Wiggins in clean tour win shocker?

Page 18 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Dr. Maserati said:
An endurance athlete? So, British Cycling were wasting all their time (and your money) having him go around a track?
Just as well Garmin were able to show them the error of their ways.

To the blue - maybe he was doping earlier with British Cycling and when he got off the gear and joined a clean American team realized he was a Tour winner - ya, that makes sense.
Seriously, do you understand nothing about the physiology of elite endurance athletes? Mo Farah would hammer you over 60 metres.

Wiggins is an exceptional athlete. Are you suggesting that he was juiced for the World Junior title? There is no inconsistency at all in his performances at 4k to 3000km. He's fast....has a good engine, however you want to put it..

Oh, hang on....you want to believe that he's a cheat.
 
Aug 18, 2009
4,993
1
0
armchairclimber said:
Mo Farah would hammer you over 60 metres.
I think you may be stretching it with that one. 60m is totally anaerobic, isn't it? From a block start?

In any case you picked the wrong comparison. The closest one would be a 1500m runner switching to ultramarathon. Or an ultramarathon each day, days in a row, in fact.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
armchairclimber said:
Seriously, do you understand nothing about the physiology of elite endurance athletes? Mo Farah would hammer you over 60 metres.

Wiggins is an exceptional athlete. Are you suggesting that he was juiced for the World Junior title? There is no inconsistency at all in his performances at 4k to 3000km. He's fast....has a good engine, however you want to put it..

Oh, hang on....you want to believe that he's a cheat.
Can you point out where I have ever said Wiggans has cheated? Of course not.

I realize that its an important part of your argument to dismiss anyone who questions BWs performance as assuming he cheats or does not like Sky -its not a smart debating move.

Bradley has a good engine - we agree on that - but where does showing ability over 4k suggest endurance over a 3 week event?
 
Jul 17, 2012
2,051
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
As to pursuiter becoming a GT winner - we know its not impossible, the philosophical reaction (since you like that) should be how is that possible.

Why aren't more teams snapping up pusuiters as this is obviously where the next generation of GT winners shall come from?
IP expert can win a GT if he's got a huge engine, predominantly slow-twitch fibres, good recovery/long-distance endurance, low body fat and a strong team. There are no guarantees, obviously.

Other teams are snapping up top pursuiters. Thomas, Kennaugh and Wiggo all ride for Sky. So does Swift, albeit he's a sprinter type.

Jack Bobridge rides for Garmin, Michael Hepburn and Luke Durbridge for Orica Greenedge.

So that's around three quarters of the two best TP squads covered, though there's only the Brits and the Aussies take the event that seriously. Other countries put together a quartet if they've got the personnel, whereas the Brits and the Aussies channel all their young talent through the junior track programmes and the TP is a big thing.

As observed elsewhere, TP exponents are likely to be too heavily endowed with fast twitch fibres to be top performers in longer endurance events, though.
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
taiwan said:
I think you may be stretching it with that one. 60m is totally anaerobic, isn't it? From a block start?

In any case you picked the wrong comparison. The closest one would be a 1500m runner switching to ultramarathon. Or an ultramarathon each day, days in a row, in fact.
First ~12 seconds are anaerobic.

ETA: Hilly marathons - there's no rolling downhill when you run, so racing 4.5-6 hours not quite the same as running for 4.5-6 hours. Still makes your head spin though. :eek:
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
richtea said:
Its difficult to find such a synopsis of the two doctors, but with all those years at Rabo, FDJ, Cervelo, you would have thought they would have developed some expertise in applying medicine in road cycling at the highest level, giving them a specific advantage over Palfreeman (alongside other factors such as personal relationships mentioned in the other thread). Sky could well have hired them for their doping knowledge, but a non doping explanation is not inadmissible. Palfreeman moving to a continental level outfit doesn't exactly speak volumes about his competitiveness in this particular labour market though.
Quite a revealing statement - so you don't know about any of the Doc's and why they were hired or removed yet feel able to make assumptions about Palfreemans move to Rapha?
Perhaps Palfreeman doesn't have doping Doctor on his CV and thats why he wasn't 'competitive' in that particular labour market?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Wallace and Gromit said:
IP expert can win a GT if he's got a huge engine, predominantly slow-twitch fibres, good recovery/long-distance endurance, low body fat and a strong team. There are no guarantees, obviously.

Other teams are snapping up top pursuiters. Thomas, Kennaugh and Wiggo all ride for Sky. So does Swift, albeit he's a sprinter type.

Jack Bobridge rides for Garmin, Michael Hepburn and Luke Durbridge for Orica Greenedge.

So that's around three quarters of the two best TP squads covered, though there's only the Brits and the Aussies take the event that seriously. Other countries put together a quartet if they've got the personnel, whereas the Brits and the Aussies channel all their young talent through the junior track programmes and the TP is a big thing.

As observed elsewhere, TP exponents are likely to be too heavily endowed with fast twitch fibres to be top performers in longer endurance events, though.
That there is no money to be made in track might mean these athletes were looking to join road teams. But are they GT winners? Well, if they are, they should be top 10ing week long races to start with showing that GT big engine endurance ability potential then top 30ing their first GT or does it not work like that?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
FrankChickens said:
I see Hoy more of a talent for Milan San Remo, provided Froome is there with the hurry-up gestures over the Poggio.
I see Hoy more a world wrestling entertainment myself. Those thighs are no good on the road.
 
May 6, 2011
452
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Quite a revealing statement - so you don't know about any of the Doc's and why they were hired or removed yet feel able to make assumptions about Palfreemans move to Rapha?
Perhaps Palfreeman doesn't have doping Doctor on his CV and thats why he wasn't 'competitive' in that particular labour market?
I speak from position of equal knowledge to you no doubt, as if you were endowed with any of that information there would be no debate to be had. My central point is that there is a possible non doping explanation here, and the move to Rapha would be at least consistent with that (had he ended up at another WT team, it would clearly be inconsistent). If I understand you correctly, you feel such an explanation can be categorically ruled out: perhaps you could explain why?
 
taiwan said:
I think you may be stretching it with that one. 60m is totally anaerobic, isn't it? From a block start?

In any case you picked the wrong comparison. The closest one would be a 1500m runner switching to ultramarathon. Or an ultramarathon each day, days in a row, in fact.
It is indeed. You'd be using the CP energy system. He'd still hammer you.
Mo could most likely make the team GB 800m squad if he so wished.

He'll run approx 13 seconds for each of the last 4 x 100m of a 10 k.
In other words, he has speed as well as endurance.
 
May 6, 2011
452
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Quite a revealing statement - so you don't know about any of the Doc's and why they were hired or removed yet feel able to make assumptions about Palfreemans move to Rapha?
Perhaps Palfreeman doesn't have doping Doctor on his CV and thats why he wasn't 'competitive' in that particular labour market?
I speak from position of equal knowledge to you no doubt, as if you were endowed with any of that information there would be no debate to be had. My central point is that there is a possible non doping explanation here, and the move to Rapha would be at least consistent with that (had he ended up at another WT team, it would clearly be inconsistent). If I understand you correctly, you feel such an explanation can be categorically ruled out: perhaps you could explain why?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
richtea said:
I speak from position of equal knowledge to you no doubt, as if you were endowed with any of that information there would be no debate to be had. My central point is that there is a possible non doping explanation here, and the move to Rapha would be at least consistent with that (had he ended up at another WT team, it would clearly be inconsistent). If I understand you correctly, you feel such an explanation can be categorically ruled out: perhaps you could explain why?
Great - whats the non doping explanation? That would cut to the chase.

It matters little what team RF has ended up with - his experience as a Doctor and his experience within cycling are easy to find.
So, why is he suddenly not qualified and what expertise do Leinders & Bartalucci bring? I know the obvious answer - but where is there another?
 
Aug 18, 2009
4,993
1
0
armchairclimber said:
It is indeed. You'd be using the CP energy system. He'd still hammer you.
Mo could most likely make the team GB 800m squad if he so wished.

He'll run approx 13 seconds for each of the last 4 x 100m of a 10 k.
In other words, he has speed as well as endurance.
Not with his current time he wouldn't. And how fast could he run one 100m out of blocks, no matter a 60m which is all acceleration. And even if he could spank all of us, he wouldn't be competitive at an international level clearly. It was a poor example.
 
May 6, 2011
452
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Great - whats the non doping explanation? That would cut to the chase.

It matters little what team RF has ended up with - his experience as a Doctor and his experience within cycling are easy to find.
So, why is he suddenly not qualified and what expertise do Leinders & Bartalucci bring? I know the obvious answer - but where is there another?
Non doping possibility: They bring years of specific experience of practicing medicine for professional road cycling teams at the highest level. This is not offered by RP, and as such Sky recruited to fill this skills gap.

This would not be plausible if he had ended up at another WT team as any suggestion that RP didn't offer the full set of skills would be highly questionable , so it is relevant. And to be clear I am not saying this is the only or even the most likely scenario. However, in order to rule it out, more information is needed.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
richtea said:
Non doping possibility: They bring years of specific experience of practicing medicine for professional road cycling teams at the highest level. This is not offered by RP, and as such Sky recruited to fill this skills gap.

This would not be plausible if he had ended up at another WT team as any suggestion that RP didn't offer the full set of skills would be highly questionable , so it is relevant. And to be clear I am not saying this is the only or even the most likely scenario. However, in order to rule it out, more information is needed.
I posted Palfreemans bio earlier - he works in sports medicine, and he has worked on Gts before as far back as the early 90's with the Linda McCartney team.

If Leinders had been contracted for GTs and RF kept on, then I might understand - but again, both RF & Hulse were replaced with 2 Docs with questionable pasts.
 
Jun 18, 2012
165
0
0
Speed skating- plagued with doping.

Track pursuit-notorious for doping, steroids

Track and field (running)- doping

Wiggo-2010 TDF 39 minutes down.


Because of some national pride bs everyone is going to stick your head in the sand?

The fact of the matter remains. The same as Armstrong and every other tour winner. You're not beating the dopers clean. Because there are always cheaters.

They can cry to the heavens about doping and hating doping, but it is all worthless self serving drivel at the end of the day.
 
May 6, 2011
452
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
I posted Palfreemans bio earlier - he works in sports medicine, and he has worked on Gts before as far back as the early 90's with the Linda McCartney team.

If Leinders had been contracted for GTs and RF kept on, then I might understand - but again, both RF & Hulse were replaced with 2 Docs with questionable pasts.
His depth of experience (in road) is undeniably of a lower level in comparison. He qualified in 1997 and would have relatively junior at a fairly small team, with almost 10 years before working with Sky. He is clearly good, but compared to head doctor at Rabobank? Obviously this doesn't disprove any doping angle - Leinders is the one that raises the suspicions, the other chap seems relatively innocuous by comparison.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
armchairclimber said:
I answered this way back. Not all pursuiters are like Wiggins. He is built to be an endurance athlete. His success in pursuits was the abnormality...if there is such a thing in his case.

There is nothing whatsoever in his performances or career progression that suggests doping.
Hold it there, buddy!

Ever ridden Team Pursuit? What the poms did was more than magic, and that wasn't Wigans on his own.

How's Greg Henderson doing in GC? That guy is a beast TPer!

Ahhh... too bad he's not warming down more after races...
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
JMBeaushrimp said:
Hold it there, buddy!

Ever ridden Team Pursuit? What the poms did was more than magic, and that wasn't Wigans on his own.

How's Greg Henderson doing in GC? That guy is a beast TPer!

Ahhh... too bad he's not warming down more after races...
Which seems really weird considering he was at Sky 2010-2011. Maybe these marginal gains at Sky all kicked in for 2012?
 
taiwan said:
Not with his current time he wouldn't. And how fast could he run one 100m out of blocks, no matter a 60m which is all acceleration. And even if he could spank all of us, he wouldn't be competitive at an international level clearly. It was a poor example.
Even 13 year olds understand this. He is quick, whether over 60m, 200m or 10,000m. He will routinely do 200m reps in between 22 and 25 seconds. He's a good runner. He has a good engine. All his levers and joints and elastic bands work very well together in concert. He can run sub-1m 50s for 800m and also be world class at 5000m. Some athletes are simply talented runners.

One important thing to note...and it is pertinent to Wiggins and the point I made about him being an endurance athlete...it is easier for a 5000m runner to be quick over 200m than it is for a 200m specialist to get good at 5k.

The 4k pursuit is much like the 1,500m, demanding excellent aerobic capacity as well as excellent lactate tolerance/basic speed. For someone with the right body shape, it would not be unusual at all to find them excelling at 1500m when they are 20 years old and progressing (as their aerobic pathways develop) to 5k/10k by the time they are 30.
 
Jul 17, 2012
2,051
0
0
Benotti69 said:
That there is no money to be made in track might mean these athletes were looking to join road teams. But are they GT winners? Well, if they are, they should be top 10ing week long races to start with showing that GT big engine endurance ability potential then top 30ing their first GT or does it not work like that?
It did work like that, but the world and cycling has changed a lot since the 1980s.

Firstly, the countries providing pro riders has expanded. We now have legions of North Americans, Brits, Aussies and East Europeans, whereas up to the 1980s, the peloton was primarily comprised of French, Italians, Spaniards and Beneluxians.

The talent-spotting and development routes in these new countries are different to the traditional areas. For example, the UK and Australia have more emphasis on channelling youngster through their track programmes and mountain biking, which didn't exist until the 1980s, has brought a lot of riders into road riding who might never previously have got into cycling.

Olympic cycling has also gone professional, so it's feasible for Olympic trackies to earn their crust via contracts with pro teams, whilst focusing on the track. The record of top-class IP riders in the open era isn't too shabby. McGee was a competitive roadie. Boardman, on his day, could compete with and even beat the EPO fuelled monsters of his day in long TTs, and he wasn't necessarily even the best pursuiter in the UK at the time. (Obree was probably better, given that he could match Boardman's performances whilst on inferior machinery and beat him in the 1993 World IP.)

Prior to the open era Olympic pursuiters were either Eastern Bloc (so didn't compete in the pro world), youngsters or proper amateurs, who had no chance against seasoned pro roadies, so it's not surprising that amateur pursuiters didn't make much of a mark in the pro scene - most prominent amateurs/juniors don't make the mark in the pro/senior world in many sports.

I don't know much about the pro pursuiting scene prior to the open era, though Roger Riviere was World Champ a few times and prominent in the Tour shortly afterwards.

In summary, I don't think the rules, conventions and norms of 30 years ago can necessarily be taken as gospel now. Both sides in the Wiggo debate need to keep an open mind.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Wallace and Gromit said:
It did work like that, but the world and cycling has changed a lot since the 1980s.

Firstly, the countries providing pro riders has expanded. We now have legions of North Americans, Brits, Aussies and East Europeans, whereas up to the 1980s, the peloton was primarily comprised of French, Italians, Spaniards and Beneluxians.

The talent-spotting and development routes in these new countries are different to the traditional areas. For example, the UK and Australia have more emphasis on channelling youngster through their track programmes and mountain biking, which didn't exist until the 1980s, has brought a lot of riders into road riding who might never previously have got into cycling.

Olympic cycling has also gone professional, so it's feasible for Olympic trackies to earn their crust via contracts with pro teams, whilst focusing on the track. The record of top-class IP riders in the open era isn't too shabby. McGee was a competitive roadie. Boardman, on his day, could compete with and even beat the EPO fuelled monsters of his day in long TTs, and he wasn't necessarily even the best pursuiter in the UK at the time. (Obree was probably better, given that he could match Boardman's performances whilst on inferior machinery and beat him in the 1993 World IP.)

Prior to the open era Olympic pursuiters were either Eastern Bloc (so didn't compete in the pro world), youngsters or proper amateurs, who had no chance against seasoned pro roadies, so it's not surprising that amateur pursuiters didn't make much of a mark in the pro scene - most prominent amateurs/juniors don't make the mark in the pro/senior world in many sports.

I don't know much about the pro pursuiting scene prior to the open era, though Roger Riviere was World Champ a few times and prominent in the Tour shortly afterwards.

In summary, I don't think the rules, conventions and norms of 30 years ago can necessarily be taken as gospel now. Both sides in the Wiggo debate need to keep an open mind.
There is absolutely no contest in earnings between track and road. You may earn a crust in track but there are bigger contracts to be earned in road with extra for sponsorship deals. Track audience is way way lower than road.

Winning a monument, classic or a GT stage on the road earns more than a track world champs win. Even waiting every 4 years for a payday gold seems stupid compared to what can be earned on the road.

Keeping an open mind is not necessary in cycling. Listening to the constant barrage of lies and knowing that we are being lied to is more important to understanding how the sport works. That Sky have lied seems not to bother some posters.
 
Aug 18, 2009
4,993
1
0
armchairclimber said:
Even 13 year olds understand this. He is quick, whether over 60m, 200m or 10,000m. He will routinely do 200m reps in between 22 and 25 seconds. He's a good runner. He has a good engine. All his levers and joints and elastic bands work very well together in concert. He can run sub-1m 50s for 800m and also be world class at 5000m. Some athletes are simply talented runners.

One important thing to note...and it is pertinent to Wiggins and the point I made about him being an endurance athlete...it is easier for a 5000m runner to be quick over 200m than it is for a 200m specialist to get good at 5k.

The 4k pursuit is much like the 1,500m, demanding excellent aerobic capacity as well as excellent lactate tolerance/basic speed. For someone with the right body shape, it would not be unusual at all to find them excelling at 1500m when they are 20 years old and progressing (as their aerobic pathways develop) to 5k/10k by the time they are 30.
Nah you started comparing similar endurance based events, but now you're randomly throwing in sprint events and claiming interchangability. You could could pretty easily find amateur sprinters quicker than Mo Farah over 60m. Also as I understood it endurance is easier to train than speed. And for the comparison with Wiggins 5/10k is too short to compare even to a long ITT.

I wonder if you've been lecturing on this topic for years or whether you just jumped on the bandwagon after the Tour. In the end it's a sideshow anyway - I'm not even claiming it's impossible for an IP rider to go for GC, but do I belive that there is a ready path between the 2, or believe in Wiggins tranformation? Hmm. I doubt this is changing anyone's opinion either way.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Wallace and Gromit said:
Well that's lucky for you, I'd say. ;)
The history of the sport and those who run it dictates this. To see it any other way is stupid imo.

We were told by Garmin and Sky they were doing it clean. Well we know that is BS. Clean teams dont work with Doping Doctors. Period. Not in a sport where the average joe considers the riders to be junkies you cant clean it up working with the likes of Lim and Leinders.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS