.

Sorry to be a bit of a downer after that last mass email that went
out. Nice work and thanks to all who are making that happen!!!

Questions?

Prentice

 

[cadelcrybaby]

"We want to be perceived as a clean team."

Hits the nail on the head, unintentionally.

Would I be right in thinking that you are interpreting this as a Freudian slip, where perception matters and not the reality?

There is another possibility and that is that he is referring to Sky positively presenting itself as clean, proactively, and not just when confronted by journalists. Most teams don't do this, they don't draw attention to themselves on this issue.

Sky seem to have put themselves at odds with the other teams on this issue, right from the start, and I think this is what Kerrison might be talking about.

(Would have been better is the interviewer had put him on the spot about Leinders)

 

[sniper]

...
(Would have been better is the interviewer had put him on the spot about Leinders)

this.......

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

It was as if he lost the ability to string a sentence together.

 

[zalacain]

Certainly doesn't seem like the kind of guy who could inspire riders with his sparkling charisma.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Certainly doesn't seem like the kind of guy who could inspire riders with his sparkling charisma.

So what - he is employed as a physiologist, more often than not they are not the most social of people. They are in to interpreting numbers and graphs, it's like the joke about the scientist who had constipation, he worked it all out with a pen and paper.

 

[sittingbison]

at least we now know why Sir Wiggo was so terribly confused when Kerrison talked to him about cadence:

"Tim studied it over the winter and decided maybe it was the cadence which was the problem. They worked out Tony's rpm compared to mine and something to do with rolling resistance and with the gears."

We can now close the Sir Wiggo cadence thread

 

[thehog]

He certainly appears to be a bit of a strange dude. He was kinda bobbing and weaving through the whole interview. Then started stumbling around the doping question.

Do you think he's aware at it rains in races?

The guy is an idiot.

 

[42x16ss]

Do you think he's aware at it rains in races?

The guy is an idiot.

Agreed, looking at that interview. However, rain isn't exactly a factor when it comes to swimming either.

 

[42x16ss]

You do realise and putting nationalism aside for one moment statistically speaking that; 99.9999999% of all Tour de France winners for the last 20 years have been doping.

Proven fact.

What made 2012 buck this trend?

In a race dominated like none other in the history of the sport do you want me to believe a 0.00000000000001% chance that the winner wasn't doping?

Simply not possible. Statistically, mathematically, logically not possible.

This thread has constant echoes of 99-05 fanboyism right through it. For the skyborg fans - replace the name Wiggins with Armstrong in all of your arguments for Wiggin's cleanliness then look up some old threads on Road Bike Review or Slowtwitch defending Lance.

The similarity will startle you. Times like these we need Wonderlance to make a reappearance...

 

[Ferminal]

Agreed, looking at that interview. However, rain isn't exactly a factor when it comes to swimming either.

But he should be expert at dealing with performances in aquatic conditions.

 

[Hugh Januss]

This thread has constant echoes of 99-05 fanboyism right through it. For the skyborg fans - replace the name Wiggins with Armstrong in all of your arguments for Wiggin's cleanliness then look up some old threads on Road Bike Review or Slowtwitch defending Lance.

The similarity will startle you. Times like these we need Wonderlance to make a reappearance...

Who will be the first to come up with the sockpuppet WonderWiggo?

 

[thehog]

But he should be expert at dealing with performances in aquatic conditions.

Kerrisons will invent a rain making machine. Have it imported to Tenerife. Also have the team take the ski lift to the top of the mountain and then practise descending.