Wiggins in clean tour win shocker?

[taiwan]

Ive had the pleasure in life to mix with some very interesting people
And had some interesting conversations however i,m not about to start giving names on here
At some point you have to take the leap of faith

Would be stupid to make a leap of faith for someone on the internet who claims to be an insider. Without names, tell us more.

 

[hrotha]

The word History Sums it up
Look to the future

"It's in the past, let's look to the future". We've heard that a lot since 1998.

 

[iZnoGouD]

he is a little juiced but the big thing is that all his team is juiced, that's what makes a difference

 

[Jeanne]

Ive had the pleasure in life to mix with some very interesting people
And had some interesting conversations however i,m not about to start giving names on here
At some point you have to take the leap of faith

Faith? As long as no one is willing to put all his cards on the table there will be no faith. All that talking and words don't count.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Ive had the pleasure in life to mix with some very interesting people
And had some interesting conversations however i,m not about to start giving names on here
At some point you have to take the leap of faith

I've met some very interesting people too. And a lot of boring ones, mind.

The problem is, you are somebody we don't know from Adam, and we're being asked to just accept that Wiggins is clean, because you have some sources, but you won't name them or tell us what they said. Just lay back and believe, man. Let your worries, negativity and suspicions float away, these anonymous voices in the wind told us Wiggins is clean.

You sound like somebody trying to convince somebody at a Jefferson Airplane gig to take their first tab.

 

[The Cobra]

For years posters laughed at Wiggins, said he was a one hit wonder and had ZERO chance of ever winning the Tour. Well guess what, he's just won.

Now that he has those same posters are saying its impossible, he must be doping. One question: Why is it so hard to admit you were wrong?? Wiggins won clean, some of you need to man up, swallow your pride and admit you were wrong.

P.S. Respect to Geordieracer for starting this thread.

 

[wannab]

Yes, he was, but one doesn't really have much to with the other. There's no doubt Wiggins is a great athlete, but the fact that he was great on the track already before becoming great on the road makes his achievement even more impressive (not more logical), and in turn suspicious.

I first had this thought too but if you think about it .. he won his last olympic track medal in 2008, so his main focus was on the track until then.

He did lose a lot of weight obviously (and thus increasing his w/kg), focused full on the road (and also training like a road cyclist, not a track) and only a year after in 2009 he finished 4th in the TDF.

So he went from an impressive track rider to an impressive stage racer in a year of dedicated and specific training. Only talent can do that imo, or he must have been doping all his life on track too if you think not

 

[Froome19]

Bradly wiggins has been exposed as a clean tour winner much to thge disapointment of cynical cycling fans

So i,ve read these forums for a few years now and i,ve finally been stung into action
The so called cycling experts on here twist and turn any information to try to prove there own view

However i think its blatently obvious that wiggins is clean , The way he rides is that of a clean rider
Why cant people just accept that the guy has worked hard and won the biggest crown in cycling

Oh and i,m not some blind fan i know all about the doping exploits of the past 1st hand

Give the guy his due
He won and he won clean

Great post.

 

[Jeanne]

For years posters laughed at Wiggins, said he was a one hit wonder and had ZERO chance of ever winning the Tour. Well guess what, he's just won.

Now that he has those same posters are saying its impossible, he must be doping. One question: Why is it so hard to admit you were wrong?? Wiggins won clean, some of you need to man up, swallow your pride and admit you were wrong.

P.S. Respect to Geordieracer for starting this thread.

If it is like that, why is it so hard to provide some hard facts, real evidence, to prove that? And PS: I NEVER EVER laughed at Wiggins or anything.

 

[Froome19]

I've met some very interesting people too. And a lot of boring ones, mind.

The problem is, you are somebody we don't know from Adam, and we're being asked to just accept that Wiggins is clean, because you have some sources, but you won't name them or tell us what they said. Just lay back and believe, man. Let your worries, negativity and suspicions float away, these anonymous voices in the wind told us Wiggins is clean.

You sound like somebody trying to convince somebody at a Jefferson Airplane gig to take their first tab.

Yet the accusers only have their own cynicism and some tenuous proofs to back them up, until there is sufficient proof then imo it is inappropriate to make such accusations about a person who one does not know personally.

 

[The Hitch]

Yet the accusers only have their own cynicism and some tenuous proofs to back them up, until there is sufficient proof then imo it is inappropriate to make such accusations about a person who one does not know personally.

You seem to not be able to tell the difference between saying someone is doping at that they may be doping.

In your previous post you agree with the poster who says Wiggins is 100% clean.

But here you back it up with - the accusations arent strong enough.

Sorry mate. if you want to go around claiming that Wiggins is CLEAN, then you have to come up with some proof yourself and not just lean on the - there is no sufficient proof argument which only works if you want to stick with - "i want to believe he is clean"

 

[Geordieracer]

Would be stupid to make a leap of faith for someone on the internet who claims to be an insider. Without names, tell us more.

Lol Not an insider , Just someone with some knowledge that i trust

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I am going to go against the grain here. While I think the OP is simply trolling, I am going to say that I will not sully Wiggins' win by calling him a doper when I have no proof what so ever. If he or anyone on his team tests positive, I will be fully on board with questioning what happened this tour. But I have read opinions that suggest the numbers being put out are possible for clean riders. Certainly there are others who claim that is nothing but hogwash. However, there is no proof for me that Wiggins or his team doped. There really is only opinion on the subject. There has been no Simeoni moment with Wiggins; there is no positive test on Wiggins; there is no positive test for any member of Sky's team. Certainly they could be ahead of the game in terms of getting away with doping, but that is merely opinion with no proof. I am personally uncomfortable with proclamations of guilt with no proof what so ever. Wiggins is not Armstrong....so far.

Congratulations to Brad for winning the Tour.

 

[Geordieracer]

For years posters laughed at Wiggins, said he was a one hit wonder and had ZERO chance of ever winning the Tour. Well guess what, he's just won.

Now that he has those same posters are saying its impossible, he must be doping. One question: Why is it so hard to admit you were wrong?? Wiggins won clean, some of you need to man up, swallow your pride and admit you were wrong.

P.S. Respect to Geordieracer for starting this thread.

Thanks mate
Its easier to believe he cheated but there is nothing to suggest that

Oh and its not my job to prove hes clean just stating my position

 

[rhubroma]

He generates the speed of an Indurain or an Armstrong in the TTs. And was the second best climber in the Tour.

If he's clean, then he's simply a phenomenon. Although every phenomenon since EPO has demonstrated to be jacked to the gills.

How can we then not be suspicious? For prudence sake and after all we have witnessed?

 

[Geordieracer]

I am going to go against the grain here. While I think the OP is simply trolling, I am going to say that I will not sully Wiggins' win by calling him a doper when I have no proof what so ever. If he or anyone on his team tests positive, I will be fully on board with questioning what happened this tour. But I have read opinions that suggest the numbers being put out are possible for clean riders. Certainly there are others who claim that is nothing but hogwash. However, there is no proof for me that Wiggins or his team doped. There really is only opinion on the subject. There has been no Simeoni moment with Wiggins; there is no positive test on Wiggins; there is no positive test for any member of Sky's team. Certainly they could be ahead of the game in terms of getting away with doping, but that is merely opinion with no proof. I am personally uncomfortable with proclamations of guilt with no proof what so ever. Wiggins is not Armstrong....so far.

Congratulations to Brad for winning the Tour.

Not trolling just using mr right to have an opionion
Just got sick of hearing all the BS about brad

 

[Nuash65]

You seem to not be able to tell the difference between saying someone is doping at that they may be doping.

In your previous post you agree with the poster who says Wiggins is 100% clean.

But here you back it up with - the accusations arent strong enough.

Sorry mate. if you want to go around claiming that Wiggins is CLEAN, then you have to come up with some proof yourself and not just lean on the - there is no sufficient proof argument which only works if you want to stick with - "i want to believe he is clean"

I haven't seen you and the other Clinic regulars telling all the people who know Wiggins is doping that they can only say "I believe he is doping"

 

[taiwan]

Lol Not an insider , Just someone with some knowledge that i trust

OK what does this guy say about the rest of the team - Froome etc.

 

[taiwan]

I haven't seen you and the other Clinic regulars telling all the people who know Wiggins is doping that they can only say "I believe he is doping"

For what it's worth I've got IMO in my sig.

But no - I don't think anyone's claiming 100% certainty until there's more evidence.

 

[VeloGirl]

Through looking at the overall picture , speaking to people in the know
the type of person he is , his reaction to doping in the past
Lots of stuff , but generally his riding style is not the style of a doper

And what is the riding style of a doper? Lance Armstrong? Remy Di Gregario? Fuyu Li?

Look, I'm willing to giving him and any rider the benefit of the doubt, but I will never say any rider is 100% clean.
I still love watching cycling ans watching all of these races, but I take every rider with a grain of salt.

And hopefully, one day, my feelings will change. The new crop of young kids looks promising: Sagan, Tejay, Pinot, EBH, etc...

 

[Geordieracer]

He generates the speed of an Indurain or an Armstrong in the TTs. And was the second best climber in the Tour.

If he's clean, then he's simply a phenomenon. Although every phenomenon since EPO has demonstrated to be jacked to the gills.

How can we then not be suspicious? For prudence sake and after all we have witnessed?

The peloton is cleaner hes just the best overall rider
This was always going to be a tour for mere humans like wiggins to win
More time trial miles , no mountain top finishes
No contador

He is and has always been a better TT rider than armstrong

 

[Froome19]

You seem to not be able to tell the difference between saying someone is doping at that they may be doping.

In your previous post you agree with the poster who says Wiggins is 100% clean.

But here you back it up with - the accusations arent strong enough.

Sorry mate. if you want to go around claiming that Wiggins is CLEAN, then you have to come up with some proof yourself and not just lean on the - there is no sufficient proof argument which only works if you want to stick with - "i want to believe he is clean"

I was applauding the poster for standing up against the torrential accusations nothing more.

I did not claim in the post you quoted Wiggins was clean but that other people cant claim he is doping, using your logic how could you possibly claim Wiggins is doping?

 

[Geordieracer]

OK what does this guy say about the rest of the team - Froome etc.

I dont think Dave Brailsford would allow current dopers in his team
Its important that people within cycling realise that it does have history , but cycling needs to move on
So if they are clean now its ok for team sky NOW

 

[rhubroma]

The peloton is cleaner hes just the best overall rider
This was always going to be a tour for mere humans like wiggins to win
More time trial miles , no mountain top finishes
No contador

He is and has always been a better TT rider than armstrong

I don't know: Bradley Wiggins (GB, Sky) 53.5 km in 1.04"13", average 50.0 km/h. in the last TT seems on board with the Indurain-Armstrong doping era.

 

[Caruut]

I dont think Dave Brailsford would allow current dopers in his team
Its important that people within cycling realise that it does have history , but cycling needs to move on
So if they are clean now its ok for team sky NOW

Read what you're saying through the eyes of someone who is already suspicious. It is utterly ridiculous if the seed of doubt is has been planted in a poster's mind.