|
Sky Doping/Hate Thread
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 11:04
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 10-07-2013 19:36
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Mwuhi wrote:
baggieboys32 wrote:
I'll join this topic by first saying: I am a sky fan
However, that being said I've spent this year with steadily less belief in them being credible, and Froome in this Tour has been a step beyond reality for me, I can no longer believe that he;s not doping.
I have a genuine question: When they are doing drug tests, are they just testing for incongruencies or for specific substances? Because if it's the latter would it be possible to get away with doping by using a new substance?
Secondly (Carrying on from Q1): When people first started using EPO etc, how were they treated? was it instantly banned and the riders with it? Because whilst I agree it's cheating, an argument which makes sense to me would be that Skys' "Research Fund" is being spent on developing a new wonderdrug which isn't on the illegal list yet?
In the early days they tested for specific substances if I'm correct. Don't know if they still do that. But you have a list of forbidden materials to use. As long as it is not that list, it is not officialy a dope. That is one of the reasons that EPO could be used, it was untracable. Will be the same for the new wonderdrug, if it is there. As they will see differences, but they won't know where those differences came from.
Please stop embarrassing yourself by making claims that are very easily proven false. Read what I'm about to reply to someone else.
masch20 wrote:
issoisso wrote:
masch20 wrote:
People have different opinions on things and i accept them..
No you very clearly don't
well that's not for you to decide!
So you're saying you don't accept my opinion that you don't?
baggieboys32 wrote:
I'll join this topic by first saying: I am a sky fan
However, that being said I've spent this year with steadily less belief in them being credible, and Froome in this Tour has been a step beyond reality for me, I can no longer believe that he;s not doping.
I have a genuine question: When they are doing drug tests, are they just testing for incongruencies or for specific substances? Because if it's the latter would it be possible to get away with doping by using a new substance?
Yep. That's one of the possibilities with Sky.
baggieboys32 wrote:
Secondly (Carrying on from Q1): When people first started using EPO etc, how were they treated? was it instantly banned and the riders with it? Because whilst I agree it's cheating, an argument which makes sense to me would be that Skys' "Research Fund" is being spent on developing a new wonderdrug which isn't on the illegal list yet?
Yes, but mind you, that doesn't make it legal. It doesn't have to be on the illegal list to be illegal.
The anti-doping rules state that if any substance has two of the following three properties:
- Enhances performance
- Is harmful to health
- Brings the sport into disrepute
It is illegal. That legislation exists precisely so that you can't go 'well, the rules state no EPO. I'm using DynEPO which is second generation so it's legal'
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 10-07-2013 19:47
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
Mwuhi wrote:
baggieboys32 wrote:
I'll join this topic by first saying: I am a sky fan
However, that being said I've spent this year with steadily less belief in them being credible, and Froome in this Tour has been a step beyond reality for me, I can no longer believe that he;s not doping.
I have a genuine question: When they are doing drug tests, are they just testing for incongruencies or for specific substances? Because if it's the latter would it be possible to get away with doping by using a new substance?
Secondly (Carrying on from Q1): When people first started using EPO etc, how were they treated? was it instantly banned and the riders with it? Because whilst I agree it's cheating, an argument which makes sense to me would be that Skys' "Research Fund" is being spent on developing a new wonderdrug which isn't on the illegal list yet?
In the early days they tested for specific substances if I'm correct. Don't know if they still do that. But you have a list of forbidden materials to use. As long as it is not that list, it is not officialy a dope. That is one of the reasons that EPO could be used, it was untracable. Will be the same for the new wonderdrug, if it is there. As they will see differences, but they won't know where those differences came from.
Please stop embarrassing yourself by making claims that are very easily proven false. Read what I'm about to reply to someone else.
masch20 wrote:
issoisso wrote:
masch20 wrote:
People have different opinions on things and i accept them..
No you very clearly don't
well that's not for you to decide!
So you're saying you don't accept my opinion that you don't?
baggieboys32 wrote:
I'll join this topic by first saying: I am a sky fan
However, that being said I've spent this year with steadily less belief in them being credible, and Froome in this Tour has been a step beyond reality for me, I can no longer believe that he;s not doping.
I have a genuine question: When they are doing drug tests, are they just testing for incongruencies or for specific substances? Because if it's the latter would it be possible to get away with doping by using a new substance?
Yep. That's one of the possibilities with Sky.
baggieboys32 wrote:
Secondly (Carrying on from Q1): When people first started using EPO etc, how were they treated? was it instantly banned and the riders with it? Because whilst I agree it's cheating, an argument which makes sense to me would be that Skys' "Research Fund" is being spent on developing a new wonderdrug which isn't on the illegal list yet?
Yes, but mind you, that doesn't make it legal. It doesn't have to be on the illegal list to be illegal.
The anti-doping rules state that if any substance has two of the following three properties:
- Enhances performance
- Is harmful to health
- Brings the sport into disrepute
It is illegal. That legislation exists precisely so that you can't go 'well, the rules state no EPO. I'm using DynEPO which is second generation so it's legal'
Which is so fucking subjective because there are so many things that you obviously wouldn't ban but fulfil the first two conditions. |
| |
|
|
| golance123 |
Posted on 10-07-2013 19:50
|
Free Agent
Posts: 132
Joined: 17-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
This whole situation with Sky is eerily similar to the USPS days. Lance was dominating the Tour when I was ages 5-11. Simply, I was too young and naive to understand what was going on. I defended Lance's performances up until the confession (who wants to admit their childhood sports hero cheated?). Now that I have matured, it is quite obvious it was simply impossible for Armstrong to put up performances like that without doping. Now I am forced to bear the "golance123" tag (sigh).
In regards to Froome and Sky...come on...You have to admit it is at least suspicious? The watts/kg for Froome are simply unrealistic to be clean. Obviously fans of Sky and Froome will defend until they get that positive test they want to see, but lets learn from the Armstrong situation. He never "failed a test." Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. I refuse to believe Froome's unbelievable performances and improvement are clean. Lets learn from the past, don't believe their b.s. excuses...we've heard them all before. |
| |
|
|
| Metriz- |
Posted on 10-07-2013 20:02
|
Domestique
Posts: 433
Joined: 19-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
My point was that Froome looked like he didn't just make a considerable effort
If this was any indication at all, Bjarne Riis would have been squeaky clean in 1996.
Other than that, I wouldn't mind the obvious dopers as much, if there were just someone to challange him. |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 10-07-2013 20:07
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Mwuhi wrote:
Why you all can't just stop nagging about doping.
It's not like you can win the tour with just doping. You still need to train damn hard, they do that. They give up many years of their lifes. And then nag about something that helps them not to be an old cripple man when they quit, or atleast help them with fulfilling our expectations?
Damn, the world is crazy.
Because some riders don't actually cheat, and having a cheater (or cheaters) finishing ahead of them, getting the money, the fame, etc. is just against our conception of a fair sport ?
masch20 wrote:
Again would people be happy if Froome is indeed clean and is just very good? Or do you want for him to be doper?
I'd like him to be clean, really. However that is just as probable as my mother being Prince Charles.
Mwuhi wrote:
It is not all about doping, doping only helps like 10% if you used it. Training is all the rest, and maybe even more. Or do you think that 10 years ago, they trained the same way as nowadays? Or is science(see windturbines and so on) still on the same level? No way, it can go faster and faster as the bike, the riderpositions, the training methods improve. And yes, there might be doping and yes it is suspicious, but why nag about it if nothing is proved. Froome can just drive that bike way faster then the others, so that means that the others need to train better. Simply as that.
4 to 13 % for EPO. But 2% and you go from podium material to barely top 10 material. So imagine what 10 % would do ?
And yes, everything has improved, though they've been using wind turbines for cyclists since the late 70's. But that should show a general improvement (and it does), not turn a random lousy pro into an absolute world beater.
Also, for what reason on Earth do cyclists who've left Sky forgotten how to train properly ? |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 10-07-2013 20:26
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Stairs wrote:
Okay, so, let's have some ranking fun!
List the most riduculous rides and riders within the last 10 years. There's been quite a few! From the top of my head:
1. Emanuelle Sella in the Giro 2008
Probably the most ridiculous ride ever to occur post-90's. I actually defended him after his first and second stage win but when he was then 2nd on Plan de Corones, it was just ludicrous - and when he even won the final mountain stage, all there was to do was just to take a bow and applause the show.
2. Chris Froome 2011-2013
We all know the story of Froome and those of us who followed him back in his U23-days will agree to the ridiculousness. The worst thing about him is that we - the spectators - have become so much smarter since the mid 00's. We know how to recognize a doper by now.
3. Santi' Perez in the Vuelta 2004
Perez had quite a few good results in his first professional seasons but absolutely no-one would have betted on the absolute ridiculousness of his riding against Roberto Heras in the 2004 Vuelta. It was fun watching and really a great race when I was still all too naive to suspect anything.
4. The CERA-gang of Saunier Duval, Schumacher and Kohl in the 2008 Tour
We were smarter by then and we could all smell doping from far away. Only Kohl were we ready to give some benefit of the doubt, at least to some extent. But no.
5. Lance Armstrong, all the way to 2009
Yes, and 2009 TdF was just the icing on the cake
6. Haussler in 2009
This is more controversial, I am very aware of that - but seriously, what an explosion of power he was in the first half of 2009. Suddenly a super classics sprinter, super cobbler and so much else. The thing was, it almost looked like he was surprised at his own strength. Had he been better aware of it, he would have won a few classics that spring. Instead, he faded back to somewhat mediocrity but has had a very fine season this year.
7. Isidro Nozal 2003 (and 2004 to some extent)
Boom! There he was! Boom! Gone forever.
8. Michael Rasmussen, Tour de France 2007
It was a wonderful summer being Danish but by the time he caught up with and overhauled Valverde on the ITT, well, it was just too obvious.
9. Hincapie on Pla-d'Adet
Not much to say. Bumblebee learns to fly.
10. Ivan Basso, Giro d'Italia 2006
I remember sitting watching the ridiculousness, first in awe but by the time of Simoni's ET-comments, I was very much in doubt. It was just too much.
11. JEG Cataluña, Giro 2006
Same as Hincapie. Come on.
12. Landis...
Yeah, it needs to be here somewhere. I don't actually think he was that suspicious in comparison to the rest of the 75 kg-guys climbing the fastest in the world back in 2006. Back then, it was all meh, today it was just a bunch of ridiculousness.
13. Di Luca - a whole career, especially Giro 2009
The Giro 2009 probably is the landmark of riduculousness of his career. He was an attacking-monster but a joy to watch. 2009 was a great Giro, much thanks to him.
14. Pecharroman
I don't actually remember seeing this guy in action - I just started following cycling later that summer of 2003 - but he's become somewhat of an urban legend of the unlikely fluke.
15. Joaquim Rodriguez - constant top shape from late 2009 to the end of 2012.
I don't get it. He even became one the absolute best climbers on all mountain-type stages and a decent TT'er along the way - how did he find the time when he's been riding all over Europe winning races and podium'ed from March to October every year?
There are many more that would deserve a spot. Mosquera, Porte, Sky, the High-Road/Columbia team of 2008/2009, Zabriskie, Julich, Vinokourov/Kashechkin, US Postal and so on.
The ranking ended up a bit arbitrary so don't put too much weight on it.
Dufaux Romandie 1998. Daufaux's home race and Festina were testing the doping program they would use in the Tour de France if they hadn't been caught. Zülle, also riding for Festina, wasn't in quite the same form because he was peaking for a few weeks later while Dufaux was peaking for this very race.
Dufaux was a pure climber, nothing else.
Won the prologue ahead of some of the world's best. Then the sprinters would take the jersey in stage 2....we can't have that obviously so he attacked the peloton on the flat and won stage 2.
On stage 4 he was going so fast he was braking for corners.....on a mountain finish.
Then he lost the long time trial by 12s to the world TT champion, but only because they were teammates on the same program.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| VoetsT |
Posted on 10-07-2013 20:26
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 851
Joined: 29-06-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Chris Froome = Too good to be true
|
| |
|
|
| Miguel98 |
Posted on 10-07-2013 20:41
|
World Champion
Posts: 10497
Joined: 23-06-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
There's one performance missing from that list. Rujano. |
| |
|
|
| Spilak23 |
Posted on 10-07-2013 20:45
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 22-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Miguel98 wrote:
There's one performance missing from that list. Rujano.
What's suspicious about a guy weighing 48 kg's climbing with the best?
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 10-07-2013 20:54
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Someone in this topic mentioned the 2003 Dauphiné is on cyclingtorrents so I downloaded it
The american commentary is hilariously biased. I can't remember the exact words, but....
About Halgand being chased by Armstrong: 'It's like having Jesus coming up to you'
Mayo attacks Armstrong: 'A bit of a James Bond villain plot happening here'
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| Patricmy |
Posted on 10-07-2013 20:59
|
Under 23
Posts: 66
Joined: 18-10-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
I used to root for Froome on the basis of a similar upbringing (raised in a central African country and schooled in South Africa) but after his recent performances and the glaring reality of his "drastic"rise to the top I have begun to seriously suspect him of doping. However, I have lost faith in the reality of cyclings results as a whole on the back of this years TdF, specifically the TTT which was apparently the 3rd fastest in history and now the ITT in which Martin was the 3rd fastest ever (hmm reminds me of someone who was breaking records for fastest tour ever while claiming to be clean) |
| |
|
|
| Kirchen_75 |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:01
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7702
Joined: 24-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Landis deserves to be Top 3. Top doper and that full retard break was magnificent |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:02
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Patricmy wrote:
hmm reminds me of someone who was breaking records for fastest tour ever while claiming to be clean
LeMond was clean, his record TT was downhill (except the flat last 800m) with a huge tailwind
Edited by issoisso on 10-07-2013 21:04
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| ruben |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:09
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
well i remember first being confronted with phil and paul (or whatever they were called) when the first internet streams came on (for any race the belgians didnt already cover). I couldn't believe what i was hearing half of the time  |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:12
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Get ready for a bigger surprise...it's not P&P
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| valverde321 |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:21
|
World Champion
Posts: 12986
Joined: 20-05-2009
PCM$: 530.00
|
issoisso wrote:
Get ready for a bigger surprise...it's not P&P
Its Bob Roll and someone else?
|
| |
|
|
| Patricmy |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:23
|
Under 23
Posts: 66
Joined: 18-10-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
Patricmy wrote:
hmm reminds me of someone who was breaking records for fastest tour ever while claiming to be clean
LeMond was clean, his record TT was downhill (except the flat last 800m) with a huge tailwind
Was refering to Armstrong in 1999 for the overall average. LeMond was sadly before my time
Edited by Patricmy on 10-07-2013 21:24
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:25
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ah, Cheers 
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| XxMillad24Xx |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:28
|
Stagiare
Posts: 235
Joined: 21-06-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
I can't even imagine what this site will be like when the day comes..."Chris Froome has tested positive for (Insert drug here) and police have raided his home/hotel" Oh lord please let this be true someday down the road.
"Cycling is now the the world's cleanest sport." - Chris Froome
|
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 10-07-2013 21:31
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
XxMillad24Xx wrote:
I can't even imagine what this site will be like when the day comes..."Chris Froome has tested positive for (Insert drug here) and police have raided his home/hotel" Oh lord please let this be true someday down the road.
I doubt that will happen. If they haven't been caught so far, they won't be.
We'll probably have some confessions from his team - mates in about 10 years 
|
| |
|
