Tinkov - no doping exists in cycling

[Franklin]

Uh. Did you mean: rides like a stud, clean, on the CLEAN TEAM, lowest weight with highest power since 16 years of age, leaves Team Clean for financial reasons, rides like a dog, gets popped for Clen at a poncy 2 bit race pretty much noone turns up to in Japan, won last year by a Continental rider from Australia.

Sorry, MR did not ride like a dog in 2013. Not as good as he did on Sky, but considering that teams strength it's not completely odd that he had less wins.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Sorry, MR did not ride like a dog in 2013. Not as good as he did on Sky, but considering that teams strength it's not completely odd that he had less wins.

The Michael Rogers of 2013 rode like a dog compared to the Michael Rogers of 2012. He rode as a domestique at the 2012 Tour and smashed people.

Half the CQ points from one year to the next, third lowest CQ points ranking for him in 10 years == a dog year.

 

[Ferminal]

He could have smashed all but the top 7 or 8 this year too if he wanted (with unsustainable efforts), no point without Contador though. He rode position so had better finishes than 2012. He had a poor start to the season but California-Dauphine-Tour weren't really much different to last year. Throughout his career he has always been inconsistent one day to the next.

 

[Gung Ho Gun]

The Michael Rogers of 2013 rode like a dog compared to the Michael Rogers of 2012. He rode as a domestique at the 2012 Tour and smashed people.

Half the CQ points from one year to the next, third lowest CQ points ranking for him in 10 years == a dog year.

Last year he never had to wait for his team leader though. I don't think he was really (a lot) worse at the Tour, mainly less consistent throughout the year

 

[Dear Wiggo]

3 against 1 looks convincing, but then it begs the question - in my mind at least - as to why they didn't give him more room to race. Thought Bjarne was an ace strategist yo?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

He could have smashed all but the top 7 or 8 this year too if he wanted (with unsustainable efforts), no point without Contador though. He rode position so had better finishes than 2012. He had a poor start to the season but California-Dauphine-Tour weren't really much different to last year. Throughout his career he has always been inconsistent one day to the next.

Tend to agree except for the TT performances this year. In 2012 Rogers could have been on the podium in most TT events if he went full power. Not so in 2013 as I recall.

 

[SundayRider]

3 against 1 looks convincing, but then it begs the question - in my mind at least - as to why they didn't give him more room to race. Thought Bjarne was an ace strategist yo?

He looked heavier this year, maybe that Sky kit it slimming though

 

[Ferminal]

Tend to agree except for the TT performances this year. In 2012 Rogers could have been on the podium in most TT events if he went full power. Not so in 2013 as I recall.

All Sky riders use wind tunnels so that would explain it.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

All Sky riders use wind tunnels so that would explain it.

yep, Riis still operates like a caveman. No modern tech...

 

[Franklin]

There are two possible answers there:

1. MR rode like a dog.
2. MR conserved strength as Bjarne knew that the team was weaker and AC needed all support he could get. He never got the "Go-Ahead".

I certainly saw him do his thing in the mountains, which is what he was hired for. Also, Saxo did very good in the TTT.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

There are two possible answers there:

1. MR rode like a dog.
2. MR conserved strength as Bjarne knew that the team was weaker and AC needed all support he could get. He never got the "Go-Ahead".

I certainly saw him do his thing in the mountains, which is what he was hired for. Also, Saxo did very good in the TTT.

The last 3-5% in TT performance is often what makes a rider win bigger stage races: Indurain, Armstrong, Contador, Sir Wiggo, Froome etc.

Something was lagging with the Riis program in 2013. Perhaps the "under the radar" margin was too big.

 

[B_Ugli]

I don't buy the marginal gains school of thought in its entirety but there is something to be said about how "Professional" cycling has been in the past.

Whilst Pro Cycling has been a Professional sport (in the sense of guys doing it full time for a living), the way in which it is run and athletes looked after is far from Professional.

I think it is this attitude and set of beliefs that have contributed to the doping culture within the sport and tendency to make up that last 5-10% with PEDS.

Say you are a naturally talented rider and you are doing everything you think you should be doing in order to be competitive but your training and preparation are largely old school with the input of one trainer independent of your team. Your equipment is crap, your team disorganised and your training un-monitored. The easy way to make up that last 5-10% is to go dope.

On the other hand if you have a dedicated team coach, dietician, psychologist, physiologist and the best most researched equipment money can buy it is debatable whether doping will give you that last 5-10% or whether the gain is much more minimal. Also whether it is worth the risk.

What I am getting at is that I think certain riders really struggle with the difference between these two scenarios and in the latter scenario getting their head around performing well without PEDS.

Conversely guys that feel that they in are a team that is "un-professional and old school" still feel that need to chase that extra 5-10%.

This is why I reckon somebody like Contador is in a no-win situation with the new pressure from Tinkov for results. He knows that he cant go back to the "old school" way of preparing for fear of getting busted a second time but Saxo simply don't know how to get results any other way. The same could be said of a lot of teams.

I could be wrong but I suspect there may be an element of what I have described above in the recent Rogers situation i.e. what he feel he needs in order to perform. Even if he is a victim of contaminated meat you have to ask yourself whether a "Professional" team would have allowed him to eat it in the first place?

 

[SundayRider]

I don't buy the marginal gains school of thought in its entirety but there is something to be said about how "Professional" cycling has been in the past.

Whilst Pro Cycling has been a Professional sport (in the sense of guys doing it full time for a living), the way in which it is run and athletes looked after is far from Professional.

I think it is this attitude and set of beliefs that have contributed to the doping culture within the sport and tendency to make up that last 5-10% with PEDS.

Say you are a naturally talented rider and you are doing everything you think you should be doing in order to be competitive but your training and preparation are largely old school with the input of one trainer independent of your team. Your equipment is crap, your team disorganised and your training un-monitored. The easy way to make up that last 5-10% is to go dope.

On the other hand if you have a dedicated team coach, dietician, psychologist, physiologist and the best most researched equipment money can buy it is debatable whether doping will give you that last 5-10% or whether the gain is much more minimal. Also whether it is worth the risk.

What I am getting at is that I think certain riders really struggle with the difference between these two scenarios and in the latter scenario getting their head around performing well without PEDS.

Conversely guys that feel that they in are a team that is "un-professional and old school" still feel that need to chase that extra 5-10%.

This is why I reckon somebody like Contador is in a no-win situation with the new pressure from Tinkov for results. He knows that he cant go back to the "old school" way of preparing for fear of getting busted a second time but Saxo simply don't know how to get results any other way. The same could be said of a lot of teams.

I could be wrong but I suspect there may be an element of what I have described above in the recent Rogers situation i.e. what he feel he needs in order to perform. Even if he is a victim of contaminated meat you have to ask yourself whether a "Professional" team would have allowed him to eat it in the first place?

They all have top equipment at the top level. All the elements you have mentioned don't help you recover in the 3rd week of a grand tour or give you a power boost in the 5K of a classic.

 

[Franklin]

The last 3-5% in TT performance is often what makes a rider win bigger stage races: Indurain, Armstrong, Contador, Sir Wiggo, Froome etc.

Something was lagging with the Riis program in 2013. Perhaps the "under the radar" margin was too big.

Yep, also a possibility.

 

[Franklin]

I don't buy the marginal gains school of thought in its entirety but there is something to be said about how "Professional" cycling has been in the past.

Whilst Pro Cycling has been a Professional sport (in the sense of guys doing it full time for a living), the way in which it is run and athletes looked after is far from Professional.

I think it is this attitude and set of beliefs that have contributed to the doping culture within the sport and tendency to make up that last 5-10% with PEDS.

Say you are a naturally talented rider and you are doing everything you think you should be doing in order to be competitive but your training and preparation are largely old school with the input of one trainer independent of your team. Your equipment is crap, your team disorganised and your training un-monitored. The easy way to make up that last 5-10% is to go dope.

On the other hand if you have a dedicated team coach, dietician, psychologist, physiologist and the best most researched equipment money can buy it is debatable whether doping will give you that last 5-10% or whether the gain is much more minimal. Also whether it is worth the risk.

What I am getting at is that I think certain riders really struggle with the difference between these two scenarios and in the latter scenario getting their head around performing well without PEDS.

Conversely guys that feel that they in are a team that is "un-professional and old school" still feel that need to chase that extra 5-10%.

This is why I reckon somebody like Contador is in a no-win situation with the new pressure from Tinkov for results. He knows that he cant go back to the "old school" way of preparing for fear of getting busted a second time but Saxo simply don't know how to get results any other way. The same could be said of a lot of teams.

I could be wrong but I suspect there may be an element of what I have described above in the recent Rogers situation i.e. what he feel he needs in order to perform. Even if he is a victim of contaminated meat you have to ask yourself whether a "Professional" team would have allowed him to eat it in the first place?

You are drinking a bit too much of the SKY coolaid. AC won a GT in autumn 2012, now people are acting he's gone already. Let's wait and see.

And as has been stated many times before, there's hardly anything that's revolutionary in the Sky methods.

Indeed, though that might be the riders missrepresentation, some methods sound decidedly old fashioned and wrong (Training hundreds of times on a very high mountain). If anything cyclists always train excesively and should train less (more quality, less quantity). Sky all of a sudden breaking those rules and going full *** is quite odd (especially since even swimmingcoaches know better).

 

[Benotti69]

I don't buy the marginal gains school of thought in its entirety but there is something to be said about how "Professional" cycling has been in the past.

Whilst Pro Cycling has been a Professional sport (in the sense of guys doing it full time for a living), the way in which it is run and athletes looked after is far from Professional.

I think it is this attitude and set of beliefs that have contributed to the doping culture within the sport and tendency to make up that last 5-10% with PEDS.

Say you are a naturally talented rider and you are doing everything you think you should be doing in order to be competitive but your training and preparation are largely old school with the input of one trainer independent of your team. Your equipment is crap, your team disorganised and your training un-monitored. The easy way to make up that last 5-10% is to go dope.

On the other hand if you have a dedicated team coach, dietician, psychologist, physiologist and the best most researched equipment money can buy it is debatable whether doping will give you that last 5-10% or whether the gain is much more minimal. Also whether it is worth the risk.

What I am getting at is that I think certain riders really struggle with the difference between these two scenarios and in the latter scenario getting their head around performing well without PEDS.

Conversely guys that feel that they in are a team that is "un-professional and old school" still feel that need to chase that extra 5-10%.

This is why I reckon somebody like Contador is in a no-win situation with the new pressure from Tinkov for results. He knows that he cant go back to the "old school" way of preparing for fear of getting busted a second time but Saxo simply don't know how to get results any other way. The same could be said of a lot of teams.

I could be wrong but I suspect there may be an element of what I have described above in the recent Rogers situation i.e. what he feel he needs in order to perform. Even if he is a victim of contaminated meat you have to ask yourself whether a "Professional" team would have allowed him to eat it in the first place?

Sky are so ahead in terms of professionalism, they put a dash of pineapple juice in the bidons, just like Kimmage got when riding for a French amateur club in the 80s.

They call their soignuers 'carers' another huge leap in professionalism.

They keep their mechanics out of the rain when working on bikes. Wonder do they use 'dry' water when washing the team bikes too.

All the top teams are extremely professional. They need to be and anyone who thinks different really is not paying attention.

 

[happychappy]

This is why I reckon somebody like Contador is in a no-win situation

The type of situation he deserves to be in. Long may it remain so.

 

[hrotha]

I think it is this attitude and set of beliefs that have contributed to the doping culture within the sport and tendency to make up that last 5-10% with PEDS.

Say you are a naturally talented rider and you are doing everything you think you should be doing in order to be competitive but your training and preparation are largely old school with the input of one trainer independent of your team. Your equipment is crap, your team disorganised and your training un-monitored. The easy way to make up that last 5-10% is to go dope.

On the other hand if you have a dedicated team coach, dietician, psychologist, physiologist and the best most researched equipment money can buy it is debatable whether doping will give you that last 5-10% or whether the gain is much more minimal. Also whether it is worth the risk.

[...]

Conversely guys that feel that they in are a team that is "un-professional and old school" still feel that need to chase that extra 5-10%.

Your argument rests on the premise that there's a "last 5-10%". There isn't. A rider with the best training regime and the best technology in the world at his disposal will still get a significant boost from PEDs. It follows that those at the very top of the sport wouldn't be there if they had neglected any of those factors, unless they were massively talented to begin with - and early talent shows early.

 

[The Hitch]

Serious theory. Once upon a time did Tinkov post here.

I saw Tinkov write "clear" rather than clean.

Oleg Tinkov ‏@olegtinkov 3h
I hope that @mickrogers 's case is just misapprehension. He will prove that he was clear. I trust him, and believe in him.

I have heard that mistake made before. Once. By a Russian poster who half trolled and went under a very similar name (observe how the russian "ov" is replaced by a "off" just like Oleg changed "Tinkov" to "Tinkoff" for his businesses.)

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=407295&postcount=1

 

[Almeisan]

Rofl

10char

 

[Netserk]

You just reminded me Hitch that I miss Fetisoff