Sky - gaming the system?

[Hot Flatus]

Im not surprised you think what you think given your blatant lack of knowledge.

Wiggins wasn't cleared by WADA. Wiggins wasn't investigated by WADA. Wiggins was investigated by UKAD.

UKAD did not clear Wiggins. UKAD abandoned their investigation saying they could not clear Wiggins because they could not get the information needed. UKAD cited obstruction and evasion by Team Sky at every turn.

WADA's response was to start talking about totally banning the drugs abused by Wiggins and used to win races.

Bźzzzźzzzzzzzźzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Exit Stage Left]

Still lots of noise, but no bite.

[Cudzoziemiec]

I've got one as a pub bike. It's my Pintarello.

I've got one of the Scandium/Carbon frames from the late 90s, as ridden by Jan Ullrich. It featured in a short film I did about volunteers and the LEL in 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ4Y2fx3rtU

That was the high point of post 'Gamesmakers' voluntarism, inspired by the success of Wiggins, Farah et al. It was inevitable that there would be a backlash against Sir Brad and Sir Dave at some point. It's not as marked as the backlash against Riis, Ullrich and Deutsche Telecom, but that was more justified.

I listened to a US time-trialling podcast about Michael Broadwith's End to End record, and how it reflected a purer type of cycling than the Pro scene. The 'dot-watching' sub-culture reflects that, but it strikes me that fatalities have had an impact there.

There's plenty to question in Sky's approach, especially the disparity in the resources they employ. But they were effective in garnering more interest in cycle sport. The pinnacle in naive enthusiasm is an expensive Pinarello. But other brands have always had more cachet, mainly Colnago. I'd certainly rather have one than a Pinarello if I was into the 'retro' scene, but I've got a Raleigh Record Ace that would do for that.

There comes a point where the negative impact of doing down Sky outweighs their peccadilloes. For me, that was passed when Wiggins and Froome were cleared by WADA.

I also have a special bike to ride if I feel like drinking vermouth. It's a Cinzanelli.

[Tail End Charlie]

I've got a bike to ride when I've had too much to drink.

It's a dribble.

[Hot Flatus]

Still lots of noise, but no bite.

Not really. What you refer to as 'noise' is the sound of somebody putting paid to your bullshit.

Your only response is to try to goad.

I've been reading your pretentious faux-intellectual waffle for years but frankly I thought that you could do better than this.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Is the heat making you folk hot under the collar?

[Exit Stage Left]

Ideas of 'fairness' in pro-cycling are a social construct. 'Society' within YACF is largely middle class, Southern English, with a bias towards the public sector and Left politics.

That's not the profile of the professional peloton, so there's an inherent clash between the reality of pro cycling, and the expectations of YACF about it.

Sky's an interesting case, because it's a politically incorrect entity by YACF standards, and that has congruence with the hostility in the peloton to the way that Sky buys success.

I don't look for 'fairness' in spectacles such as the Tour de France, and I'm a bit perplexed by those who do. But I'm not, middle-class, don't work in the public sector and live in Southern England. I might think differently if I did.

[Hot Flatus]

fwap fwap fwap

[Exit Stage Left]

Sky are very much gaming the Tour de France system by turning up without a sprinter, pure climber or white jersey contender. They can sit on the front without any other ambition than GC.

They were pretty naive in 2012, when they had Cav and Wiggo, leaving the other teams scrabbling for crumbs.

[Hot Flatus]

Still, the massive doses of Cortisone made up for that naivety, eh 

[Exit Stage Left]

It will always be difficult to know if the alleged unauthorised cortisone use at the Criterium Dauphine in 2011 could have set Wiggins up for a Tour win, as he crashed out of the Tour that year.
 
Cavendish joined in 2012, giving Sky a fall-back option, if Wiggins's run of bad luck continued. I always felt that Cav's win on the Champs Elysee determined the Olympic road race, with the GB team having to make all the pace.

The current focus on GC will enable Froome to dispense largesse to other teams, and strengthen his status as patron. Having so many national TT champions will enable Sky to build alliances.

[Hot Flatus]

Who knows what happened to the 55 doses of Kenacort ordered in by Team Sky. We'll never know because the records mysteriously disappeared. Sky even tried citing doctor-patient confidentiality during UKAD's investigation...such is Team Sky's devotion to ethical behaviour.

Funny thing that. A record of 55 doses of Kenacort being ordered, but no record of Fluimucil.

Still, Wiggins had a great year in 2012 though, didn't he. Win pretty much everything he entered.

Can't have been Kenacort though because you can't keep up long-term usage of it without serious damage. If Wiggins total domination in 2012 was due to Kenacort he couldn't have continued that into successive years and we'd have seen him disappear from the highest level of road cycling.

[Exit Stage Left]

Apart from his Hour record at the age of 35, and his fifth Olympic Gold Medal at the age of 36 of course.

Edit, I'd forgotten the world TT championship in 2104.

[Hot Flatus]

Two track events, and at his previous level before his sudden
but incredibly short lived total domination on the road.

Where are his WT road victories? One year wonder. Can't keep doing the Kenacort...

[Exit Stage Left]

Apart from his fourth at the 2009 Tour, later promoted to third. Five years at the highest level, punctuated by injury, is a pretty solid record, even ignoring his Olympic medals.

[mattc]

I see Gerry Thomas is promoting helmet compulsion. So that's 2 out of 3 SKY tour winners.

I'm sure Flatus will join me in condemning these idiots 

[sojournermike]

I see Gerry Thomas is promoting helmet compulsion. So that's 2 out of 3 SKY tour winners.

I'm sure Flatus will join me in condemning these idiots 

Be nice to have agreement about the place;)

[Hot Flatus]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/bradley-wiggins-lance-armstrong-was-perfect-tour-de-france-winner/

I wonder if in a few years time we will look back on this as a step towards Wiggins telling the truth about his own miracle year.

[hubner]

Wiggins is a grade 1 dickhead and drugs cheat, same as Armstrong.

[Hot Flatus]

Any proof of that?

How very dare you!

[Hot Flatus]

Wiggins is a grade 1 dickhead and drugs cheat, same as Armstrong.

Wiggins has a new book out, hence hitting the media circus hard. Not everybody is willing to give him a free ride...

https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/paul-kimmage-sir-wiggo-gets-back-to-brass-necks-37489358.html

[CrazyEnglishTriathlete]

Wiggins is a grade 1 dickhead and drugs cheat, same as Armstrong.

Wiggins has a new book out, hence hitting the media circus hard. Not everybody is willing to give him a free ride...

https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/paul-kimmage-sir-wiggo-gets-back-to-brass-necks-37489358.html

I think Wiggins has a point.  However much you love or loathe either Mr Wiggins or Mr Armstrong, Lance was in many ways an icon - focused, dedicated, determined, utterly committed.  He did step over the line, in a major way, both in a coordinated program of cheating and deception and by his intimidation of other riders that might expose that cheating and deception. 

That gives observers a binary decision.  You can decided that the faults mean that you write off the individual as totally worthless and disregard any of their achievements, or you can look at them as a flawed character and consider both their strengths and weaknesses.  In these days it might seem counter-cultural to do the latter, but IMHO we have more to learn from the latter approach than the former.

[rafletcher]

This made me smile...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/valverde-i-never-tested-positive/

[Hot Flatus]

Wiggins is a grade 1 dickhead and drugs cheat, same as Armstrong.

Wiggins has a new book out, hence hitting the media circus hard. Not everybody is willing to give him a free ride...

https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/paul-kimmage-sir-wiggo-gets-back-to-brass-necks-37489358.html

I think Wiggins has a point.  However much you love or loathe either Mr Wiggins or Mr Armstrong, Lance was in many ways an icon - focused, dedicated, determined, utterly committed.  He did step over the line, in a major way, both in a coordinated program of cheating and deception and by his intimidation of other riders that might expose that cheating and deception. 

That gives observers a binary decision.  You can decided that the faults mean that you write off the individual as totally worthless and disregard any of their achievements, or you can look at them as a flawed character and consider both their strengths and weaknesses.  In these days it might seem counter-cultural to do the latter, but IMHO we have more to learn from the latter approach than the former.

None of that is at issue.

What is at issue is Wiggins's inconsistency regarding his comments towards Armstrong.

[DuncanM]

Wiggins is a grade 1 dickhead and drugs cheat, same as Armstrong.

Wiggins has a new book out, hence hitting the media circus hard. Not everybody is willing to give him a free ride...

https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/paul-kimmage-sir-wiggo-gets-back-to-brass-necks-37489358.html

I think Wiggins has a point.  However much you love or loathe either Mr Wiggins or Mr Armstrong, Lance was in many ways an icon - focused, dedicated, determined, utterly committed.  He did step over the line, in a major way, both in a coordinated program of cheating and deception and by his intimidation of other riders that might expose that cheating and deception. 

That gives observers a binary decision.  You can decided that the faults mean that you write off the individual as totally worthless and disregard any of their achievements, or you can look at them as a flawed character and consider both their strengths and weaknesses.  In these days it might seem counter-cultural to do the latter, but IMHO we have more to learn from the latter approach than the former.

None of that is at issue.

What is at issue is Wiggins's inconsistency regarding his comments towards Armstrong.

Exactly. Wiggins was someone who painted himself as whiter than white, and one of the ways he did that was by talking trash about dopers. However, since the fancy bears stuff, and the jiffy bag, and all that other controversy, Wiggins' halo has slipped, and now he's not talking trash about dopers any more. Loads of are clearly going to people put 2 and 2 together.

It's great that he has a new book - he's clearly someone who has been obsessed by cycling since a kid, he has all this cool memorabilia, and so he can build some cool stories about the heroes of the sport. And if it's a list of his heroes, one has to accept that if your influences were top 90s cyclists, they were probably EPOers. No-one seems to have a problem with Museeuw (not sure why, maybe it's just because he's not been such a giant arse), but Armstrong is controversial, so if you want to include him, you've got to be aware that what you say will reflect on you. See David Millar's little essay on why he's OK with Valverde winning the worlds for how to apply nuance. If he's just going to claim Armstrong as one of the greats, and ignore all the other stuff, then I can see why people are using it to call him names. I wonder if it's all part of the game - it's all publicity after all. He's also using it to talk back at everyone who had a go over the DCMS report, and again, that's his prerogative, but you can't do that and complain about how you are treated and how your family have been treated. He's the one pulling it back into the public eye. Again.