He's been a pro since 2002, not 2009.armchairclimber said:The progression from 4th with Garmin to podium in the 2011 vuelta to winner of the TDF is not that exceptional or meteoric.
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
He's been a pro since 2002, not 2009.armchairclimber said:The progression from 4th with Garmin to podium in the 2011 vuelta to winner of the TDF is not that exceptional or meteoric.
taiwan said:You make it sound so simple, yet there are no precedents for the IPWC and Tour wins, and few for stage races in general.
taiwan said:He's been a pro since 2002, not 2009.
armchairclimber said:Actually, he performed like a newbie who didn't have anywhere near the aerobic endurance background to be a GC contender, nor the belief that he could be a GC contender. He was poorly prepared.
He hasn't transformed himself overnight and SKY have taken at least a couple of years to improve their training and physical preparation.
He has always been an exceptionally talented athlete, he just hasn't always had the preparation or team around him to win a GT. The progression from 4th with Garmin to podium in the 2011 vuelta to winner of the TDF is not that exceptional or meteoric.
Dr. Maserati said:If you change the highlighted to Doctors - which is also correct - it puts a rather different slant on your argument.
armchairclimber said:Yes, I know. A long road to GC contender and winner...coming from a discipline which demands different training emphasis. It's a good job that there are some patient, intelligent folk to guide you through this minefield.
Really. Can you show me what would be wrong or factually incorrect in this statement.armchairclimber said:Only if you have the mind of a muppet.
You mean that Giro where everyone was doped to the gills? U mean Wiggo even than had better recovery as to road pro's?Wallace and Gromit said:Wiggo was a class apart as a pursuiter. For example, he beat McGee by 4 over four seconds in the Athens final, which equates to a 5% power advantage, all other things equal.
In the Athens IP, Wiggo was very consistent through the rounds, doing 4:15 in the qualifying round and 4:16 in the final.
McGee faded from a 4:17 in the qualifying round to over 4:20 in the final, suggesting Wiggo's recovery powers were superior to McGee as well.
So we have someone with more power and better recovery than a man who finished that year's Giro 8th @ 6 minutes.
This proves nothing, other than highlighting just how good Wiggo was relative to other world class pursuiters, even those with proven GT capabilities.
Food for thought, maybe.
Wallace and Gromit said:Contador is banned.
Schleck injured.
Evans patently below last year's form.
Basso and Scarpo Giro'd out.
Ditto Ryder, even if he hadn't crashed.
JRod didn't enter the Tour; wisely so after the Giro.
Wallace and Gromit said:With the exception of Evans, none of the above had a hope in hell's chance of challenging the Sky guys who were focused specifically on the Tour. It was a very thin field that they beat.
To be pedantic, getting banned or riding the Giro seriously is manifestly and undeniably bad preparation for the Tour!
Fearless Greg Lemond said:You mean that Giro where everyone was doped to the gills? U mean Wiggo even than had better recovery as to road pro's?
armchairclimber said:Yes, I know. A long road to GC contender and winner...coming from a discipline which demands different training emphasis. It's a good job that there are some patient, intelligent folk to guide you through this minefield.
You aren't aware of the fact doping is actually 'he who has the best recovery'?Wallace and Gromit said:Not all road pros. Just McGee, who'd featured prominently in the Giro. If he was doped then it makes Wiggo's achievements in 2004 all the more impressive.
The progression of times through the rounds in Athens cannot be argued with: In that even, Wiggo had superior recovery powers to McGee.
If Wiggo was doped in 2004, then doping is not the explanation for his transformation post 2008...
Benotti69 said:Get out of your plastecine suit and come back into the real world.
Fearless Greg Lemond said:You aren't aware of the fact doping is actually 'he who has the best recovery'?
taiwan said:Just don't misrepresent his development as steady and predictable, when he couldn't climb for years and then went top 5 at the Tour.
If IP is a good predictor of GC success, who's the next rider to cross over successfully in your opinion?Wallace and Gromit said:Wiggo was a class apart as a pursuiter. For example, he beat McGee by 4 over four seconds in the Athens final, which equates to a 5% power advantage, all other things equal.
In the Athens IP, Wiggo was very consistent through the rounds, doing 4:15 in the qualifying round and 4:16 in the final.
McGee faded from a 4:17 in the qualifying round to over 4:20 in the final, suggesting Wiggo's recovery powers were superior to McGee as well.
So we have someone with more power and better recovery than a man who finished that year's Giro 8th @ 6 minutes.
This proves nothing, other than highlighting just how good Wiggo was relative to other world class pursuiters, even those with proven GT capabilities.
Food for thought, maybe.
You brought up Wiggo's exceptional recovery in comparison to McGee, a man who finished 8th in a very dirty Giro d'Italia.Wallace and Gromit said:Really? Well b*gger me. You learn something every day.
So are you saying Wiggo was doping in 2004? The debate here - in as much as this can be called a debate - relates to Wiggo's transformation post 2008. So if he was doping in 2004, what did he start doing after the Beijing Olympics to move from the autobus to the podium?
So why is it even meaningful that his development from 2009 wasn't that exceptional?armchairclimber said:Improvement often isn't steady or predictable.
131313 said:I have no doubt LeMond and Hinault would have dominated the event if they chose to do it.
1979
2nd Track Pursuit, Junior World Championship
taiwan said:If IP is a good predictor of GC success, who's the next rider to cross over successfully in your opinion?
Fearless Greg Lemond said:You brought up Wiggo's exceptional recovery in comparison to McGee, a man who finished 8th in a very dirty Giro d'Italia.
What Wiggo did in the winter of 2008-2009 is there for anyone to see. Or did the pro peloton got clean that winter? That's a retorical question. When a 37 year old man will get on the podium of the Tour de France, well...
But with due respect, Wiggo was a good trackie, but is track racing so clean?
Wallace and Gromit said:I've only posted here around 30 times and in at least 10% of those posts I've highlighted that I have suspicions about Sky, so you'll have to be a bit more rational in your responses to my posts I'm afraid.
You asked me if I thought the rest of the peloton had not prepared well. I highlighted that all conceivable GT challengers for the Tour bar Nibs had indeed prepared very badly or were unavailable for combat.
If riders want to do well in the Tour they should not ride the Giro hard, get banned or be injured. That's hardly controversial. Or did you really expect Basso and Scarpo to dish it out to Wiggo after the Giro?
Wallace and Gromit said:By introducing the idea of Wiggo doping in 2004, you open up an interesting can of worms. If you're doping in 2004 and getting the sh*t kicked out of you on the road climbs in 2006, 2007 etc. why leave it to 2008/9 to start doping properly? That's an awful lot of suffering to endure if you have already turned to the Dark Side.
Wallace and Gromit said:This makes no sense. Wiggo was an afterthought road-wise in 2008. He left High Road after the management told him that their plans for him in 2009 went no further than being in Cav's leadout train, so he's unlikely to have suddenly come across the extra resources in 2008/9 to start doping properly if he'd only been doing "amateur" doping up to then.
I'm not saying he WAS doping in 2004, I'm only pointing out his great recovery [doping=recovery] in comparison to Brad M. who came in 8th in a less than clean Giro.Wallace and Gromit said:By introducing the idea of Wiggo doping in 2004, you open up an interesting can of worms. If you're doping in 2004 and getting the sh*t kicked out of you on the road climbs in 2006, 2007 etc. why leave it to 2008/9 to start doping properly? That's an awful lot of suffering to endure if you have already turned to the Dark Side.
Maybe he geared up after he saw idiots like Kohl and Schumacher do the miracle dance?Wallace and Gromit said:This makes no sense. Wiggo was an afterthought road-wise in 2008. He left High Road after the management told him that their plans for him in 2009 went no further than being in Cav's leadout train, so he's unlikely to have suddenly come across the extra resources in 2008/9 to start doping properly if he'd only been doing "amateur" doping up to then.
Benotti69 said:Lotto, how did they prepare badly?
How did Movistar prepare badly?
OPQS how did they prepare badly?