|
Sky Doping/Hate Thread
|
| BritPCMFan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:04
|
Stagiare
Posts: 245
Joined: 03-06-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
BritPCMFan wrote:
issoisso wrote:
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
issoisso wrote:
They cheat the rules on the final climb even when they have an advantage of many minutes on GC.
But no, they'd never do drugs. They're too ethical to cheat....oh wait 
What's the rationale behind the rule?
Two reasons:
- To vary the races tactically so people will have to plan when to feed
- So cyclists don't hang on to team cars to 'get a feed' close to the finish.
Lol. You wish.
Its entirely for safety. They don't want riders calling up cars in the last km's because its dangerous to have a car overtaking a group who are fighting in the last kilometres. Cars will fight with riders for space, it would be horrible. Especially in the sprint stages where this will all happen at 50km+ an hour.
Its nothing to do with tactical feeding otherwise they should just make you start the day with what you will use and nothing more.
What happened here is the sky car was already just behind the group, so Porte merely dropped back. Technically a breech of the rule, but putting no-one in danger.
Try knowing the facts for once.
The rule was proposed in 1991 after Bruno Leali won a stage of the Midi Libre by spending most of the last 20kms hanging on to bottles from the team car...while the DS was holding on from the other side of course, so that he wouldn't have to pedal.
It was voted in favour of for the two reasons I posted.
But have fun in your fantasy world.
Yes, its entirely because of the cars. Sorry, that was my point.
I meant the the whole, tactical feeding thing is rubbish and nothing to do with it. Its because of the danger of cars coming up past riders and car drafting, neither of which were an issue today.
The draft issue is why is was introduced originally, but its not so much of an issue on MTFs. Thats why its a much later cut off point on these stages. Hell, TJ basically got drafted up the whole climb by a motobike today.
Edited by BritPCMFan on 18-07-2013 17:07
|
| |
|
|
| IncredibleIan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:06
|
Amateur
Posts: 16
Joined: 24-01-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
I agree with GD, hit the nail on the head there. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 08:52
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| mb2612 |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:10
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5759
Joined: 18-05-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
GD wrote:
Just to interject here Froome reports that the Sky team car had a mechanical issues before the bottom of the final climb hence why the riders couldn't get any food from the car. Yes it is illegal and he has paid a 20 second penalty for, what if he says is true, was a situation where he was a bit unlucky. To clarify in my opinion the penalty is justified
Also it isn't unheard for riders to get bottles etc after the cut off so those that are saying it is the same level of immoral as doping you are clearly way of the mark. A ridiculous comparison to be frank
Deliberate cheating is deliberate cheating. They have different punishments, but the moral justification is just the same.
 [url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182] Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
Please assume I am joking unless otherwise stated |
| |
|
|
| BritPCMFan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:11
|
Stagiare
Posts: 245
Joined: 03-06-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
GD wrote:
Just to interject here Froome reports that the Sky team car had a mechanical issues before the bottom of the final climb hence why the riders couldn't get any food from the car. Yes it is illegal and he has paid a 20 second penalty for, what if he says is true, was a situation where he was a bit unlucky. To clarify in my opinion the penalty is justified
Also it isn't unheard for riders to get bottles etc after the cut off so those that are saying it is the same level of immoral as doping you are clearly way of the mark. A ridiculous comparison to be frank
Its desperation for their guy to win. I know I've been guilty of it before, when I'm watching football, team is losing, opponent commits minor foul. You'll swear blind he should be been sent off, when a warning a free kick was totally fair . |
| |
|
|
| IncredibleIan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:14
|
Amateur
Posts: 16
Joined: 24-01-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Froome is the most tested rider in the peloton. How could he be doping? Also his data was shown to l'equipe and they analysed all of it from 2011 vuelta onwards and say there has been no major improvement between then and now and there is no signs whatsoever of doping. Im just curious to know what drug could froome use and its not working if he is because his data is just as good as 2011. |
| |
|
|
| Waghlon |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:16
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7694
Joined: 18-08-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
armstrong4ever wrote:
Armstrong is the most tested rider in the peloton. How could he be doping?
Gee, i don't know armstrong4ever. I guess he really shouldn't had his 7 titles stripped from him.
THE THOMAS VOECKLER PROPHET OF PCM DAILY
 |
| |
|
|
| Ithaca |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:17
|
Domestique
Posts: 401
Joined: 13-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
IncredibleIan wrote:
Froome is the most tested rider in the peloton. How could he be doping? Also his data was shown to l'equipe and they analysed all of it from 2011 vuelta onwards and say there has been no major improvement between then and now and there is no signs whatsoever of doping. Im just curious to know what drug could froome use and its not working if he is because his data is just as good as 2011.
What is interesting is that the data does not include pre-Vuelta 2011 information. Enough said. |
| |
|
|
| IncredibleIan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:18
|
Amateur
Posts: 16
Joined: 24-01-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Froome hasn't paid the UCI though! |
| |
|
|
| Dizzle |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:19
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 378
Joined: 30-06-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
IncredibleIan wrote:
Froome is the most tested rider in the peloton. How could he be doping? Also his data was shown to l'equipe and they analysed all of it from 2011 vuelta onwards and say there has been no major improvement between then and now and there is no signs whatsoever of doping. Im just curious to know what drug could froome use and its not working if he is because his data is just as good as 2011.
So was Armstrong. What would be more interesting, if Sky released his data prior to the Vuelta 11.
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:19
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
IncredibleIan wrote:
Froome hasn't paid the UCI though!
Valverde never tested positive.
|
| |
|
|
| IncredibleIan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:20
|
Amateur
Posts: 16
Joined: 24-01-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Okay he is doping.
Sky is a team full of dopers and no one believes that training in the right way or using different techniques and analyzing everything like sky do makes any difference.
I wonder what this wonder drug is? |
| |
|
|
| BritPCMFan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:21
|
Stagiare
Posts: 245
Joined: 03-06-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
mb2612 wrote:
Deliberate cheating is deliberate cheating. They have different punishments, but the moral justification is just the same.
Personally I actually agree with that. Cheat is a cheat.
I think within games now though, there is a general acceptance within people that partake in sport (for sure at an elite level) that when you have punishments for things that aren't an instant ban that its more a case of a trade off.
Again to compare with football. Players will deliberate foul a player to break play and stop what could be a very very good chance, knowing they will get a yellow card. Its technically not allowed, but the yellow card is worth the trade off for denying play. This is massively common place throughout the whole sport and there is hardly a player that will not do it.
In F1, cars have often suffered a problem during a period where the pitlane is meant to be closed. They will still pit and take the 10/20sec or stop/go penalty because they deem it worth the trade off.
Boxers are not meant to hold, but they all still do it.
Its not right, but I totally understand why Sky did it. And whilst I don't like it, in that position I'd have done the same thing and so would have any of the other riders.
Although Contador would probably have just made one of the spanish guys from another team give him theirs with his Spanish mind control magic. |
| |
|
|
| Roo |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:24
|
Stagiare
Posts: 236
Joined: 15-04-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
IncredibleIan wrote:
How many people here are actually cycling fans or cyclists themselves? You accuse every cyclist who has achieved anything of doping and not because they have worked hard and trained!
I think you'll find that the real cycling fans are probably the ones questioning Froome.
- They've been around for long enough to see similarities between Froome's dominance and that of previos riders: Landis, Armstrong, Contador, Basso etc. all of whom have one thing in common
- They're the ones who stick with the sport despite seeing all this persistent cheating.
IncredibleIan wrote:
Froome is the most tested rider in the peloton. How could he be doping? Also his data was shown to l'equipe and they analysed all of it from 2011 vuelta onwards and say there has been no major improvement between then and now and there is no signs whatsoever of doping. Im just curious to know what drug could froome use and its not working if he is because his data is just as good as 2011.
I'll assume you're some kind of troll, but'll reply in case you aren't. The values released to L'Equipe conveniently start from the first race Froome rode at the level he's currently at. Had his values from before Vuelta '11 been released it would likely show something completely different as he was such an average rider before this (real cycling fans actually know him and his level from before Vuelta '11). As for the excuse that he's the most tested rider in the peloton, well we all know who has used such an excuse before. |
| |
|
|
| GD |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:26
|
Amateur
Posts: 21
Joined: 03-06-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
@BritPCMFan I agreed that the 20 second penalty was just, I'm not arguing with the decision made, rather that I disagree with mb2612 with regards to the immorality of it. Feeding when bonked is hardly the same as doping. |
| |
|
|
| Waghlon |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:26
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7694
Joined: 18-08-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
IncredibleIan wrote:
Okay he is doping.
Sky is a team full of dopers and no one believes that training in the right way or using different techniques and analyzing everything like sky do makes any difference.
I wonder what this wonder drug is?
Whoa. My ironymeter... it's on fire!
THE THOMAS VOECKLER PROPHET OF PCM DAILY
|
| |
|
|
| Roo |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:28
|
Stagiare
Posts: 236
Joined: 15-04-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
IncredibleIan wrote:
Okay he is doping.
Sky is a team full of dopers and no one believes that training in the right way or using different techniques and analyzing everything like sky do makes any difference.
I wonder what this wonder drug is?
Also what makes you think Sky's training is so revolutionary. Because they say it is? What makes you think no other team can train as hard or as sophisticated, even if they take in previous riders from Sky, who'd know the training programmes?
There's no wonder drug. There's doping in small doses of several drugs + blood transfusions all of them giving you slight advantages that add up (edit: making it much harder to detect as well)
Edited by Roo on 18-07-2013 17:30
|
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:30
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
IncredibleIan wrote:
Okay he is doping.
Sky is a team full of dopers and no one believes that training in the right way or using different techniques and analyzing everything like sky do makes any difference.
Let's put things in another perspective. Why would the other riders not train or why wouldn't their teams analyze everything and use those different techniques?
|
| |
|
|
| BritPCMFan |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:37
|
Stagiare
Posts: 245
Joined: 03-06-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
IncredibleIan wrote:
Okay he is doping.
Sky is a team full of dopers and no one believes that training in the right way or using different techniques and analyzing everything like sky do makes any difference.
Let's put things in another perspective. Why would the other riders not train or why wouldn't their teams analyze everything and use those different techniques?
I've answered this a few time lately.
The story is, from the early 90's some geek in the British Cycling setup began collecting data, and has basically over the last 15-20 years developed a sports science system with very specific relation to cycling. With the Sky cash from the British sponsorship, this got highly developed and it is this that drove the leaps forward in british cycling, and now Sky Road Cycling.
As I've also said, I'm rather on the fence with as to what I believe. Its pretty out there, but if true it does make alot of sense and is fairly logical.
The problem is, with both sides of the argument is all ifs and whats and maybes. You can look at data all you like and there can be thousands explainations for it. |
| |
|
|
| ppanther |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:45
|
Domestique
Posts: 482
Joined: 25-12-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
IncredibleIan wrote:
Froome is the most tested rider in the peloton. How could he be doping? Also his data was shown to l'equipe and they analysed all of it from 2011 vuelta onwards and say there has been no major improvement between then and now and there is no signs whatsoever of doping. Im just curious to know what drug could froome use and its not working if he is because his data is just as good as 2011.
BEST. POST. EVER.
I am sorry i accused Froome of doping. The facts in this post arejust overhelming. It changed my mind. |
| |
|
|
| labete |
Posted on 18-07-2013 17:47
|
Amateur
Posts: 15
Joined: 30-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Has anyone ever wondered why SKY hired Froome if he was so mediocre before 2011 Not a more respected rider / Tour de l'Avenir winner etc? And what did his contract look like then? And when did it change / improved?
Or why would SKY choose to develop Froome and Porte over other riders that have a better existing palmares?
Or why Barloworld threw him into the Tour de France in 2008 having previously ridden only one year pro in South Africa? |
| |
|
