|
Sky Doping/Hate Thread
|
| jph27 |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7339
Joined: 20-03-2010
PCM$: 900.00
|
The real question is not if, but what Sky are taking. Whatever it is, it'll be undetectable. And that's a scary thought. I may have my cynical hat on here, but that whole Turbo trainer business may be more than a warm down, remember the tales about Cyclists waking in the middle of the night and getting on a bike in their rooms? |
| |
|
|
| Coop |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:14
|
Under 23
Posts: 77
Joined: 06-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
kirtley9 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
It's funny because when the Armstrong allegations happened., the Americans flaired (including me) and were critisized. It's the exact same thing witht he Brits. guys, can't you see it?
The "Brits" aren't saying they are 100% clean becasue noone apart from the riders themselves can tell you that just like you can't say they are defintly doping without having proper evidence.
The 'Brits' are asking for people to wait until Sky turns up a failed or missed test.
If Sky fail then fine SKy are doped
If Sky dont fail, then you can suspect but dont just accuse them
Don't accuse them? So they deserve special treatment why? If this were an Italian team or Europcar the Brits would be leading the charge with or without evidence. Performance is evidence, you don't do what Sky has done without raising some eyebrows! |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:14
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
valverde321 wrote:
jph27 wrote:
Maybe Sky are doping, but are you naive enough to think they are the only ones? And let's face it, they aren't stupid enough to get caught here.
This.
Also the doctors point made by Alakagom. If a Doctor only knows one way to get his riders fully prepared for a race, through use of dope, then gets suspended and comes back saying he'll never dope his riders again, but still only knowing one way to get his riders prepared, but is asked to get riders prepared again by the managers, what other way can he really get his riders prepared? Obviously he might have some knowledge being a doctor but if you are a dope doctor, you are a dope doctor imo. Or am I wrong, I dont know a whole lot about doctors, but it doesn't seem like a half bad assumption. I mean if you are a dope doctor and then you're not but your still making your riders improve their results by 100%, through the normal methods it just seems unlikely. Thats just my thoughts on the doctors with shady pasts.
Unless a doctor makes some sort of breakthrough like gluten free diet etc.
People can always change, staff included. But you've got to admit there's some circumstantial evidence (it's not a proof, I admit) when the riders of the team he's in all suddenly improve while he's there, and decline again when he leaves.
And, come on, cycling managers and directors are not more stupid than common people. When they hire one particular doctor, or a doctor with such a history, they do know what they're doing, and why.
They could pick virtually any sport doctor if it was just about healing wounds consecutive to falls, etc. |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:17
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
kirtley9 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
It's funny because when the Armstrong allegations happened., the Americans flaired (including me) and were critisized. It's the exact same thing witht he Brits. guys, can't you see it?
The "Brits" aren't saying they are 100% clean becasue noone apart from the riders themselves can tell you that just like you can't say they are defintly doping without having proper evidence.
The 'Brits' are asking for people to wait until Sky turns up a failed or missed test.
If Sky fail then fine SKy are doped
If Sky dont fail, then you can suspect but dont just accuse them
What's the difference when you're not a court or a legal representative of UCI or something official ?
As for your "no positive test" argument : how often did Riis, Ullrich, Virenque, etc. test positive ? Never. So they were unfairly condemned when they were in fact innocents ? Or is it slightly more complicated than that ?
I thought Riis has admitted doping
Ullrich i feel was harshly treated as there was no solid evidence
Virenque is a bit complicated
It is straight forward, either you doped or you didnt.
If a person tests positive they doped. If they didnt they didnt. If you admit it you doped.
Sky have tested positive, they are clean.
|
| |
|
|
| Likkivi |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:18
|
Stagiare
Posts: 201
Joined: 30-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
CLURPR wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
Took this from another site:
Gert Leinders, Sky,s Team Dr Has an "Interesting" History.
Forums elswhere are buzzing with incredulity at whats going on and the desciption "UK Postal" is geting used and it most certainly aint a compliment. ....and then we have this little revelation : "Leinders was team doctor for Sigma, Histor, Panasonic and Lotto before becoming team doctor for Rabobank in 1996. He left Rabobank in 2009 citing 'dissatisfaction with the policies of the new management of the cycling team'.
According to Rabobank one of those new policies bought in between 2007 and July 2009 was a 'zero tolerance' attitude to doping, a policy that followed an internal investigation into the use of doping within the team during the period Leinders was the team doctor, an investigation that was triggered by Michael Rasmussen’s expulsion from the Tour de France"
There's the evidence.
I noticed this argument stands alone. It's settled.
Now it's just a question of time before it leads to a ban.
Stop being an idiot, just because a doctor with doping history is on the team doesn't mean you have evidence. Keep your mouth shut from now on about banning Team Sky unless you have a positive test for me to look at 
I see you have no counter argument so you get angry instead. Don't worry. That's normal.
But it doesn't change the fact of this time line.
Geert Leinders at Rabobank = Rasmussen kicked out of Tour
Geert Leinders stops at Rabobank = All Rabobank riders start declining
Geert Leinders at Sky: Froome out of nothing dominates Vuelta and Tour
Rasmussen missed a test, did not have a positive test
All Rabo rider decline what?
Have you seen Rabobank in this Tour?
Clearly lacking a hint of Geert. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 07:29
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| valverde321 |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:18
|
World Champion
Posts: 12986
Joined: 20-05-2009
PCM$: 530.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
valverde321 wrote:
jph27 wrote:
Maybe Sky are doping, but are you naive enough to think they are the only ones? And let's face it, they aren't stupid enough to get caught here.
This.
Also the doctors point made by Alakagom. If a Doctor only knows one way to get his riders fully prepared for a race, through use of dope, then gets suspended and comes back saying he'll never dope his riders again, but still only knowing one way to get his riders prepared, but is asked to get riders prepared again by the managers, what other way can he really get his riders prepared? Obviously he might have some knowledge being a doctor but if you are a dope doctor, you are a dope doctor imo. Or am I wrong, I dont know a whole lot about doctors, but it doesn't seem like a half bad assumption. I mean if you are a dope doctor and then you're not but your still making your riders improve their results by 100%, through the normal methods it just seems unlikely. Thats just my thoughts on the doctors with shady pasts.
Unless a doctor makes some sort of breakthrough like gluten free diet etc.
People can always change, staff included. But you've got to admit there's some circumstantial evidence (it's not a proof, I admit) when the riders of the team he's in all suddenly improve while he's there, and decline again when he leaves.
And, come on, cycling managers and directors are not more stupid than common people. When they hire one particular doctor, or a doctor with such a history, they do know what they're doing, and why.
They could pick virtually any sport doctor if it was just about healing wounds consecutive to falls, etc.
So i'm not entirely wrong then? Good! 
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:18
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
jph27 wrote:
remember the tales about Cyclists waking in the middle of the night and getting on a bike in their rooms?
I don't think that's an issue anymore. As much as I think there's doping going on in Sky, whatever the scale, there's no way it's that bad. Those stories are back from the pre 50% limit era.
|
| |
|
|
| Alakagom |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:18
|
World Champion
Posts: 10891
Joined: 19-11-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Likkivi wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
CLURPR wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
Took this from another site:
Gert Leinders, Sky,s Team Dr Has an "Interesting" History.
Forums elswhere are buzzing with incredulity at whats going on and the desciption "UK Postal" is geting used and it most certainly aint a compliment. ....and then we have this little revelation : "Leinders was team doctor for Sigma, Histor, Panasonic and Lotto before becoming team doctor for Rabobank in 1996. He left Rabobank in 2009 citing 'dissatisfaction with the policies of the new management of the cycling team'.
According to Rabobank one of those new policies bought in between 2007 and July 2009 was a 'zero tolerance' attitude to doping, a policy that followed an internal investigation into the use of doping within the team during the period Leinders was the team doctor, an investigation that was triggered by Michael Rasmussen’s expulsion from the Tour de France"
There's the evidence.
I noticed this argument stands alone. It's settled.
Now it's just a question of time before it leads to a ban.
Stop being an idiot, just because a doctor with doping history is on the team doesn't mean you have evidence. Keep your mouth shut from now on about banning Team Sky unless you have a positive test for me to look at
I see you have no counter argument so you get angry instead. Don't worry. That's normal.
But it doesn't change the fact of this time line.
Geert Leinders at Rabobank = Rasmussen kicked out of Tour
Geert Leinders stops at Rabobank = All Rabobank riders start declining
Geert Leinders at Sky: Froome out of nothing dominates Vuelta and Tour
Rasmussen missed a test, did not have a positive test
All Rabo rider decline what?
Have you seen Rabobank in this Tour?
Clearly lacking a hint of Geert.
What are you on about ?
They were unlucky to be involved in crashes.
Nothing to do with doctor 
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:19
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
jph27 wrote:
The real question is not if, but what Sky are taking. Whatever it is, it'll be undetectable. And that's a scary thought. I may have my cynical hat on here, but that whole Turbo trainer business may be more than a warm down, remember the tales about Cyclists waking in the middle of the night and getting on a bike in their rooms?
I thought they did push ups, not cycling, but the global figure remains the same.
The warming up and down makes a lot of sense, to me, even for non doped riders. I'd say it will probably generalise to more riders in the future. The same is done in other sports as well.
What it makes me think of, though, is the funny effect of EPO use, at least the one that was used a couple of years ago. In a mountain stages with many mountains to climb, the riders using it could deliver a better performance after a couple of mountains than on the first one. Which is absurd, even for a pro. The performance, if you climb everything at 100 % (not 100%, but on a constant pace that's as fast as you can maintain) will decrease on every mountain. The more endurance you have, the lesser decline, of course. |
| |
|
|
| Coop |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:22
|
Under 23
Posts: 77
Joined: 06-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
kirtley9 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
It's funny because when the Armstrong allegations happened., the Americans flaired (including me) and were critisized. It's the exact same thing witht he Brits. guys, can't you see it?
The "Brits" aren't saying they are 100% clean becasue noone apart from the riders themselves can tell you that just like you can't say they are defintly doping without having proper evidence.
The 'Brits' are asking for people to wait until Sky turns up a failed or missed test.
If Sky fail then fine SKy are doped
If Sky dont fail, then you can suspect but dont just accuse them
What's the difference when you're not a court or a legal representative of UCI or something official ?
As for your "no positive test" argument : how often did Riis, Ullrich, Virenque, etc. test positive ? Never. So they were unfairly condemned when they were in fact innocents ? Or is it slightly more complicated than that ?
I thought Riis has admitted doping
Ullrich i feel was harshly treated as there was no solid evidence
Virenque is a bit complicated
It is straight forward, either you doped or you didnt.
If a person tests positive they doped. If they didnt they didnt. If you admit it you doped.
Sky have tested positive, they are clean.
You have a serious case of "Fanboyitis" The only cure is for you to wake up and face reality. |
| |
|
|
| boork |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:22
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 336
Joined: 10-06-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
the dopers always stay a few years ahead of the tests. Unless they make a mistake it is very hard to catch them if not impossible.
Hopefully now they got their eyes on the more suspicious riders on the team and with the help of the blood passport and such things maybe they will be able to have a case soon. From what i understand they already got some irregular numbers on sky cyclists.
For now i try to enjoy their performances. Froome might have had a natural progression but todays TT made me really wonder. Either way you need some immense talent to get such a time even with drugs. He must have worked very hard to get the right technique. . |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:23
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
It is straight forward, either you doped or you didnt.
If a person tests positive they doped. If they didnt they didnt. If you admit it you doped.
Sky have tested positive, they are clean.
That's totally different. Your logic is flawed.
You took dope : you doped. You didn't : you didn't dope.
You're caught : it's proven you doped. You admit you doped : it's admitted you did. You didn't get caught and never admitted : there might be suspicions based on your performances or anything.
Doping is the action or will to enhance one's performances through banned substances or not yet commercialised medicines.
It's not the fact of being caught or not. |
| |
|
|
| marble |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:24
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 389
Joined: 28-07-2007
PCM$: 400.00
|
Alakagom wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
Have you seen Rabobank in this Tour?
Clearly lacking a hint of Geert.
What are you on about ?
They were unlucky to be involved in crashes.
Nothing to do with doctor
Yeah. Rabobank has had several good results this year. It's been an unfortunate Tour so far, but they are definitely capable of GT podiums still. It's obvious that this Geert person leaving hasn't really made a big difference, on Rabobank atleast.
Edited by marble on 09-07-2012 17:25
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:26
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
Coop wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
kirtley9 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
It's funny because when the Armstrong allegations happened., the Americans flaired (including me) and were critisized. It's the exact same thing witht he Brits. guys, can't you see it?
The "Brits" aren't saying they are 100% clean becasue noone apart from the riders themselves can tell you that just like you can't say they are defintly doping without having proper evidence.
The 'Brits' are asking for people to wait until Sky turns up a failed or missed test.
If Sky fail then fine SKy are doped
If Sky dont fail, then you can suspect but dont just accuse them
What's the difference when you're not a court or a legal representative of UCI or something official ?
As for your "no positive test" argument : how often did Riis, Ullrich, Virenque, etc. test positive ? Never. So they were unfairly condemned when they were in fact innocents ? Or is it slightly more complicated than that ?
I thought Riis has admitted doping
Ullrich i feel was harshly treated as there was no solid evidence
Virenque is a bit complicated
It is straight forward, either you doped or you didnt.
If a person tests positive they doped. If they didnt they didnt. If you admit it you doped.
Sky have tested positive, they are clean.
You have a serious case of "Fanboyitis" The only cure is for you to wake up and face reality.
Yes im biased, i admit that freely
If a Sky rider fails a drugs test then i will retract my previous statements.
Until then (which i hope is never) i will believe in my team and riders.
Wiggins is one of my heroes and i will defend him.
Armstrong was one of my heroes. I never believed he doped. Until his team mates started saying otherwise. I now believe Armstrong doped. I am willing to change my mind if there is compelling well founded evidence
|
| |
|
|
| ruben |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:26
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Indeed, Rabobank was just very unlucky. In the 1st week before the crashes Mollema and Gesink were good in the uphill finishes so.. |
| |
|
|
| Schleck96 |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:28
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1498
Joined: 10-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think that some people here are starting to act like idiots with each other. Seriously you should calm down yourselves. And talking about Sky (Froome to be most specific) I can't say that he is doped but it seems like. If we make a "rewind" in his career, in 2010 his best result was 9th place in the Tour de Haut Var. In 2011 he had top 15 finishes in the Vuelta a Castilla y León and the Tour de Romandie. Fair amount of progress imo. In August he enters the Vuelta and kicks everybody's ass out of nowhere. Seems kinda suspicious. Now he crushes Cancellara in a TT when Spartacus is in GREAT Shape. There are reasons to look at him in a suspicious way imo. |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:29
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
It is straight forward, either you doped or you didnt.
If a person tests positive they doped. If they didnt they didnt. If you admit it you doped.
Sky have tested positive, they are clean.
That's totally different. Your logic is flawed.
You took dope : you doped. You didn't : you didn't dope.
You're caught : it's proven you doped. You admit you doped : it's admitted you did. You didn't get caught and never admitted : there might be suspicions based on your performances or anything.
Doping is the action or will to enhance one's performances through banned substances or not yet commercialised medicines.
It's not the fact of being caught or not.
"Doping means to make use of physiological substances in immoderate quantity or abnormal method from healthy people whose only aim is to obtain an artificial increase of the performance during the competition"
I take part in local, sanctioned races. I use energy bars so i can ride faster and further. Am i doping?
|
| |
|
|
| ianrussell |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:31
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3440
Joined: 09-10-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Interesting post by Science of Sport on Twitter (I'M NOT SAYING IT'S PROOF OF ANYTHING MIND  ):
"Here's Chris Froome's TT at Vuelta last year: https://teamsky.cyclingnews.com/tech-n...uelta-lead/ (via @TrainingPeaks) That's 406W at 5.8W/kg. Not unexpected,not unusual"
Will be interesting to compare with today's ride and also they have mountain analysis incoming soon.
Edited by ianrussell on 09-07-2012 17:33
|
| |
|
|
| Coop |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:34
|
Under 23
Posts: 77
Joined: 06-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
Coop wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
kirtley9 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
It's funny because when the Armstrong allegations happened., the Americans flaired (including me) and were critisized. It's the exact same thing witht he Brits. guys, can't you see it?
The "Brits" aren't saying they are 100% clean becasue noone apart from the riders themselves can tell you that just like you can't say they are defintly doping without having proper evidence.
The 'Brits' are asking for people to wait until Sky turns up a failed or missed test.
If Sky fail then fine SKy are doped
If Sky dont fail, then you can suspect but dont just accuse them
What's the difference when you're not a court or a legal representative of UCI or something official ?
As for your "no positive test" argument : how often did Riis, Ullrich, Virenque, etc. test positive ? Never. So they were unfairly condemned when they were in fact innocents ? Or is it slightly more complicated than that ?
I thought Riis has admitted doping
Ullrich i feel was harshly treated as there was no solid evidence
Virenque is a bit complicated
It is straight forward, either you doped or you didnt.
If a person tests positive they doped. If they didnt they didnt. If you admit it you doped.
Sky have tested positive, they are clean.
You have a serious case of "Fanboyitis" The only cure is for you to wake up and face reality.
Yes im biased, i admit that freely
If a Sky rider fails a drugs test then i will retract my previous statements.
Until then (which i hope is never) i will believe in my team and riders.
Wiggins is one of my heroes and i will defend him.
Armstrong was one of my heroes. I never believed he doped. Until his team mates started saying otherwise. I now believe Armstrong doped. I am willing to change my mind if there is compelling well founded evidence
Well I hope for you that you don't get too disappointed if/when it happens. I like Wiggo too, his TT is not too surprising, he's certainly worked on his climbing so his improvements aren't that shocking. Most people usually lose on one thing to improve in an other though. |
| |
|
|
| CLURPR |
Posted on 09-07-2012 17:34
|
Domestique
Posts: 452
Joined: 19-01-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Alakagom wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
CLURPR wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
Likkivi wrote:
Took this from another site:
Gert Leinders, Sky,s Team Dr Has an "Interesting" History.
Forums elswhere are buzzing with incredulity at whats going on and the desciption "UK Postal" is geting used and it most certainly aint a compliment. ....and then we have this little revelation : "Leinders was team doctor for Sigma, Histor, Panasonic and Lotto before becoming team doctor for Rabobank in 1996. He left Rabobank in 2009 citing 'dissatisfaction with the policies of the new management of the cycling team'.
According to Rabobank one of those new policies bought in between 2007 and July 2009 was a 'zero tolerance' attitude to doping, a policy that followed an internal investigation into the use of doping within the team during the period Leinders was the team doctor, an investigation that was triggered by Michael Rasmussen’s expulsion from the Tour de France"
There's the evidence.
I noticed this argument stands alone. It's settled.
Now it's just a question of time before it leads to a ban.
Stop being an idiot, just because a doctor with doping history is on the team doesn't mean you have evidence. Keep your mouth shut from now on about banning Team Sky unless you have a positive test for me to look at
I see you have no counter argument so you get angry instead. Don't worry. That's normal.
But it doesn't change the fact of this time line.
Geert Leinders at Rabobank = Rasmussen kicked out of Tour
Geert Leinders stops at Rabobank = All Rabobank riders start declining
Geert Leinders at Sky: Froome out of nothing dominates Vuelta and Tour
Rasmussen missed a test, did not have a positive test
All Rabo rider decline what?
Have you seen Rabobank in this Tour?
Clearly lacking a hint of Geert.
What are you on about ?
They were unlucky to be involved in crashes.
Nothing to do with doctor
+1 Alakagom, clearly this guy hasn't been watching the Tour properly else he would have known. I mean come on Leinders isn't that powerful to stop their entire team being involved in crashes repeatedly is he? |
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
