Wiggins in clean tour win shocker?

[joe_papp]

I declare Alejandro Valverde to be clean. Like you I am certain of it. So to prove you are for clean cycling, why don't you join me and others in supporting Valverde and hence clean cycling. Like you say, it must be true because i declare him to be clean, same way wiggins we must all accept now is 100% clean because you said it.

I support you 100% in declaring Valverde to be clean. He's at least as clean as Wiggins. It is so. B/c I said so.

Next...

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

That is, HIGH AS FCK! lol

Anyone who would claim in terms of absolutes that they "knew" ANY rider in the Tour was 100% clean would have to be HIGH! lol

 

[Knutsen]

Most of the Friggins fanboyism is verbally indistinguishable form the Armstrong fanboyism, with the minor difference that English jingoism is substituted for US jingoism.

The Schleck fanboys were in the same dreamland until last week.

Yupp, and everyone claiming a rider is clean is a fanboy and since Lance had fanboys every fanboys rider is doping. Its just pure logic.

 

[Caruut]

Why do i have to back it up inoccent untill proven guilty
Its my opionion get over it

I,m not arguing that you cant have your opionion , just stating mine
End of

If you think you do not have to back up your opinion, then that tells me all I need to know. Have a nice day, and enjoy the final stage.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I would hope that would be a figment of the past and that cycling had left this behind but it seems like people are not ready to let go of their skepticism even though the world of cycling is getting out of its own hole. Fair enough maybe you guys are correct but on the evidence I have see it seems to be much more localized then it once was and therefore it doesnt deserve such skepticism.

The problem is, the fans will always be a few years behind the riders on that. The riders could go clean as of tomorrow (I'll say this Tour exists as part of the bad old days more because of di Gregorio and Schleck than out of the contentious Sky issue)... but the fans will always remember the bad old days. We need to be at the point where there isn't just a younger generation of clean riders, but ALL the guys who were there in the 'bad old days' are gone. THEN, perhaps the fans can leave their suspicions behind. Until then, dominant performances will always remind us of Armstrong, of Riccò, of Landis, and so on. We can't just say "as of this date, we will believe cyclists who say they're clean," because we've been burnt by that before.

After all, if we take "there must be incontrovertible evidence of doping" as the stance, then strictly speaking A Certain Mr Lance Armstrong can still be considered clean.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

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

Well, hold on - the first thing we know about cyclings history is that much of what happens is not revealed until many years later.

The whole idea that riders have to prove their innocence is ridiculous and just shows how messed up this sport is thanks to riders that have gone and doped before. No one demands to see Moncoutie's blood data, or anyone else's. It is the job of the police, of the UCI, of WADA to catch the dopers. Proving you are 100% clean is an impossible task. Even if Wiggins published very believable passport data, people would say it just proves that he's microdosing and Gert is the best in the business etc. It's not Wiggins' fault the UCI is a corrupt pile of ****.

PS I never mentioned you directly, the posters who laughed at Wiggins' chances in the Tour know who they are, *Cough*BroDeal*Cough*.

Sadly, this is the point - it is still the same UCI that is in control (in fact more in control than a few years ago) - while that should not mean automatically assuming a rider is suspicious it does mean that mean that the benefit of doubt should be waived.

 

[Geordieracer]

If you think you do not have to back up your opinion, then that tells me all I need to know. Have a nice day, and enjoy the final stage.

Yeah going to be great seing the british yellow jersey holder leading out the british world champ to another wine
Oh next you will be saying Cav is doped

 

[Hugh Januss]

Why do i have to back it up inoccent untill proven guilty
Its my opionion get over it

I,m not arguing that you cant have your opionion , just stating mine
End of

Well it is my opinion (or opionion if you'd rather) that you are wrong. Just my opinion as an insider. I know me and so I put more weight behind my opinion than I would yours.



Good troll though.

 

[spalco]

Yupp, and everyone claiming a rider is clean is a fanboy and since Lance had fanboys every fanboys rider is doping. Its just pure logic.

Well yeah, although not because of Armstrong. Anyone who's followed cycling for any amount of time knows that you can never know. Nice guys dope, ******bags dope, winners dope, domestiques dope, losers dope, big names dope, nobodies dope. Only a fanboy would claim with certainty his favourite rider is clean for sure.

 

[Stueyy]

Wiggins and Froome road this tour like machines, they road every day as hard as they needed to neutralise any competition without an off day. Clean riders can't do that. 3 weeks riding better than the rest of the guys at the tour without a bad day for both of them is beyond the capability of a clean rider.

 

[Caruut]

Innocent until proven guilty is a principle of law, not of opinion. When the body "verifying" your cleanliness is as big a heap of s*** as the UCI, their backing of you has no credibility. You cannot use the word of the UCI as backing. From there, you can either say "there will always be doubt, but I cannot be bothered to put the effort in to prove myself" or "I will fight to do all I can to prove myself". The first one is a perfectly valid position, in my view, so long as you are honest about it and don't expect everyone to just believe you anyway. The second is the ideal, and I can see how difficult it is to commit to. The absolute worst is to say you are going to do one, back out of it, do the other, and still expect everyone to take your word.

 

[wannab]

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?

I just reacted to a similar statement in another thread because I find these kinda cheap and short sighted logic ..

Comparisons based on TT speed are irrelevant, that's why riders also use watts etc. because speed is very conditions-bound (distance, course difficulty, weather conditions, technology, ..)

Hill TT's (e.g. alpe d'huez) are obviously more comparable because condition's mostly remain the same.

If you really want to compare Wiggins to Indurain/Armstrong etc. Do so based on the watts he pushed, which indicate the rider's true effort. All information so far (numbers calculated for the climbs, ..) suggests that riders could be clean (= extraordinary? yes, but nothing which isn't possible without PED's, in contrast to the Armstrong era).

 

[Normandy]

Why do i have to back it up inoccent untill proven guilty
Its my opionion get over it

I,m not arguing that you cant have your opionion , just stating mine
End of

Since you started this thread about 4 hours ago, you have posted nearly 30 times. Out of about 90 posts on this thread that it is a high percentage.

You have said 30 times that wiggins is clean and iimply you have inside knowledge of Sky/Brailsford/wiggins but no facts.

Having said the same thing 30 times and given your opinion 30 times with no facts to support it. The more credibility you loose.

So assuming you are British, please shut up my good chap and go and watch your hero 'old wiggo' ride into to Paris.

 

[2008885]

Only a fanboy would claim with certainty his favourite rider is clean for sure.

The clinic isn't exactly short of people who feel able to say that <insert hate figure here> is dirty for sure is it?

 

[Caruut]

Yeah going to be great seing the british yellow jersey holder leading out the british world champ to another wine
Oh next you will be saying Cav is doped

I actually have a lot more faith in Cav than I do in Wiggins, though this isn't the thread for that. I wasn't being sarcastic when I said "enjoy your day". If you believe in Wiggins, I expect you will enjoy it . I will be cheering too if Cav comes across the line first.

 

[Caruut]

The clinic isn't exactly short of people who feel able to say that <insert hate figure here> is dirty for sure is it?

There are less than some like to imply.

 

[Geordieracer]

Its Been fun guys

 

[Benotti69]

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

Did you get sick of Brad BSing about Sastre?

Did you get sick of '2007 Brad' BSing about the winner of the TdF, then Contador, who had never tested positive and even though Wiggans had no evidence called only the Grupetto clean insinuating that at least the top 30 riders were dopers? Evans fnished 2nd! Valverde 6th.

this thead is trolling if the OP doesn't look at the bigger picture.

Even the English ES commentators are admitting he is not the same rider he was

 

[hrotha]

Did you get sick of Brad BSing about Sastre?

Did you get sick of '2007 Brad' BSing about the winner of the TdF, then Contador, who had never tested positive and even though Wiggans had no evidence called only the Grupetto clean insinuating that at least the top 30 riders were dopers? Evans fnished 2nd! Valverde 6th.

this thead is trolling if the OP doesn't look at the bigger picture.

Even the English ES commentators are admitting he is not the same rider he was

Don't bother, he's dodging all questions that he can't answer with "Sky is clean, Rule Britannia".

 

[Geordieracer]

Don't bother, he's dodging all questions that he can't answer with "Sky is clean, Rule Britannia".

It really is about Racism , You guys cant face that we are now the greatest cycling nation in the world Sad but true
He must be doping because we hate him and hes british

 

[taiwan]

This could pretty much have gone in the Sky thread.

 

[joe_papp]

Well it is my opinion (or opionion if you'd rather) that you are wrong. Just my opinion as an insider. I know me and so I put more weight behind my opinion than I would yours.

Good troll though.

LOL.

I can't wait til Froome turns on Sky in a year or two after having been denied the leadership role and (doped) Tour victory he was promised and so spills the beans on SKY's über-doping program!

 

[sniper]

i told you guys this thread was going to be a quadrupel facepalm

 

[thamask]

OP is a troll

wiggins/froome look like they eat aicar for breakfast. To simply say his a natural after massive drops in weight with large output increase is simply ridiculous in this sport ....

 

[Froome19]

There are less than some like to imply.

But they are the most prominent.

 

[Froome19]

OP is a troll

wiggins/froome look like they eat aicar for breakfast. To simply say his a natural after massive drops in weight with large output increase is simply ridiculous in this sport ....

Yet to totally dismiss something because it is a great achievement is as ridiculous.