CLURPR wrote:
For anybody who thinks the Sky riders have doped, what scientific proof/ tests/ substantial evidence do you have that you can use to line up a well-rounded argument with some pretty good points to say that they have doped? Brailsford wouldn't allow any doping to go on simply because his life would be ruined, he would lose his job at Sky and as Head of British Cycling.
Just becuase he doesn't know about it doesn't mean it's not happening
For instance if you hear what Riis says about him mentoring and basically living with basso in the run up to the tour to found out days before that he was seeing a doctor outside of the team's authority, at the end of the day a rider can perosnally himself do what he wants.
Yes Riis, the mentor for clean cycling... sorry for being so cynical today
CLURPR wrote:
For anybody who thinks the Sky riders have doped, what scientific proof/ tests/ substantial evidence do you have that you can use to line up a well-rounded argument with some pretty good points to say that they have doped? Brailsford wouldn't allow any doping to go on simply because his life would be ruined, he would lose his job at Sky and as Head of British Cycling.
Just becuase he doesn't know about it doesn't mean it's not happening
For instance if you hear what Riis says about him mentoring and basically living with basso in the run up to the tour to found out days before that he was seeing a doctor outside of the team's authority, at the end of the day a rider can perosnally himself do what he wants.
The whole team? Really? without any staff knowing? or fans?
That i find hard to believe
At what point there did i say the whole team? the fans would never know anyway and the staff don't have to know riders can do this themself with the right contacts
CLURPR wrote:
For anybody who thinks the Sky riders have doped, what scientific proof/ tests/ substantial evidence do you have that you can use to line up a well-rounded argument with some pretty good points to say that they have doped? Brailsford wouldn't allow any doping to go on simply because his life would be ruined, he would lose his job at Sky and as Head of British Cycling.
Just becuase he doesn't know about it doesn't mean it's not happening
For instance if you hear what Riis says about him mentoring and basically living with basso in the run up to the tour to found out days before that he was seeing a doctor outside of the team's authority, at the end of the day a rider can perosnally himself do what he wants.
Yes Riis, the mentor for clean cycling... sorry for being so cynical today
Haha yeah true but his book is quite a good read to be fair.
jt1109 wrote:
No i agree i think with everyone but Rogers who i think has just stayed at the same level for years doesn't seem to have moved up or down
In that case, this:
mb2612 wrote:
If Rogers has stayed the same level for years then he is doping, because he wasn't clean in 06
He was at T-Mobile, he was named in the Freiburg scandal, he was named as a buyer of EPO at QuickStep, he was a Ferrari client.....
jt1109 wrote:
basically Froome results though do have to be looked at because of his illness and if you look in CQ he was on an upward curve till 2009 when he got the illness the two years he had it he went down and it looks as though his improvement was still going just the illlness was hiding it seriously look at it add the same gradient increase from 08 to 09 to 09 to 10 and 10 to 11 and that just looks like a straight curve.
That "upward curve" was two years getting points in tiny crap races in Australia, South Africa, Portugal, etc. In that 2nd year he also rode big races where he failed to finish anywhere near the top 20 of a mountain stage in any kind of race.
Now he's dropping everyone on a Tour de France mountain finished after riding at the goddamn front in the wind??? That's not stretching disbelief, that's taking it behind the barn and shooting it.
sutty68 wrote:
You should pay a visit to the teams website and take a look at all the regimes they put themselves through so as to improve not just as an individual but a team
You should read up on the CV of team's "doctor", Geert Leinders.
Makes Fuentes look like a saint.
CLURPR wrote:
For anybody who thinks the Sky riders have doped, what scientific proof/ tests/ substantial evidence do you have that you can use to line up a well-rounded argument with some pretty good points to say that they have doped?
Aside from the team doctor being who he is and their insane jump in performance, I'd point to the UCI's list of riders and their classification of whether or not they're suspicious according to the blood passport.
There's a ridiculously high percentage of Sky riders among the upper categories of "Extremely irregular blood values"
CLURPR wrote:
Brailsford wouldn't allow any doping to go on simply because his life would be ruined, he would lose his job at Sky and as Head of British Cycling.
Oh man that's so funny it almost brought a tear to my eyes.
You do realize that argument is equally "valid" for literally any team manager ever, right? Bruyneel. Riis. Saiz...
Anyway, I'm hoping we'll have an entertaining stage tomorrow, before we have a far more hilarious stage on monday
"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
Anyone noticed Vinokourov? Only 02:17 behind Froome. I think we can expect to see him tomorrow along with Chavanel, Cobo, Vanendert, Chris Anker, Moncoutie, Pinot, Voeckler, Rabobank (at least 1 of LLS and the climbers) and maybe even Valverde and Van den Broeck.
jt1109 wrote:
basically Froome results though do have to be looked at because of his illness and if you look in CQ he was on an upward curve till 2009 when he got the illness the two years he had it he went down and it looks as though his improvement was still going just the illlness was hiding it seriously look at it add the same gradient increase from 08 to 09 to 09 to 10 and 10 to 11 and that just looks like a straight curve.
That "upward curve" was two years getting points in tiny crap races in Australia, South Africa, Portugal, etc. In that 2nd year he also rode big races where he failed to finish anywhere near the top 20 of a mountain stage in any kind of race.
Now he's dropping everyone on a Tour de France mountain finished after riding at the goddamn front in the wind??? That's not stretching disbelief, that's taking it behind the barn and shooting it.
Was he meant to be winning protour race at 23?
Look i'm not saying that because he was hitting an upwards point in his career that he isn't doping i'm just saying that it can be shown that he was improving still when he had his blood infection in doing so hiding his form
Tiny crap races
like 3rd in the Giro dell'Appennino
30th on the Alpe D'huez stage
14th in the last TT
at 22
at 23
35th in the Giro
6th on a stage
17th in the World ITT
Yes he gained his points in lower races but he wasn't just riding well in them
Recorded the stage, wtached it, and feel pretty bad about it. This was no fun watching. Of course, all Sky-fans loved it, but the way their very average climbers in the past (Rogers...) dropped all the better climbers in this Tour. Man, what a waste of time.
Okay, riders as Gesink, Mollema, Scarponi crashed yesterday and probably it played a role. Then Valverde and Van den Broeck punctured. Only thing I missed was the fan who knocked Nibali and Evans off their bikes, so Sky could take a 1-2 and maybe 3-4-5-6-7-8...
I'm neutral about Sky. Don't fancy them, don't hate them. But the way did rode, reminded me of US Postal in their better days. And we all know about that one, with most of the riders (almost all but one... wait, that was Festina ) confessing to have used doping. It took me until last month to believe that Armstrong used dope in at least 1 Tour. It took me 7 stages to believe that Sky-performance is suspicious (before you react, Sky-lovers, I don't say they've used doping, I only say that a performance like today is suspicious. When Rabo did this, you would say the same!)
If there is a God, please let him throw nails on the road tomorrow when the last climb starts and only the Sky-riders (and Evans, Nibali, even Menchov) get punctures, so all the riders that have lost time so far (Schleck, VdB, Gesink, etc) can regain time. And since I'm a Christian, I'lll pray for it tonight
That was awful. Vuelta all over again, except that I thought back then it was because noone else had decent form or skills.
Seriously, 8 guys can keep up with Rogers, 4 with Froome, and he still drops everyone at the end?
Surely, “he's more suited to steep stuff than the rest“, but he fricking made the pace for 3k?
Highlight of the day Taaramae for sure, great performance.
Still, makes me think whether I want to watch that with my full attention.
jt1109 wrote:
Was he meant to be winning protour race at 23?
He's far stronger than anyone else in the mountains on today's stage.
Aside from his suspicious team of instant revelations, the other guys there were
Evans, at 23 was world mountain bike champion, winner of the Tour of Austria, could climb with top GC contenders, if inconsistent. Today he was dropped. AND HE'S CONSIDERED A LATE BLOOMER
Nibali at 23 was top 10 in LBL, 11th at the Giro, 18th at the Tour, all while working for others, and had won the Giro del Trentino.
Froome dropped them all today. At 23 he wasn't expected to win WT races, no....he was expected to have shown anything in terms of either climbing or time trialling.
jt1109 wrote:
Look i'm not saying that because he was hitting an upwards point in his career that he isn't doping i'm just saying that it can be shown that he was improving still when he had his blood infection in doing so hiding his form
No, you can't, that's my point.
jt1109 wrote:
like 3rd in the Giro dell'Appennino
Have you seen the field? He was beaten By Eddy Ratti, also known as "who?"
jt1109 wrote:
30th on the Alpe D'huez stage
He rested for several days by riding in the autobus so he could "shine" on that stage. He finished 30th because a lot of guys ahead of him worked for their team leaders and then sat up. Froome was riding for himself.
Despite that, he lost 6 minutes to such a vaunted climber as Nicolas Vogondy
I mean, seriously, if you're using a result like that to show that he was "getting results", that's really grasping at straws
jt1109 wrote:
14th in the last TT
16th actually. 14th was that world class time triallist Danny Pate. Yes, he beat Froome. The wind changed quite a bit so riders who started early like them got a huge benefit from it.
jt1109 wrote:
at 22
No, he was 23. Now compared those results to the guys above who he beat so resoundingly today
At the same age Nibali was 7th in the Tour de France. (He'd also won that all important Giro dell'Appennino )
jt1109 wrote:
35th in the Giro
That's one way to put it.
Another way to put it would be that he finished 43 minutes behind Lars Bak despite not having to work for any teammates.
Yeah, not exactly a ringing endorsement of the world's future top climber just 3 years later.
jt1109 wrote:
6th on a stage
.....because he was in a break that was allowed to win the stage. He lost 36 seconds on the stage winner on a 2km finishing climb!
jt1109 wrote:
17th in the World ITT
11 places behind Koos Moerenhout. 7 places behind David McCann, whoever he is. Not exactly a massively strong field that year.
jt1109 wrote:
Yes he gained his points in lower races but he wasn't just riding well in them
You're cherry picking results, as I think I made clear above. If you cherry pick, you can make Theo Eltink look like a superstar waiting to happen
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
Indeed, the step between 35th in Giro and dropping everyone on a Tour mountain stage is such a small one
On a more serious note, I seriously cannot understand how so many people have any doubt over Froome not being clean. The overall win at the Tour of Mauritius clearly showed the boy had potential.
And from the first page, post #8:
jph27 wrote:
Froome to win after UK Postal do a Mountain TTT.
jph27 wrote:
Froome to win after UK Postal do a Mountain TTT.
I'm just... scared of you
Nice
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
ringo182 wrote:
Just thiought i'd pop in to have a read of the usual anti-British dross that crops up on this board whenever we dominate a race.
Congrats, you haven't dissapointed.
I'm off.
No, you didn't. You don't pop in to read when Cavendish wins because nobody has anything to say about doping when Cavendish wins.
Which means that even to you this performance was so out of the ordinary and suspicious that you felt the compelling need to drop in and see the reactions
BURN
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
jt1109 wrote:
Was he meant to be winning protour race at 23?
He's far stronger than anyone else in the mountains on today's stage.
Aside from his suspicious team of instant revelations, the other guys there were
Evans, at 23 was world mountain bike champion, winner of the Tour of Austria, could climb with top GC contenders, if inconsistent. Today he was dropped. AND HE'S CONSIDERED A LATE BLOOMER
Nibali at 23 was top 10 in LBL, 11th at the Giro, 18th at the Tour, all while working for others, and had won the Giro del Trentino.
Froome dropped them all today. At 23 he wasn't expected to win WT races, no....he was expected to have shown anything in terms of either climbing or time trialling.
jt1109 wrote:
Look i'm not saying that because he was hitting an upwards point in his career that he isn't doping i'm just saying that it can be shown that he was improving still when he had his blood infection in doing so hiding his form
No, you can't, that's my point.
jt1109 wrote:
like 3rd in the Giro dell'Appennino
Have you seen the field? He was beaten By Eddy Ratti, also known as "who?"
jt1109 wrote:
30th on the Alpe D'huez stage
He rested for several days by riding in the autobus so he could "shine" on that stage. He finished 30th because a lot of guys ahead of him worked for their team leaders and then sat up. Froome was riding for himself.
Despite that, he lost 6 minutes to such a vaunted climber as Nicolas Vogondy
I mean, seriously, if you're using a result like that to show that he was "getting results", that's really grasping at straws
jt1109 wrote:
14th in the last TT
16th actually. 14th was that world class time triallist Danny Pate. Yes, he beat Froome. The wind changed quite a bit so riders who started early like them got a huge benefit from it.
jt1109 wrote:
at 22
No, he was 23. Now compared those results to the guys above who he beat so resoundingly today
I'm not going to participate in the whole doping discussion, although I agree it looks ... weird (in lack of a better word).
I am, however, going to say that I actually enjoyed watching the stage. To me, it was exciting to see such a large group of riders, top riders, being dropped and losing quite a lot of time for such a short climb.
That said, I hope to see Froome betray Wiggins at some point
valverde321 wrote:
One thing is Team Sky suspiciously dominating.
Another thing is the "Sky Fans" over-rating all the riders, saying that these guys have been this good their whole life. In all honesty, most of these guys are coming from years of anonymity.
This is going to be a looooong Tour, if Sky keep winning.
... sorry for being so cynical today
) confessing to have used doping. It took me until last month to believe that Armstrong used dope in at least 1 Tour. It took me 7 stages to believe that Sky-performance is suspicious (before you react, Sky-lovers, I don't say they've used doping, I only say that a performance like today is suspicious. When Rabo did this, you would say the same!)
