Sky - gaming the system?

[DuncanM]

This is an interesting article on how you can use world records in track and field to plot use of/testing for drugs:
https://sportsscientists.com/2016/08/world-records-fossils/

[sojournermike]

This is an interesting article on how you can use world records in track and field to plot use of/testing for drugs:
https://sportsscientists.com/2016/08/world-records-fossils/

Yes, Ross is a very good analyst of this stuff. His views on Sky are not that they are clean - any more than other cycle teams of course

[marylogic]

There is a very good website where you can check the status of any medication that you are about take

www.globaldro.com

UK anti-doping advise that you
1 check the status of your medication using the above site
2 if it is prohibited, ask your doctor if there is any alternative that is not prohibited
3. If there is no alternative apply for a TUE

My main concern about retroactive TUEs is that you only have a short time frame in which to get one. Not always easy with the current shortage of GPs

One of my club mates tells a tale of a middling TTer who was randomly tested and returned a positive result due to a cough medicine. He was more troubled by the ignominy rather than the actual ban

[DrMekon]

I take prednisolone pretty regularly (to manage brochiectasis exacerbations) - not that I do anything with testing, but what gap between taking some and competition is required, given it's allowed out of competition but not in comp.

I know you could train super hard on it, come off and spend a less than week all tearful and tired, and get a massive bounce from the adaptation.

[Hot Flatus]

Here's what Wiggins had to say, today, about 'marginal gains':

"I think it’s a load of rubbish, if I'm honest. I do. A lot of people made a lot of money out of it and David Brailsford used it constantly as his calling card. But I always thought it was a load of rubbish"

"It's a bit like the whole chimp thing," Wiggins added in reference to 'The Chimp Paradox', a book by psychiatrist Steve Peters who formerly worked with Team Sky.

  I think we had a couple of suckers right here on this thread.

http://www.eurosport.co.uk/cycling/blazin-saddles-bradley-wiggins-slams-rubbish-marginal-gains_sto6106372/story.shtml

[DrMekon]

Here's what Wiggins had to say, today, about 'marginal gains':

"I think it’s a load of rubbish, if I'm honest. I do. A lot of people made a lot of money out of it and David Brailsford used it constantly as his calling card. But I always thought it was a load of rubbish"

"It's a bit like the whole chimp thing," Wiggins added in reference to 'The Chimp Paradox', a book by psychiatrist Steve Peters who formerly worked with Team Sky.

  I think we had a couple of suckers right here on this thread.

http://www.eurosport.co.uk/cycling/blazin-saddles-bradley-wiggins-slams-rubbish-marginal-gains_sto6106372/story.shtml

I hate to agree with Wiggins, but on this occasion I think he on to something.

Can anyone find reference to the research Prof Peters has done? I do some work with consultant psychiatrists, and my sense if that it's common not to have evidence for why stuff works. From what little of his stuff that I have read, it's a shame if he hasn't worked closely with colleagues in Sheffield, as they've done some interesting work on emotion regulation, and understand the mechanisms behind it.

All the management and consultancy stuff - makes him look like a glorified lifestyle coach.Still, I am sure he falls asleep on piles of cash, and doesn't care.

[Hot Flatus]

So does Brailsford...

[mattc]

So does Brailsford...

You know what? I'm beginning to suspect you're not a Brailsford fan.

[rob]

I chatted to a sports psychologist last year who said the chimp theory was nicked from Freud and just presented in a different way.

In the radio documentary that Victoria Pendleton did a couple of years back Wiggins clearly said he didn't work with Peters or go along with his theory.   Other riders said he worked wonders with them.

[mzjo]

Yeah, keeping people alive seems a good reason! Unfortunately it seems it doesn't always work. 

There are numerous surveys of track and field athletes that lead to some quite alarming conclusions. In one, something like half or more of those surveyed said they would take a substance that was:

A. Undetectable
B. Would guarantee a (Olympic) gold medal
C. Would (significantly) shorten their life expectancy

I don't think for one second that track and field athletes are any different to those in other sports. Indeed the financial rewards are far greater and the lack of effective testing more obvious outside of athletics.

Another anonymous survey, again reproduced on more than one occasion, suggests that between 25% and 45% of athletes will admit to illegal doping. I suspect there is some reluctance to admit even in an anonymous survey, so these numbers probably understate the prevalence.

It would seem that individuals are making, or having to make, the choices in any case. That does change the nature of sport from one of competition on the field to one of risk acceptance and genetic response to doping approaches. It doesn't necessarily harm the spectacle of course.

Smoking and drinking are not undetectable, guarantee nothing and shorten your life but that doesn't stop ordinary people doping themselves (not to mention "recreational" drugs). Why should athletes be any different to the rest of common humanity (which is why clean sport can't exist without doping testing?

[mzjo]

PBP allegedly has testing. Never seen it happen, but I have never been far away from the back of the field.

I had to throw away the medicine I'd bought in France the previous year (for a sore throat) and buy something much less effective.

When Marie-George Buffet brought in widespread testing following the Festina case the FFCT and cycle-touring events were included in the action. I have never seen or heard of drug-testing in any FFCT event but it would not be unreasonable to expect it in events like the BRA (or PBP). The bigger problem, apart from how it is paid for, is what possible sanction could be imposed, bearing in mind that you don't even need to have a licence from one of the federations to take part in these events and that checking the names of potentially barred riders could be very difficult. Taken further, do you ban someone from riding his bike to work after a doping offence? No licence needed! All of which means that it is unlikely to happen even in events like sportives where there is a proven need for testing.

[DuncanM]

Can anyone find reference to the research Prof Peters has done? I do some work with consultant psychiatrists, and my sense if that it's common not to have evidence for why stuff works. From what little of his stuff that I have read, it's a shame if he hasn't worked closely with colleagues in Sheffield, as they've done some interesting work on emotion regulation, and understand the mechanisms behind it.

All the management and consultancy stuff - makes him look like a glorified lifestyle coach.Still, I am sure he falls asleep on piles of cash, and doesn't care.

The Chimp stuff is not original, and I'm not aware of Steve Peters presenting it as such.  I thought it was a re-packaging of existing ideas, using a simple to understand metaphor. It might be placebo effect, and there might be little to no effectiveness in the general population, but I can fully understand how the techniques he taught athletes could allow them to control their emotions better (if they lacked that ability before talking to Peters), and therefore produce better performances. Wiggins strikes me as someone who already has the mental tools to control and channel their emotions - as such I can see how he thinks that the chimp stuff is all nonsense.
Peters' "appeal to authority" is far greater than that of Brailsford though - he is genuinely a qualified medical doctor, clinical psychiatrist and professor.
Brailsford on the other hand has an MBA, and outside of British Cycling seems to have worked as a salesperson for PlanetX.

[citoyen]

I know of amateur TTers who dope, and there were a couple recently caught and banned since CTT started more regular testing.

Interesting case reported last week:
http://www.cyclist.co.uk/news/2512/british-amateur-cyclist-gets-two-year-ban-after-testing-positive

[Veloman]

Here's what Wiggins had to say, today, about 'marginal gains':

"I think it’s a load of rubbish, if I'm honest. I do. A lot of people made a lot of money out of it and David Brailsford used it constantly as his calling card. But I always thought it was a load of rubbish"
http://www.eurosport.co.uk/cycling/blazin-saddles-bradley-wiggins-slams-rubbish-marginal-gains_sto6106372/story.shtml

Interesting article by Matthew Syed in The Times today commenting on the interview with Wiggins and marginal gains.  He takes a slightly different view regarding how attention to the finer detail of 'stuff' can result in gains.  How significant those gains are will no doubt be the subject of another debate, but I quite like the newer cycling apparel that presumably has only arisen in the pursuit of such marginal gains.

[Hot Flatus]

Of course he does. He's a peddler of the same management bullshit, on the same gravy train as Brailsford with books published and speaking tours. He's a long time hagiographer of Team Sky because he's minting it off the back of the same narrative.

http://www.director.co.uk/2392-matthew-syed-analysing-mistakes-is-key-to-success/

[Veloman]

I have always found the articles by Syed to be unbiased to anyone and if anything he is commenting on Wiggins and not Sky.  I suppose Walsh and Kimmage, who also publish books and do speaking tours, can also be classed as peddling tosh, as could anyone who has a particular viewpoint or can see how a situation in one area can relate to a situation in an unrelated area.

I suppose the fact that most teams seem to have followed the warm down sessions adopted by Sky is no evidence of marginal gains or indeed the development of cycling apparel that others appear to have followed.  Not sure who was the first with those integrated brakes and placing brakes behind the leading edge, but not much evidence of returning to the old days.  I suppose the improvements attributed to Lemond's use of aero helmet and tri-bars had no bearing on his time over Fignon and he would have won by 8s even if he had not used the kit.  Or was it the rear disc wheel and 650c front wheel without disc?  Marginal gains; what a load of tosh!

[Veloman]

I chatted to a sports psychologist last year who said the chimp theory was nicked from Freud and just presented in a different way.

In the radio documentary that Victoria Pendleton did a couple of years back Wiggins clearly said he didn't work with Peters or go along with his theory.   Other riders said he worked wonders with them.

It could be viewed that all subsequent psychologists have nicked stuff from Freud as he has often been referred to as the father of psychology, even though Wundt preceded him in terms of active research.  Same nicking stance with Carl Rogers and cognitive behavioural therapy and neuro-linguistic programming with Bandler and Grinder; rework and different language framing.  Gallwey's 'Inner game of tennis' has marked similarities with the chimp paradox work by Peters, although the subtitle to the chimp paradox was ‘The mind management programme for confidence, success and happiness’ and is based on human behaviour which can be changed by suitable ‘mind coaching’ which was appreciated by the likes of Ronnie O’Sullivan, Pendleton and Hoy to name a few.  But essentially the same as Gallwey and essentially the same as Freud in terms of the ability to understand and change human behaviour.  Not everyone will subscribe to such coaching and Wiggins no doubt was in that category.  I don’t think this is any reflection of Peters.

[Hot Flatus]

I have always found the articles by Syed to be unbiased to anyone and if anything he is commenting on Wiggins and not Sky.  I suppose Walsh and Kimmage, who also publish books and do speaking tours, can also be classed as peddling tosh, as could anyone who has a particular viewpoint or can see how a situation in one area can relate to a situation in an unrelated area.

I suppose the fact that most teams seem to have followed the warm down sessions adopted by Sky is no evidence of marginal gains or indeed the development of cycling apparel that others appear to have followed.  Not sure who was the first with those integrated brakes and placing brakes behind the leading edge, but not much evidence of returning to the old days.  I suppose the improvements attributed to Lemond's use of aero helmet and tri-bars had no bearing on his time over Fignon and he would have won by 8s even if he had not used the kit.  Or was it the rear disc wheel and 650c front wheel without disc?  Marginal gains; what a load of tosh!

Walsh trumpeted the marginal gains mantra, published a load of books for Sky, and now regards Sky as very heavily soiled goods. Why do you think that is?

Kimmage published a book several decades ago. He does not do speaking tours. He mostly writes newspaper articles about sports other than cycling.

Sky did not invent warm downs. In fact Sky did not invent anything. If you want to understand why sports scientists...you know, the people who actually do develop the techniques that result in progress...are so hacked off by Team Sky's crap then have a read of Ross Tucker:

https://www.businesslive.co.za/rdm/sport/2017-03-27-ross-tucker-bradley-wiggins-team-sky-and-the-science-of-marginal-gains/

Lemond won that TT by 58 seconds. That wasn't a marginal gain. Aero bars, helmets, disc wheels have fuck all to do with 'marginal gains'. Team Sky's crap about mattresses, pillows, bringing in a surgeon to show riders how to wash their hands etc etc is just that...crap. 

Meanwhile they couldn't even organise keeping an accurate record of the massive doses of weapons grade steroids they used to get Wiggins onto the podium.

Marginal gains 

[sojournermike]

https://sportsscientists.com/2017/03/sports-science-marginal-gains-common-sense/

This expert talks sense on marginal gains, from a position of personal knowledge and experience

[Hot Flatus]

We watch Team Sky doing a copycat performance of USPS, and when we ask 'how?', we are told its the pineapple juice, fluffy pillows and hand wash 

Turns out it was Triamcinolone.

[Veloman]

Sky did not invent warm downs. In fact Sky did not invent anything.

Ah yes, I seem to remember talk of all the teams doing a warm down on the trainers after the stage that was not very obvious to all as I assume it all took place inside the team bus where they hid the trainers to prevent other folk seeing what they were doing.  Or perhaps it was Sky that actually did warm downs after each stage on the trainers in full view of the public.  Seem to recall some of the TV folk commentating on it when they first did that as it was sufficiently rare that it merited comment.

Comments of Yates in this article by Will Fotheringham , who I realise may be viewed as someone who knows very little about cycling, is interesting regarding the warm-down and post race protocol:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/23/team-sky-tour-de-france-dominance-chris-froome

[Veloman]

If you want to understand why sports scientists...you know, the people who actually do develop the techniques that result in progress...are so hacked off by Team Sky's crap then have a read of Ross Tucker:

https://www.businesslive.co.za/rdm/sport/2017-03-27-ross-tucker-bradley-wiggins-team-sky-and-the-science-of-marginal-gains/

Tucker appears to object to how the tweeks have been reported rather than the process itself as he states “So it was how it was framed — the context more than the concept — that was objectionable.”  Seems that Tucker is a little peeved that all the work he and others have done regarding improving performance has not been recognised and Brailsford’s marginal gains mantra has gained considerable attention.  Great example of ‘sour grapes’.  Marginal gains or sports science, call it what you want, does appear to have some benefit from my observations as I have fine-tuned what I like in my bidon to make the water more palatable and I note this a trend with other folk who ride audax.  So I can understand why some of the changes implemented could be considered as marginal, namely that to all intense and purpose no major revolution and a nuancing of the process.  Rather like sprinters wearing a skin suit during a sprint stage. 

[Hot Flatus]

Triamcinolone.

Enough said.

[Veloman]

Lemond won that TT by 58 seconds. That wasn't a marginal gain. Aero bars, helmets, disc wheels have fuck all to do with 'marginal gains'. Team Sky's crap about mattresses, pillows, bringing in a surgeon to show riders how to wash their hands etc etc is just that...crap. 

May I assume that fine-tuning the position on areobars have nothing to do with performance improvement?  Interesting to contrast how the position of Gilbert compares to the old aero positions and more akin to that developed for Wiggins.  Clear difference between the two positions for the same rider:

http://www.podiumcafe.com/2014/6/5/5781820/ronde-van-belgie-a-patrick-verhoest-gallery

http://www.velonews.com/2017/03/race-report/de-panne-gilbert-wins-overall-kittel-and-durbridge-victorious-on-final-day_434167

Which I assume is due to wind tunnel research to tweek those marginal gains rather than just following fashion.  Rather like the marginal changes to helmet design and ventilation which I assume make no difference whatsoever.

And from what you post I can only assume that Lemond would have still won if he had not been using the aero bars and aero helmet.

[Veloman]

Triamcinolone.

Enough said.

And I assume that if Sky, Brailsford, Wiggins or anyone else for that matter have done something against the rules, illegal or outside what is permitted, they would be facing either legal or sporting sanctions.  However, while there has been much debate on ethics and morality etc, there appears to be a lack of evidence to support such action. Takes us right back to #13 of this thread.