Wiggins, a man in love!

[blackcat]

is that the reason for his haircut?

 

[The Hitch]

unfortunately, he inherited his old mans alcoholism. did he have a few smokes too?

What the **** has this got to do with anything? This thread is about wiggos relationship with lance and how it contradicts to his previous anti doping comments and his current denials to have even ever met him.

Childish insults about alcoholism and offensive comments about his father, who's death must have been very traumatic have jack **** to.do with the thread.

Wiggins once implied that if anyone suggested he doped to.his face they'd see his physical side (itself hilarious when compared to 2007 comments)

But if you said what you just posted above, to his face, he would be more than justified in any action he took.

I hope the mods add some weight and maybe some politeness to this message but, unless you have something to contribute, **** off.

 

[blackcat]

What the **** has this got to do with anything? This thread is about wiggos relationship with lance and how it contradicts to his previous anti doping comments and his current denials to have even ever met him.

Childish insults about alcoholism and offensive comments about his father, who's death must have been very traumatic have jack **** to.do with the thread.

Wiggins once implied that if anyone suggested he doped to.his face they'd see his physical side (itself hilarious when compared to 2007 comments)

But if you said what you just posted above, to his face, he would be more than justified in any action he took.

I hope the mods add some weight and maybe some politeness to this message but, unless you have something to contribute, **** off.

I was serious Hitch.

Wiggins has gone on the record previously about his alcoholism, especially post Athens I think. Or was it post Beijing.

Google it for yourself dude.

I was completely serious. Wiggins last line mentioned about his father said "if he was sober/when he was sober". And his father had other more unsocial traits. But you are right, this not the forum. So you also should keep the ad hominem out.IF Wiggins wants to act like a d!ck, let him act like an alcoholic d!ck who likes the gaspers too. How a Tour winner could be on the gaspers, well, it aint doing much damage to the hematology and blood bags innit

 

[pedaling squares]

Hell hath no fury...

Apparently the love affair is over. Bradley can no longer even mention the name of his former crush.

“Even with all the problems cycling has had with the American guy, it is still growing all the time. People love it and that is fantastic,” he told The Daily Mail.

From cycling's great benefactor to "the American guy", oh how love can be cruel. And how long until we hear Bradley sob about "the Kenyan guy"?

the break-up note, delivered by a friend

 

[Parrulo]

Well, i think we just discovered the reason why he has been gaining weight. . . .

Too much breakup chocolate

 

[blackcat]

Wiggins revealed that he will be close to eight kilogrammes heavier than his Tour de France weight when he rides the individual time trial at the world championships in Tuscany on Wednesday September 25.

now he is fing with us

 

[pedaling squares]

I think he really believes that we, the great unwashed wankers of the world, will actually forget everything he has said in times past.

 

[Afrank]

Wiggins revealed that he will be close to eight kilogrammes heavier than his Tour de France weight when he rides the individual time trial at the world championships in Tuscany on Wednesday September 25.

now he is fing with us

He just enjoys trolling us.

 

[darwin553]

Anyone know whether this 8 kilos will put him close to the weight of Cancellara?

Upon looking, 82 kilos it has Cancellara at on wiki, 69 for Wiggins..add 8 kilos makes Wiggins 77 kilos and given they are both at similar height (well Cancellara is 5 cm less than Wiggins), Wiggins I say is still very much within the optimal weight/height ratio to become TT specialist (perhaps even a bit too light)

 

[Robert21]

Anyone know whether this 8 kilos will put him close to the weight of Cancellara?

Upon looking, 82 kilos it has Cancellara at on wiki, 69 for Wiggins..add 8 kilos makes Wiggins 77 kilos and given they are both at similar height (well Cancellara is 5 cm less than Wiggins), Wiggins I say is still very much within the optimal weight/height ratio to become TT specialist (perhaps even a bit too light)

Personally, I don't believe for one moment these 'public' weights for the top riders. Most of them seem inflated, probably because this makes the numbers look more credible when the 'armchair experts' start working out their likely watts per kilo figures.

I also find it odd that people like Wiggins can apparently gain or lose 8 kg without this making any significant difference to the way they look. For me 8kg is the difference between being looking pretty 'cut' and being a fat slob!

 

[Cycle Chic]

Wiggins Weight Gain

Personally, I don't believe for one moment these 'public' weights for the top riders. Most of them seem inflated, probably because this makes the numbers look more credible when the 'armchair experts' start working out their likely watts per kilo figures.

I also find it odd that people like Wiggins can apparently gain or lose 8 kg without this making any significant difference to the way they look. For me 8kg is the difference between being looking pretty 'cut' and being a fat slob!

Race Radio commented on how different Wiggins is looking now. His face is showing 'bloating'.

 

[blackcat]

Personally, I don't believe for one moment these 'public' weights for the top riders. Most of them seem inflated, probably because this makes the numbers look more credible when the 'armchair experts' start working out their likely watts per kilo figures.

I also find it odd that people like Wiggins can apparently gain or lose 8 kg without this making any significant difference to the way they look. For me 8kg is the difference between being looking pretty 'cut' and being a fat slob!

basically, your position, works on the downside. the negative, or inverted "a loss of 8 kgs". [nb pleonasm for effect not double negative]

but when a rider is about 10kg below their natural weight, sticking on 8 kgs, IS NOT, is not difficult. the body, and one has to think, your vital organs, are all crying out for calories: carbs and protein.

and WHEN dave brailsford throws the reason of caloric deficit, behind peter kennaugh losing 5 or 6 kgs, after Dauphine, before the TdF. Ask Sir Dave, how the heck is a rider supposed to maintain fitness, and prime/ or peak, for the TdF whilst being in caloric deficit and riding 200k training rides to lose weight.

it just is not possible to be in caloric deficit and prepare for the TdF. This is a flat out lie by Brailford.

 

[Cycle Chic]

Just seen a bit of the Eneco Tour - camera on Wiggins. His face is well weird !! could that bloating be steroids ? adds up if he's bulking up to transmorph into Jurgen Roelandts.

 

[horsinabout]

Just seen a bit of the Eneco Tour - camera on Wiggins. His face is well weird !! could that bloating be steroids ? adds up if he's bulking up to transmorph into Jurgen Roelandts.

I noticed the puffy cheeks, definite weight again. Wiggo is starting to morph into a David Cameron look a like, complete with chubby chops..

 

[D-Queued]

Personally, I don't believe for one moment these 'public' weights for the top riders. Most of them seem inflated, probably because this makes the numbers look more credible when the 'armchair experts' start working out their likely watts per kilo figures.

I also find it odd that people like Wiggins can apparently gain or lose 8 kg without this making any significant difference to the way they look. For me 8kg is the difference between being looking pretty 'cut' and being a fat slob!

This is possible.

There is an old joke about how basketball players grow two inches when they join the NBA. Except for Wilt the Stilt, of course, who insisted he was not a 7 footer. But, that is a one-time deception that can easily be perpetuated year-after-year.

But, if what you are saying is true then you have painted a picture of an even greater degree of Omerta and doping conspiracy than the largest conspiracy theorists here would likely pursue.

Thus, it is possible that the weights are constantly distorted.

Of course, the simpler case is probably true, n'est-ce pas?

Thus, I suggest that your theory is possible, but not it is probable.

As for:

1. The difference in being 'cut' or not, not necessarily.

Aside from the 'subjectivity' of such observations, please consider that clear muscle definition is observable at 9-12% body fat where one is in the "Lean Category". From Bodybuilding.com (people who are more expert than I on being cut): "At this point you will see clear muscle definition, often being able to clearly see where the muscle starts and ends. There will be little fat to pinch on the body and it will be clearly obvious these individuals are exercising regularly and following a strict diet."

For someone like Wiggo, that would easily translate to almost 8 kg as this is barely 10% of his weight.

Perhaps your own observations are more keen, but someone in the "Lean" category should not yet have reached even your standards of a "Fat Slob".

2. Other explanations for weight fluctuation

There are definitely other explanations for a weight gain that would not suggest a "fat slob".

Consider, for example, the effect of steroids. Weight gain from steroids is both a desired outcome for some, and a well-documented side effect.

In this case, look for signs of water retention, or bloating.

Imagine, for example, that you were an athlete in a sport where doping was both common and provided a considerable advantage.

Continue to imagine that you may already have been on a doping program where you could sustain very, very low fat percentages. Imagine you did that to perform well in mountain stages in Grand Tours. Imagine that there are drugs like Clenbuterol and others that can provide that benefit without health or performance sacrifices.

Imagine that you could easily sustain fat percentages of less than 4% with artificial PED aids.

Imagine further that you wanted to shift your focus from Grand Tours and mountain stages to those events where weight was not a significant penalty. Such events could include the time trial or track disciplines.

Imagine that you wanted to wave your magic wand and gain some additional power.

Imagine that you wanted to do make that gain in a short period of time, when you were already hyper-trained.

Imagine that you thought you could get away with it. Imagine that you had specialists in the use of PEDs to assist your transformation.

In that case, I imagine, you might see a weight gain of 8 kg.

And, I imagine, you would not qualify as a fat slob.

Dave.

 

[D-Queued]

Just seen a bit of the Eneco Tour - camera on Wiggins. His face is well weird !! could that bloating be steroids ? adds up if he's bulking up to transmorph into Jurgen Roelandts.

Yes.

Dave.

 

[Alphabet]

Sounds like he's OD'd on cortisone.

 

[blackcat]

1. The difference in being 'cut' or not, not necessarily.

Aside from the 'subjectivity' of such observations, please consider that clear muscle definition is observable at 9-12% body fat where one is in the "Lean Category". From Bodybuilding.com (people who are more expert than I on being cut): "At this point you will see clear muscle definition, often being able to clearly see where the muscle starts and ends.

c Mo Greene. I dare say, he carried within 1% gross of the other 100 metre sprinters, but his bodyshape of muscles "looked" less defined. he might have been 5% compared to Linford Christies 4%. (nb. just arbitrary numbers).

apart from the inability to ascertain cut/fat% from a look. best way or should it be "weigh" to measure bf percentage, is pool or bath/water submersion. i think that still fails to discount a persons bone density also.

When the weightloss is "visible" on a tv, you have probs. There is one advantage of watching on televisual media, it offers an anamorpic perspective, and tends to reveal underlying bone structure. As in person, we tend to see, only features. nose, eyes, calves. taking in the entire structure, is instructive. And its not merely the ratio of the tv, and compared to seeing an athlete in person from distance. In person, it is still individual features. Watching it in viewing media, offers this anamorphous phenomenon

 

[JimmyFingers]

cue a 'Wiggins' Head' thread

 

[thehog]

The camera adds 10 pounds?

 

[red_flanders]

This is possible.

There is an old joke about how basketball players grow two inches when they join the NBA. Except for Wilt the Stilt, of course, who insisted he was not a 7 footer. But, that is a one-time deception that can easily be perpetuated year-after-year.

But, if what you are saying is true then you have painted a picture of an even greater degree of Omerta and doping conspiracy than the largest conspiracy theorists here would likely pursue.

Thus, it is possible that the weights are constantly distorted.

Of course, the simpler case is probably true, n'est-ce pas?

Thus, I suggest that your theory is possible, but not it is probable.

As for:

1. The difference in being 'cut' or not, not necessarily.

Aside from the 'subjectivity' of such observations, please consider that clear muscle definition is observable at 9-12% body fat where one is in the "Lean Category". From Bodybuilding.com (people who are more expert than I on being cut): "At this point you will see clear muscle definition, often being able to clearly see where the muscle starts and ends. There will be little fat to pinch on the body and it will be clearly obvious these individuals are exercising regularly and following a strict diet."

For someone like Wiggo, that would easily translate to almost 8 kg as this is barely 10% of his weight.

Perhaps your own observations are more keen, but someone in the "Lean" category should not yet have reached even your standards of a "Fat Slob".

2. Other explanations for weight fluctuation

There are definitely other explanations for a weight gain that would not suggest a "fat slob".

Consider, for example, the effect of steroids. Weight gain from steroids is both a desired outcome for some, and a well-documented side effect.

In this case, look for signs of water retention, or bloating.

Imagine, for example, that you were an athlete in a sport where doping was both common and provided a considerable advantage.

Continue to imagine that you may already have been on a doping program where you could sustain very, very low fat percentages. Imagine you did that to perform well in mountain stages in Grand Tours. Imagine that there are drugs like Clenbuterol and others that can provide that benefit without health or performance sacrifices.

Imagine that you could easily sustain fat percentages of less than 4% with artificial PED aids.

Imagine further that you wanted to shift your focus from Grand Tours and mountain stages to those events where weight was not a significant penalty. Such events could include the time trial or track disciplines.

Imagine that you wanted to wave your magic wand and gain some additional power.

Imagine that you wanted to do make that gain in a short period of time, when you were already hyper-trained.

Imagine that you thought you could get away with it. Imagine that you had specialists in the use of PEDs to assist your transformation.

In that case, I imagine, you might see a weight gain of 8 kg.

And, I imagine, you would not qualify as a fat slob.

Dave.

Dave, you are at times a force for good and reason. Great post!

 

[thehog]

This is possible.

There is an old joke about how basketball players grow two inches when they join the NBA. Except for Wilt the Stilt, of course, who insisted he was not a 7 footer. But, that is a one-time deception that can easily be perpetuated year-after-year.

But, if what you are saying is true then you have painted a picture of an even greater degree of Omerta and doping conspiracy than the largest conspiracy theorists here would likely pursue.

Thus, it is possible that the weights are constantly distorted.

Of course, the simpler case is probably true, n'est-ce pas?

Thus, I suggest that your theory is possible, but not it is probable.

As for:

1. The difference in being 'cut' or not, not necessarily.

Aside from the 'subjectivity' of such observations, please consider that clear muscle definition is observable at 9-12% body fat where one is in the "Lean Category". From Bodybuilding.com (people who are more expert than I on being cut): "At this point you will see clear muscle definition, often being able to clearly see where the muscle starts and ends. There will be little fat to pinch on the body and it will be clearly obvious these individuals are exercising regularly and following a strict diet."

For someone like Wiggo, that would easily translate to almost 8 kg as this is barely 10% of his weight.

Perhaps your own observations are more keen, but someone in the "Lean" category should not yet have reached even your standards of a "Fat Slob".

2. Other explanations for weight fluctuation

There are definitely other explanations for a weight gain that would not suggest a "fat slob".

Consider, for example, the effect of steroids. Weight gain from steroids is both a desired outcome for some, and a well-documented side effect.

In this case, look for signs of water retention, or bloating.

Imagine, for example, that you were an athlete in a sport where doping was both common and provided a considerable advantage.

Continue to imagine that you may already have been on a doping program where you could sustain very, very low fat percentages. Imagine you did that to perform well in mountain stages in Grand Tours. Imagine that there are drugs like Clenbuterol and others that can provide that benefit without health or performance sacrifices.

Imagine that you could easily sustain fat percentages of less than 4% with artificial PED aids.

Imagine further that you wanted to shift your focus from Grand Tours and mountain stages to those events where weight was not a significant penalty. Such events could include the time trial or track disciplines.

Imagine that you wanted to wave your magic wand and gain some additional power.

Imagine that you wanted to do make that gain in a short period of time, when you were already hyper-trained.

Imagine that you thought you could get away with it. Imagine that you had specialists in the use of PEDs to assist your transformation.

In that case, I imagine, you might see a weight gain of 8 kg.

And, I imagine, you would not qualify as a fat slob.

Dave.

It's odd that the weight gain requires an announcement. To appear the need to justify or provide some form of faux made up reason.

More odd that his best time trialling (ever) was when he had the least weight.

Some of the reasons behind the announcements we'll just never know.

 

[Cycle Chic]

Wiggins Given Up

So now he's gona go back to the Track... WTF !!

Return to Tour de France unlikely for Wiggins

"I would prefer my attention back toward the track," said Wiggins.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/return-to-tour-de-france-unlikely-for-wiggins

And still no journalist asking him some obvious questions.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Just seen a bit of the Eneco Tour - camera on Wiggins. His face is well weird !! could that bloating be steroids ? adds up if he's bulking up to transmorph into Jurgen Roelandts.

he looks weirdly puffy

 

[mewmewmew13]

So now he's gona go back to the Track... WTF !!





http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/return-to-tour-de-france-unlikely-for-wiggins

And still no journalist asking him some obvious questions.

wow...wigg's comment about the "supremacy of Chris Froome for the next five years"
pretty cut and dried then.. they've got the formula down?