Yet Another Cycling Forum

General Category => Freewheeling => Racing => Topic started by: Bledlow on September 24, 2016, 02:18:32 pm

Title: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Bledlow on September 24, 2016, 02:18:32 pm
Is this what's been going on? Following the rules to the letter, but exploiting the little wrinkles that allow getting away with what might be considered cheating?

Or is that harsh, & Sky is clean as a whistle, & every TUE is absolutely justified?

The number of top cyclists taking medication for asthma is interesting. Is it really well above the rate in the population as a whole or is that a mistaken impression?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 24, 2016, 02:46:29 pm
It would be interesting to see how many TUE requests get rejected.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Kim on September 24, 2016, 02:48:06 pm
The number of top cyclists taking medication for asthma is interesting. Is it really well above the rate in the population as a whole or is that a mistaken impression?

Happens a lot with swimmers, because it's a sport that asthmatics are encouraged to do, and some of them turn out to be really good at it.  Maybe something similar is going on with cycling?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 24, 2016, 03:02:00 pm
Asthma folk being pointed towards swimming is well known. I've never heard of them being pointed towards cycling.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 24, 2016, 03:32:42 pm
The interesting thing is that several ex-pro riders have said that Wiggins use of strong steroid drugs and more importantly when he used them was identical to the protocol they used for doping purposes.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on September 24, 2016, 03:46:16 pm
The number of top cyclists taking medication for asthma is interesting. Is it really well above the rate in the population as a whole or is that a mistaken impression?
rate in Gen Pop ~10%

Rate in ALL SPORTS ~20%

Rate of russians in all sports known to be cheats ~ much higher%  :P
(whom oddly have not been exposed by Operation Fairy Bear)

This is no big deal. But it is a nice bit of mud to throw, for those that reckon mud-slinging is cool.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on September 24, 2016, 09:03:25 pm
I saw an interesting article the other day saying that different athletic events that require breathing heavily through the mouth for prolonged periods can help cause asthma because if you aren't "conditioning" the air through your nose then you are stressing the lungs. So the incidence of asthma in swimming and cycling could be caused by the training required to be elite at these sports.
As for Wiggins' TUEs, they look dodgy from a number of angles. There are lots of different drugs that he could have taken, and the timing looks pretty weird too. That said, the TUE was legitimately granted, so he's not broken any rules...
Cheers
Duncan
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on September 24, 2016, 09:22:08 pm
Is there any evidence he took the drugs or is it a preemptive TUE in case he needed treatment during the event? Any other evidence of needing treatment other than those?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Bledlow on September 24, 2016, 11:21:11 pm
Both Wiggo & his team say he was given injections of the drug covered by the TUEs on each occasion.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 24, 2016, 11:33:12 pm
Wiggo hasn't broken the rules but he has lied - said in his autobiography that he never had injections. And this when Sky had a stated no needles policy. That doesn't look good at all.

Froome, by contrast, has been up front about having used TUEs on two occasions - confirmed by the leak, but nothing else uncovered.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on September 25, 2016, 12:07:39 am
'Except for normal vaccinations' Maybe he was a bit confused by that..
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: bikenrrd on September 25, 2016, 09:32:29 am
Only Wiggo looks dodgy so far.
Also, there hasn't been any data released from cyclists from other nations, so we don't really know how prevalent this type of TUE timing is for other, non-British cyclists.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: rafletcher on September 25, 2016, 09:48:37 am
'Except for normal vaccinations' Maybe he was a bit confused by that..

His "spokesperson" clarified (when the fact of the injections first came out) that he'd meant "no intravenous injections". Apprently.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 09:50:42 am
Interesting interview with him on Andrew Marr show.

No doubt available on BBC iPlayer or whatever it is called.

As MattC stated, easy to throw mud.

Does doing something entirely legal make someone, or an organisation, bad?  Good debate about legality and morality applied to cycling as opposed to taxation!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on September 25, 2016, 09:55:21 am
Only Wiggo looks dodgy so far.

How does he look dodgy? On rare occasions he took a medicine recommended by his doctor and formally permitted by the relevant authorities.

Even if he had taken triamcinolone illegally (which is in no way the case), it would have had a tiny effect on performance. It’s nothing like the oxygen-vector doping of the past, which made a mockery of racing.

I think it’s a disgrace that the Russians have hacked into medical records and confused millions of people about doping by publishing them in this way.

Meanwhile, the use of TUEs in cycling has fallen dramatically over the last few years as the authorities have become stricter with issuing them. This is normal and good, but it doesn’t change the fact that Wiggins was fully permitted to use the substances he used.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on September 25, 2016, 10:25:49 am
Only Wiggo looks dodgy so far.

How does he look dodgy? On rare occasions he took a medicine recommended by his doctor and formally permitted by the relevant authorities.

Even if he had taken triamcinolone illegally (which is in no way the case), it would have had a tiny effect on performance. It’s nothing like the oxygen-vector doping of the past, which made a mockery of racing.

I think it’s a disgrace that the Russians have hacked into medical records and confused millions of people about doping by publishing them in this way.

Meanwhile, the use of TUEs in cycling has fallen dramatically over the last few years as the authorities have become stricter with issuing them. This is normal and good, but it doesn’t change the fact that Wiggins was fully permitted to use the substances he used.
Well said.
Fully permitted, openly stated to the authorities and monitored.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 01:21:38 pm
It's dodgy as fuck.

His own doctor from Garmin days is basically saying WTF. St David of Millar is saying WTF. But again, several ex riders are saying the pattern of use and the timings mirrored their own abuse of this drug for performance gains.

It stinks. The really stinky bit is the granting of TUEs of a substance known to be a super effective PED. Did Wiggins need it for medical reasons? His former doctor says he would never have prescribed it.

I heard rumours a few years back that Sky abuse the TUE system to allow PED use. I don't find this news contradicting that rumour.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on September 25, 2016, 01:30:22 pm
It stinks. The really stinky bit is the granting of TUEs of a substance known to be a super effective PED. Did Wiggins need it for medical reasons? His former doctor says he would never have prescribed it.

I heard rumours a few years back that Sky abuse the TUE system to allow PED use. I don't find this news contradicting that rumour.
and I'm sure that his FORMER doctor is entirely impartial on the subject :P I have opinions on how clean/dirty certain riders are, so do you; we're not impartial either.

Rumours schmumours. Whatever. You cant disprove rumours, just as you cant prove a negative.

You have to have some system of rules - or just give up and allow uncontrolled drug use. FanA or ForumUserB says "its dodgy as fuck" isnt a basis for enforcement, sorry.

Until a rider is proven guilty of breaking a rule, it's all just mud.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Sergeant Pluck on September 25, 2016, 01:43:24 pm
I am sure I’m not alone in feeling some sort of reluctance to take the obvious on board here. It’s a great story, now somewhat sullied :-(

My view: it was taken as a PED and not as an asthma treatment*

Have a read at the usual indications for use of IM triamcinolone (typically, severe “difficult” asthma, patients who are in and out of hospital for management).

*Even if he didn’t break any written rules.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 01:45:36 pm
Quite
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 01:50:38 pm
It stinks. The really stinky bit is the granting of TUEs of a substance known to be a super effective PED. Did Wiggins need it for medical reasons? His former doctor says he would never have prescribed it.

I heard rumours a few years back that Sky abuse the TUE system to allow PED use. I don't find this news contradicting that rumour.
and I'm sure that his FORMER doctor is entirely impartial on the subject :P I have opinions on how clean/dirty certain riders are, so do you; we're not impartial either.

Rumours schmumours. Whatever. You cant disprove rumours, just as you cant prove a negative.

You have to have some system of rules - or just give up and allow uncontrolled drug use. FanA or ForumUserB says "its dodgy as fuck" isnt a basis for enforcement, sorry.

Until a rider is proven guilty of breaking a rule, it's all just mud.

I'm not convinced you have much of a handle on this matt.

There is a 'system of rules' but as we know from Armstrong's backdated TUE after testing positive, UCI's attempt to bury Contador's clen pozzy, Froome's 'fast-tracked' TUE, Armistead's 3 missed tests and suddenly-reversal-of-automatic-ban-so-that-she-could-ride-the-Olympics,  the enforcement of these rules depends on who you are.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 01:54:59 pm
..... the granting of TUEs of a substance known to be a super effective PED. ........

Super effective PED?

Compared to what? Aspirin? EPO? Or super effective when compared to blood doping?

Did he have just one injection before the 3 week race?  If it was that good that it could be super effective over the 3 weeks, and it is legal to take, then I'm amazed that everyman and his dog is not having a quick jab of this stuff.

Interesting article by David Walsh in the Sunday Times today on the matter.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 02:01:30 pm
What makes you think everyman and his dog would be granted a TUE?

If you want to know more see what David Millar and Jorg Jakcse have to say...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on September 25, 2016, 02:07:37 pm
I'm not convinced you have much of a handle on this matt.

There is a 'system of rules' but as we know from Armstrong's backdated TUE after testing positive, UCI's attempt to bury Contador's clen pozzy, Froome's 'fast-tracked' TUE, Armistead's 3 missed tests and suddenly-reversal-of-automatic-ban-so-that-she-could-ride-the-Olympics,  the enforcement of these rules depends on who you are.
I believe Armstrong n Contador were banned and lost TdeF titles. The system isnt perfect (of course) but it is there. Riders dope, some get caught (what's new?).

Throwing mud at your favourite dodgy rider based on your view of how other riders were treated is at best just gossip. It could be viewed as sour grapes, but I wouldnt like to accuse you of that.

The number of TUEs is dropping rapidly, which some would see as a good thing; or you could just keep slinging mud. Your choice!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 02:15:23 pm
Cognitive dissonance, Matt.

Tell me what has changed in cycling such that the favoritism meted out to current big name cash cow riders, is somehow different to the favoritism meted out to Armstrong and Contador. Remember too that the UCI did everything they could to hinder the prosecution of Armstrong and Contador.

It's not black and white, Matt.  It's shades of grey, and I'm sure you'd be the first to acknowledge that you struggle with that.  :demon:
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 02:16:31 pm
What makes you think everyman and his dog would be granted a TUE?

If you want to know more see what David Millar and Jorg Jakcse have to say...

Are you suggesting that Wiggins/Sky received favourable treatment and other riders with record od medication needs for asthma would not have been able to obtain a TUE?  If so state it.

I've read the opinions of the folk you refer to and also read what Walsh has to say on the matter.

Now, back to my question which you have conveniently sidestepped, evidence for 'super effective PED' and compared to what?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 02:22:44 pm
See previous reply. There have been many examples of top riders receiving favorable treatment with regards to PED use. I don't believe this has stopped just because British riders are now at the top, a British man is in charge of the UCI, and another Brit heads WADA.

For information on Wiggins choice of steroid see Miller's description.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on September 25, 2016, 02:31:48 pm
MattC is right. There is an awful lot of mud slinging going on, not least by the BBC, which is very disappointing. I've just listened to 20 minutes on 5Live where the BBC put up as many people as they could to sling mud, and no-one to put the alternative view. I heard David Walsh saying "I believe...", "I suspect..." "In my opinion..."; no facts, just suspicion and innuendo.

TUEs are not just handed out by team doctors, the UCI or Wada, but have to be approved by independent medical professionals based on tests and examinations. Sky have abided by these rules.

Flaatus - what was Armtrsong's backdated TUE (they only came into effect in 2005)?

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 02:49:25 pm
Sorry, you are correct, it predates the TUE system. It was a backdated prescription given to him after he tested positive for cortisone in 99. Armstrong alleges the president of the UCI enabled it.

But no. It's not just mud slinging.  It is informed comment from people involved in the sport. If you triangulate what Millar, Steffen and Jaksche are saying it really doesn't look good.

Wiggins's own statements are unconvincing. Prior to the hack release he claimed never having had injections other than vaccinations. Now we find he's whacked a fuck load of PEDS prior to riding GTS. 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Gareth Rees on September 25, 2016, 03:06:04 pm
It seems likely that there's a selection process at work here — if asthmatic cyclists are the only ones who can legitimately use steroids, then we can expect to find a lot of asthmatic cyclists at the elite end of the sport. This could well have been an unconscious process rather than a deliberate strategy, but who knows? There are a lot of people in the sport who are cynical enough to have spotted the opportunity.

(As an asthmatic cyclist myself, I sympathize, but since I don't race I can just keep the intensity low enough to avoid having to cough up buckets of mucus out of my lungs after every ride.)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 03:34:06 pm
See .......... etc

I.ve read Miller's comments and note the medication is available to all riders via a TUE if required and neither Wiggins or Sky broke any rules and WADA did not express any concern.

Of course, there will always be those who do not believe that man landed on the moon or such like and conspiracy theory will abound.

Do you think Wiggins should relinquish his TdF title?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 03:42:49 pm
See .......... etc

I.ve read Miller's comments and note the medication is available to all riders via a TUE if required and neither Wiggins or Sky broke any rules and WADA did not express any concern.

Of course, there will always be those who do not believe that man landed on the moon or such like and conspiracy theory will abound.

Do you think Wiggins should relinquish his TdF title?

I find your faith in sporting governing bodies rather quaint.
Equally, I don't doubt that you hold all those conspiracy theorists that doubted Lance Armstrong, in equal contempt.

Of course, there will always be those who have a Pavlovian response to a British flag.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 25, 2016, 03:49:00 pm
It is a bit too early to find out if somebody is doping/ gaming the system. Isn't the statute of limitations eight years?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 25, 2016, 04:00:46 pm
The problem with Wiggo is not that he broke the rules but that his statements have a ring of "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" about them.

Or, worse, a ring of "I never tested positive".

There's a big difference between the revelations about Froome, which go no further than confirming what we knew already, and the revelations about Wiggo, which show that he has been disingenuous, if not an outright liar.

Anyone who is not concerned by this because he didn't break the letter of the law is beyond naive.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 25, 2016, 04:15:42 pm
It seems likely that there's a selection process at work here — if asthmatic cyclists are the only ones who can legitimately use steroids, then we can expect to find a lot of asthmatic cyclists at the elite end of the sport. This could well have been an unconscious process rather than a deliberate strategy, but who knows?

Interesting idea. Professional sport is certainly cynical enough that it could be possible.

I don't have chronic asthma myself but I've experienced exercise induced asthma a few times - most notably at the end of a triathlon a couple of years ago when I'd really pushed myself too hard. Based on my experience, I find it fairly easy to believe that perfectly healthy cyclists with no history of asthma can discover they are susceptible to asthma attacks under the extreme duress of racing conditions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 25, 2016, 04:37:06 pm
On rare occasions he took a medicine recommended by his doctor and formally permitted by the relevant authorities.

It's worth noting that the particular drug isn't tested for out of competition, so no TUE would be sought. I'm not suggesting that Wiggo did use the drug on other occasions, only that we wouldn't know about it if he did.

Quote
I think it’s a disgrace that the Russians have hacked into medical records

Agreed, but again, I'd go back to what I said about Froome - there have been no new revelations about him, suggesting that he has been fully transparent as he has claimed. Whereas the revelations about Wiggo are not only new, they contradict things he has said in the past. This isn't rumour or mud-slinging, it's a simple observation of facts. And given the history of the sport, I think it's fair to be concerned by the revelations.

Quote
Wiggins was fully permitted to use the substances he used.

True, but it's not the legality of his use that's being questioned, it's why that particular drug (a known PED) at that particular time (just before the Tour) - mainly because it follows a known pattern of use for non-medicinal reasons. Legal or not, that is disappointing.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 04:52:36 pm
......... Of course, there will always be those who have a Pavlovian response to a British flag.

OK, I'll try again.  Do you think Wiggins should relinquish his TdF title?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 05:04:28 pm
What makes you think I should answer every question you pose? Especially when phrased in such a patronising manner.

I think as far as the concept of clean sport is concerned, all GT winners should relinquish their titles. That doesn't mean that I don't watch the races....but I have the background knowledge to know that what I am watching is a circus.

Think of pro cycling as akin to WWE Wrestling, and you'll be about there.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 05:26:41 pm
Well if you think he cheated then I assume you would wish to see his title go to someone else, but you can't bring yourself to answer a simple question. A life in politics awaits you.

Also, past experience suggests that doping was not restricted to GT winners but also to those supporting those who won. So I assume if you condemn all GT winners then you must also be condemning quite a few other cyclists who have never won anything but simply worked for a team leader.

Quite cynical and appalling stereotyping IMO which I'm sure you would argue against if such a stance was to be directed against folk in other walks of life.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 25, 2016, 05:32:17 pm
With professional cycling in the past few decades, it has been more accurate to assume doped, unless shown otherwise, for 'surprisingly good performances'. When do you think we should swap that approach back to 'innocent unless proven guilty'?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 05:35:46 pm
Also, past experience suggests that doping was not restricted to GT winners but also to those supporting those who won.


Quite cynical and appalling stereotyping IMO which I'm sure you would argue against if such a stance was to be directed against folk in other walks of life.

The only thing that doesn't make those two statements contradictory is your implication that doping only took place in the past.

So what's changed? A Brit in charge of WADA and another one in charge of UCI (who's son works for Sky)?

Move along, nothing to see here.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 05:49:06 pm
Still no answer!

The "move along ......" comment is very apposite to the whole story in many ways as the use was justified by UCI and WADA. Of course, conspiracy theorists will say the British folk in positions of authority were 'bent' and turned a blind eye, but hardly supported by evidence.

I believe John Fahey was WADA boss in 2012. Australian I believe.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 06:07:22 pm
To be blunt, the questions you pose which remain unanswered do so because they are facile, and really don't merit an answer.  I'm beginning to suspect that perhaps, like mattc, you struggle with nuance, and need a more binary paradigm. 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on September 25, 2016, 06:32:00 pm
With professional cycling in the past few decades, it has been more accurate to assume doped, unless shown otherwise, for 'surprisingly good performances'. When do you think we should swap that approach back to 'innocent unless proven guilty'?
Whenever you want to. Or never, if you prefer.   

It makes no difference to how sport actually works. There may be shades of grey in riders' morals, ethics, or degrees of cheating. (In fact I'm certain there are - happy Flatus??)

But the races depend on simple facts. Who won? One rider per race. Did he/she cheat? Yes or no.  That is it.

Within that system you cant have "hans probably cheated", becuase then you don't have a winner. Even if EVERYONE thinks that Hans Probably Cheated, until it's proven - under whatever current system is in place - he keeps his race wins.


If Dave/James/etc are all convinced that nearly everyone is cheating well ...  fine ... you may well be right ... but so what? We're unlikely to find out actually during any race EXACTLY how much dope any rider is on - let alone ALL the riders. So what does it add to our enjopyment of the race? It's an open question.  The sport seems very different to WWE in that respect, cos all the cheating is there in front of the camera for us in WWE!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 25, 2016, 06:42:54 pm
Still no answer!

When the questions are so fatuous...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 07:07:20 pm
Question is simple. If folk believe what Wiggins did was cheating, then do they believe he should be stripped of his title?

Fatuous, facile or whatever you want to say, the fact remains there seems little appetite to answer a simple question regarding the use of what some consider to be a PED rather than medication.

I can't understand why there is such reluctance to answer a very simple question.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: rob on September 25, 2016, 07:12:03 pm
Interesting piece by David Walsh in the Sunday Times.   Worth a read.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 07:14:29 pm
Interesting piece by David Walsh in the Sunday Times.   Worth a read.

See #22 on p1 of thread.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Bledlow on September 25, 2016, 07:15:14 pm
There is a 'system of rules' but as we know from Armstrong's backdated TUE after testing positive, UCI's attempt to bury Contador's clen pozzy, Froome's 'fast-tracked' TUE, Armistead's 3 missed tests and suddenly-reversal-of-automatic-ban-so-that-she-could-ride-the-Olympics,  the enforcement of these rules depends on who you are.
Except that one of Armitstead's missed tests was accepted as having been missed by the UCI official, not her: she was available & where she was supposed to be. And one of the other two was a filing error not a true missed test. So she missed two (one on a technicality).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 25, 2016, 07:21:21 pm
I can't understand why there is such reluctance to answer a very simple question.

And you suggest others would be well suited to a career in politics.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 07:23:23 pm
Except that one of Armitstead's missed tests was accepted as having been missed by the UCI official, not her: she was available & where she was supposed to be. And one of the other two was a filing error not a true missed test. So she missed two (one on a technicality).

As the media I used to work with used to say "never let fact get in the way of a good story!" And don't forget the UCI are all corrupt etc etc etc ......
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 07:25:32 pm
I can't understand why there is such reluctance to answer a very simple question.

And you suggest others would be well suited to a career in politics.

What question do you want answering?

I'm quite happy to answer questions on the topic. Others appear to skirt around the issue and avoid stating whether they believe Wiggins should be stripped of title.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on September 25, 2016, 07:33:57 pm
With professional cycling in the past few decades, it has been more accurate to assume doped, unless shown otherwise, for 'surprisingly good performances'. When do you think we should swap that approach back to 'innocent unless proven guilty'?

Just a few decades?   

Personally, I can't see any professional sport ever being 'clean'.  It's a pipedream.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 25, 2016, 07:35:58 pm
I suspect more information will come out over time about how some Sky riders have got unexpected improvements in performance. After that, questions about whether Wiggo should keep his TdF would become much easier to answer.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 25, 2016, 07:37:42 pm
With professional cycling in the past few decades, it has been more accurate to assume doped, unless shown otherwise, for 'surprisingly good performances'. When do you think we should swap that approach back to 'innocent unless proven guilty'?

Just a few decades?   

Personally, I can't see any professional sport ever being 'clean'.  It's a pipedream.

I've not seen anything that would suggest Lemond's TdF wins weren't clean. I can't say that about the winners since then.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 07:46:40 pm
There is a fair bit of the old Pavlovian dogmatic response to Rule Britannia, going on here.

There are none so blind as those that will not see...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 07:54:57 pm
Not at all. You assume I am British, assume I have loyalty to Britain, Sky or Wiggins, and assume I will respond in a particular way.

Surprising that a simple question will be avoided.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: bikenrrd on September 25, 2016, 08:10:19 pm
Of course Wiggins shouldn't relinquish his Tour de France title, as he hasn't done anything outside of the rules.  Still dodgy, but within the rules.

Whereas Armstrong did lots outside of the rules but I, personally, don't think he should relinquish his titles either.  The UCI obviously don't know what to do with those years either, hence the strikethrough in the official records.

If it turns out that Wiggins has done more than apply the rules to his advantage then his tour title should have the same status as Armstrong's.

However, if Sky have merely pushed the rules right up to the (blue) line then they have not done anything untoward.  We also need to see the TUEs of riders on other teams before casting too many aspersions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on September 25, 2016, 08:50:32 pm
I suspect more information will come out over time about how some Sky riders have got unexpected improvements in performance. After that, questions about whether Wiggo should keep his TdF would become much easier to answer.

What, you mean like Wiggo's big improvement when he rode for Garmin? 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on September 25, 2016, 09:12:18 pm
I thought that Sky were keen on the aggregation of marginal gains. I'd have been surprised if they didn't push the rules as far as they would go.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 09:14:12 pm
Not at all. You assume I am British, assume I have loyalty to Britain, Sky or Wiggins, and assume I will respond in a particular way.

Surprising that a simple question will be avoided.

It's a pretty fair bet
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 09:20:22 pm
So how money do you wish to bet?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 09:45:14 pm
So you are claiming you aren't British and have no allegiance to Britain.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 09:47:28 pm
How much you want to bet?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on September 25, 2016, 09:52:52 pm
I suspect more information will come out over time about how some Sky riders have got unexpected improvements in performance. After that, questions about whether Wiggo should keep his TdF would become much easier to answer.

What, you mean like Wiggo's big improvement when he rode for Garmin? 

Coupled with leaving the track and pushing the same watts but with 10kg less? 

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 09:59:38 pm
How much you want to bet?

Ever sworn allegiance to the Queen?

Thought so.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on September 25, 2016, 10:04:55 pm
It seems likely that there's a selection process at work here — if asthmatic cyclists are the only ones who can legitimately use steroids, then we can expect to find a lot of asthmatic cyclists at the elite end of the sport. This could well have been an unconscious process rather than a deliberate strategy, but who knows? There are a lot of people in the sport who are cynical enough to have spotted the opportunity.

(As an asthmatic cyclist myself, I sympathize, but since I don't race I can just keep the intensity low enough to avoid having to cough up buckets of mucus out of my lungs after every ride.)


Diagnosed asthma is very significantly over represented in the most successful populations of elite sportspeople - I use that phrase rather than asthmatics, although clearly some are the latter also. That is not consistent with the impact of asthma on respiratory capability and it's an important question to ask whether the drugs are leveling the playing field above the norm for both those with childhood induced asthma and those with later onset exercise induced/identified asthma.

One question I think is worth pondering is whether it is reasonable to allow someone to use drug treatment to increase their athletic potential beyond the natural genetic limitations they face - this may be asthma, or just wanting more respiratory capacity and less fatigue/faster recovery, but it might also apply to the lady with naturally low haematocrit and her EPO TUE or the low testosterone 'sufferer' and his testosterone TUE etc etc. What about the intersex athletes competing in the female classes?

The public media image is that sport is about natural talent and hard work. Using drugs to 'level the playing field' does not enter into that equation. Sorry, but I'm no world champion either. Genetics matter.

Personally, I've become jaundiced in my view of Team Sky, British Cycling and British Sport in general. The fawning nationalism of the Olympics did nothing to dispel my doubts and cynicism. Wiggin's TUE does nothing to make me feel more comfortable, but looks very confirmatory. Asking the Times to criticise Team Sky seems a long stretch, given its ownership, and I wonder whether they are hanging Wiggins out to dry, while trying to protect Sky, British Cycling and the rest. Maybe, they'll upset Wiggins enough for him to tell a whole lot more.


I'm sure LW&B can add something of greater value and real knowledge to this.

Mike


Edited to add - read up on Alberto Salazar and the Nike Oregon Project for some background in a non-cycling field.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on September 25, 2016, 10:07:20 pm
See .......... etc

I.ve read Miller's comments and note the medication is available to all riders via a TUE if required and neither Wiggins or Sky broke any rules and WADA did not express any concern.

Of course, there will always be those who do not believe that man landed on the moon or such like and conspiracy theory will abound.

Do you think Wiggins should relinquish his TdF title?

I find your faith in sporting governing bodies rather quaint.
Equally, I don't doubt that you hold all those conspiracy theorists that doubted Lance Armstrong, in equal contempt.

Of course, there will always be those who have a Pavlovian response to a British flag.


Indeed, it took one Lord Coe to get a grip on doping in athletics, after his role at FIFA of course
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on September 25, 2016, 10:09:41 pm
What makes you think I should answer every question you pose? Especially when phrased in such a patronising manner.

I think as far as the concept of clean sport is concerned, all GT winners should relinquish their titles. That doesn't mean that I don't watch the races....but I have the background knowledge to know that what I am watching is a circus.

Think of pro cycling sport as akin to WWE Wrestling, and you'll be about there.

Corrected for you
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 25, 2016, 10:12:58 pm
It seems likely that there's a selection process at work here — if asthmatic cyclists are the only ones who can legitimately use steroids, then we can expect to find a lot of asthmatic cyclists at the elite end of the sport. This could well have been an unconscious process rather than a deliberate strategy, but who knows? There are a lot of people in the sport who are cynical enough to have spotted the opportunity.

(As an asthmatic cyclist myself, I sympathize, but since I don't race I can just keep the intensity low enough to avoid having to cough up buckets of mucus out of my lungs after every ride.)


Diagnosed asthma is very significantly over represented in the most successful populations of elite sportspeople - I use that phrase rather than asthmatics, although clearly some are the latter also. That is not consistent with the impact of asthma on respiratory capability and it's an important question to ask whether the drugs are leveling the playing field above the norm for both those with childhood induced asthma and those with later onset exercise induced/identified asthma.

One question I think is worth pondering is whether it is reasonable to allow someone to use drug treatment to increase their athletic potential beyond the natural genetic limitations they face - this may be asthma, or just wanting more respiratory capacity and less fatigue/faster recovery, but it might also apply to the lady with naturally low haematocrit and her EPO TUE or the low testosterone 'sufferer' and his testosterone TUE etc etc. What about the intersex athletes competing in the female classes?

The public media image is that sport is about natural talent and hard work. Using drugs to 'level the playing field' does not enter into that equation. Sorry, but I'm no world champion either. Genetics matter.

Personally, I've become jaundiced in my view of Team Sky, British Cycling and British Sport in general. The fawning nationalism of the Olympics did nothing to dispel my doubts and cynicism. Wiggin's TUE does nothing to make me feel more comfortable, but looks very confirmatory. Asking the Times to criticise Team Sky seems a long stretch, given its ownership, and I wonder whether they are hanging Wiggins out to dry, while trying to protect Sky, British Cycling and the rest. Maybe, they'll upset Wiggins enough for him to tell a whole lot more.


I'm sure LW&B can add something of greater value and real knowledge to this.

Mike


Edited to add - read up on Alberto Salazar and the Nike Oregon Project for some background in a non-cycling field.

A very good post.

I share your view that Wiggins is being thrown under the bus. Plus ca change...

He's old news and expendable. Squeaky clean Froome is where it's at now.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on September 25, 2016, 10:15:01 pm
Question is simple. If folk believe what Wiggins did was cheating, then do they believe he should be stripped of his title?

Fatuous, facile or whatever you want to say, the fact remains there seems little appetite to answer a simple question regarding the use of what some consider to be a PED rather than medication.

I can't understand why there is such reluctance to answer a very simple question.


Actually, we don't know if he cheated, even though we all have our views. The key question is did he need that particular performance enhancing treatment for his asthma at that time and was that the most appropriate treatment (i.e. would no other non-PED have worked). A significant number of medics have stated that a case of asthma needing Triamcinlone injected IM or IA is not consistent with going on to win a grand tour or the precursor events in 2012.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 10:15:36 pm
Don't have to be British to do that. Queen is Monarch of countries other than this fair isle and she welcomes folk from those countries to serve her.

I just wish folk would not make insinuations about others without being prepared to give their opinion.

I believe Wiggins was within the rules and as my earlier posts suggests he had agreement of both UCI and WADA. Some folk will conjure conspiracy theories and make disparaging comments. Personally, I don't believe he should be stripped of his title. Others are not willing to comment or say whether he should or should not be stripped. The morality or ethics can be discussed, but playing within the rules is allowed and he has stayed within the rules.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on September 25, 2016, 10:18:06 pm
With professional cycling in the past few decades, it has been more accurate to assume doped, unless shown otherwise, for 'surprisingly good performances'. When do you think we should swap that approach back to 'innocent unless proven guilty'?

Just a few decades?   

Personally, I can't see any professional sport ever being 'clean'.  It's a pipedream.

I've not seen anything that would suggest Lemond's TdF wins weren't clean. I can't say that about the winners since then.

Last win in 1990, then Mig Indurain in an Armstrong like 5 year dominance, right at the heart of the epo era...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on September 25, 2016, 10:22:19 pm
The 'key question' is was he allowed to do what he did?  Answer is yes and agreed by UCI and WADA.

So you either accept it as nothing wrong was done, or you take the stance that UCI and WADA are corrupt and they favoured a particular rider. I take the former.

As for the future then perhaps TUEs need to be looked at and I agree it might rule some folk out. But until changes take place, then Wiggins and Sky did not break any rules.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 25, 2016, 10:25:27 pm
So taking heavy-duty steroids for performance-enhancement purposes is fine, as long as you happen to be diagnosed with asthma?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: jsabine on September 26, 2016, 12:56:06 am
Are you drawing a distinction between 'fine' and 'within the rules'?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Henryk531 on September 26, 2016, 08:43:19 am

If you are not fit for work you stay at home-problem solved.



Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on September 26, 2016, 10:08:12 am
It is exceptionally unfair to Wiggins to say that he shouldn’t merely have operated within the rules but according to some – unspecified! – higher moral standard.

Going down this route quickly becomes farcical, too. What is moral racing? Should cyclists be allowed to take strong painkillers? What about caffeine? What about surprisingly large quantities of beetroot juice? Perhaps a moral racer should eat chips and drink lager – unless he’s from Japan when he should eat sushi and drink sake? Why should pale-skinned riders be allowed sunscreen?

As for the dopers who’ve come out of the woodwork to throw stones: they have a vested interest in calling others dopers, because it makes them seem not to be uniquely heinous human beings. Yes, they cheated – “but, look, so does everyone!”

Although I think their doping crimes are not as grave as popularly imagined, they should not be given time of day on this topic. And the BBC and other media outlets should be ashamed of themselves for giving them a platform to air their innuendo.

Which brings me to another point. The media has not figured out a sensible way to report on cycling. They were duped by dopers so many times in the last 20 years that they overreacted and are now afraid to report a great cycling achievement as a straightforwardly great feat. Instead, they throw in question marks as willingly as someone at the pub. This is poor journalism, to put it mildly.

I happen to think that Wiggins did nothing outside the rules. So do most of you, which is why even those casting aspersions are so reluctant to say he should be stripped of his Tour win. Operating within the rules is all that can sensibly be expected of a professional racer.

The question of whether the rules are fit for purpose is a reasonable one but not something for Wiggins to worry about unless he chooses to.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 26, 2016, 10:16:26 am
Therapeutic Use Exemptions are explicitly intended to be normal medical treatments for illness, etc., not performance-enhancing doping. Doping under a false TUE is doping.

Wiggo has repeatedly used a drug for performance-enhancing purposes that normally would not be issued to a fit, healthy athlete. Doctors have said that this drug would normally be given to somebody in a hospital bed.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on September 26, 2016, 10:23:54 am
But there is no such thing as a false TUE. A TUE is either granted or not, and the decision is made according to a binding set of published rules, with the unanimous agreement of three independent doctors, etc.

You clearly take a different view than the sporting establishment on how far asthma treatment should go. It’s not unreasonable to take your view, but neither is the sporting establishment’s position unreasonable. After all, it was adopted at the behest of lots of clever people – doctors, lawyers, team directors, sponsors, and many other stakeholders including the racers themselves.

It remains the case that it’s unreasonable to lay any fault of the system at Wiggins’s feet.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 26, 2016, 10:27:13 am
Check the dates of Wiggo's TUEs. TUEs often only needed one doctor's approval back then. One doctor who publicly stated that some TUEs were for performance enhancement. Shall we talk about favouritism again?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on September 26, 2016, 10:28:13 am
As ESL said back there, "marginal gains". It would be disappointing if Sky had not used every legal means possible.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 26, 2016, 10:46:11 am
Dope testers and riders were noting a surge in older doping methods like steroids about five years ago but not finding positives in dope tests. Remember that using cortisone out of competition doesn't require a TUE and isn't tested for. Then have a think about the following:

TUE applications need to meet all of the following criteria before a TUE will be granted:

• The rider would experience significant health problems without taking the prohibited substance or method

• The therapeutic use of the substance would not produce enhancement of performance

• There is no reasonable therapeutic alternative

• Use of the prohibited substance or method is not needed because of previous doping.

The following evidence is needed to support a TUE application:

• Medical history

• An accurate diagnosis. For chronic conditions, up-to-date review letters that confirm treatment monitoring should be provided.

• Alternatives have been considered or trialled.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on September 26, 2016, 11:08:07 am
I think they should ban training. It has been proven to enhance performance, and that obviously is gaming the system.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 26, 2016, 11:23:00 am
Don't laugh but back in the halcyon days of Victorian England, gentlemen often didn't want to compete with those who had to work for a living because their manual labouring was an unfair advantage. Obviously, no real gentleman would consider training for a competition, relying instead purely on natural ability.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on September 26, 2016, 11:40:30 am
I thought that Sky were keen on the aggregation of marginal gains. I'd have been surprised if they didn't push the rules as far as they would go.

This.

I've set PBs on my commute with an upper respiratory tract infection, but on prednisolone. What Brad was having injected is stronger. I've seen my peak flow leap 50l/min on pred. You feel like you are in beast mode. I have about a month's supply at home. I take them in my saddlebag on audax in case of difficulties - they are a get out of jail free card. My sis took some because she was feeling rough on The Old 240. She  was going slow - my HR was at 105 before she took them. Half an hour later, it was at 145bpm.

I'd love to have seen Brad's numbers before and after levelling the playing field.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on September 26, 2016, 11:43:18 am
Brian Cookson, the UCI President, was voicing concerns about TUEs a couple of years ago.

Quote
The UCI has come under fire in recent week concerning a Therapeutic Use Exemption given to Tour de France winner Chris Froome and the delays in Roman Kreuziger's UCI Biological Passport case. Cookson refused to go into specific details of Kreuziger's on-going case but confirmed that more will be done to improve the governance of TUEs, starting with better rules on how TUEs are permitted. He said the general ethics of the sport will come before a single rider's needs to use a specific banned medicine to stay in a race.

"There was a TUE Committee but it was only being used for exceptional cases. This was an entirely routine case and Dr Zorzoli approved it, as WADA confirmed two days later," he said justifying why Zorzoli was able to fast-track Froome's TUE during the Tour de Romandie.

"We've looked at how we canmake that process stronger. We've got a TUE committee and we will now use that Committee more. We'll use it for every TUE case. That may slow the process what's more important? An individual rider or the integrity of an entire sport? Frankly in my view, it's the integrity and reputation of the entire sport."




http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/cookson-on-his-sons-role-at-team-sky-zorzoli-and-froomes-tue/

In the same article he addressed the state of professional cycling in Germany.

Quote
He is convinced that the same growth and success for cycling can be replicated and rediscovered in different countries, including Germany, which while being a cycling nation, has largely turned its back on professional racing.

"A lot of people are working hard behind the scenes to do some good work in Germany, that includes the Federation and some race promoters, people are working to put teams together too. I had a meeting in Germany yesterday. I can’t reveal any details but the picture is beginning to turn because of the problems of that era. Germany is the biggest economy in Europe and if we're not in Germany as a sport, we're going to suffer. I think we can get back in and the signs are there. As long as we keep our act together and don’t descend into the problems of the past, I'm optimistic that cycling can be strong again there and in other countries.”

Cookson clearly means doping when he talks about 'the problems of the past’.

You could argue that the current revelations are useful in working towards greater transparency. The problem boils down to how many of the UK recruits to cycling will move onto something else if the image of the sport is tarnished by a sense of betrayal, and how that will impact on Sky's involvement.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on September 26, 2016, 12:22:02 pm
Mention of Germany being "a cycling nation [which has] turned its back on professional racing" raises the connection, or lack of it, in the minds of the public at large and non-racing cyclists, between cycling and sport. Clearly in the UK it's strong, in countries like Germany with a transport cycling habit probably less so. So in Britain there might be fall out from a doping scandal not only on BC activities but audax etc and government funding for cycle facilities and so on. It also widens the question of what is cheating. If you take a substance which is banned by WADA but not in itself illegal to help you round an audax or a non-competitive club ride, is that cheating? Or to help you over the Alps on tour? After all, it happens!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on September 26, 2016, 12:25:52 pm
This thread needs to be Godwinned:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 26, 2016, 12:31:03 pm
No problems with people using all sorts of performance-enhancing things, provided they aren't taking part in competitive sports. Audax is accordingly off the hook. Interestingly, Audax Oz is part of Cycling Australia, the equivalent of British Cycling. Audax Oz members who don't race are specifically exempt from the drug testing regime of competitive cyclists.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: JBB on September 26, 2016, 01:36:02 pm
I thought that Sky were keen on the aggregation of marginal gains. I'd have been surprised if they didn't push the rules as far as they would go.

This.

I've set PBs on my commute with an upper respiratory tract infection, but on prednisolone. What Brad was having injected is stronger. I've seen my peak flow leap 50l/min on pred. You feel like you are in beast mode. I have about a month's supply at home. I take them in my saddlebag on audax in case of difficulties - they are a get out of jail free card. My sis took some because she was feeling rough on The Old 240. She  was going slow - my HR was at 105 before she took them. Half an hour later, it was at 145bpm.

I'd love to have seen Brad's numbers before and after levelling the playing field.

Interesting. I've taken the stuff in the past for totally debilitating hay fever and, apart from being able to see breathe,hear and work I've never noticed any performance enhancement. I've still got some in the cupboard but can't remember what the dose was!

Fortunately my hay fever has declined to the point where I no longer need it.

Julia
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on September 26, 2016, 02:16:05 pm
I'm on 50mg a day during an exacerbation. I think Froome was on 40mg. Feel really strong on it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on September 26, 2016, 04:12:25 pm
I'm on 50mg a day during an exacerbation. I think Froome was on 40mg. Feel really strong on it.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17805102 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17805102)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: jamesld8 on September 27, 2016, 06:55:07 am
A few odd points though that Wiggins / Sky don`t appear to have answered which given their `whiter than white` proclamations previously I would have hoped to have heard about

1. Why didn`t Wiggins make any reference to his asthma in his autobiography ? Froome has been open about getting bilharzia for example

2. Isn`t it a teeny weeny bit odd that he used the drugs, TUE or not, leading up to big GT rides, or was his asthma so selective that he needed the drug just then and there ?

3. Again given Sky`s whiter than white, within rule OK but maybe they should have  not been so clear in proclaiming their riders were clean, technically and legally maybe but morally?

4 and why is it just now that Brailsford is talking about changing their TUE policy? Sounds like having been, albeit morally , caught out they, just like so many politicians do are trying to make retrospective amends and hoping it will all go away. Which of course it won`t.

--and having just seen the Telegraph item that Brailsford didn`t know about the performance enhancing capabilities of drug that Wiggins use to me is a laughable defence, one of, if not the, top pro team mangers claiming ignorance of a TUE drug capabilities is just making it all seem now to be a giant cover up.

Again legal OK but morally ????? IMO no way, sorry Sky have been very ingenuous in this

Simple question, if at time of Wiggins TdeF  win Sky had been fully open about Wiggins using a TUE approved drug, but drug has known / reputed performance enhancing abilities would his victory have been met back in UK with such acclaim?

 For me too many doubts now about the `genuineness` of Wiggins results, within rules yes, morally highly dubious.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 27, 2016, 07:18:12 am
A TUE requires the treatment to not enhance performance. The drug and methodology selected fails on that criteria (not the only one). I don't think these TUEs are within the rules. It looks like another example of official bodies tacitly accepting doping.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on September 27, 2016, 09:10:36 am
Or deciding that without doping there would be no sport? Or rather, no spectacle.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on September 27, 2016, 09:53:21 am
Looked up when treatment guidelines suggest the injection is appropriate for adults. It's for use when you've taken oral steroids religiously and your severe asthma still isn't controlled.

Sure, Brad has asthma. Poorly controlled despite taking steroids? I'm grinning at the ridiculousness of that. If Brad had severe uncontrolled asthma, he had no business racing.

Whether Brad had any insight in to the effects he could expect, I'm not sure. I suspect he just trusted his doctor.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 27, 2016, 10:20:44 am
I don't think these TUEs are within the rules. It looks like another example of official bodies tacitly accepting doping.

It's a borderline case that hinges on whether you accept Wiggins and Brailsford's explanation that he was suffering from a pollen allergy in the build-up to the Tour in 2012 and was legitimately prescribed the drug by a consultant purely for medicinal reasons..

But then, as DrMekon says, you have to question why the doctor prescribed that particular medicine. Did Wiggins and Brailsford not question whether there were alternatives considering the requirement for a TUE and the fact that it is a known PED? Was the doctor using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut, just to make absolutely sure Wiggins was fit for the Tour, or was there a more nefarious agenda?

And why did Wiggins lie about receiving injections?

Some have questioned why Sky didn't sign up to the MPCC, which has a no TUE policy, but the MPCC has shown on numerous occasions that it is far from bringing credibility to cycling, so that is a red herring as far as I'm concerned.

I'm still dissatisfied with Sky's explanations for covering up and lying about the TUE.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on September 27, 2016, 10:33:59 am
I always felt that Wiggins' main problem was his nerves. Giving him an injection for a respiratory problem that might be linked to anxiety would stop him fixating on his breathing, and overdosing on inhalers.
Brailsford is unlikely to come out and say that dealing with Bradley's nerves was a nightmare. Brad is now the cool and flippant mod, but he never looked comfortable in yellow until the podium.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Peter on September 27, 2016, 10:58:19 am
No grown man should be comfortable in yellow.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 27, 2016, 11:16:16 am
Ross Tucker ‏@Scienceofsport
The greatest marginal gain Brailsford identified is the gullibility of so many sheep coming to the sport with poor knowledge of its history
https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/780712008496873472


Ouch!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on September 27, 2016, 12:18:55 pm
I don't think these TUEs are within the rules. It looks like another example of official bodies tacitly accepting doping.

It's a borderline case that hinges on whether you accept Wiggins and Brailsford's explanation that he was suffering from a pollen allergy in the build-up to the Tour in 2012 and was legitimately prescribed the drug by a consultant purely for medicinal reasons..
There will always be borderline cases - this is sport! Watch an Olympic sprint relay final. Look at the UCI dimensions-of-bikes rules. etc

You can either accept that, or you can take the oh-so-clever-sceptic role.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 27, 2016, 12:30:22 pm
This isn't borderline.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on September 27, 2016, 12:33:50 pm
You can either accept that, or you can take the oh-so-clever-sceptic role.

Those aren't the only two options available.

This isn't borderline.

Hmmm, let me think about this...

Did Wiggins use a known performance-enhancing drug ahead of the 2012 Tour? Yes.

OK, fair enough, I'm with you.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on September 27, 2016, 01:30:46 pm
Wiggins' case doesn't look marginal, just egregious.

Froome's TUE was for prednisolone, which, based on the research piece I referenced earlier and that Dr Mekon provided anecdotal information on, appears also to performance enhancing. Also for the treatment of severe asthma. I know the shape my daughter needs to be in to get it, and she won't be running or riding a bike.

I've been thinking about how you run a microdosing program for a team and give a boost to the leader who needs to be protected and to perform exceptionally from time to time through a 3 week tour. I think it could be done.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on September 27, 2016, 01:38:23 pm
Is it right that prednisolone can be used out of competition? If so, what about the training effects of being about to push harder and recover easier?

I was chatting to an anaesthetist and he was saying you could get away with about two years continuous use before the side effects would really screw with you. I keep my use to a minimum because I can't sleep on it, and when I come off, I get all weepy.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 27, 2016, 02:12:14 pm
I wondered about the amount of time during the racing season that Sky's GC riders spend training at altitude and out of competition. It is quite difficult to recover sufficiently while maintaining such high intensity training with very low body fat percentages. Blood passport anomalies are excused by altitude effects and cortisone (and similar) isn't tested out of competition.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on September 27, 2016, 02:30:27 pm
The possible ramifications of these cases could be worse than the Armstrong case was. Lance was cheating and everyone who knew what he was doing, knew it was illegal. With TUEs people can believe, be convinced or choose to believe that it's all above board; after all, it is legal, unless someone lied on the TUE application, which I haven't actually seen alleged – and if they did, it wouldn't have been the rider competitor (abuse of TUEs obviously isn't exclusive to any one sport). Not marginal or borderline but not straightforward in determining where the abuse happens, since the system is designed to allow it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on September 27, 2016, 02:38:42 pm
I think TUEs are a reducing problem. The absolute numbers approved by the UCI are dropping noticeably. Are national federations also able to approve TUEs?

Unless something quite odd is being done nowadays, the benefits of performance-enhancing TUEs aren't as great as from blood doping. Still cheating though.

It does seem surprising that cortisone can be used out of competition with virtually no restrictions. Cortisone was stuffing up riders four decades ago.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob W on September 27, 2016, 04:13:25 pm
So is the whole marginal gains stuff just a smokescreen? I've just finished James Witts' _The Science of the Tour de France _ (I thought it was pretty good - road.cc review here: http://road.cc/content/review/203921-science-tour-de-france-james-witts ), and his take seems to be that there is an awful lot of effort being spent on nutrition, super-aero kit, altitude training etc for - at the elite level - indeed pretty marginal gains; if anyone's running a doping programme it can only be providing the slightest of edges, unlike EPO.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: bikenrrd on September 27, 2016, 04:27:30 pm
So is the whole marginal gains stuff just a smokescreen? .... if anyone's running a doping programme it can only be providing the slightest of edges, unlike EPO.

Now read "The Secret Race" by Tyler Hamilton and Daniel Coyle.  The protocol of doping that Lance (and Tyler to some degree) and his doctors developed towards the end of his career could easily still be carried out today and not be detected.  That is (out of competition): microdosing EPO last thing at night - the testers cannot test overnight and the detectability of a small dose of EPO is about 7 hours; small amounts of synthetic testosterone to aid recovery; corticosteroids to aid recovery - not banned OOC, and small blood bags in competition.

The new drugs since then are peptides - like AICAR, which was not banned until 2011.  These aid weightloss without reducing power output as much as a calorie deficit would.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on September 27, 2016, 06:03:10 pm
So is the whole marginal gains stuff just a smokescreen? .... if anyone's running a doping programme it can only be providing the slightest of edges, unlike EPO.

Now read "The Secret Race" by Tyler Hamilton and Daniel Coyle.  The protocol of doping that Lance (and Tyler to some degree) and his doctors developed towards the end of his career could easily still be carried out today and not be detected.  That is (out of competition): microdosing EPO last thing at night - the testers cannot test overnight

They can now.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on September 27, 2016, 09:17:27 pm
The TUE is only needed during competition. Asthma can be seasonal. The dosage taken is at the very bottom end of the scale.  Looking at Pubmed for what was known about performance enhancement prior to 2012:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17609220 - no effect on overall performance though some indicators change - 2008.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17614029 - effect on various dietary metabolism parameters but no overall effect on performance - 2008
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18048433 - positive effect in recreational athletes - small study - 2008

There are no other relevant studies in pubmed prior to 2012.
It is reasonable to take from this that there are three small studies, together providing only marginal evidence that prednisolone has an effect on performance. I don't know enough exercise physiology to know whether changes seen would be expected to be replicated in elite athletes (though I know someone who might know). Recreational athletes do show a bigger response than elite athletes to specific interventions, so it is entirely reasonable to put forward a case that prednisolone has a minimal performance enhancing effect beyond therapeutic use, and the dose in question is much lower than used in the studies.

Locker room tittle tattle on the effect of drugs is just that, biased and unrepresentative. There does appear to be reasonable grounds for the selection and use of prednisolone as a purely therapeutic agent at that time, though as more data is determined, it may be more appropriate to remove it from the TUE list.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 27, 2016, 10:09:59 pm
Whereas what Wiggins had shot into his arse was full lead PED.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: bikenrrd on September 28, 2016, 08:57:03 am
It is reasonable to take from this that there are three small studies, together providing only marginal evidence that prednisolone has an effect on performance.
*snip*...
Locker room tittle tattle on the effect of drugs is just that, biased and unrepresentative.

This is very interesting, as it is (almost) impossible to study the effects of doping on elite athletes due to the ethics involved - i.e. you are helping them to cheat.

Instead, you have a setup where a (large) group of riders, and an associated group of "race doctors", are trying to find substances that give them an advantage over the competition.  So, you have a large, uncontrolled experiment with many variables which produces a list of substances that riders can take to give them that advantage.  Or at least lead them to think it gives them an advantage.  Prednisolone is one of those substances.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Morat on September 28, 2016, 10:23:23 am
There is a fair bit of the old Pavlovian dogmatic response to Rule Britannia, going on here.

There are none so blind as those that will not see...

and all Wiggins supporters voted Brexit, but don't like Froome because he's an immigrant.
amirite?

I really don't think your arguments stand up to scrutiny.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 28, 2016, 10:42:18 am
You may think that. I couldn't possibly care comment.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Henryk531 on September 28, 2016, 12:03:34 pm
Of course  it's handy having a brit as head of the U.C.I. and the I. O. C.




Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TigaSefi on September 29, 2016, 09:18:45 am
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/asthma-medication-cycling-teams-disrespect-riders-all-nick-marshall

Hmmm interesting.....
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Terry72 on September 30, 2016, 08:50:59 pm
Personally, I find it hard to believe that three injections mean Wiggins whole career was a fraud. Could one injection really have lasted for three weeks of the tour?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 30, 2016, 09:06:02 pm
Why did he lie about never having injections?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on September 30, 2016, 09:11:38 pm
Personally, I find it hard to believe that three injections mean Wiggins whole career was a fraud. Could one injection really have lasted for three weeks of the tour?

Yes, the point of giving triamcinolone intramuscularly is that it is effective over a 3 week period, that is as a treatment for severe, uncontrolled chronic asthma of course.

It doesn't mean his whole career is a fraud, but it raises significant doubts. The more so when considered on conjunction with the lies told about 'needles'. A similar discussion is ongoing in the running world about Mo Farah and his inconsistent explanations of how he was photographed Jamaica Adenosine etc, and that before his triamcinolone TUE was revealed.

The trouble is, there is a real stench about elite sport in general amd the governing bodies have such a chequered history they appear part of the problem. The idea of TUE as permitted doping is widespread and not new.

Mw
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Carlosfandango on September 30, 2016, 10:04:08 pm
I'm asthmatic and use inhalers which are fine in everyday life, but occasionally when exercising I am wheezing like an old steam train with lungs that feel solid and immovable. My exercise is Audax, twiddling along at 20kph. I suspect that if I was a proper athlete I'd have more issues, so hypothetically it's conceivable that I might need intramuscular steroids to compete on a similar level with non asthmatics.

It's difficult to find a way to balance genuine medical need for drugs that may are necessary for a persons medical condition against use for performace enhancement.

Wiggins worked within the system to obtain his medication, he hasn't broken the rules, we don't know how he was suffering at the time, we have his explanation and his Doctors opinion, his hayfever and asthma could have been bad at the time, not ameliorated with inhalers and to be at his peak performance other treatments may have been required, you can't win the TDF at below your best.

Who knows in Wiggins case?

Maybe the system needs to be improved though.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on September 30, 2016, 10:11:24 pm
It's just a coincidence that a bunch of ex-dopers have said that they took the exact same drug, administered in the same way, and at the same time in relation to big races as Wiggins, but for purely performance enhancing purposes.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on September 30, 2016, 10:13:00 pm
It is also for a pollen allergy (allegedly) and pollen is extremely seasonal. Allergies can also be quite species specific.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on September 30, 2016, 11:02:55 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtoG4DSWcAEJ9lM.jpg)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: rogerzilla on October 01, 2016, 08:24:11 am
I once had injected steroids for asthma BUT I was under a year old at the time, so couldn't really use an inhaler, and it was life-threatening at the time (I was fortunate enough to grow out of asthma - I credit having two pet cats for that - at about the age of 40, having used salbutamol before exercise for years).

I haven't previously heard of otherwise fit adults needing injections for asthma or hay fever.

ICBA to read the entire thread, but Indurain faced similar questions for using salbutamol.  It is almost certainly performance-enhancing, although IME the effect strictly caused by the drug is fairly short-lived  - what it can do is get an asthma sufferer through the first half hour of exercise (normally asthma will come on in the first few minutes without an inhaler, especially in cold weather), after which they can keep going indefinitely.  however, if you take the inhaler and sit still for an hour, then ride, you'll probably still get asthma.  One curiosity with asthma is that it may give up trying to choke you and just disappear after about 20 minutes' exercise, if you can last that long.  And you usually can't last that long without the inhaler beforehand.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Eccentrica Gallumbits on October 02, 2016, 06:55:33 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/sep/30/bradley-wiggins-interview-tues

I think he comes across as credible in this.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 02, 2016, 07:10:46 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/sep/30/bradley-wiggins-interview-tues

I think he comes across as credible in this.


Look at his sorry little face

(http://i67.tinypic.com/v3f5fo.png)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Aunt Maud on October 02, 2016, 08:03:38 pm
Awwww, so puppy.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 03, 2016, 10:24:43 am
Look at his sorry little face

(http://i67.tinypic.com/v3f5fo.png)

You've convinced me.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on October 04, 2016, 12:49:11 am
Personally, I find it hard to believe that three injections mean Wiggins whole career was a fraud. Could one injection really have lasted for three weeks of the tour?

30-40 days, allegedly.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on October 04, 2016, 03:20:11 am
Here's the view from one anonymous rider:

Quote from: http://cyclingtips.com/2016/10/the-secret-pro-cortisone-tues-world-championships-and-rider-transfer-season/
Wiggins won the Tour in 2012 and that was a result I wanted to have faith in. Now, I think he was kind of a puppet, just told what to do and when to do it. I think he did the same thing with his training, just so he didn’t have to think about it.

I see these TUEs as a loophole, and it’s something a lot of teams, including Sky, have exploited. They have not broken any rule, so you can’t call Wiggins a drug cheat. Unfortunately, you also have to ask the question: who is the guy at the UCI signing off on this? Back then, it was Mario Zorzoli, and now he’s gone; just disappeared off the face of the earth apparently.

For me, it’s all very disappointing.

http://cyclingtips.com/2016/10/the-secret-pro-cortisone-tues-world-championships-and-rider-transfer-season/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on October 04, 2016, 07:31:53 am
Here's the view from one anonymous rider:

Quote from: http://cyclingtips.com/2016/10/the-secret-pro-cortisone-tues-world-championships-and-rider-transfer-season/
Wiggins won the Tour in 2012 and that was a result I wanted to have faith in. Now, I think he was kind of a puppet, just told what to do and when to do it. I think he did the same thing with his training, just so he didn’t have to think about it.

I see these TUEs as a loophole, and it’s something a lot of teams, including Sky, have exploited. They have not broken any rule, so you can’t call Wiggins a drug cheat. Unfortunately, you also have to ask the question: who is the guy at the UCI signing off on this? Back then, it was Mario Zorzoli, and now he’s gone; just disappeared off the face of the earth apparently.

For me, it’s all very disappointing.

http://cyclingtips.com/2016/10/the-secret-pro-cortisone-tues-world-championships-and-rider-transfer-season/
Spot on. I wonder if anyone has gone back through the dates and mapped then against those photos of Wiggins looking stripped like Rasmussen.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 04, 2016, 08:10:19 am
"If you’re really all for clean sport, then why would you not join the MPCC? Then you see this, and you think, “Ah, that’s why they don’t want to join.”

"I’ve heard about this, with some of the Classics riders. They’ll pull out, a week or so before a big race, say they have a knee injury, or a sore ankle, or bronchitis, get a TUE for cortisone, get an injection, and then take a little more just before the race. If they get tested, they just say, “Eight days ago, I took something, and I have a TUE.” It’s the same sort of thing. Three days before the Tour de France? I mean, come on".
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on October 05, 2016, 04:22:39 am
^^^^

Yeah, that was the other standout point from the Secret Pro and makes a lot of sense.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 05, 2016, 01:31:48 pm
I vaguely recall in 1999 following the Festina affair, the teams and riders were asked to sign a declaration that they weren't doping. The MPCC has about the same level of credibility as that.

I don't think the TUE thing is the reason for some teams leaving the organisation or not signing up in the first place. Only half the WT teams are members.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on October 12, 2016, 09:34:14 am
Team Sky has someone to carry an item from Manchester to the continent but the mule has no idea what's inside the package. Cope (the guy doing the trip) must have been pretty trusting that it wasn't anything dodgy as he passed through customs.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cope-i-dont-know-what-was-in-the-package-for-team-sky/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on October 12, 2016, 09:46:05 am
Isn't everyone asked to sign a declaration when they fly that they know the contents of their luggage?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 12, 2016, 01:14:57 pm
Isn't everyone asked to sign a declaration when they fly that they know the contents of their luggage?
Dunno, but I would guess there are limits e.g.
- Courier carrying confidential legal documents. or
- Owner of Samsung phone; would he/she know what sort of battery it uses?



I have a question too about the Cope case; how did these errands come to light? I couldn't work it out from the article  :-\
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 12, 2016, 01:20:11 pm
How many current phones don't use lithium batteries?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Mr Larrington on October 12, 2016, 02:23:19 pm
Isn't everyone asked to sign a declaration when they fly that they know the contents of their luggage?

Not IME.  They've even stopped asking whether you packed it yourself.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on October 12, 2016, 02:37:09 pm
Isn't everyone asked to sign a declaration when they fly that they know the contents of their luggage?

Not IME.  They've even stopped asking whether you packed it yourself.

I think it's been incorporated into the online check-in procedure.  Have a look next time you fill in your details - I'm pretty sure there will be a check-box saying you know the contents of your luggage and packed it yourself.  It certainly has been the last few times I've flown.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on October 16, 2016, 02:18:35 pm
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/opinion/sunday/how-to-get-away-with-doping.html
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on October 17, 2016, 08:27:15 pm
Much as my prednisolone gives me some whoosh, I'll admit that article made me wonder what it'd take to get prescribe kenalog outside of a BC setting.  My respiratory consultant is ludicrously - worryingly, even - happy to throw more drugs at my chest problem. I'll ask him what he'd need to see for him to consider it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on October 17, 2016, 09:56:20 pm
I await your report on its effectiveness.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 24, 2016, 11:39:39 pm
It's a shame, because it's completely undermined the value of his wins. Yeah, it was 'legal', but I doubt he would be permitted to do the same thing with the current TUE system.
P.S. We have a hard enough time to get the doc to prescribe prednisolone for my wife and she has to be in the 'can barely breathe' state before they'll consider it. Would love to get her a cortisone injection and see what that would do!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 25, 2016, 08:40:16 am
It's a shame, because it's completely undermined the value of his wins. Yeah, it was 'legal', but I doubt he would be permitted to do the same thing with the current TUE system.
[my bold] That's completely a matter of personal opinion.

He won under the rules in place at the time. Rules change (not just for drugs); no one loses their titles just cos they weren't wearing a modern helmet, for example.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 25, 2016, 09:33:45 am
It would only be in accordance with the rules if it was necessary treatment of a medical condition, not if it was for performance enhancement doping. It looks a lot like the latter.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on October 25, 2016, 09:57:25 am
Medical treatment is literally performance-enhancing.

I think the only “shame” in this case is the revisionist moralising that observers have been extraordinarily motivated to do, driven by who-knows-what reasons. I expect no better from various arms of the media, but the way cycling fans have jumped on the bandwagon is hugely disappointing. Wiggins has been put through the wringer. I hope he emerges with his head in one piece.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 25, 2016, 10:00:48 am
. It looks a lot like the latter.

Remind me - is there a "Looks a lot like cheating" rule?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 25, 2016, 10:02:06 am
He has taken a performance enhancing substance at the same time before major races (but at different times of year) at the appropriate times and in appropriate quantities for performance enhancement alone, as evidenced by dopers.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2016, 10:06:01 am
Indeed.

His credibility is in tatters (at least, for those who understand the issues) because it is clear that he took this substance repeatedly for performance enhancing reasons, not for 'pollen allergy'.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: hubner on October 25, 2016, 10:27:45 am
I think this is on the same level as a someone who hasn't failed a dope test and can say they haven't broken any rules and therefore isn't a doper when in fact they've done the following:

taken drugs that aren't prohibited, eg newly created drugs,
taken drugs that are undetectable, eg drugs now known to have been taken by certain runners,
taken drugs that allowable if you have a certain medical condition, eg for severe asthma, but in fact don't have the condition,
taken drugs but has taken measures to pass dope tests, including collusion of governing bodies.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: hubner on October 25, 2016, 10:40:30 am
I think doping has always been so common in pro cycling you have either accept it or just ignore the sport.

It seems the more closely you can identify with a rider, in nationality, language, the more a fan is willing to make an exception and say "he didn't break any rules!".

As for people saying certain riders were/are clean, I think that's more like they like to think so and so were clean.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 25, 2016, 10:46:53 am
(at least, for those who understand the issues)
I see what you've done there.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2016, 11:25:06 am
Good.

I knew it would make your brain vibrate.  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 25, 2016, 11:34:35 am
It seems the more closely you can identify with rider, in nationality, language, the more a fan is willing to make an exceptions and say "he didn't break any rules!".
Can you give an example of this sort of hypocrisy?

(e.g. I'm a big fan of David Millar - but he cheated, he broke the rules, there was evidence, and  he was rightfully punished.
Of course some would say he should have had a lifetime ban and his goolies cut off, but that wasn't the rule in place at the time.

Wiggo? Froome? Nothing proven yet => no punishment. Simples. )
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2016, 11:39:51 am
Surely Sky's use of TUEs is a good example of what the system was set up to allow. It's cheating in that it goes against what appears to be the spirit of the rules and what (most of) the public want, but it's fully in line with the letter of the rules and their professional application.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on October 25, 2016, 11:50:45 am
…but it's fully in line with the letter of the rules and their professional application.

Of course. It may even be a breach of someone’s fiduciary duty not to sail close to the wind like this. It’s professional sport.

Flatus, though, can read the guilt in Wiggins’s face. See upthread. He reminds me of my uncle, who can tell a criminal by the look in his eyes (after the fact, natch).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2016, 11:52:49 am
Nope.

I can see an attempt to use the media.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on October 25, 2016, 12:53:12 pm
Though apparently not when Fancy Bears uses the media.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on October 25, 2016, 01:34:29 pm
Indeed.

His credibility is in tatters (at least, for those who understand the issues) because it is clear that he took this substance repeatedly for performance enhancing reasons, not for 'pollen allergy'.
I think it's conceivable that he thought that he was talking it for pollen. It's that the drug is so powerful, it does more than put you "on a level playing field". I've had some of my best days on a bike on pred recovering from a chest infection.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on October 25, 2016, 03:15:13 pm
Of course, Wiggins is currently taking the heat from Froome. Sky is, however, falling apart around them all
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Peter on October 25, 2016, 03:28:36 pm
Froome can't possibly be on drugs.  Look at him - where the Hell would you put them?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on October 25, 2016, 03:44:58 pm
Froome can't possibly be on drugs.  Look at him - where the Hell would you put them?

In the seat tube?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on October 25, 2016, 04:00:27 pm
Of course, Wiggins is currently taking the heat from Froome. Sky is, however, falling apart around them all

How so?

Froome's TUEs were nowhere near what Wiggins did (and don't forget that what Wiggins did was sanctioned and acceptable).

Surely you are not suggesting some form of 'motor-aid'?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on October 25, 2016, 04:14:18 pm
Indeed.

His credibility is in tatters (at least, for those who understand the issues) because it is clear that he took this substance repeatedly for performance enhancing reasons, not for 'pollen allergy'.

Well, it will be interesting to see whether UKAD come to the same conclusions as you...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2016, 05:33:54 pm
I have no confidence in UKAD.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2016, 05:37:09 pm
Though apparently not when Fancy Bears uses the media.

What does this post even mean?

"Though not" what?

First you try and misrepresent what I am saying, and back it up with some bullshit about your uncle, now you are attempting the "well they did it too" defence.

Who gives a toss what the motivation was behind the Fancy Bears? It has no bearing whatsoever on what Wiggins did. Al it did was expose what Wiggins did.

Who are you? Donald Trump?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on October 25, 2016, 06:07:42 pm
I have no confidence in UKAD.

Well there you have it then. Let's abandon any evidence based conclusions and just go with trial be media  ::-)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 25, 2016, 06:39:54 pm
The way I read it is that Sky took the opportunity presented by Wiggo's exercise-induced asthma and a quite-likely genuine medical issue to obtain the strongest possible medication allowed under the TUE rules extant at the time - even Wiggins said it was to 'level the playing field'. The moral question of whether anyone should be able to medically compensate for an illness in order to compete is arguable - and will be into eternity, no doubt.

However, the fact is what they did was within the rules, declared as happening at the time, and raised no objection from the governing bodies responsible - who had every opportunity to do so had they wished. There was no subterfuge, no attempt to hide what was happening. Therefore, as I see it, there is no reason for Sky or Wiggins to feel under any threat. The rules were subsequently changed, and will no doubt change again. But you can't judge people for actions which were legal and open at the time, but would not now be so.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on October 25, 2016, 06:47:06 pm
Of course, Wiggins is currently taking the heat from Froome. Sky is, however, falling apart around them all

How so?

Froome's TUEs were nowhere near what Wiggins did (and don't forget that what Wiggins did was sanctioned and acceptable).

Surely you are not suggesting some form of 'motor-aid'?

Perhaps being slightly mischievous;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: slope on October 25, 2016, 06:58:37 pm
The way I read it is that Sky took the opportunity presented by Wiggo's exercise-induced asthma and a quite-likely genuine medical issue to obtain the strongest possible medication allowed under the TUE rules extant at the time - even Wiggins said it was to 'level the playing field'. The moral question of whether anyone should be able to medically compensate for an illness in order to compete is arguable - and will be into eternity, no doubt.

However, the fact is what they did was within the rules, declared as happening at the time, and raised no objection from the governing bodies responsible - who had every opportunity to do so had they wished. There was no subterfuge, no attempt to hide what was happening. Therefore, as I see it, there is no reason for Sky or Wiggins to feel under any threat. The rules were subsequently changed, and will no doubt change again. But you can't judge people for actions which were legal and open at the time, but would not now be so.

^ = ✔ :)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 25, 2016, 07:05:21 pm
It's a shame, because it's completely undermined the value of his wins. Yeah, it was 'legal', but I doubt he would be permitted to do the same thing with the current TUE system.
[my bold] That's completely a matter of personal opinion.

He won under the rules in place at the time. Rules change (not just for drugs); no one loses their titles just cos they weren't wearing a modern helmet, for example.

Obviously. No one is going to take his victories away...but Sky abused a loophole to legally use PED's. If he was sick enough to require those injections, he shouldn't have been racing...so it'll be "Sir" Bradley from now on.
 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 25, 2016, 07:05:53 pm
Go back to the requirements for obtaining a TUE. Wiggo's medical treatment goes well beyond those requirements. His TUE application should never have been approved at the time as it was not within those rules.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2016, 07:14:00 pm
^

The problem with 'rules' is that we know they are not uniformly applied. We know from prior history that big name stars are heavily favoured.



Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2016, 07:16:30 pm
I have no confidence in UKAD.

Well there you have it then. Let's abandon any evidence based conclusions and just go with trial be media  ::-)

Evidence based on conclusions? Perhaps you meant the opposite...

Would you like some evidence as to my conclusion that UKAD has a lack of desire to catch big name British dopers?

It's all out there if you look.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on October 25, 2016, 07:57:49 pm
UKAD went after Lizzie Armitstead. They were overruled by CAS.

However there is a conflict of interest here. It'd be better handled by a supranational body. I was impressed by USADA going so hard after LA, so it can work.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 25, 2016, 08:13:33 pm
UKAD went after Lizzie Armitstead. They were overruled by CAS.

However there is a conflict of interest here. It'd be better handled by a supranational body. I was impressed by USADA going so hard after LA, so it can work.

After failing badly with Barry Bonds, I also think that USADA were eager to prove that they were relevant.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2016, 08:20:53 pm
UKAD went after Lizzie Armitstead. They were overruled by CAS.

Yes...and this happened immediately after UKAD had been excoriated by an independent inquiry ordered by the relevant Government minister after an expose of their inaction when presented with evidence of a doping doctor.

Ukad made ‘ghastly mistake’ in not passing on drug allegations

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/11/drugs-ukad-mark-bonar?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 25, 2016, 08:25:26 pm
It's a shame, because it's completely undermined the value of his wins. Yeah, it was 'legal', but I doubt he would be permitted to do the same thing with the current TUE system.
[my bold] That's completely a matter of personal opinion.

He won under the rules in place at the time. Rules change (not just for drugs); no one loses their titles just cos they weren't wearing a modern helmet, for example.

Obviously. No one is going to take his victories away...but Sky abused a loophole to legally use PED's. If he was sick enough to require those injections, he shouldn't have been racing...so it'll be "Sir" Bradley from now on.
My view is that such a loophole should be looked at and quite possibly tightened. It's quite normal for professional sportsmen to make the most of the rules as they stand - and indeed certain anti-Wiggo posters on this thread have said as much about other rules.

If your opinion is that it's unethical to exploit any particular loophole, that's fair enough. I have a similar view about many rules in many sports (too long to list!). Discussing these is generally part of the fun of watching sport! But they're just personal opinions - the official results will always be what they are. No asterisks for loopholers. Maradonna's goals still stand.



Meanwhile, if you want to get rid of the "Sir" in "Sir Wiggo", you have my vote!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 25, 2016, 08:40:45 pm
Maradona's Hand of God goal and game may be officially counted but everybody knows it was a cheat and shouldn't be.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2016, 08:51:39 pm
Not really comparable though. Maradona didn't obtain official permission in advance for a handball.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 25, 2016, 08:55:22 pm
Where it might be comparable is in the actions of officials.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 25, 2016, 10:32:12 pm
[Y'all  realise that I just threw the Hand of God in for light relief. Right?  :-\  ]
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on October 25, 2016, 11:05:23 pm
It's a shame, because it's completely undermined the value of his wins. Yeah, it was 'legal', but I doubt he would be permitted to do the same thing with the current TUE system.
[my bold] That's completely a matter of personal opinion.

He won under the rules in place at the time. Rules change (not just for drugs); no one loses their titles just cos they weren't wearing a modern helmet, for example.

Obviously. No one is going to take his victories away...but Sky abused a loophole to legally use PED's. If he was sick enough to require those injections, he shouldn't have been racing...so it'll be "Sir" Bradley from now on.
My view is that such a loophole should be looked at and quite possibly tightened. It's quite normal for professional sportsmen to make the most of the rules as they stand - and indeed certain anti-Wiggo posters on this thread have said as much about other rules.

If your opinion is that it's unethical to exploit any particular loophole, that's fair enough. I have a similar view about many rules in many sports (too long to list!). Discussing these is generally part of the fun of watching sport! But they're just personal opinions - the official results will always be what they are. No asterisks for loopholers. Maradonna's goals still stand.



Meanwhile, if you want to get rid of the "Sir" in "Sir Wiggo", you have my vote!


1. I'm actually not 'anti-Wiggo', but I have grave concerns about Team Sky and British Cycling, probably because they claim to be cleaner than the competition. Astana don't really concern me, nor Tinkoff-Saxo when they were in action - they never gave the sense of being 'clean'

2. I don't agree that Sky 'exploited a loophole'. Given the nature of the drug prescribed and the situations in which it would usually be used, plus the risks involved, it seems hard to believe that it should be given as a preventative or to someone who is fit to race. Therefore, it falls outside the TUE requirements at the time. Further, if given as a preventative and the condition doesn't materialise, it will be performance enhancing.

All this may die down, like the Nike Oregon Project allegations, but something is seriously amiss - even if only the level of hypocrisy - and it seems mistaken to me, not to admit it.

My comment about Froome was really more focused on Sky, and was also mischievous. However, he had TUEs for Prednisolone, which he has previously acknowledged. What I also find difficult to understand is how he gets down to 4% body fat (as quoted by Dave Brailsford) without losing power in the process.

LWAB is probably the best person to comment on this, and any motor drive that may or may not be doing the rounds.
   
Mike
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 26, 2016, 07:48:50 am
Not this little black duck. I've been too many years away from the game to actually know what is happening now, though I still have an enquiring mind and a jaundiced eye.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on October 26, 2016, 10:32:09 am
The way I read it is that Sky took the opportunity presented by Wiggo's exercise-induced asthma and a quite-likely genuine medical issue to obtain the strongest possible medication allowed under the TUE rules extant at the time - even Wiggins said it was to 'level the playing field'. The moral question of whether anyone should be able to medically compensate for an illness in order to compete is arguable - and will be into eternity, no doubt.

However, the fact is what they did was within the rules, declared as happening at the time, and raised no objection from the governing bodies responsible - who had every opportunity to do so had they wished. There was no subterfuge, no attempt to hide what was happening. Therefore, as I see it, there is no reason for Sky or Wiggins to feel under any threat. The rules were subsequently changed, and will no doubt change again. But you can't judge people for actions which were legal and open at the time, but would not now be so.
EXACTLY!

I remember reading an article, from donkey's years ago about the US track team, their training, diet, equipment and prep for olympics.

They used helium in their tyres.
During training they stored blood and reinjected their own red blood cells before competition. It was legal at the time, so all above board.

Absolutely banned now. Talked about as if it were on a par with murdering babies.
Should they give their medals back? OFFS

Have sky been gaming the system? Absolutely.
Have riders been riding bikes made to just within the rules aerodymanics? Of course. They would be fools not to. Is that gaming the system? Of course.
Should they be riding penny farthings made from wrought iron instead? Don't be ridiculous.

Stop being children. Wiggo was managed by professionals who will work to the edge of the rules. His injections were declared and in the rules. Nothing was hidden.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 26, 2016, 10:34:52 am
Wiggo's injections were not within the rules, though they were approved by the relevant authority.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 26, 2016, 11:42:39 am
The way I read it is that Sky took the opportunity presented by Wiggo's exercise-induced asthma and a quite-likely genuine medical issue to obtain the strongest possible medication allowed under the TUE rules extant at the time - even Wiggins said it was to 'level the playing field'. The moral question of whether anyone should be able to medically compensate for an illness in order to compete is arguable - and will be into eternity, no doubt.

However, the fact is what they did was within the rules, declared as happening at the time, and raised no objection from the governing bodies responsible - who had every opportunity to do so had they wished. There was no subterfuge, no attempt to hide what was happening. Therefore, as I see it, there is no reason for Sky or Wiggins to feel under any threat. The rules were subsequently changed, and will no doubt change again. But you can't judge people for actions which were legal and open at the time, but would not now be so.
EXACTLY!

I remember reading an article, from donkey's years ago about the US track team, their training, diet, equipment and prep for olympics.

They used helium in their tyres.
During training they stored blood and reinjected their own red blood cells before competition. It was legal at the time, so all above board.

Absolutely banned now. Talked about as if it were on a par with murdering babies.
Should they give their medals back? OFFS

Have sky been gaming the system? Absolutely.
Have riders been riding bikes made to just within the rules aerodymanics? Of course. They would be fools not to. Is that gaming the system? Of course.
Should they be riding penny farthings made from wrought iron instead? Don't be ridiculous.

Stop being children. Wiggo was managed by professionals who will work to the edge of the rules. His injections were declared and in the rules. Nothing was hidden.

Not quite true.

Prior to his exposure Wiggins claimed he'd never had an injection. He lied.

Sky lie. Their ZTP PR bullshit now looks even more ridiculous than when it did after they employed doping doctor, Geert Leinders and Froome's "fast track" TUE he needed because he was so poorly.....that he then went on to decimate the Tour de Romandie.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 26, 2016, 12:39:25 pm
He lied to whom? In a book for his adoring public, ghost-written by some journo or other? That's irrelevant. I am pretty damn sure his TUE will have specified the drugs to be used, the dosage, and the method of administration. That will have been seen by UKAD and the UCI before the event. Sky and Wiggins have no legal resppnsibility to you and me, and they are not required to seek our approval. Their responsibility on the first place is to the legal authorities of the sport, and then to their shareholders. As far as I can see, those responsibilities were discharged properly.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Pingu on October 26, 2016, 12:44:16 pm
[Y'all  realise that I just threw the Hand of God in for light relief. Right?  :-\  ]

Too soon  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 26, 2016, 12:45:34 pm
Surely it's UKAD who (might) have cheated, not Sky, by approving a TUE that didn't strictly meet the criteria?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: hubner on October 26, 2016, 01:04:39 pm
I suspect collusion by sporting bodies is common. It's not really in their interest to expose drug taking, especially by "stars".

Armstrong failed a dope test in his first Tour "win" and the UCI covered it up by giving him a TUE. I guess the big dollar signs were too much to resist.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on October 26, 2016, 01:13:37 pm
He lied to whom? In a book for his adoring public, ghost-written by some journo or other? That's irrelevant.

Its not to me. I know he wont be losing any sleep over me not believing in him any more but equally I wont be buying anything him, Sky, Froome or UCI or UKADA have to say anymore.  He's scratched from my list of cycling heroes.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 26, 2016, 01:17:28 pm
But I don't understand why. He and his team were within the rules, and used them to their legal advantage. It may be unpleasant, but I expect all premier sportspeople to do the same. Exploiting the letter of the rules for maximum advantage is - and will always be - part and parcel of professional sport. It's not a game!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 26, 2016, 01:21:22 pm
In the very early days of codified football, when professionals and amateurs still played together, there were no sending-offs because it was assumed that any infringement of the rules was accidental.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: hubner on October 26, 2016, 01:29:57 pm
There's more to sport than just not breaking any rules. There's also the way, panache, style, method or manner a win is achieved!

Eg, there was limited overs cricket match where the batter need a six from the last ball to win the match, but the bowler rolled the ball along the ground instead of delivering a normal bowl. No rules were broken!

Eg, in the 89 tour, Lemond won by using a piece of equipment that enabled him to rider faster, something that no other rider had, as far as I'm concerned he cheated.

And of course there's the Maradonna hand of god.

And if Armstrong hadn't confessed, he'll be still saying he didn't fail any dope tests!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on October 26, 2016, 01:45:21 pm
There's more to sport than just not breaking any rules. There's also the way, panache, style, method or manner a win is achieved!


You mean how entertaining it is for the onlooker.  For me it was Sky's strict adherence to team discipline that bored me just a little (and yes, it seemed to be learnt from Armstrong's team).  Give me the unpredictable brilliance of a Pantani anytime.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: hubner on October 26, 2016, 01:49:36 pm
Good point, sport is just entertainment.

Forget about any Olympic ideals or spirit, somebody has to win.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on October 26, 2016, 02:06:07 pm
It's not just sport though. I like watching the coverage, as it's a narrative which enables us to see landscape from interesting viewpoints. That costs a lot to do, and it's only viable because it sells advertising.

I accept that people like winners, and that advertisers create that pressure to win. In the past that has caused health problems, so it's right that there are sanctions against drug use.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on October 26, 2016, 02:17:15 pm
Eg, in the 89 tour, Lemond won by using a piece of equipment that enabled him to rider faster, something that no other rider had, as far as I'm concerned he cheated.

The good news is that you don't decide the rules, so since his use of tribars was officially appealed and allowed at the time, he unquestionably rode and won legally, and changed the sport in the process, just like the first guy to use caliper brakes, spoked wheels, derailleur gears, alu frames, carbon frames, disc wheels, ergoshifters, heart rate monitors and power meters.  Shall we go back to riding penny farthings?

There is one and only one version of the rules: that which is written.  Whether an athlete breaks what some random spectator interprets as the spirit of the rules matters not at all.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 26, 2016, 02:23:12 pm
He lied to whom? In a book for his adoring public, ghost-written by some journo or other? That's irrelevant.

Its not to me. I know he wont be losing any sleep over me not believing in him any more but equally I wont be buying anything him, Sky, Froome or UCI or UKADA have to say anymore.  He's scratched from my list of cycling heroes.

It's not to me either.

Whatever happened to Sky being whiter than white? Cleaner than everybody else? It's pretty obvious why Sky refused to join the MPCC
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 26, 2016, 02:29:02 pm
He lied to whom? In a book for his adoring public, ghost-written by some journo or other? That's irrelevant.

Its not to me. I know he wont be losing any sleep over me not believing in him any more but equally I wont be buying anything him, Sky, Froome or UCI or UKADA have to say anymore.  He's scratched from my list of cycling heroes.

It's not to me either.

Whatever happened to Sky being whiter than white? Cleaner than everybody else? It's pretty obvious why Sky refused to join the MPCC
Were you a big Sky/Wiggo fan before? Have you been tearing their posters off the wall? Throwing away signed replica shirts?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on October 26, 2016, 02:56:49 pm
He lied to whom? In a book for his adoring public, ghost-written by some journo or other? That's irrelevant.

Its not to me. I know he wont be losing any sleep over me not believing in him any more but equally I wont be buying anything him, Sky, Froome or UCI or UKADA have to say anymore.  He's scratched from my list of cycling heroes.

It's not to me either.

Whatever happened to Sky being whiter than white? Cleaner than everybody else? It's pretty obvious why Sky refused to join the MPCC

They had Sean Yates since the start ...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on October 26, 2016, 04:01:26 pm
He lied to whom? In a book for his adoring public, ghost-written by some journo or other? That's irrelevant.

Its not to me. I know he wont be losing any sleep over me not believing in him any more but equally I wont be buying anything him, Sky, Froome or UCI or UKADA have to say anymore.  He's scratched from my list of cycling heroes.

It's not to me either.

Whatever happened to Sky being whiter than white? Cleaner than everybody else? It's pretty obvious why Sky refused to join the MPCC
Were you a big Sky/Wiggo fan before? Have you been tearing their posters off the wall? Throwing away signed replica shirts?

I was a big Wiggo fan. No posters, but I bought the royal mail 1st day cover of his gold medal :-)
I feel very much misled by the "no injections" and the claims of zero tolerance to anything other than whiter than white.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on October 26, 2016, 04:14:20 pm
I've shaved off my sideburns, pissed on them, burned them, then used them as cat litter.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 26, 2016, 05:15:50 pm
He lied to whom? In a book for his adoring public, ghost-written by some journo or other? That's irrelevant.

Its not to me. I know he wont be losing any sleep over me not believing in him any more but equally I wont be buying anything him, Sky, Froome or UCI or UKADA have to say anymore.  He's scratched from my list of cycling heroes.

It's not to me either.

Whatever happened to Sky being whiter than white? Cleaner than everybody else? It's pretty obvious why Sky refused to join the MPCC
Were you a big Sky/Wiggo fan before? Have you been tearing their posters off the wall? Throwing away signed replica shirts?

Nope.

I never bought into their bullshit. It was good to have a British team, despite doing nothing for nearly 2 seasons. Then hiring the guy that ran the team doping system at Rabobank, and all of sudden taking 2nd and 3rd on the Vuelta and then dominating cycling a few months later looking exactly like USPS was just a little too much in the way of suspension of disbelief.

I guess you are just sorry I "don't believe in miracles".
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on October 26, 2016, 05:17:02 pm
I've shaved off my sideburns, pissed on them, burned them, then used them as cat litter.

That should ensure you're not caught by random testing. ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 26, 2016, 05:24:37 pm
He lied to whom? In a book for his adoring public, ghost-written by some journo or other? That's irrelevant.

Its not to me. I know he wont be losing any sleep over me not believing in him any more but equally I wont be buying anything him, Sky, Froome or UCI or UKADA have to say anymore.  He's scratched from my list of cycling heroes.

It's not to me either.

Whatever happened to Sky being whiter than white? Cleaner than everybody else? It's pretty obvious why Sky refused to join the MPCC

They had Sean Yates since the start ...

Yep....and in a sense I think it's inevitable that if you are going to employ experienced top level ex-pros as DSs then they are likely to be ex-dopers. I don't see that as an issue.

What I do see as an issue is employing a doping doctor...when other doctors are available, and when another member of your staff was on the team he doped at the same time as he was doping them. And then, when challenged, to try an use the tragic death of another member of staff as a justification for the hiring of said doctor.

And then, despite all the holier than thou bullshit, not joining the MPCC, because doing so would have meant not being able to abuse cortisone.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 26, 2016, 06:25:28 pm
But I don't understand why. He and his team were within the rules, and used them to their legal advantage.

Only if you believe that the injection was actually necessary to treat an acute, serious medical problem.  I think it's quite clear that it wasn't.  If prednisolone or similar less aggressive drugs wouldn't have been enough, then he was sick enough not to be able to get on a bike.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 27, 2016, 01:54:06 am
Nope. The drug, the dose, and the method of administration will have been proposed and agreed by the authorities prior to being approved. Whether or not it was best medical practice is between the UCI and Sky's doctor, and is not something any of us are qualified to judge because we weren't privy to the medical consultations. All of this hand-wringing and backseat driving of Sky is, frankly, emotional bollocks.

The TUE was legal and approved prior to administration. Whatever you think of the drugs used, the personalities involved, or the ethics of the rules that applied at the time, it was legal. That is the only relevant metric.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 27, 2016, 06:18:06 am
No it isn't.

You can ask yourself if it was ethical, and the answer is a resounding no. It's very obvious that Sky and Wiggins have abused the TUE process so that they can use PEDs.

There is more to this than whether or not it conformed to rules, which is why Wiggins has reputation is gone. He knows it too.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 27, 2016, 09:34:30 am
Nope. The drug, the dose, and the method of administration will have been proposed and agreed by the authorities prior to being approved. Whether or not it was best medical practice is between the UCI and Sky's doctor, and is not something any of us are qualified to judge because we weren't privy to the medical consultations. All of this hand-wringing and backseat driving of Sky is, frankly, emotional bollocks.

The TUE was legal and approved prior to administration. Whatever you think of the drugs used, the personalities involved, or the ethics of the rules that applied at the time, it was legal. That is the only relevant metric.
Agreed.

Some people seem to think that you can have perfect, ethical rules around drug use; well the bad news is that you can't. I'm not happy about this, as I'm one of those pathetic sports fans who does judge athletes on their ethics, supporting the "nice guy" even when he loses to the ruthless cad. But it's fact.

For sport to function at all you need arbitrary rules. How much is a "normal" level of testosterone? What drugs are "necessary" for a sick athlete? When does a painkiller become a PED?

The rules will always be a necessary compromise; it's reasonable to debate improvements, but it's absurd to criticise the athletes who figure out how to push the rules most effectively.

And the cynical "i'm not as naive as some" view is no help to anyone. Sure, riders are cheating right now, and getting away with it. We all know this! So all that matters is the current rules; if you find a loophole, you aren't cheating. If you push right upto the limits, you aren't cheating.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 27, 2016, 09:39:39 am
If anything is allowed, as long as the governing body signs off on it (even if it is against their own rules), then brown paper bags full of money become very useful.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 27, 2016, 09:45:37 am
If anything is allowed, as long as the governing body signs off on it (even if it is against their own rules), then brown paper bags full of money become very useful.
Again, I'm sure this happens (it happens at FIFA and most other big money sports, so why not cycling, and why not now?).

But it's just like drugs offences - noone can prove a negative. It's just mud-slinging without proof; what would you accept as proof that no brown paper bags were involved??

You're entitled to your opinion, but don't expect anyone to take it seriously without evidence. There's just no point. BTW: just accusing whoever wins doesn't count as evidence ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 27, 2016, 09:54:49 am
It might be interesting to do a full investigation and financial audit of the UCI doctor who signed off Wiggo's TUEs.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 27, 2016, 11:57:37 am
I've shaved off my sideburns, pissed on them, burned them, then used them as cat litter.
Just as long as you don't feed them to the chickens.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 27, 2016, 12:29:33 pm
It might be interesting to do a full investigation and financial audit of the UCI doctor who signed off Wiggo's TUEs.

It might. If you can fund it, and can produce substantive evidence from your investigation, then you have a case. Suspicion and accusation is not a case.

This is not like using illegal methods and drugs to produce an apparently legal result, as was commonly the case with EPO use. Everything about this was declared, open for official examination, and approved at the time. I'm no more impressed by it than Matt is, but I recognise the line between legal and illegal, and that legality - however marginally moral - is the only line that counts.

I'm sure most of us (and all professional athletes) recognise the benefits of caffeine for cycling. In some athletes, the benefits are startling. Perfectly legal - at the moment - and any team not studying and employing the benefits of caffeine are missing a trick and selling themselves short. Yes, there are medical risks with overuse, but how many of us drink too much coffee or tea (not to mention alcohol) and accept the risk? It's legal. It may not be wise, but it's legal. And, in the coffee and alcohol case, we like the effects. So, even with no financial or competitive pressure, we do it anyway.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: trekker12 on October 27, 2016, 03:42:27 pm
Wiggins has reputation is gone. He knows it too.

So why is he spending this week riding round a sold out London Velodrome with the whole crowd cheering when he takes a lap?

If he thinks his reputation has gone I suspect he would quietly slip out the back door and stick his fingers up to all of us. Instead he's fulfilling a commitment presumably made to the London six day some time ago and is carrying on because as far as he is concerned he's not done anything wrong.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 27, 2016, 04:10:40 pm
Wiggins has reputation is gone. He knows it too.

So why is he spending this week riding round a sold out London Velodrome with the whole crowd cheering when he takes a lap?

If he thinks his reputation has gone I suspect he would quietly slip out the back door and stick his fingers up to all of us. Instead he's fulfilling a commitment presumably made to the London six day some time ago and is carrying on because as far as he is concerned he's not done anything wrong.
I have seen a ticket for Saturday on sale this morning; no doubt they have read this thread and it has opened their eyes!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 27, 2016, 04:43:41 pm
Wiggins has reputation is gone. He knows it too.

So why is he spending this week riding round a sold out London Velodrome with the whole crowd cheering when he takes a lap?

If he thinks his reputation has gone I suspect he would quietly slip out the back door and stick his fingers up to all of us. Instead he's fulfilling a commitment presumably made to the London six day some time ago and is carrying on because as far as he is concerned he's not done anything wrong.

Most people are blindly flag-waving and have little clue as the back story and the details. How many of the know about the history of Kenacort use in cycling or have even heard of Jorg Jackshe, let alone what he said?

There's a fair chunk of cognitive dissonance  going on too.

It's the Lance Armstrong syndrome all over again.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on October 27, 2016, 04:47:30 pm
Tho Wiggns did seem to unexpectedly DNS the Abu Dhabi Tour, possibly to avoid the press. One report is here: http://cyclingtips.com/2016/10/abu-dhabi-tour-organisers-insist-that-wiggins-withdrawal-from-race-is-unexpected/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: trekker12 on October 27, 2016, 05:10:19 pm
Wiggins has reputation is gone. He knows it too.

So why is he spending this week riding round a sold out London Velodrome with the whole crowd cheering when he takes a lap?

If he thinks his reputation has gone I suspect he would quietly slip out the back door and stick his fingers up to all of us. Instead he's fulfilling a commitment presumably made to the London six day some time ago and is carrying on because as far as he is concerned he's not done anything wrong.

Most people are blindly flag-waving and have little clue as the back story and the details. How many of the know about the history of Kenacort use in cycling or have even heard of Jorg Jackshe, let alone what he said?

There's a fair chunk of cognitive dissonance  going on too.

It's the Lance Armstrong syndrome all over again.

So his reputation isn't in tatters then
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 27, 2016, 05:11:47 pm
Apart from Sky fans for whom cycling didn't exist prior to 2012, yes it is.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on October 27, 2016, 05:34:01 pm
Wiggins has reputation is gone. He knows it too.

So why is he spending this week riding round a sold out London Velodrome with the whole crowd cheering when he takes a lap?

If he thinks his reputation has gone I suspect he would quietly slip out the back door and stick his fingers up to all of us. Instead he's fulfilling a commitment presumably made to the London six day some time ago and is carrying on because as far as he is concerned he's not done anything wrong.
I have seen a ticket for Saturday on sale this morning; no doubt they have read this thread and it has opened their eyes!

It's not my ticket  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 27, 2016, 05:46:04 pm
It's just been taken anyway!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 27, 2016, 06:51:32 pm
Tho Wiggns did seem to unexpectedly DNS the Abu Dhabi Tour, possibly to avoid the press. One report is here: http://cyclingtips.com/2016/10/abu-dhabi-tour-organisers-insist-that-wiggins-withdrawal-from-race-is-unexpected/

Because the press there might not be as friendly as the local press in London?
I still find it amazing that no one seems to know what was in that 'medical package' and had to issue and then correct a string of lies.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 27, 2016, 07:02:37 pm
Brailsford has almost impossibly managed to out-bullshit himself on this issue.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on October 27, 2016, 08:18:39 pm
I must admit that I find this side of it almost as entertaining as the racing.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 27, 2016, 08:27:27 pm
Yeah. Have you heard....Bradley Wiggins has got really bad asthma.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 27, 2016, 08:58:55 pm
Apart from Sky fans for whom cycling didn't exist prior to 2012, yes it is.

For you.

I don't really care one way or the other; I don't put anyone on a pedestal - especially sportspeople.  But if you're going to fling accusations, you need to explain why a legal process, undertaken in full view of the authorities, justifies anything over and beyond a raised eyebrow and a shrug.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on October 27, 2016, 10:00:41 pm
It might be interesting to do a full investigation and financial audit of the UCI doctor who signed off Wiggo's TUEs.

It might. If you can fund it, and can produce substantive evidence from your investigation, then you have a case. Suspicion and accusation is not a case.

This is not like using illegal methods and drugs to produce an apparently legal result, as was commonly the case with EPO use. Everything about this was declared, open for official examination, and approved at the time. I'm no more impressed by it than Matt is, but I recognise the line between legal and illegal, and that legality - however marginally moral - is the only line that counts.

I'm sure most of us (and all professional athletes) recognise the benefits of caffeine for cycling. In some athletes, the benefits are startling. Perfectly legal - at the moment - and any team not studying and employing the benefits of caffeine are missing a trick and selling themselves short. Yes, there are medical risks with overuse, but how many of us drink too much coffee or tea (not to mention alcohol) and accept the risk? It's legal. It may not be wise, but it's legal. And, in the coffee and alcohol case, we like the effects. So, even with no financial or competitive pressure, we do it anyway.

Wasn't there an issue with Gianni Bugno having an excessive caffeine result? Sometime in the early 90's I think. I remember that at the time my daily coffee consumption would have been very close to his (estimated) "excessive" count (and the pundits didn't believe his figure credible!!)

In this story concerning Sky and BC I note that J Tiernan-Locke has said that Tramadol was freely available at one of the World's. Having taken Tramadol (in some heavy doses as well as lighter ones) I have to admit that I fail to see how it can be a PED. Effective painkiller yes but make you go faster? Never!!! This throws me into serious doubt about the validity of this whole story - too much reading of tea leaves and clutching of straws.

I am thoroughly enjoying Eurosport (France) coverage of the London 6; hope team 1 win but even if not it's all good entertainment.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 27, 2016, 10:21:28 pm
Apart from Sky fans for whom cycling didn't exist prior to 2012, yes it is.

For you.

I don't really care one way or the other; I don't put anyone on a pedestal - especially sportspeople.  But if you're going to fling accusations, you need to explain why a legal process, undertaken in full view of the authorities, justifies anything over and beyond a raised eyebrow and a shrug.

Not only for me. Also for Wiggins's colleagues.

Marcel Kittel: cyclists with severe asthma should compete in Paralympics

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/oct/14/marcel-kittel-cyclists-severe-asthma-paralympics?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on October 27, 2016, 10:24:42 pm
It might be interesting to do a full investigation and financial audit of the UCI doctor who signed off Wiggo's TUEs.

It might. If you can fund it, and can produce substantive evidence from your investigation, then you have a case. Suspicion and accusation is not a case.

This is not like using illegal methods and drugs to produce an apparently legal result, as was commonly the case with EPO use. Everything about this was declared, open for official examination, and approved at the time. I'm no more impressed by it than Matt is, but I recognise the line between legal and illegal, and that legality - however marginally moral - is the only line that counts.

I'm sure most of us (and all professional athletes) recognise the benefits of caffeine for cycling. In some athletes, the benefits are startling. Perfectly legal - at the moment - and any team not studying and employing the benefits of caffeine are missing a trick and selling themselves short. Yes, there are medical risks with overuse, but how many of us drink too much coffee or tea (not to mention alcohol) and accept the risk? It's legal. It may not be wise, but it's legal. And, in the coffee and alcohol case, we like the effects. So, even with no financial or competitive pressure, we do it anyway.

Wasn't there an issue with Gianni Bugno having an excessive caffeine result? Sometime in the early 90's I think. I remember that at the time my daily coffee consumption would have been very close to his (estimated) "excessive" count (and the pundits didn't believe his figure credible!!)

In this story concerning Sky and BC I note that J Tiernan-Locke has said that Tramadol was freely available at one of the World's. Having taken Tramadol (in some heavy doses as well as lighter ones) I have to admit that I fail to see how it can be a PED. Effective painkiller yes but make you go faster? Never!!! This throws me into serious doubt about the validity of this whole story - too much reading of tea leaves and clutching of straws.

I am thoroughly enjoying Eurosport (France) coverage of the London 6; hope team 1 win but even if not it's all good entertainment.

Caffeine was controlled at the time, but has since been taken off the list.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 27, 2016, 10:33:20 pm
Apart from Sky fans for whom cycling didn't exist prior to 2012, yes it is.

For you.

I don't really care one way or the other; I don't put anyone on a pedestal - especially sportspeople.  But if you're going to fling accusations, you need to explain why a legal process, undertaken in full view of the authorities, justifies anything over and beyond a raised eyebrow and a shrug.

You mean like Armstrong's TUE?. And why did Wiggins lie about it?
Do you really think that taking a  powerful PED just before his most famous victories deserves only a raised eyebrow and a shrug?.
More so, going straight from standard inhalers to triamcinolone? No attempt controlling it with prednisolone or similar first?.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on October 27, 2016, 11:05:09 pm
Yeah. Have you heard....Bradley Wiggins has got really bad asthma.
I read that as anathema.  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: trekker12 on October 28, 2016, 09:06:34 am
Apart from Sky fans for whom cycling didn't exist prior to 2012, yes it is.

So, I'm a better class of cycling fan because I've been watching the tour since the 1980's and spent much of the 90's having to put up with lies and nonsense from the UCI and the likes of Marco Pantani, Jan Ullrich, Erik Zabel, the entire Festina team and of course Lance Armstrong, to name just a few? Was that supposed to be some kind of initiation into the real world of cycling fandom and anyone who missed out on the 'wonders' of the era and those before are not worthy enough to form their own opinion?

I don't buy this snobbery that recent converts to cycling are somehow lesser educated and not worth our acknowledgement. I don't own Sky kit, I don't particularly like the way they race but the fact it's brought a million new fans into a dying sport and reinvigorated it, to the point that such conversations about it's dark past and known bad apples are brought kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

As far as I'm concerned the only bad thing about this is the fact I'm finding it hard to avoid the results of major races before I've had a chance to get home to watch the highlights now it's in the popular press and radio sports bullitens.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 09:29:36 am
I, and many others, think Sky are USPS Mk II.  What you are saying is exactly what people said about USPS.

There have been several chances for cycli g to clean up its act. Festina...then along came USPS. Puerto and Landis, and along came Sky.

Marginal gains my arse.


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on October 28, 2016, 10:19:56 am
Marginal gains my arse.

So if Sky are USPS Mk II as you suggest, then can we assume that folk like Thomas are also part of the PED culture that you seem to believe is prevalent at Sky?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 10:44:01 am
Geraint Thomas?  ....oh no... not our G!.....proper Welsh lad.....only discovered he could climb when he hit 30 years old mind you....move along, nothing to see here.


Marginal gains. The son of the President of the UCI works for Team Sky.

How's that for a fucking marginal gain  ;D ;D ;D


(P.s. Remember when Thomas scored a 6? No. Thought not)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 28, 2016, 11:04:19 am
Apart from Sky fans for whom cycling didn't exist prior to 2012, yes it is.

For you.

I don't really care one way or the other; I don't put anyone on a pedestal - especially sportspeople.  But if you're going to fling accusations, you need to explain why a legal process, undertaken in full view of the authorities, justifies anything over and beyond a raised eyebrow and a shrug.

Not only for me. Also for Wiggins's colleagues.

Marcel Kittel: cyclists with severe asthma should compete in Paralympics

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/oct/14/marcel-kittel-cyclists-severe-asthma-paralympics?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Whereas various Paralympians would like to be allowed to compete in the mainstream Olympics or even for the whole ability/disability distinction to be abolished.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 28, 2016, 11:04:39 am
Do you really think that taking a  powerful PED just before his most famous victories deserves only a raised eyebrow and a shrug?.
More so, going straight from standard inhalers to triamcinolone? No attempt controlling it with prednisolone or similar first?.

The answer is: why would they do those things, if the rules don't require them to? They(Sky) want the best performance from Wiggo - they want him healthy. They want to be 100% certain that a health issue won't undermine their multi-million dollar investment for 3 Weeks In July. If there's also a "marginal" performance gain from medicine A vs medicine B, then why not? The rules allow it.

(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)


You mean like Armstrong's TUE?. And why did Wiggins lie about it?
Is there a link between Wiggo and Armstrong? IAMFI :)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 28, 2016, 11:21:00 am
Apart from Sky fans for whom cycling didn't exist prior to 2012, yes it is.

For you.

I don't really care one way or the other; I don't put anyone on a pedestal - especially sportspeople.  But if you're going to fling accusations, you need to explain why a legal process, undertaken in full view of the authorities, justifies anything over and beyond a raised eyebrow and a shrug.

You mean like Armstrong's TUE?. And why did Wiggins lie about it?
Do you really think that taking a  powerful PED just before his most famous victories deserves only a raised eyebrow and a shrug?.
More so, going straight from standard inhalers to triamcinolone? No attempt controlling it with prednisolone or similar first?.


What did he do that was illegal? Come on, tell us what the UCI and UKAD missed?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 28, 2016, 11:23:18 am
I, and many others, think Sky are USPS Mk II.  What you are saying is exactly what people said about USPS.

There have been several chances for cycli g to clean up its act. Festina...then along came USPS. Puerto and Landis, and along came Sky.

Marginal gains my arse.

Facts, please. Unsubstantiated accusations and implications are worthless.

You may be right - but if you give no evidence, you cannot expect to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 11:26:49 am
And Lance never tested positive.

Yes, we've heard this all before.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 28, 2016, 11:32:00 am
No, you don't get away with that kind of lazy slander. There was evidence against Armstrong, and eventually it came out. The suspicions about him and his team were strong and well-founded, and the culture of the time allowed non-credible medical statistics to be regarded as not unusual, even though everyone knew how they were achieved. And the methods by which they were achieved were illegal.

What is there about the Wiggins situation that was illegal? Explain.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on October 28, 2016, 11:36:30 am
<snip>
<snip>

(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)


I think this is the key distinction between the sides of this thread.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 28, 2016, 11:43:06 am
<snip>
<snip>

(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)


I think this is the key distinction between the sides of this thread.
Yes. Rules v ethics.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 28, 2016, 11:55:18 am
<snip>
<snip>

(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)


I think this is the key distinction between the sides of this thread.

I think you're right. There are those here who wish that what Sky and Wiggins did was illegal, and who would - with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight - have had a different set of rules around TUEs and medical intervention for professional athletes. And, apart from the fact that armchair medics are perhaps even more irrelevant than armchair DSs/football coaches, there are good arguments supporting the changes that have already happened and may happen in the future. However, the rules in 2012 were what they were, and Sky exploited them - as they were fully entitled to do, and as they were arguably obliged to do.

Professional sport is not about gentlemen's agreements and moral certitude. It's about taking any legal advantage available. Several teams and individuals in many sports have overstepped that mark and, using subterfuge, corruption and methods outside the rules have achieved an advantage they were not entitled to achieve. I see no way to interpret these events as being illegal, or cheating, or obtaining an unfair advantage.

As for the 'lying', that's a complete red herring. A book written on Wiggins' behalf by a ghost writer has an inaccuracy? It probably has several. It was not a deposition to a court of law, nor was it a statement by Wiggins to his sport's authorities. And the facts that were left out (and only left out to casual observers, not to those concerned with policing the sport) were in no way illegal. So what's the case?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 11:56:40 am
No, you don't get away with that kind of lazy slander. There was evidence against Armstrong, and eventually it came out. The suspicions about him and his team were strong and well-founded, and the culture of the time allowed non-credible medical statistics to be regarded as not unusual, even though everyone knew how they were achieved. And the methods by which they were achieved were illegal.

What is there about the Wiggins situation that was illegal? Explain.

I think you'll find its libel, not slander.

Lance accused people of libel too. Never tested positive either.

Sky's day will come, just as did Armstrong's. It's already started.  Those of us who can see clearly, and are not blinded by misplaced patriotism can understand why it is that independent journalists like Paul Kimmage are so enraged by Team Sky.

We can understand why it is that the Tour press room erupted with side-splitting laughter when Froome did his spinning attack up the Ventoux.

We can make the connection between Team Sky's sudden transformation from nobodies to complete dominators and their employment of a known doctor expert in doping techniques (known because it was ready in the public domain, but also because one of Team Sky's staff had been under this doctor's 'care' whilst at Rabobank).

We can see the 'marginal gains' bullshit for what it is. Sky beating known dopers, and beating known doped ascent times with fluffy pillows and no Nutella.

We also see the Bilharzia bullshit for what it is. A confected back story to explain how Froome transformed in a matter of weeks from a nobody to unbeatable.

We recognise that when Floyd Landis sums up Team Sky's wins with the phrase "we know the script", he is telling us something.

We also remember Wiggins eulogising Lance Armstrong in 2009, whilst riding for Garmin, a team managed by Jonathan Vaughters. You might not u derstand the significance of this, and many other factors, but we do.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 28, 2016, 12:02:22 pm
Whatever, Flatus. Bring me evidence and I'll consider it dispassionately. I have no vested interest in Sky or Wiggins (or anyone else in professional sport - including those who resent the success of anyone they don't, or haven't, worked for). There are plenty who would wish for the downfall of Sky simply because they are successful. As I've said before, casting aspersions is not evidence, and if you wish to be taken seriously you must present evidence. If you do, and you're right, I'll happily acknowledge that. But if you just go on shouting that the emperor has no clothes but fail to demonstrate his bare bum, I'll take you no more seriously than I will any beer-fuelled pub expert.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 12:04:43 pm
You want a positive test?

That isn't going to happen, ever.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 28, 2016, 12:11:19 pm
No, Flatus, I want to know what you interpret about Wiggins' TUE as illegal. I'm well aware that you regard pretty much everyone in professional cycle sport as drugged up to the eyeballs and that money is changing hands left right and centre to cover it up. But those are simply allegations, and your repetition of them, however loud, will not make a blind bit of difference to anyone. We will all just stop listening to you unless you can present a case, which is something you have signally failed to do. I am quite sure that nefarious activities are still going on in cycling, though the consensus among expert observers is that it's much less than it was. But I am at a loss to understand what it is about the events we are discussing (remember Wiggins' TUE? That's what this is about) that is interpretable as illegal. But if you know differently, please explain.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 12:20:54 pm
Here's a quick pub quiz question for you, Tim.

Which famous person referred to Team Sky's 'marginal gains' as "bollocks"?

With regards to Wiggins use of a classic PED granted through a TUE, yes...it might have been within the 'rules' but it's pretty clear he abused the rules, and quite possibly was allowed to abuse the rules (as was Armstrong). 

It's interesting that you dismiss Wiggins's lies about injections so glibly, as if the 'ghostwriter' quoted a minor inaccuracy and nobody noticed. Yeah right.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 28, 2016, 12:33:01 pm
Here's a quick pub quiz question for you, Tim.

Which famous person referred to Team Sky's 'marginal gains' as "bollocks"?

I have no idea. What facts did that person quote to back his opinion?

Quote
With regards to Wiggins use of a classic PED granted through a TUE, yes...it might have been within the 'rules' but it's pretty clear he abused the rules, and quite possibly was allowed to abuse the rules (as was Armstrong).

No, it's not clear. As far as I can see, Wiggins' TUE were explicitly within the rules, and I see no evidence that the rules were abused. I see rules that may have been inadequate. I see differences of expert medical opinion on the validity and effects of the drugs used. I see non-expert speculation on whether such drugs were correctly prescribed. I see an allegation from you that there was/is a corrupt relationship between the UCI and Sky. I see no evidence for that.

Quote
It's interesting that you dismiss Wiggins's lies about injections so glibly, as if the 'ghostwriter' quoted a minor inaccuracy and nobody noticed. Yeah right.

Why is it 'interesting'? Are you suggesting that perhaps I'm an undercover operative for the Sky project? Or do you regard Wiggins' book as some kind of commitment to you personally, and one in which any inaccuracies are punished by terminal scepticism?

I'm not the one being glib. You are. You are making accusations without any substantive evidence. If you have some, present it. Don't give me questions, or invite me to make circumstantial observations and come to the same conclusions you have. State your case. Or, frankly, be quiet.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: trekker12 on October 28, 2016, 01:26:36 pm
Hear hear
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 01:36:45 pm
Here's a quick pub quiz question for you, Tim.

Which famous person referred to Team Sky's 'marginal gains' as "bollocks"?

1. I have no idea. What facts did that person quote to back his opinion?

Quote
With regards to Wiggins use of a classic PED granted through a TUE, yes...it might have been within the 'rules' but it's pretty clear he abused the rules, and quite possibly was allowed to abuse the rules (as was Armstrong).

No, it's not clear. As far as I can see, Wiggins' TUE were explicitly within the rules, and I see no evidence that the rules were abused. I see rules that may have been inadequate. I see differences of expert medical opinion on the validity and effects of the drugs used. I see non-expert speculation on whether such drugs were correctly prescribed. I see an allegation from you that there was/is a corrupt relationship between the UCI and Sky. I see no evidence for that.

Quote
It's interesting that you dismiss Wiggins's lies about injections so glibly, as if the 'ghostwriter' quoted a minor inaccuracy and nobody noticed. Yeah right.

2. Why is it 'interesting'? Are you suggesting that perhaps I'm an undercover operative for the Sky project? Or do you regard Wiggins' book as some kind of commitment to you personally, and one in which any inaccuracies are punished by terminal scepticism?

3. I'm not the one being glib. You are. You are making accusations without any substantive evidence. If you have some, present it. Don't give me questions, or invite me to make circumstantial observations and come to the same conclusions you have. State your case. Or, frankly, be quiet.

1. Greg Lemond.  Heard of him?

2. It's interesting because in the context of professional cycling, and in particular the storm in which Sky have hound themselves since 2011, the issue of doping is pretty paramount. It's interesting that you seem to think Wiggins claim never to have had an injection is a minor oversight, when it turns out he has been regularly injecting a classic doping product before major tours during his period of success.  A minor oversight from a team which tries very hard to control the narrative. Yeah right.

3. You don't give the impression of coming at this from an informed position. Perhaps it is you that should be quiet whilst you go and do some homework.

You want a positive test as evidence? It's not going to happen. In the meantime, perhaps you'd like to extend your invitation to shut up to Paul Kimmage, Greg Lemond, Shane Stokes, Jorg Jackshe, Floyd Landis, Antoine Vayer and all the rest of people from inside pro cycling who see the Sky farce for what it is.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: trekker12 on October 28, 2016, 01:40:46 pm
Bored now
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 01:42:22 pm
Go and read another thread then. Nobody is forcing you to read my posts.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on October 28, 2016, 01:43:51 pm
Professional sport is not about gentlemen's agreements and moral certitude.

There is a gentlemen's agreement. It's called mpcc but Sky refused to join. If they had been a member Wiggins won't have ridden those races and ex-Sky riders (Barry & Tiernan locke Locke) won't have been given Tramadol (possibly in liquid form in bidons near the end of stages).


Wiggins got a TUE from UCI for serve asthma. If he didn't have serve asthma or got the TUe because he actually wanted the drug for the known performance boost then that was cheating the Tue system.

If the reason(s) for getting the TUE were bullshit then it's cheating. That's the same as riders getting a TUE for a one day classic a few days beforehand for hurty knee, which the Secret Pro article spoke about.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on October 28, 2016, 01:47:01 pm
1. Greg Lemond.  Heard of him?

Wasn't that the guy who was cheating by inventing aerobars or something ?
Sorry, this isn't helping is it?     ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 01:48:06 pm
We know from past history (Froome's "fast-track" TUE before a race bypassing normal procedures, Armstrong's prescription etc) that high-price riders have rules bent for them.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on October 28, 2016, 01:57:43 pm
I think that attitude of officialdom is a far more serious issue than what Wiggins or Froome might or might not have done.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 28, 2016, 02:12:57 pm
"You want a positive test as evidence? It's not going to happen." seems an odd statement.

In the last 10 years, quite a few Grand Tour titles (at least 10) have been stripped from proven drugs cheats. Most of them the biggy - the one in France.

I don't have anywhere near 100% knowledge of GT history (or perfect memory!), but that may be more than in all the previous 100-odd Grand Tours put together. Most of those tours were won by self-confessed, public dopers.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 02:27:22 pm
Professional sport is not about gentlemen's agreements and moral certitude.

There is a gentlemen's agreement. It's called mpcc but Sky refused to join. If they had been a member Wiggins won't have ridden those races and ex-Sky riders (Barry & Tiernan locke Locke) won't have been given Tramadol (possibly in liquid form in bidons near the end of stages).


Wiggins got a TUE from UCI for serve asthma. If he didn't have serve asthma or got the TUe because he actually wanted the drug for the known performance boost then that was cheating the Tue system.

If the reason(s) for getting the TUE were bullshit then it's cheating. That's the same as riders getting a TUE for a one day classic a few days beforehand for hurty knee, which the Secret Pro article spoke about.

The refusal of Sky to join MPCC fits in with the rumours from the last 5 years that Sky are abusing cortisone.

Here's what MPCC are saying about Sky's travails:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/amp.timeinc.net/cyclingweekly/news/racing/mpcc-says-it-already-has-a-solution-for-team-sky-wiggins-tue-woes-287295%3Fsource%3Ddam?client=ms-android-samsung

They must be pissing themselves laughing.

(P.s. so.  Tim, Trekker....don't click on the link where Tom Dumoulin says Wiggins stinks  ;)   )

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 28, 2016, 03:19:33 pm
Which famous person referred to Team Sky's 'marginal gains' as "bollocks"?
...
Greg Lemond.  Heard of him?

LeMond didn't call Sky's training methods bollocks, it's Brailsford's claim to have invented a new approach to training that he called bollocks. As far as LeMond is concerned, Sky are only using the same methods that he was using over 20 years earlier.

beating known doped ascent times

Not really. Even if you can pick individual examples where Froome beat a time set by Armstrong or Pantani or whoever on a particular climb, the overall trend is slower climbing than in the 90s and 00s. You only have to watch clips of the Tour from the 90s and 00s to see the differences very clearly. Froome's best times on most of the major climbs are nowhere near the likes of Pantani or Armstrong or even 'Big' Miguel Indurain.

None of which proves Froome is clean, of course, but you need to be wary of placing blind faith in the pseudo-scientific witterings of people like Antoine Vayer and Ross Tucker.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on October 28, 2016, 03:23:57 pm
Is this a bit like where I can claim 300W average power for climbing Cheddar Gorge on Strava, but a power meter says I averaged 220W?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 28, 2016, 03:24:32 pm
The refusal of Sky to join MPCC fits in with the rumours from the last 5 years that Sky are abusing cortisone.

'Fits in' is convenient for your argument but proves nothing.

It might be meaningful if Sky were the only WT team not to join the MPCC, but in fact only half the WT teams are currently members - some having never signed up, others having been kicked out for picking and choosing which of the MPCC's rules to follow. As an organisation that claims to be bringing credibility back to cycling, it's laughable.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 28, 2016, 03:30:57 pm
Is this a bit like where I can claim 300W average power for climbing Cheddar Gorge on Strava, but a power meter says I averaged 220W?

I'm not sure it's even that scientific. Vayer and Tucker are making at best educated guesses based on watching the Tour on telly, and then interpreting their invented data in a way that's consistent with the outcome they want to see.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on October 28, 2016, 03:48:33 pm
Not really. Even if you can pick individual examples where Froome beat a time set by Armstrong or Pantani or whoever on a particular climb, the overall trend is slower climbing than in the 90s and 00s. You only have to watch clips of the Tour from the 90s and 00s to see the differences very clearly. Froome's best times on most of the major climbs are nowhere near the likes of Pantani or Armstrong or even 'Big' Miguel Indurain.

None of which proves Froome is clean, of course, but you need to be wary of placing blind faith in the pseudo-scientific witterings of people like Antoine Vayer and Ross Tucker.
And when froome did an amazing day, he didn't follow it with a day where he rode like a ferret on amphetamines.

That's the real difference.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 28, 2016, 05:37:48 pm
Thank you, Cs! You see, Flatus, suspicion, allegations and rumours are not evidence. The fact that some with an axe to grind are loudly critical of Sky is not evidence. Sky's refusal to join the rather laughable MPCC is not evidence. A false claim that Sky's riders are faster than the Armstrong years is not evidence. The crap about the fucking book is not evidence.

What it comes down to, as far as I can see, is that in the same way I can't stand Mercedes F1 and Lewis Hamilton, you can't stand Sky and Bradley Wiggins. It's not something you can put your finger on (or at least, you've failed to put your finger on) but you just don't like them. And you're going to trash-talk them until either someone does produce evidence, or we all get totally fed up with the noise.

The subject of this thread is Wiggins' TUEs and was Sky gaming the system. The answer is yes they were, but what they did was legal. No bribery was needed; the rules pre-existed and were followed. To the letter, as far as I can see. It's quite possible that doing so gained them an advantage, but one that any team could themselves have exploited - and no doubt have done so. The rules have been changed since and, as far as I am aware, the same could not be done now. But there will be other loopholes, and someone will exploit them. And, as far as I'm concerned, that's perfectly ok. Professional sports rulemaking will always be a case of whack-a-mole, and any hope that 'gentlemen's agreements' can be effective is a waste of time. Write the rules properly, promptly, and comprehensively, and expect to see your mistakes punished by clever interpretation.

It's just the way life is.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 06:11:47 pm
Which famous person referred to Team Sky's 'marginal gains' as "bollocks"?
...
Greg Lemond.  Heard of him?

LeMond didn't call Sky's training methods bollocks, it's Brailsford's claim to have invented a new approach to training that he called bollocks. As far as LeMond is concerned, Sky are only using the same methods that he was using over 20 years earlier.

beating known doped ascent times

Not really. Even if you can pick individual examples where Froome beat a time set by Armstrong or Pantani or whoever on a particular climb, the overall trend is slower climbing than in the 90s and 00s. You only have to watch clips of the Tour from the 90s and 00s to see the differences very clearly. Froome's best times on most of the major climbs are nowhere near the likes of Pantani or Armstrong or even 'Big' Miguel Indurain.

None of which proves Froome is clean, of course, but you need to be wary of placing blind faith in the pseudo-scientific witterings of people like Antoine Vayer and Ross Tucker.

You have misquoted me, I didn't say that Lemond called Sky's training methods bollocks. I said he called marginal gains bollocks.

Here is what Lemond said:

"Others make us believe they are ahead of the best scientists, the famous Team Sky marginal gains! What bollocks! There are no new methodologies. That is wrong. In this area too, miracles do not exist."

He is calling the concept of 'marginal gains', bollocks. The key word here is 'gains'. It's an explanation for why Team Sky riders go faster, and it doest involve doping.

With regards to ascent times, I agree, it is very difficult to compare climbs because of differences in where they appear on a given stage on a given Tour and differences in the dynamics of the race on a given day.

And yet....

Froome holds the 3rd all time fastest ascent time up AX3. He beat two of Armstrong's ascents (03/05) but not Armstrong's 01 time.

Funnily enough here's what Brailsford said the day before Froome made his record climb:

"At some point in time, clean performances will surpass the doped performances in the past."


Yeah, Dave, of course they will.

Here's what Froome said immediately after the stage:

""absolutely no way I'd be able to get these results if the sport hadn't changed."

Here are the other top ten climb times of AX3...

1. Laiseka 22:57, 2001

2. Armstrong 22:59, 2001
3. Froome 23:14, 2013
4. Ulrich 23:17, 2003
5. Zubeldia 23:19, 2003
6. Ulrich 23:22, 2001

7. Armstrong 23:24, 2003
8. Vinokourov 23:34, 2003

9. Basso 23:36, 2003

10. Armstrong 23:40, 2005

So Froome is saying that he wins because he is not racing against dopers. And yet his climb on the day he said this was in top 3 when the other 9 times were all from known dopers.

Funny that isn't it.  Nothing to see here. No evidence. Move along....
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 28, 2016, 06:57:10 pm
You have misquoted me, I didn't say that Lemond called Sky's training methods bollocks. I said he called marginal gains bollocks.

What is marginal gains if not a description of Sky's approach to training? The term is just management jargon anyway, it really doesn't mean anything.

In any case, LeMond's comments are ambiguous but he stops well short of accusing Sky of doping. I'd like to read the original interview rather than the garbled translation - just not badly enough to subscribe to L'Equipe.

Quote
Froome holds the 3rd all time fastest ascent time up AX3. He beat two of Armstrong's ascents (03/05) but not Armstrong's 01 time.

Funny that isn't it.  Nothing to see here. No evidence. Move along....

If it were evidence of anything, what exactly would it be evidence of?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 28, 2016, 07:11:22 pm
You have misquoted me, I didn't say that Lemond called Sky's training methods bollocks. I said he called marginal gains bollocks.

Here is what Lemond said:

"Others make us believe they are ahead of the best scientists, the famous Team Sky marginal gains! What bollocks! There are no new methodologies. That is wrong. In this area too, miracles do not exist."

He is calling the concept of 'marginal gains', bollocks. The key word here is 'gains'. It's an explanation for why Team Sky riders go faster, and it doest involve doping.

It's ambiguous, but I'm inclined to agree that Lemond is accusing Sky of doping. The problem here is that he - like Flatus - is assuming that any gains in performance over time must be down to improved undetected doping. I dont think this holds water.

Mediocre domestic UK time-triallists are riding faster than Anquetil et al did. Pretty much every sport in the world has shown massive gains over - say - 40 years, even where doping would be of negligible effect e.g. cricket. Techniques improve, coaching improves, equipment improves. In endurance sport - especially the complex area of road-racing which isn't just about a steady effort over fixed time - the science of training has come on signigicantly, with blood/gas analysis that Anquetil just didnt have (heard of power-meters Flatus?). Sky have made dozens of quite small improvements (that are often then copied); a trivial-but-nice example is the interview-warmdown! Oh yeah - nutrition has come on too.

But hey - if you win, you must be doping. Or rather taking the best dope!

We keep coming back to it - riders can't prove a negative, but rumours sell the most papers/click-thrus/books ..
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 07:18:11 pm
You have misquoted me, I didn't say that Lemond called Sky's training methods bollocks. I said he called marginal gains bollocks.

What is marginal gains if not a description of Sky's approach to training? The term is just management jargon anyway, it really doesn't mean anything.


It isn't just a description of training. It's a description of everything.....which is why they blat on about equipment, mattresses, pillows, etc etc.

Of course it's jargon, but it is being used to explain inexplicable performance gains.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on October 28, 2016, 07:20:19 pm
Quote
Froome holds the 3rd all time fastest ascent time up AX3. He beat two of Armstrong's ascents (03/05) but not Armstrong's 01 time.

Funny that isn't it.  Nothing to see here. No evidence. Move along....

If it were evidence of anything, what exactly would it be evidence of?

Evidence of better understanding of the effects of training and diet on performance, training at altitude for preparation, sleeping in oxygen enriched environment to aid recovery, use of power meters to gauge progress and performance, including use on the climb, better use of teams to enable star rider gets to bottom of climb with more energy to spare, better equipment including kit that helps marginal gains to give a 'faster' bike.  Might even check road surface!

But none of this will convince the keyboard warrior that can slag off someone at will without having any credible evidence.  In another thread that attitude would be roundly condemned, but in this thread it appears OK, in the eyes of some, to make accusations that simply amount to 'hear say' with nothing to substantiate the claim.  Personally, I think they would be better of following the investigation as to whether or not man did really land on the moon!

(Good posts citoyen, but I don't think your rational argument will have any effect on someone with a closed mind and appears to hold a view that could be described as biased)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 07:26:37 pm
And of course "Evidence of better understanding of the effects of training and diet on performance, training at altitude for preparation, sleeping in oxygen enriched environment to aid recovery, use of power meters to gauge progress and performance, including use on the climb, better use of teams to enable star rider gets to bottom of climb with more energy to spare, better equipment including kit that helps marginal gains to give a 'faster' bike.  Might even check road surface! Bla bla bla"...

...is only available to Team Sky riders ::-)

It's not new. Lance won because he trained harder than everyone else  ;)

We've heard it all before, which is why Landis (do you know who he is and for whom he rode?) said "we know the script".

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on October 28, 2016, 07:39:49 pm
And what evidence does Landis have to substantiate his claim?

None whatsoever. But as he is a convicted doper, he is credible!

Based on your stance, all winners in whatever sport must be doping. Sky have not won Giro or Veluta, so others that have won must dope. Cav must dope, Kittel, Mo, Usain, and all those para Olympians as they did beat the competition and set WRs at the same time.

Or do you just think Sky are cheating?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 07:44:14 pm
And what evidence does Landis have to substantiate his claim?

None whatsoever. But as he is a convicted doper, he is credible!

That's exactly the line Armstrong tried when Landis exposed him.

Quote
Based on your stance, all winners in whatever sport must be doping. Sky have not won Giro or Veluta, so others that have won must dope. Cav must dope, Kittel, Mo, Usain, and all those para Olympians as they did beat the competition and set WRs at the same time.

Or do you just think Sky are cheating?

All winners in all sports must be doping based on my stance?
I think you and logic have a difficult relationship.

Do I think just Sky are cheating? No, I don't.  But I think Sky are definitely cheating.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 28, 2016, 07:57:21 pm
It isn't just a description of training. It's a description of everything.....which is why they blat on about equipment, mattresses, pillows, etc etc.

OK, fair enough. I just mentally package all that up into the 'training' side of things as opposed to the racing side.

I took LeMond's comments at face value when he said there's nothing new in Sky's methodology. LeMond took a similarly scientific approach back in the 80s, looking at aerodynamics and using power meters - albeit without a billionaire media mogul to fund him. Hence 'marginal gains' is 'bollocks' because it's simply putting a new label on ideas that have been knocking around for a long time. (And that may or may not include doping.)

I have a great deal of respect for LeMond, he's my all-time cycling hero, so when he says he's troubled by the sight of Froome spinning away from his rivals up a mountain at 110rpm, I take notice of that. But he stops well short of making any specific accusations. And the reason he stops short is because he just doesn't know. And this is one of the reasons I still respect his opinion - he knows where to draw the line when it comes to making accusations. Whenever Paul Kimmage opens his mouth these days, he just sounds bitter and almost deranged.

Quote
Of course it's jargon, but it is being used to explain inexplicable performance gains.

If you think Brailsford is using the term as a smokescreen, OK, I get where you're coming from. I just think he's the kind of management twat who talks like that and don't read anything more into it.

Of course, if you want to see what really sets Sky apart from all the other teams, follow the money - nothing marginal about that gain.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on October 28, 2016, 07:58:44 pm
No problem with logic but I do have a challenge trying to work out how someone can make unsubstantiated claims without any evidence other than opinions of others.

You quote Lemond. I could accuse him of using PEDs based on his unbelievable performance: just look at the way he caught BH on AdH, it was just unbelievable! And coming back after that shooting, unbelievable!  And just because he did not test positive? Clever boy!

Of course, I don't believe the above, but so easy to make accusations based on nil evidence, rather like there is no evidence regarding Sky. But why let the facts get in the way of a good story?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 28, 2016, 08:03:56 pm
...is exactly what Armstrong fans (and Armstrong) used to say.  Never tested positive.

What evidence would you like? A failed dope test? That will never happen.

It never happened with Armstrong. It only happened with Contador because the UCI failed in their cover up.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: De Sisti on October 28, 2016, 08:08:02 pm
Government now appear to be getting involved. It doesn't look good for SKY, especially with Brailsford currently
not commenting on the contents of the 2011 package.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/parliament-to-look-into-wiggins-mystery-package-news-shorts/

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 28, 2016, 08:54:32 pm
(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)

So, you're perfectly ok that they pretended to have a severe medical iisue and prescribed him a drug that he did not need, so that he could gain a significant advantage over his fellow competitors?..because it was 'within the rules'?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 29, 2016, 12:36:44 am
You have misquoted me, I didn't say that Lemond called Sky's training methods bollocks. I said he called marginal gains bollocks.

What is marginal gains if not a description of Sky's approach to training? The term is just management jargon anyway, it really doesn't mean anything.


It isn't just a description of training. It's a description of everything.....which is why they blat on about equipment, mattresses, pillows, etc etc.

Of course it's jargon, but it is being used to explain inexplicable performance gains.

And this is where we -and an awful lot of intelligent observers - disagree. Actually, the concept of 'marginal gains' applies to all professional sport, and will continue to do so. Changes in training technique, diet and equipment will always and continually enable people to achieve better and better results. That may spook you, but it's a fact that I - a 60 year old man with no history of elite athleticism - can out-perform an elite athlete of 100 years ago while surviving on a diet of beer and burgers, simply because the limited amount of training I do is better focussed than anything they did, and the equipment I ride is from another level of technology to anything they could imagine. Over years and years, that encapsulates marginal gains. But I've occasionally used cough and cold remedies that would have disqualified me from competition, even though they would have made absolutely no difference to the end result. But, hey-ho, I'm probably part of the problem...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 29, 2016, 12:38:55 am
(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)

So, you're perfectly ok that they pretended to have a severe medical iisue and prescribed him a drug that he did not need, so that he could gain a significant advantage over his fellow competitors?..because it was 'within the rules'?


I am. Because the rules are the only criteria against which they may be judged. And they were within the rules.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: hubner on October 29, 2016, 01:29:29 am
I wonder if the rules say, eg:

we (the UCI) will consider granting you a TUE if you:
suffer from the condition for which the drug is to treat, and you have a prescription from your team doctor.

Or:
we (the UCI) will consider granting you a TUE if you:
you have a prescription from your team doctor.

Apparently TUEs are all done in secret, it would interesting to know which riders have applied for TUEs and who gets them.



Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 29, 2016, 04:29:29 am
(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)

So, you're perfectly ok that they pretended to have a severe medical iisue and prescribed him a drug that he did not need, so that he could gain a significant advantage over his fellow competitors?..because it was 'within the rules'?


I am. Because the rules are the only criteria against which they may be judged. And they were within the rules.

Heh. Pretty darn sure you wouldn't be if it was non-Sky team did the same thing.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 08:00:58 am
You have misquoted me, I didn't say that Lemond called Sky's training methods bollocks. I said he called marginal gains bollocks.

What is marginal gains if not a description of Sky's approach to training? The term is just management jargon anyway, it really doesn't mean anything.


It isn't just a description of training. It's a description of everything.....which is why they blat on about equipment, mattresses, pillows, etc etc.

Of course it's jargon, but it is being used to explain inexplicable performance gains.

And this is where we -and an awful lot of intelligent observers - disagree. Actually, the concept of 'marginal gains' applies to all professional sport, and will continue to do so. Changes in training technique, diet and equipment will always and continually enable people to achieve better and better results. That may spook you, but it's a fact that I - a 60 year old man with no history of elite athleticism - can out-perform an elite athlete of 100 years ago while surviving on a diet of beer and burgers, simply because the limited amount of training I do is better focussed than anything they did, and the equipment I ride is from another level of technology to anything they could imagine. Over years and years, that encapsulates marginal gains. But I've occasionally used cough and cold remedies that would have disqualified me from competition, even though they would have made absolutely no difference to the end result. But, hey-ho, I'm probably part of the problem...

Righto.

So Sky are using Pinarellos from space, unavailable to anyone else, and all the other teams are using steel Bianchis from the 1920s?

Sky are using training techniques that nobody else knows about and team staff and riders have their memories wiped clean when they move to other teams so that they can't take the techniques with them?

What people were doing 50 years ago is neither here nor there. Nobody is saying that nutrition, equipment and training techniques haven't and can't improve, but you'd have to be particularly blinkered to think that these gains are only available to one team and the benefits stop working once riders leave that one team.

Sure you can try and improve everything, but again that cannot account for the dominance of one sole team, whose Tour de France roster all seem to be able to reach the performance of their careers at the same time.  It can't account for a rider like Froome, whose contract with Sky was coming to an end and unlikely to be renewed, suddenly transforming from a back of the pack nobody to the best rider in the world.

Oh, sorry. I forgot he unknowingly had Bilharzia for years and Sky (and only Sky) looked into why he was under performing and cured him with marginal gains.

You and the British media have lapped this shit up.  We've seen it all before. Last time it was called CTS, the Carmichael Training System, and Lance Armstrong used it to train harder than anybody else.   Nobody else thought to train a bit harder.

So now we find out that Wiggins used the drug of choice of the 1980s and won lots of races. We find that Brailsford has run out of bullshit to spout and that there is interest at Parliamentary level into what Sky have been doing.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 08:35:24 am
Quick pub quiz question for TimC:

In which well-known sportsman's book did a ghostwriter hear from the sportsman that he had received intramuscular injections of a steroid, used extensively in cycling as a PED, prior to his greatest win and prior to other big events but interpreted the sportman's words as meaning  this:

“British Cycling have always had a no-needle policy, it’s been a mainstay of theirs; so it was something I grew up with as a bike rider,” he wrote.
“In British cycling culture, at the word ‘needle’ or the sight of one, you go, ‘Oh shit’, it’s a complete taboo…
“I’ve never had an injection, apart from I’ve had my vaccinations, and on occasion I’ve been put on a drip, when I’ve come down with diarrhoea or something or have been severely dehydrated.”

(Nothing to see hear, move along everyone and shut up too)

Of course, when Wiggins wrote his book he had no idea the TUEs  would ever come to light. The only reason we know about them is because a hack revealed them.

This from a team who promised to be whiter than white. A team who said they operate to higher ethical standards than everyone else. A team who talk about openness and transparency. A team who didn't join the MPCC (which would have meant Wiggins couldn't have used Kenacort to win the TdF) because they operate at a higher level of ethical purity than even the MPCC demand.

This has been blown out of the water because of a hack that Sky couldn't have anticipated. Whoops.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on October 29, 2016, 09:46:18 am
This from a team who promised to be whiter than white. A team who said they operate to higher ethical standards than everyone else.

That's what galls people, including me.  At the very least it's hypocrisy, but increasingly appears to be outright cheating, ethically if not strictly legally.  To me the argument of legality is a fig leaf for cheaters to hide behind - e.g. Lance.

It will be really interesting to see what Parliament find out about the mystery package.  Wiggo could be the second person this year to lose his honour (so to speak).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 09:53:25 am
Here's what former UCI President, Patrick McQuaid said:

"“It would look like it’s more Sky and their ethical policy. Their attitude is that marginal gains are anything that’s possible as long as it’s in the rules. TUEs are in the rules. When you’re trying to preach the ethics and this, that and the other, and you’re seeming to be bending the rule, it’s a bit hypocritical to be honest with you.”

Hmmm......bending the rules.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 29, 2016, 10:30:36 am
(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)

So, you're perfectly ok that they pretended to have a severe medical iisue and prescribed him a drug that he did not need, so that he could gain a significant advantage over his fellow competitors?..because it was 'within the rules'?


I am. Because the rules are the only criteria against which they may be judged. And they were within the rules.

Heh. Pretty darn sure you wouldn't be if it was non-Sky team did the same thing.

Really? Why? I have no association with, nor do I support, any pro cycling team. I don't watch pro cycling other than the TdF and male and female Tours of Britain. I don't regard it as a particularly exciting sport to watch, and it makes no difference to my life if the whole sport consumes itself in its ever-decreasing circles of self-examination. I found the melée over TUE-gate to be both amusing and bizarre, and the tendency of some observers to now assume that absolutely everything is suspicious is simply conspiracy theory. The idea that working within the rules is somehow illegal is fantasy. If the rules are inadequate (and they were), change them (they have).

Listen, I don't care if the entire Sky media organisation ceases to exist tomorrow. I don't use Sky, I don't buy any of their product, and I certainly don't give a shit about their cycling team. I do give a shit about logic and legalities, and I do not accept that rules can be applied in hindsight.

And now I'm bored with this. You can carry on arguing up your own fundament if you wish. I have a lawn to mow, beer to drink, and more interesting places to be.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 10:32:59 am
Toys out of the pram.

You had no need for that last paragraph.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TimC on October 29, 2016, 10:39:11 am
My pram remains full of toys, actually. And they are more interesting than this argument!

You see, pro cycling is totally unimportant in the grand scheme of things, and I've exceeded the number of milliseconds of my attention it justifies in a totally useless and aimless argument, the result of which makes absolutely no difference to me. So go ahead, continue. I have exhausted my interest in it. If you get whatever result you're after (and I'm not clear what that is, unless it's the banning of anyone that wins anything in cycling), good luck to you. Then you can move on to something else that probably has no impact on the world outside the pro-cycling bubble.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on October 29, 2016, 10:45:03 am
I've love to be able to share around some of my pred so others can get a sense of what it'd feel like to be on a Froome "Romandie dose". You really know you are on it. Gawd knows how full on kenalog feels.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 29, 2016, 10:56:21 am
Sky are using training techniques that nobody else knows about and team staff and riders have their memories wiped clean when they move to other teams so that they can't take the techniques with them

What Sky have that other teams don't have is money. A fuck of a lot of money. They can sign up riders as domestiques  who would be leaders on other teams. Wout Poels and Mikel Landa have no business being Froome's lieutenants - they should be GC contenders in their own right.

There could be many reasons why some riders show a dip in performance when they leave Sky and join other teams, and not all of them are suspicious.

There are also plenty of cases of riders who have dipped or failed to improve when joining Sky (eg Nicolas Roche), and others who have improved after leaving Sky (eg Alex Dowsett). As with the climbing times, it's easy to pick and choose examples to support whatever argument you choose. None of it is proof of anything.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on October 29, 2016, 10:59:19 am
Even if you care about pro cycling and follow it more closely than TimC does, it doesn’t follow that you must think Sky are innocent because they’re British or innovative or whatever. I think they’re innocent because there hasn’t been a shred of evidence to the contrary. No other reason.

My support for Sky is really the support of rational thought and the rule of law over innuendo and unhinged ranting. I’m afraid I now read everything Flatus writes in the voice of his avatar.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 11:03:26 am
Sky are using training techniques that nobody else knows about and team staff and riders have their memories wiped clean when they move to other teams so that they can't take the techniques with them

What Sky have that other teams don't have is money. A fuck of a lot of money. They can sign up riders as domestiques  who would be leaders on other teams. Wout Poels and Mikel Landa have no business being Froome's lieutenants - they should be GC contenders in their own right.

There could be many reasons why some riders show a dip in performance when they leave Sky and join other teams, and not all of them are suspicious.

There are also plenty of cases of riders who have dipped or failed to improve when joining Sky (eg Nicolas Roche), and others who have improved after leaving Sky (eg Alex Dowsett). As with the climbing times, it's easy to pick and choose examples to support whatever argument you choose. None of it is proof of anything.

Tinkov have a pretty large budget too.

In 2012 when Wiggins won his Tour, Sky's budget wasn't the largest. There were at least two other teams with larger.

So, yes, you can pick and choose your examples.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 29, 2016, 11:03:37 am
I've love to be able to share around some of my pred so others can get a sense of what it'd feel like to be on a Froome "Romandie dose". You really know you are on it. Gawd knows how full on kenalog feels.

I've used my wife's salbutamol inhaler and even that weak-ass shit had pretty noticeable effects, albeit fairly short lived.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 11:06:32 am
Even if you care about pro cycling and follow it more closely than TimC does, it doesn’t follow that you must think Sky are innocent because they’re British or innovative or whatever. I think they’re innocent because there hasn’t been a shred of evidence to the contrary. No other reason.

Lance Armstrong was innocent until 2012

Quote
My support for Sky is really the support of rational thought and the rule of law over innuendo and unhinged ranting. I’m afraid I now read everything Flatus writes in the voice of his avatar.

I think we all know what it means when people resort to personal attack.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 11:08:28 am
I've love to be able to share around some of my pred so others can get a sense of what it'd feel like to be on a Froome "Romandie dose". You really know you are on it. Gawd knows how full on kenalog feels.

http://www.stickybottle.com/blogs/medical-opinion-taking-corticosteroids-when-you-have-no-medical-need-to/

This is worth a read.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on October 29, 2016, 11:12:16 am
I've love to be able to share around some of my pred so others can get a sense of what it'd feel like to be on a Froome "Romandie dose". You really know you are on it. Gawd knows how full on kenalog feels.

We have some emergency supply for the bairn's asthma. Should checkmate date really and see if it needs replacing. Would be an interesting experiment, but I'll probably just leave it. I can imagine wanting to feel stringer and faster all the time...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on October 29, 2016, 11:18:10 am
I've love to be able to share around some of my pred so others can get a sense of what it'd feel like to be on a Froome "Romandie dose". You really know you are on it. Gawd knows how full on kenalog feels.

http://www.stickybottle.com/blogs/medical-opinion-taking-corticosteroids-when-you-have-no-medical-need-to/

This is worth a read.
Yes, I've seen my peak flow jump 50l/min, and taken 2mins out of a 35m commute pb.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 11:35:41 am
How's that for a marginal gain  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 29, 2016, 11:37:35 am
In 2012 when Wiggins won his Tour, Sky's budget wasn't the largest. There were at least two other teams with larger.

Just having the money doesn't guarantee success - BMC are perennial underachievers and it's not necessarily because they're cleaner than other teams. But that kind of money does give you a massive advantage over the majority of your rivals.

The question is really whether Wiggo's use of triamcinolone is what made the difference between him and Nibali in 2012. It's certainly possible.

There are plenty of other less dubious factors to take into account as well though. The course suited Wiggins, he had a stronger team around him, Contador was absent etc etc.

I don't think the evidence is conclusive either way. And I'm not only saying that because I'm a Sky fan boy. I feel much the same about Nibali's Tour win in 2014.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on October 29, 2016, 01:14:07 pm
You can rely on anecdata, and you can do all sorts of armchair calculations on uncontrolled situations. Ultimately the errors in the VAM calcualtions done from watching the telly are junk. The optimum way to ride up a reasonably constant gradient is constant(ish) power. Which is what Sky do, setting a pace. Look back at the Contador/Pantani era and you will see a very different style of riding - attack, recover, attack recover. Not the optimum for speed. Add to that the delays built in to telly coverage (yes 'live' is not always as live as you might think when you have multiple cameras covering different aspects of the same event).

The changes in training methods and investment in sports science in Sky are well documented - they do make a difference. They are very targeted and focused. If Froome needs to be able to attack at 110rpm on a climb, you can bet he has been doing that like crazy on Teide, it isn't something that is pulled out of the bag by chance. Wiggins can't do that. Different riding style so target his strengths.

Sky have taken the budget and spent it well, and many of the things they brought in (warm down after races etc.) were rapidly adopted by other teams and are still current practice.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 01:57:54 pm
...is a regurgitation of Sky PR mantra.

It takes a leap of faith to believe it is true. I'm scratching my head to think of any seasoned observers who are prepared to make that leap. Even Walsh, who took the King's shilling, is backing out. Kimmage called bollocks on it. Foreign media call bollocks on it. Lemond calls bollocks on it. The British media lapped it up, happy to parade the British heroes beating Johnny Foreigner at their own game without resorting to the dirty tricks employed by swarthy faced Latins.

Hooray for British Fair Play!

Shame about the cortisone abuse though. Shame Skys turnaround success coincided with the employment of a doctor who is now banned for being at the centre of a team doping programne. Shame that all the talk about ztp, higher ethical standards, independent investigations, release of data etc turned out to be bollocks.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 29, 2016, 03:26:27 pm
(I do understand that it's outside your personal ethics code - and I can understand why - but the rules aren't based on that.)

So, you're perfectly ok that they pretended to have a severe medical iisue and prescribed him a drug that he did not need, so that he could gain a significant advantage over his fellow competitors?..because it was 'within the rules'?


I am. Because the rules are the only criteria against which they may be judged. And they were within the rules.

Heh. Pretty darn sure you wouldn't be if it was non-Sky team did the same thing.
Unfortunately I am NOT perfectly OK with it. Clearly it is a tactic that goes beyond the spirit of the rules - you will probably find rants from me about such things in other sports, especially where my favourite loses! It looks like the rules need improving, and I believe the TUE rules already have been. The MPCC suggestions also look like a good idea.

But - as Flatus is so keen to point out - there ARE grey areas in sport. I wish I had a hero on the Pro-tour who was challenging for big wins with squeaky clean ethics. Oh poor me. In the absence of such a Paladin,  I am a Wiggo fan until there is sufficient evidence of real cheating to persuade me*. (I might even be persuaded if sufficient "ethical" misdeeds are exposed - they are unknown unknowns. )

Do please note - I am not a "Sky fan boy"; I am aware of some bike racing pre-2012 - I grew up in a house called Anquetil FFS!!! I can't stand Murdoch and would rather Wiggo had struggled for wins without all that particular money. OK??



* Incidentally, I believed in Armstrong until the evidence was dug up and he was rightfully nicked. I wouldnt say I was a "fan" though - his persona didn't much appeal to me. But his life made a great story - at least the version in his book did!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on October 29, 2016, 03:49:44 pm
I never believed in the Armstrong miracle. I admit that I thought Sky were better than that though. Most of the supposed evidence is specious nonsense but they do have a case to answer over their use of medications and TUEs, and Wiggins' barefaced lies about needle use.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on October 29, 2016, 04:32:20 pm
...is a regurgitation of Sky PR mantra.

No it isn't. It takes a dispassionate view of what they have actually done with the application of sports science. Sky did come in without baggage and brought in folk like Tim Kerrison, a top sports scientist from outside the 'traditional'  realm. Hence a sudden performance gap with the Sky train and mode of riding in the hills. Guess what? Other teams notice and follow the same process, e.g. Movistar, Astana and so on. If you have the money to afford the research, the riders and the training investment you can do the same thing.

It was a case of "you can't apply knowledge from swimming to cycling". "Oh, maybe you can".

Quote
It takes a leap of faith to believe it is true. I'm scratching my head to think of any seasoned observers who are prepared to make that leap. Even Walsh, who took the King's shilling, is backing out. Kimmage called bollocks on it. Foreign media call bollocks on it. Lemond calls bollocks on it. The British media lapped it up, happy to parade the British heroes beating Johnny Foreigner at their own game without resorting to the dirty tricks employed by swarthy faced Latins.
Most of that is anti-jingoistic rubbish. Look at the science and what is going on. Sure there are some laughable things and some not so laughable. Mattresses etc. A very strong control of nutrition (did other teams have their own chef and kitchen truck before Sky set that as a benchmark?)


Quote

Shame about the cortisone abuse though. Shame Skys turnaround success coincided with the employment of a doctor who is now banned for being at the centre of a team doping programne. Shame that all the talk about ztp, higher ethical standards, independent investigations, release of data etc turned out to be bollocks.

Leinders was specifically employed for his knowledge of dehydration and recovery in competition. Allegedly. A mistake in the signing there. As for cortisone abuse? I've not seen the medical records. I think it is tipping the playing field back the wrong way. Treatment for post race recovery or a specific allergy is fine, but something like that should be a TUE and excluded from competition for the riders health.

Abuse is a strong word, and your rather rabid anti-Sky frothing is not really helping the case.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 04:53:27 pm
How do you know what Leinders was specifically employed for?

Oh, because Brailsford told you.....after Leinders was revealed as a doping mastermind. 

Sorry, David, you are accepting what Brailsford says on face value.  That's a shame, as he is at best 'inconsistent' in his recollections of what he knew or didn't know at any given moment.

Brailsford, the master of small details, determined to run a team purer than anyone else, didn't know what his own DS knew about Leinders, nor what was actually already in the public domain. Nor, he claims, did he have any idea that Wiggins choice of steroid was performance enhancing.

It's literally unbelievable.

"Rabid anti-Sky frothing", "unhinged ranting", "slander", "closed mind" "keyboard warrior".....lots of personal attack from people who claim to be neither very interested in Sky, nor subject to the forces of unthinking patriotism.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on October 29, 2016, 06:47:12 pm
Well, I don't care. I'm about to see Sir Wiggo perform on the track for nearly the last time.

Plus you can see lots of football and cricket on Sky.

What's not to like.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on October 29, 2016, 07:27:40 pm
Flatus,
It is far too late to moan about personal slights. Very early in the thread we find this:

Of course, there will always be those who have a Pavlovian response to a British flag.

Not that 2 wrongs make a right, but, you know - Just Saying ...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on October 29, 2016, 09:04:39 pm
Flatus,
It is far too late to moan about personal slights. Very early in the thread we find this:

Of course, there will always be those who have a Pavlovian response to a British flag.

Not that 2 wrongs make a right, but, you know - Just Saying ...

It's a fair cop.  Flags bring me out in a rash.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on October 29, 2016, 09:37:44 pm
You've built a picture of what is going on in your own mind and are twisting everything to fit. It is a classical conspiracy theory approach.

Everyone who tells you something contrary to your belief is either part of the conspiracy or deluded.

Information that contradicts your pet theory is ignored.
 
You have built up a picture of Brailsford being an infallible master of management.  He is of course the ultimate micromanager down to whether or not brazillians are performance enhancing and has a detailed knowledge of every riders medical records and discussion with their doctors. Every decision goes through his hands at all times. So if something does happen it has to be his deliberate decision.

You have decided that cycling has somehow reached perfection with sports science and therefore any improvement Sky make has to be via illicit means.

You chose opinions that support your preconceived notions without much critical assessment as to the validity of those opinions.

Classic conspiracy theorist or clinic inhabitant. 

Leinders. A doctor who allegedly provided doping products in other teams. Employed on a small number of races allegedly due to his experience with rider recovery/dehydration. But of course that isn't the case and Brailsford the mastermind would employ deliberately a known doper expecting the rest of the world to not notice? Occams razor applies. You of course have some special insight.

As has been stated before, facts, not ungrounded allegations based on circumstantial incidents twisted to fit a preconceived agenda.



Quote from: Flatus link=topic=99572.msg2096217#msg2096217
date=1477756407
How do you know what Leinders was specifically employed for?

Oh, because Brailsford told you.....after Leinders was revealed as a doping mastermind. 

Sorry, David, you are accepting what Brailsford says on face value.  That's a shame, as he is at best 'inconsistent' in his recollections of what he knew or didn't know at any given moment.

Brailsford, the master of small details, determined to run a team purer than anyone else, didn't know what his own DS knew about Leinders, nor what was actually already in the public domain. Nor, he claims, did he have any idea that Wiggins choice of steroid was performance enhancing.

It's literally unbelievable.

"Rabid anti-Sky frothing", "unhinged ranting", "slander", "closed mind" "keyboard warrior".....lots of personal attack from people who claim to be neither very interested in Sky, nor subject to the forces of unthinking patriotism.


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 29, 2016, 09:46:00 pm
Who do think you are, Hannibal Lector?

Do you really think I think you, Sam D, Tim C, Mattc are part of a conspiracy?

Don't be an over-dramatic dick, David.

You've done nothing but quote back Brailsford's words at me,  with complete and uncritical acceptance.

Impressive work, David. Well done.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 29, 2016, 09:52:01 pm
Employing a known doping doctor (and Leinders was known as a doping doctor before Sky hired him) is a massive fail for a team that investigates all of the angles and wants a squeaky-clean reputation.

Unusual variations in rider performance in the last decade or so reasonably correlates with the movements of various doctors between teams.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on October 29, 2016, 09:57:33 pm
No I haven't. I've used words from Walsh, and from what has been published about the changes in training methods, and a bit of old fashioned scientific logic.

I'm not uncritically reciting Brailsfords words, nor am I uncritically gathering circumstantial 'evidence' and claiming something close to a smoking gun, whilst ignoring equally plausible explanations that would actually make more sense.

It gets wearisome, this nudge, nudge wink wink. What is clear is that, like in every significant organisation, Brailsford isn't an infallible mastermind. He doesn't know everything going on in the organisation. And sometimes that facade slips. Doesn't mean it is something sinister going on, doesn't mean it isn't.

I have followed what I can on the science behind Sky's approach and how it differs from previous practice. What you can see is the other teams playing catch up (much like F1 tech changes where one team makes a breakthrough and the others follow suit, but for a period they have an advantage).

FWIW I thing that TUE's should exempt from sanctions, but those taking them should also be excluded from competition.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on October 29, 2016, 10:00:56 pm
I'm more interested in Heiko Salzwedel.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 29, 2016, 10:04:07 pm
Yes. I did some of my coaching classes with Heiko when he first went to Oz, straight from East Germany.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on October 29, 2016, 10:05:31 pm
Employing a known doping doctor (and Leinders was known as a doping doctor before Sky hired him) is a massive fail for a team that investigates all of the angles and wants a squeaky-clean reputation.
So what possible explanation is there other than a screw up with Sky? If they were going to dope they'd be far better than that, surely. It seems to be a very silly thing to do for such an amazing criminal mastermind.

Quote
Unusual variations in rider performance in the last decade or so reasonably correlates with the movements of various doctors between teams.
Again, circumstantial evidence being interpreted to fit a preconceived model. Not saying it doesn't happen, but looking for a higher standard of proof than allegation and rumour.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on October 29, 2016, 10:08:30 pm
I don't care. Wiggo and Cav won the Madison  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on October 29, 2016, 10:15:41 pm
But what’s up with his handlebars? Ugly!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 29, 2016, 10:33:52 pm
DM, the benefits of a good doping doctor are very, very tempting. The definition of a good doping doctor is one that significantly improves a rider's performance without them testing positive.

Rabobank had repeated instances of doping and 'almost certain but not tested positive doping' going back years. Anybody hiring an ex-Rabobank doctor should have known they had probably been involved in doping. Nobody clean in top-level cycling, and I do mean nobody, should have hired a doctor with Rabobank on their CV.

Edited with an eye on the British legal system.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on October 29, 2016, 11:21:58 pm
Yes. I did some of my coaching classes with Heiko when he first went to Oz, straight from East Germany.

We owe a lot to the East Germans, Jürgen Gröbler got some great performances out of the asthmatic Steve Redgrave.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on October 30, 2016, 12:18:31 am
But what’s up with his handlebars? Ugly!

We couldn't see from our seats.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 30, 2016, 05:26:35 am
Wiggo is using 3T Sphinx bars in a non-UCI-compliant position. The handlebars should get no more than 5cm in front of the front hub (probably to ban the Superman position) but his bars are further forward than that.
https://www.3tcycling.com/road/en/bike-components/handlebars/sphinx-ltd/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 30, 2016, 07:22:18 am
Employing a known doping doctor (and Leinders was known as a doping doctor before Sky hired him) is a massive fail for a team that investigates all of the angles and wants a squeaky-clean reputation.
So what possible explanation is there other than a screw up with Sky? If they were going to dope they'd be far better than that, surely. It seems to be a very silly thing to do for such an amazing criminal mastermind

It points to the possibility that they knew very well exactly what they were employing, David.

It might just be pure coincidence of course that after employing an experienced doping doctor, Sky (and in particular Froome) suddenly made a leap in performance (see Froome's performance in 2011 Vuelta)

Or it might just have been the fluffy pillows and warm downs...

I guess Occams razor would say it was the pillows. After all, there is no history of doping being used in cycling.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on October 30, 2016, 01:53:33 pm
It points to the possibility that they knew very well exactly what they were employing, David.

Anything could be POSSIBLE but without evidence then EVERYTHING is CONJECTURE!

Or it might just have been the fluffy pillows and warm downs...

Or it might be the culmination of the efforts from the support team as a whole, rather like what we saw in BC, or do we assume that folk like Kenny and Hoy were part of the Brailsford doping programme?

Or was is just Sky that were involved and the BC was a separate operation seeing gains by hard work, good support and appropriate professional support?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 30, 2016, 02:13:44 pm
It points to the possibility that they knew very well exactly what they were employing, David.

Anything could be POSSIBLE but without evidence then EVERYTHING is CONJECTURE!

Or it might just have been the fluffy pillows and warm downs...

Or it might be the culmination of the efforts from the support team as a whole, rather like what we saw in BC, or do we assume that folk like Kenny and Hoy were part of the Brailsford doping programme?

Or was is just Sky that were involved and the BC was a separate operation seeing gains by hard work, good support and appropriate professional support?

I'm glad you accept, finally, that anything is possible.  You don't seem to have understood that if there was conclusive evidence we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You evidently will ascribe Froome's almost overnight transformation to a sudden response to Sky's training methods. Me? I think it's more likely to be a bit of dope.  Seemed to work well enough for other riders.

You've no evidence that it is Sky's methods that are responsible for Froome's improvement. Sky had the opportunity to provide some evidence, indeed they said they would release Froome's data. Yet what they released was all data from after the 2011 Vuelta, and not the data from before.  Their claim was that they didn't necessarily own the data from before September 2011.....and yet immediately after that Vuelta they claimed to have always known of Froome's abilities.

But this is Sky, and the constant excuses and inconsistencies are why I don't think they are telling the truth.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on October 30, 2016, 02:25:03 pm
Froome had never been a donkey - there were issues with Bilharzia (nasty disease, easy to test for and can be sporadic in it's resurgence.) which meant he was inconsistent. You may dismiss it as a concoction - it seems to be a very curious thing to choose as a made up excuse as the evidence would be clearly available if it were true. And transferring from a bottom rung team to a team that invests in training strategy and modern science would be expected, coinciding with his maturation as a rider, to make substantial differences.

A long hard look at Leinders would have ensured he wasn't in the frame for any post at Sky. However, the circumstances around his appointment were not a long slow deliberation but (allegedly) a rapid response to something they needed at the time, ie expertise on looking after riders in the heat. For that they need a medically qualified person who has experience with top level cycle racing. If they wanted someone with experience of doping to run a secret program whilst proclaiming innocence, Leinders would be a very strange choice.

Evidence is what is needed. What did Leinders sign off on? When was he involved and to do what?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on October 30, 2016, 02:29:44 pm
Froomes potential, not necessarily abilities. First indication is when someone who is self trained and managed turns up to the commonwealth games, takes out a marshal and still posts a very creditable time. Rides for teams as a domestique where finishing high up the order is not the objective but helping team leaders is. Then change to a different role and apparent performances go up. Not surprising.

There really isn't a huge amount there that is massively surprising unless you believe it to not be possible and then everything is suspicious..
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on October 30, 2016, 02:46:17 pm
I'm glad you accept, finally, that anything is possible.  You don't seem to have understood that if there was conclusive evidence we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You evidently will ascribe Froome's almost overnight transformation to a sudden response to Sky's training methods. Me? I think it's more likely to be a bit of dope.  Seemed to work well enough for other riders.

Fully understand what I understand and fully understand a patronising posting when I see one.  And your post would also mean it is perfectly possible that Sky have not broken any rules and have achieved success by hard work and taking greater interest in areas that others have previously ignored, such as the introduction of warm-down sessions that is now copied by all other teams.  Which also means, as you accept, there is no conclusive evidence and that you are giving an opinion which does not constitute fact.  Your opinion is worth nothing more than a few keystrokes at the keyboard or whatever you use to post comments.

An overnight transformation did not happen with Froome and such statements are akin to tabloid journalism IMO.  You accuse Froome of doping.  I assume you also accuse his teammates of doping, or do you restrict your allegations to Wiggins and Froome?  No mention of Thomas, and he is part of Sky and has seen some marked improvement in performance.  What do you think?  And how about the others?

Oh, and how about BC riders such as Mr Kenny and Mrs Kenny?  Bit of a Brailsford connection, so must be part of the doping scene, or is it that Brailsford is only part of the doping regime in road racing?

Ah well, easy to knock folk rather than provide evidence and easy to deride the decisions of those in charge who make the decisions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 30, 2016, 03:07:54 pm
Why do you equate Kenny with Froome?  Last time I looked Kenny hadn't won 3 Tours.

Geraint Thomas?  You mean the guy who appeared high up on a leaked list of riders with suspicious blood profiles. Carry on...


I am entitled to my opinion, you are to yours. I'm not satisfied with the answers given by Team Sky when people ask pertinent questions. Sometimes they can't even get their story straight between themselves.  The revelations about Wiggins use of a well know PED, albeit via a TUE, and the unexplained mystery package aren't helping me overcome my scepticism.

Yes, it is easy to knock people, but in the context of pro-cyclibg the sceptics have usually been proved right.  As Landis says, clean cycling would be a different sport to the one we are used to seeing. Sky and Froome look all too familiar.

Not proof, not evidence, I agree. But as it stands I can't suspend my disbelief in the way you do with such apparent ease.



Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on October 30, 2016, 03:19:49 pm
A few things to think about:
- Even in USPS, there was a core of dopers and other riders that didn't.

- The lanterne rouge at the Tour de France is a one in a million physical specimen. Being designated as team leader won't let that rider achieve a top ten finish, let alone become the best rider in the world.

- Pretty much every previous time there has been a dramatic increase in cyclist performance mid- or late-career, it has later been found to be due to doping. The boring example is Armstrong who went from being a very good but not worldbeating athlete to world-class Classics rider who couldn't climb (while doped) to the best stage race climber and time triallist in the world (with even more dope).

- There have been lots of drug busts in cycling. Each time (for systematic doping), there has been more effort at concealment and less of a paper trail to find. Do you expect it to be easier to find incontrovertible evidence for the next big drug bust?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on October 30, 2016, 05:40:25 pm
A few things to think about:
- Even in USPS, there was a core of dopers and other riders that didn't.

- The lanterne rouge at the Tour de France is a one in a million physical specimen. Being designated as team leader won't let that rider achieve a top ten finish, let alone become the best rider in the world.

- Pretty much every previous time there has been a dramatic increase in cyclist performance mid- or late-career, it has later been found to be due to doping. The boring example is Armstrong who went from being a very good but not worldbeating athlete to world-class Classics rider who couldn't climb (while doped) to the best stage race climber and time triallist in the world (with even more dope).

- There have been lots of drug busts in cycling. Each time (for systematic doping), there has been more effort at concealment and less of a paper trail to find. Do you expect it to be easier to find incontrovertible evidence for the next big drug bust?

Thank you LWaB, for posting intelligently and, very much, for taking some of the heat out of this

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Tewdric on November 03, 2016, 04:19:37 pm
I see Ian Drake has stepped down.  I wonder if a shit:fan collision is imminent?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on November 03, 2016, 04:53:42 pm
A few things to think about:
- Even in USPS, there was a core of dopers and other riders that didn't.
...

ISTR their doping strategy changed for different Tours depending on how vigilant the dope testers were being that year, so less important domestiques were sometimes kept off the dope in order to minimise risk rather than because they were whiter than white: e.g. in 2000, doping was concentrated on Lance, Big George and one other (Andreu?  Landis?)  while the rest were paniagua.  Oui?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 03, 2016, 05:22:41 pm
That is true but there were also a few riders on Armstrong's teams that actively avoided doping. I don't know how many of them made the TdF squads though. Roger Hammond rode for Discovery for a couple of years.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 03, 2016, 07:20:29 pm
I see Ian Drake has stepped down.  I wonder if a shit:fan collision is imminent?

If his reasons for quitting are true (just wanted a change) it's a really odd time to announce leaving....right when there is a UKAD investigation into an unknown medical package by a BC staff member to Team Sky riders Wiggins.

Brailsford is purporting to know what was in the package but won't say until UKAD finish their investigation.

Seems odd....almost as if he knows but he won't say because UKAD might not find out. After all, he might not know the extent of the leak that allowed the information out in the first place.

Or, it might be all totally above board, just some saddle sore cream or hydration sachets from Leinders or something.

 ::-)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on November 03, 2016, 07:48:06 pm
Or, it might be all totally above board, just some saddle sore cream or hydration sachets from Leinders or something.

 ::-)

Plus the mini pack of Haribo Starmix.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 03, 2016, 08:03:20 pm
Or, it might be all totally above board, just some saddle sore cream or hydration sachets from Leinders or something.

 ::-)

Plus the mini pack of Haribo Starmix.

Yes, it was probably just  Wiggle order of chamois cream.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on November 04, 2016, 09:12:25 am
I'm currently doing some work connected with an EPO court case.









European Patent Office...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on December 19, 2016, 12:36:23 pm
Robert Howden OBE, President and Chair, British Cycling, when pressed by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee a few minutes ago, committed to sending the committee within a couple of days full details of the contents of the infamous package should it prove to have been pharmaceuticals.

Shane Sutton now being grilled. Live here. (http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/fe5a6178-448d-44cc-835d-7ee6cd91b6e4) Brailsford coming up next.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on December 19, 2016, 01:36:53 pm
Fluimucil!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 19, 2016, 02:00:30 pm
"Would you have ever had a conversation with a medical member in which you would ask them not to prescribe anything that may have a performance-enhancing side-effect?

 Brailsford: The medical team do not need any reining in or any advice of that sense. They are absolutely trustworthy and have the health of the athletes at their heart. They know where the lines are
.”

Note how the question is in the past conditional, thus covering all possibilities since Team Sky's inception.

Brailsford answers it in the present tense. Maybe he doesnt want to talk about Geert Leinders  ::-)

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: spesh on December 19, 2016, 02:00:50 pm
Fluimucil!

Gesundheit.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 19, 2016, 02:47:56 pm
"We invite anybody to come and examine us and scrutinise us.”

Yeah...right, Dave. Just like you invited Kimmage to accompany Team Sky on the 2012 Tour, then uninvited him shortly before the Tour started.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 19, 2016, 02:51:19 pm
Fluimucil!

Gesundheit.

Available for €8 in any French pharmacy.  Seems a remarkable effort involving several people (Freeman, Sutton, Cope) and two organisations (BC, Team Sky) to ship something internationally that could have been picked up by a soigneur on their daily shopping trip.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on December 19, 2016, 03:38:32 pm
Yebbut did it come with added Spanish steak?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: IJL on December 19, 2016, 03:55:17 pm
Its an interesting drug, not licensed in the UK but a bit of googling shows its available from health food shops.  Its a precursor to Glutathione, its drug name is acetylcysteine, this is used in IV form to treat Paracetamol  overdose.

Its a Mucolytic and such drugs are only used in the UK in people with significant chest disease, its does seems to be marketed in other countries for much more general use.

A google of "acetylcysteine and exercise" brings some interesting stuff.  However as its not a banned drug it doesn't matter why it was being used.  It does however suggest that the Sky ethics code involve a bit of smoke and mirrors
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 19, 2016, 04:57:41 pm
That's even if it was the drug in the package....or indeed the only drug in the package. I dont take anything that comes out of Brailsford's mouth as fact.

Marginal gains, taking care of the smallest details bla bla bla.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 19, 2016, 04:57:41 pm
Why would somebody conceal this particular product for so long? If you knew beforehand that you were being questioned about this particular parcel, why would you not confirm the contents and bring along your corroborating evidence, instead choosing only to pass on what you had been told by another person?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 19, 2016, 05:01:33 pm
Brsilsford's line was that he immediately disclosed what he knew to the Daily Mail but it turned out that he was mistaken on what he thought he knew....like who the package was for and where Bradley Wiggins was....so he decided not to say anything at all.

He didnt know Bradley's choice of asthma drug was a massive PED either with a long history of abuse in cycling.

But he does know that Sky are clean and transparent  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on December 19, 2016, 05:22:14 pm
LittleWheelsandBig: because, as Robert Howden and George Gilbert of British Cycling and Brailsford himself explained, they had been told by UKAD not to talk about the package while UKAD performed its own investigation. In fact, UKAD told British Cycling not only not to talk about the package but not to investigate it internally.

It was only an email from UKAD to the committee at the last moment that freed the witnesses to talk. Howden and Gilbert were so shocked by the sudden revelation of this email that they pretended it didn’t exist and stuck to their prepared line that they weren’t supposed to talk about the package and anyway didn’t know what it was. Brailsford had more time to ponder his options (while the others were questioned) and decided to reveal the package contents.

I suspect by Sutton’s replies that he knew fine well what was in the package despite his denials. Otherwise how could he have been so sure it was above board? When Brailsford did reveal the contents the committee became unsure of its purpose and ended up personally congratulating him for his achievements!

All a bit silly. There must be countless such packages winging their way around a bicycle race. Badly handled by Brailsford, though.

The separate line of questioning on the process and nature of TUEs got nowhere because the committee members didn’t know enough to ask sensible questions. The intent was there but they should have been better prepared.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 19, 2016, 05:50:01 pm
So Sutton lied about not knowing the contents? They had only been prepared by their lawyers to follow the 'know nothing' defence. Prosecute him for lying.

Nobody ever thought to bring along corroborating evidence? I call bullshit. So far we have several people involved with this package that has the contents supposedly identified by only one person who hasn't been questioned yet. The doctor is being lined up to fall on his sword.

Frankly, I could do a better job of questioning than this Parlimentary committee, if I had ten minutes to prepare.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on December 19, 2016, 08:26:32 pm
Fluimucil!

Well, that's what he claims :D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on December 19, 2016, 08:40:22 pm
So Sutton lied about not knowing the contents?

That’s just my guess without proof. He said in several ways, with impressive conviction, that the package contents would reveal Sky to be above board. I’m not sure how he could have said that without knowing the package contents. (Of course he does have a general belief that Sky and British Cycling are clean.)

Nobody ever thought to bring along corroborating evidence?

As noted above, they were directly instructed by UKAD not to investigate the package or even talk about it. Obviously in that context there was never any possibility of evidence being produced today. Howden for British Cycling did commit to providing evidence within “a couple of days” if the package turned out to be pharmaceutical. He said they would have a paper trail in that case. Since it was revealed to be pharmaceutical an hour later, we should see some evidence soon.

Not that evidence will be enough to put off the true believers in systemic British doping.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 19, 2016, 08:43:53 pm
Just keep believing in fairy stories. It'll keep you happy.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Giropaul on December 19, 2016, 09:30:48 pm
Fluimucil!

Gesundheit.

Available for €8 in any French pharmacy.  Seems a remarkable effort involving several people (Freeman, Sutton, Cope) and two organisations (BC, Team Sky) to ship something internationally that could have been picked up by a soigneur on their daily shopping trip.

From experience (only for allowed pharmaceuticals for e.g. Skin allergies) . Me to pharmacist " have you got bonzogel please." Pharmacist " No, we will order it for tomorrow " . Me " Sorry, we will be 120kms away by tomorrow " cue Gallic shrug. On bike races a soigneur  really hasn't got time, when someone is arriving tonight who can bring the stuff from the service de course stores. It would be just the same for chainring bolts, or energy gels.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 19, 2016, 09:46:32 pm
Here's what another former soigneur had to say, Paul...

https://twitter.com/Emma_OReilly/status/810833079409504263
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on December 19, 2016, 09:57:25 pm
...who has no connection this, whatsoever...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 19, 2016, 10:05:14 pm
Neither does Giropaul  ;)

However Emma O'Reilly knows a thing or two about what doping looks like in pro cycling.

Heres her subsequent tweet:

https://twitter.com/Emma_OReilly/status/810838022417682432
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on December 19, 2016, 10:15:45 pm
Perhaps Sky wanted control of the product to check providence of product to ensure it did not contain it should not have.
Was any rule broken?
Ethics, tactics, marginal gains or whatever. More interested in UKAD report than a group of non-experts asking questions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 19, 2016, 10:24:24 pm
http://www.biomed.cas.cz/physiolres/pdf/58/58_855.pdf

Hmmm.....did I misread this study? Fluimucil can provoke a 9% gain in HCT??

Another marginal gain?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on December 19, 2016, 10:31:59 pm
Is it legal?
If so then use it to get marginal gains.
Whatever next?
Employing specialist in bike design or clothing design to gain improvements. Horror of horrors!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on December 19, 2016, 10:54:07 pm
http://www.biomed.cas.cz/physiolres/pdf/58/58_855.pdf

Hmmm.....did I misread this study? Fluimucil can provoke a 9% gain in HCT??

Another marginal gain?

That study is interesting. The cross comparison between NAC and ALA should show that the controls are within statistically significant bounds. This is the case for most of the measures but not for Glutathione. It is also not the case that the two groups are directly comparable (looking at the physical parameters of the subjects). The Glutathione for the NAC treatment is in line with the ALA control and treatment groups.

Also strange is the increase (albeit modest) in EPO but the number of RBC have dropped instead of rising. The difference in Hct is due to a change in RBC volume.

I'm not sure you can take very much from a small-n study like this. They have not explicitly mentioned any repeat measures correction for the single sample analysis (all the analyses are paired, so should be subject to a repeat measures correction). The latter would tend to make the results appear more significant.

Needs to be repeated with a larger sample size.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on December 20, 2016, 08:04:17 am
So last time I saw my respiratory consultant, I asked what he thought about therapeutic use exemptions and winning events on prednisolone (like Froome). "If you need prednisolone, you have no business being in competition" was the straight faced answer. This time I said "so what do you reckon about Wiggins being given Kenalog just before an event? It's cheating, right?" Got a flabbergasted "yes, yes, yes!"

I wish I'd followed up with "so when do I get some?" (I'd just spent the consultation resisting his efforts to put a 13th medicine on my prescription, but I have to got back in 6 weeks, so I'll see).

Someone ought to do a delphi study of respiratory consultants with a vignette about a cyclist needing treatment before a race.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: IJL on December 20, 2016, 09:29:42 am
Quote
"so what do you reckon about Wiggins being given Kenalog just before an event? It's cheating, right?" Got a flabbergasted "yes, yes, yes!"

I wish I'd followed up with "so when do I get some?" (I'd just spent the consultation resisting his efforts to put a 13th medicine on my prescription, but I have to got back in 6 weeks, so I'll see).

Someone ought to do a delphi study of respiratory consultants with a vignette about a cyclist needing treatment before a race.

Kenalog (triamcinolone) used to be a fairly common treatment for people with bad hayfever, an IM injection would get rid of all hayfever symptoms, sometimes for the whole hayfever season.  There are still a few patients where I work that insist on it. Not many people will prescribe it as there is a real risk of fairly nasty side affects
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 20, 2016, 09:39:51 am
Yes, you might inadvertantly win a Grand Tour  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 20, 2016, 10:54:40 pm
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/daily-mail-claims-brailsford-tried-to-kill-the-mystery-package-story/

Well well well

And...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/brailsfords-failure-to-convince-only-fuels-further-scepticism/

Ouch.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on December 21, 2016, 12:04:07 am
If it was 'just' fluimucil, why were they so reluctant to say so?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 06:47:03 am
From BBC website:

But questions remain:

Why has it taken so long for organisations that claim to be committed to transparency and accountability to get here?

The Daily Mail now reports that Brailsford tried to persuade them not to run the Jiffy bag story. Why go to such efforts when it merely contained a decongestant?

Will British Cycling or Team Sky now be able to provide a paper trail to back up the Fluimucil explanation?

Why was British Cycling president Bob Howden still unable to say what was in the jiffy bag months after the story broke, only for Brailsford to then reveal it?

Why were Brailsford's original explanations about the delivery not correct when all he had to do was ask former team medic Dr Richard Freeman?

Why send for a routine, innocuous drug from over 1,000 kilometres away when it could have been easily sourced in France?

Why did former coach Shane Sutton "authorise" the delivery of something, the details of which he claims not to be aware of?

 And why did Wiggins' long-term mentor not know what medication his star cyclist was taking?

And why was Wiggins taking a decongestant that apparently is not meant to be used by asthmatics (like him)?.


Doubtless Brailsford will answer all of these by saying "it was badly handled" and "we'll be transparent"(again)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on December 21, 2016, 07:28:40 am
Daily Mail. 'Nuff said.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 08:09:18 am
Daily Mail. 'Nuff said.

Riiiight. So everything in the Mail is a lie then. Because its the Mail.

That would include the original 'package' story then, wouldnt it, which was broken by the Mail on information from a Team Sky insider. Brailsford has admitted the story is true, after first failing in attempts to claim that the package was meant for a different rider in a different location (subsequently contradicted by the rider), and then claiming that Wiggins hadnt gone back to the Team bus where the substance was alledgedly administered.....until some pesky youtube footage turned up showing Wiggins had gone back to the bus.

The team insider claimed Wiggins had received an injection. This we know to be impossible because Wiggins said in his post tour win autobiography that hed never had an injection apart from holiday vaccinations. (Until Fancy Bears hack leaked that Wiggins had received injections of PED steroids before 3 major races). Whoops.

For the cleanest and most transparent team in pro cycling they seem to have a real problem with facts.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on December 21, 2016, 08:16:50 am
Daily Mail. 'Nuff said.

Riiiight. So everything in the Mail is a lie then. Because its the Mail.

That would include the original 'package' story then, wouldnt it, which was broken by the Mail on information from a Team Sky insider. Brailsford has admitted the story is true, after first failing in attempts to claim that the package was meant for a different rider in a different location (subsequently contradicted by the rider), and then claiming that Wiggins hadnt gone back to the Team bus where the substance was alledgedly administered.....until some pesky youtube footage turned up showing Wiggins had gone back to the bus.

The team insider claimed Wiggins had received an injection. This we know to be impossible because Wiggins said in his post tour win autobiography that hed never had an injection apart from holiday vaccinations. (Until Fancy Bears hack leaked that Wiggins had received injections of PED steroids before 3 major races). Whoops.

For the cleanest and most transparent team in pro cycling they seem to have a real problem with facts.

I saw that story on Cyclingnews and decided to ignore it due to the source.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 08:29:30 am
The entire story has the same source. Hence this new twist.

If its untrue, Im sure Brailsford will counter it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on December 21, 2016, 09:04:04 am
Daily Mail. 'Nuff said.

Riiiight. So everything in the Mail is a lie then. Because its the Mail.

No (although that's not an unreasonable assumption to make), but precisely because it was the Mail that first broke the 'story' (and then demanded the right to know what is in the the 'mysterious' package, one of many that are sent out to different teams during a season, without giving any information as to why it was significant). But do we have a right to know who the source of this allegation is, because that might actually have a bearing on things? No, apparently not. Or a right to even know what the allegation was? No, apparently not. Instead we have the Mail and the BBC whipping up a storm and feeding the gullible British public a conspiracy theory. It really has been disgraceful gutter journalism.

Now that there is no story, the journalists in question are trying to save face. Personally, I think after his initial error Brailsford has played them all for fools.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 09:54:27 am
That is an 'interesting' conclusion to draw from the events of the past few months and one in which, apart from a few blinkered flag-wavers, you are pretty much on your own.

There is a reason why pretty much everyone is sceptical about Team Sky, even papers and cycling journalists who have previously feted Sky. I get that you aren't seeing it, but I suspect that is more to do with a lack of knowledge and a reluctance to even accept the possibility of that Team Sky's oft-repeated promises to be "transparent" and "whiter than white" might be worthless.

As it stands, the story is still right up there. Nothing has been put to bed. Nobody with any sense (and that is pretty much everybody) accepts what Brailsford says on trust. Why? Because he is highly unreliable. He has been found out on every salient supposed 'fact' he put forward prior to the commons hearing. He tried to claim that the package was for another cyclist at another race (said cyclist put him right about that very publically), he tried to claim Wiggins wasnt even there when said medecine was alledgedly administered (youtube clip proved otherwise). Now he makes a claim as to the content of the package. Why accept this given his history of 'mistakes'? Is it because he is telling you what you want to hear?

These arent just "mistakes", just as the hiring of a notorious doping doctor (who is now banned for life) in 2010-11 was not a "mistake". There were people in Team Sky who had been in the same previous team as this doping doctor when he was doping the team and yet nobody objected. There was already an investigation in the Netherlands into this doctor at the time of hiring and this was in the public domain.

It takes a perculiar type of naivity to blindly accept Brailsfords glib attempts to brush all of this off.

Yes, we all enjoy a bit of sporting success from national riders and teams, but not at the price of integrity and honesty, including at a personal level from us as spectators.

YMMV.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on December 21, 2016, 12:13:36 pm
There is a reason why pretty much everyone is sceptical about Team Sky, even papers and cycling journalists who have previously feted Sky. I get that you aren't seeing it, but I suspect that is more to do with a lack of knowledge and a reluctance to even accept the possibility of that Team Sky's oft-repeated promises to be "transparent" and "whiter than white" might be worthless.


I can see where people are coming from perfectly well, and your suspicions are wrong; it is 'more to do' with being a scientist where one is trained not to leap to wild conclusions based on a lack of factual data, of which there is precious little in this 'story'. If the journalists can actually dig up something concrete then fine, let's see it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 12:23:02 pm
Why do you think there was a Commons comittee investigation?

Perhaps, as a scientist, you should explain to them why they were wasting their time  ::-)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on December 21, 2016, 12:39:08 pm
Why do you think there was a Commons comittee investigation?

Perhaps, as a scientist, you should explain to them why they were wasting their time  ::-)
Politicians doing political things?

Surely the UKAD report will be of more value?

And if there was real concern then perhaps UCI or WADA would be very interested along with IOC as if doping was endemic within Sky, who worked hand in glove with BC, then all those track cyclists would be under suspicion and we would have a scenario akin to Russia.

Alternatively, nothing to see here so move on.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 01:03:27 pm
The UCI?  Would that be the UCI that colluded with Armstrong...forewarned him of a positive dope test so that he could have a back-dated prescription fabricated?

Would this be the UCI that subsequently accepted a $100, 000 donation from Armstrong (2002)?

You havent really got a handle on this whole thing, have you.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on December 21, 2016, 01:19:21 pm
Have you noticed that the old UCI folk have been replaced?

Have you noticed things have moved on since 2002?

Your haven't really got a handle on this whole thing, have you?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 01:30:23 pm
Funnily enough, yes. I had noticed there is a new president of the UCI.

Funnily enough its Brian Cookson, former head of British Cycling, and former member of the management Board of Team Sky, who's son works for Team Sky.

I cant begin to imagine how cross he'd be if it turned out that Team Sky won by using PEDs.

 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on December 21, 2016, 01:37:23 pm
Have you noticed that the old UCI folk have been replaced?

Remind me, when did Wiggins win the Tour? And when was Cookson elected?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on December 21, 2016, 01:38:32 pm
Funnily enough, yes. I had noticed there is a new president of the UCI.

Funnily enough its Brian Cookson, former head of British Cycling, and former member of the management Board of Team Sky, who's son works for Team Sky.

I cant begin to imagine how cross he'd be if it turned out that Team Sky won by using PEDs.

my bold

I do believe that would now be Dimension Data, a team whose World Tour status problems recently magically resolved themselves.

Nothing to see here........

Pass the tinfoil hat.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 05:09:13 pm
More gutter journalism reporting, verbatim, the responses of the Parliamentary committee to the exposé that Brailsford tried to bribe a journalist out of revealing the 'package' story.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/brailsford-facing-further-questions-after-conflicting-statements-emerge

Of course, if tbe MPs were scientists they would be looking for evidence and proof, rather than the....err....evidence they are seeking.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on December 21, 2016, 06:31:29 pm
They are certainly putting up a lot of smokescreens.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 06:42:25 pm
Stock Brailsford tactics have been to say what people want to hear, making promises in the full knowledge that if he rides it out it will fall off the front page and nobody will remember to come back and check if he has done what he said he would do.

We've seen this with promises to release all data, carry out investigations, be open to scrutiny and be 'transparent'.

Problem for him now is that he has a parliamentary committee looking into him. Not sure if he'll be able to wheedle himself out of this one. UKAD are already contradicting his claims that they have been given Wiggins's full medical records.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 21, 2016, 07:02:26 pm
Here is a comedic example of just how FOS Team Sky are:

Shane Sutton: "Sky are the cleanest team I've ever seen"

Committee: "Mr. Sutton, in your long illustrious cycling career have you ever witnessed any doping?"

Shane Sutton: "No I havent".

 ;D ;D ;D

You couldn't make it up.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Giropaul on December 21, 2016, 07:21:20 pm
Stock Brailsford tactics have been to say what people want to hear, making promises in the full knowledge that if he rides it out it will fall off the front page and nobody will remember to come back and check if he has done what he said he would do.

We've seen this with promises to release all data, carry out investigations, be open to scrutiny and be 'transparent'.

Problem for him now is that he has a parliamentary committee looking into him. Not sure if he'll be able to wheedle himself out of this one. UKAD are already contradicting his claims that they have been given Wiggins's full medical records.

Just to be clear, the Committee is looking into doping across sport. The performance of UKAD with reference to athletics in front of the Committee set entirely new lows . It emerged that UKAD emailed athletes before big events notifying them that tests would be taking place !
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on December 21, 2016, 10:00:25 pm
Stock Brailsford tactics have been to say what people want to hear, making promises in the full knowledge that if he rides it out it will fall off the front page and nobody will remember to come back and check if he has done what he said he would do.

We've seen this with promises to release all data, carry out investigations, be open to scrutiny and be 'transparent'.

Problem for him now is that he has a parliamentary committee looking into him. Not sure if he'll be able to wheedle himself out of this one. UKAD are already contradicting his claims that they have been given Wiggins's full medical records.

Just to be clear, the Committee is looking into doping across sport. The performance of UKAD with reference to athletics in front of the Committee set entirely new lows . It emerged that UKAD emailed athletes before big events notifying them that tests would be taking place !

Surely, they have to notify to ensure that our athletes are competing on a level playing field.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 22, 2016, 10:18:38 am
One has to wonder if time is running out for Brailsford, if not Team Sky. Brailsford's attempts to evade, obfuscate and misconstrue are finally starting to catch up with him.

Even Sky's former hagiographers are turning against them. Walsh is calling for Brailsford to go. Ive yet to see any press report that isnt an excoriation.

 Ken Matheson, a former BC coach, is acting as a conduit for disgruntled whistle-blowers from Brailsford's BC days.

Here is a neat summary of what is going on:

https://cyclingtips.com/2016/12/commentary-team-sky-has-a-history-of-credibility-issues-with-dave-brailsford-at-centre-stage/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 22, 2016, 06:40:08 pm
Wiggins's former doctor, whilst at Garmin, doesnt believe the Fluimucil story...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-former-doctor-likens-fluimucil-story-to-the-armstrong-days/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on December 24, 2016, 02:07:01 pm
https://twitter.com/cervelo_nick/status/812291881170247681

Merry Xmas to Flatus, and his band of unfoolables :)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 25, 2016, 05:09:52 pm
(https://s27.postimg.org/x8xqqjdcz/IMG_20161225_170718.jpg)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 29, 2016, 08:56:23 am
The story gets more and more bizarre.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0zAVvXWgAAsdKP.jpg:large)

To recap, AIUI Brailsford now says he had been...ahem...cough...mistaken about where Cope went with the package (saying he was going to see Emma Pooley 600 miles away, which she then refuted) and then denying that the contents of the package were administered to Wiggins in the back of the team bus at the end of a race on the grounds that Wiggins had already left (proven false by a pesky youtube clip). He says that the Fluimicil was just dropped off as it was the easiest way to get it there.

Here is how easy it was. Cope booked a return train ticket from Eastbourne to Manchester on June 10, and his credit card bill is annotated with 'Dauphiné', thereby showing that the planned train journey to Manchester was linked to his trip out to the Dauphiné. He made the journey, collected the package then stayed in an airport hotel at Gatwick on June 11 before flying the next day to Geneva where he picked up a hire car and drove a round trip of 4.5 hours and 350km to La Toussière, delivered the package and then flew back to Gatwick. The total cost of the trip was £596.

This is very odd. There are 4 pharmacies in La Toussiere where Fluimucil can be purchased without prescription for €8.  Why spend £600?

More to the point, why identify a need for Fluimucil during a race, and then take nearly 5 days to deliver it when it could have been purchased on the spot from a pharmacy?

Remember too, that Cope says he did not know the contents of the package, despite taking the package on an international flight, and crossing two borders with it.

By the way, in other news, Wiggins announced his retirement yesterday.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on December 29, 2016, 09:07:30 am
By the way, in other news, Wiggins announced his retirement yesterday.
Yes, I had heard! ;)


The Today programme made great efforts to keep the 2 stories apart this morning. They gave some BC guy a gentle grilling about the drugs investigation.

Half an hour earlier they had a standard piece about a succesful GB athlete retiring, and interviewed Rob Hayles*. They asked him if the current drugs ...er "controversy" would taint Wiggo's reputation:
"No, not with cycling fans, not at all."
I think that was less than truthful!




*I think?!?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 29, 2016, 09:39:43 am
I find it odd that Wiggins didnt wait until the UKAD and the Parliamentary investigations were concluded, and he was exonerated, before announcing his retirement. It would have avoided the inevitable cloud over his retirement announcement.

Did you see the BBC news broadcast where they interviewd National TT Champion and Cycling Weekly writer Dr Michael Hutchinson? He gave a very measured response to the same question along the lines that for most people Wiggins would remain untainted, but for those close to cycling there remains a big question mark.

By this I understand him to mean that those on the inside and those speaking from an informed position, including himself, do not accept what Sky are saying at face value with regards to TUE use and the mystery package story.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Nuncio on December 29, 2016, 12:27:09 pm
More to the point, why identify a need for Fluimucil during a race, and then take nearly 5 days to deliver it when it could have been purchased on the spot from a pharmacy?

Simple misunderstanding.

SirBW: I need Fluimicil and I need it quick.
SirDB:  Cope, get SBW some Fluimicil.  He needs it in a in a jiffy
Simon Cope: Will do.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on December 29, 2016, 12:30:22 pm
I'd have thought those on the inside would be looking at the mystery package story and reviewing their use of couriers. There but for the grace of WADA.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 29, 2016, 12:46:47 pm
http://bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38457434

British lawers seem to require every story to end with "...there is no suggestion either he or Team Sky have broken any rules."
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on December 29, 2016, 01:32:30 pm
http://bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38457434

British lawers seem to require every story to end with "...there is no suggestion either he or Team Sky have broken any rules."
Have you perhaps thought about why that might be?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 29, 2016, 02:02:12 pm
The UK's defamation laws are renowned for being amongst the most onerous in the Western world. That is why they are used by foreign folk to attack remarks made/ books published outside of the UK.

Isn't it interesting that Brailsford's assurances that proof of the package's contents would be provided have come to naught?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on December 29, 2016, 02:46:56 pm
Isn't it interesting that Brailsford's assurances that proof of the package's contents would be provided have come to naught?

... so far.  There was a suggestion on R4 this morn that he may have given details to UKADA. I find it doubtful tbh.

I find it odd that Wiggins didnt wait until the UKAD and the Parliamentary investigations were concluded, and he was exonerated, before announcing his retirement. It would have avoided the inevitable cloud over his retirement announcement.

Maybe he realised that if he retires now, he will still avoid the doubt amongst most.   The way it looks just now, the longer he holds on the worse this looks.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 29, 2016, 05:14:44 pm
Slightly different tack, but Nicole Cooke puts the boot in....

Nicole Cooke: Team Sky and British Cycling provide more questions than answers

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2016/dec/29/nicole-cooke-team-sky-british-cycling?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on December 29, 2016, 05:28:45 pm
Nicole Cooke has a few choice words, although mostly aimed at Sutton/BC

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2016/dec/29/nicole-cooke-team-sky-british-cycling
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on December 29, 2016, 06:13:00 pm
The story gets more and more bizarre.....

Got the second page?



The story doesn't add up at all IMO. Maybe there's a decent explainable but it all seems fishy.

Firstly there's been an attempt to cover up the story. In a number of ways. Why?

When someone explained what was inside the jiffy bag it turns out to be Fluimicil (well that's the suggestion...). Fine, but why spend a decent chunk of cash on getting Cope to carry the medicine across Europe when it could've been purchased a few kilometres away?

Why not tell Cope what was inside the jiffy?

Why was Cope travelling across Europe in the first place when someone else could have done the job? Or just pay a courrier service?

And why the sudden need for this drug at the end of race?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 29, 2016, 09:31:31 pm
There were several steps in the attempted cover-up. First try and persuade the Mail not to run the story....why? What a weird thing for a transparent team to do. Why didnt Brailsford just stall and find out what was in the package if hd didnt know.

Then, on publication of the story, despite having time to investigate properly (ask Cope, ask Freeman...two texts)give out two false pieces of information. Not just irrelevant information but untrue information.

Then appear in front of a select committee months later and do such a bad job that the MPs are just left with further questions.

I think there are several likely possibilities and not one of them revolves àround Brailsford telling the truth.  I think he knew all along what the substance was, but I dont think he knows how much the Mail knew.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on December 29, 2016, 09:38:49 pm
I'm fairly confident that it didn't contain Fluimicil. If that was the case, they could have killed this story the moment it surfaced.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: madcow on December 29, 2016, 11:19:17 pm
I find it odd that Wiggins didnt wait until the UKAD and the Parliamentary investigations were concluded, and he was exonerated, before announcing his retirement. It would have avoided the inevitable cloud over his retirement announcement.

OTOH ,if Wiggo had announced his retirement either at  Ghent or immediately afterwards, then everyone would have said it was the right time to go.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on January 02, 2017, 11:41:38 am
I've been reading a book called Inverting the Pyramid. It's about the history of football tactics and it's fascinating even for someone with only a mild interest in football. It only mentions cycling twice (the other mention is about someone using an early form of exercise bike for endurance training) but not surprisingly it talks about drugs a bit:
Quote
Salo Muller, who was Ajax's masseur between 1959 and 1972, admitted as much in his autobiography, published in 2006, and revealed that Hulshoff and Johnny Rep had both come to him with concerns over pills given them by John Rollink, the club doctor. ... 'They ranged from painkillers, muscle relaxants and tranquilising pills to amphetamine capsules.'

The first drugs scandal to hit Dutch sport came at the 1960 Rome Olympics [in swimming] ... Rollink later left the Dutch Cycling Union when doping controls were instituted, and said that Ajax would have refused to comply had doping controls been brought in to Dutch football.

Other sides linked to PED use in the book include the successful Milan and Inter teams in the 1960s and 70s, against whom there are also allegations of referee bribing. In this case, their pharmacological assistance, the referee bribing and their ultra-defensive style of play are all linked in their belief that Italians were physically smaller and weaker than Northern Europeans and so needed other means to succeed. Similarly, Britain is traditionally a weak cycling nation, with no tradition, no great champions, not even a Grand Tour. In a sport where drug use is probably even more embedded than in football, how else are we to compete?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on January 02, 2017, 12:20:55 pm
^^^^^

Are we to assume that BC is tainted with the drug culture, otherwise how do we explain the rise from what you describe as no tradition, champions etc, then the likes of Laura and Jason Kenny are also on the PED treadmill?

Or perhaps they got their rewards by hard work, better facilities with good support and dedication to the sport. Not such an interesting story perhaps, although their book gives an insight to what it takes.

My challenge is that too many cyclists have achieved greatness in terms of medals etc and if that was achieved by PED the story would have been spilled by now as there are too many folk involved.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on January 02, 2017, 01:07:19 pm
BC's success from the late 90s onwards is principally down to a combination of two factors: lottery money and Peter Keen. Keen was the one who identified the need for a structured program to identify and develop potential winners - until then, any Brit who enjoyed success in cycling got there largely under their own steam, usually by moving to France. Chris Boardman's success at the 92 Olympics also helped as a catalyst to generate interest in the sport. The lottery money came because cycling was identified as a sport with potential for big returns on the investment, with lots of medals available at the Olympics.

I have total faith in Peter Keen and Chris Boardman and their methods. Chris Hoy was the first major success of the program and there has never been a hint of doubt about him either.

It's only since Brailsford took over from Peter Keen that doubts have started to creep in, a lot of which is down to the close association between the national body and a commercially sponsored pro road team - something that Keen expressed concern about even before Team Sky was established. Add to that Brailsford's combination of hubris and incompetence when it comes to dealing with the media and it's no surprise that people are starting to feel jaded towards cycling.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 02, 2017, 01:38:41 pm
Loving the attempt to extrapolate Wiggins doping to win a Tour de France to every single British person on two wheels who has had some success.  ;D. Its a sort of inverse reductio ad absurdam.

Fact is, Wiggins doping to win the Tour has no bearing on, or says nothing about, any other British cyclist, road, track, bmx or whatever. Wiggins doping can be considered on its own merits without recourse to attempts to infer that if Wiggins doped so must have the entire GB track team for over a decade. (Which of course is much harder to accept than the possibility of only one person doping.  ;))

Which is probably just as well, seeing that we now know Wiggins took PEDS to win the Tour  :)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on January 02, 2017, 06:02:45 pm
That's not quite what I meant, but the existence of British success in the 90s also relates to the football example; at the time Milan were indulging in their (alleged) skulduggery, which was apparently motivated at least in part by a feeling of Mediterranean weakness, the only teams to have won the European Cup were from Italy, Spain and Portugal. As is the change in BC between Keen and Brailsford; Milan's manager at the time, Helenio Herrera, who was originally from Argentina, was surrounded by the same suspicions when he was at Barcelona in the late 50s. At all of his clubs the players were routinely given "il cafe Herrera". It's said he experimented with the drugs on the reserve players before giving them to the first team, as well as taking amphetamines himself when he had to work late.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 02, 2017, 07:22:47 pm
My post wasnt reacting to yours, it was an analysis of Veloman's increasingly desperate attempts to avoid the reality of what went on in France in 2012.

Of course, Veloman's final point is actually wrong. Somebody has spilled the beans, which is why we know about the 'package' delivery to Wiggins at the Dauphiné.

Whilst we are on the subject of the package, the journalist at the centre of the exposé has said that he knows the contents of the package but cannot reveal the contents for legal reasons. Of course, the implication of this is that it isnt Fluimicil. Then again, if we accept as true that Brailsford tried to beg and bribe his way out the the story being released we can reasonably assume that the contents of the package were not an over the counter decongestant.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on January 02, 2017, 09:13:00 pm
Whilst we are on the subject of the package, the journalist at the centre of the exposé has said that he knows the contents of the package but cannot reveal the contents for legal reasons.

I'll look forward to reading about that in the UKAD report then.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on January 02, 2017, 09:43:32 pm
the journalist at the centre of the exposé has said that he knows the contents of the package but cannot reveal the contents for legal reasons. Of course, the implication of this is that it isnt Fluimicil.

How did you come across that bit of information?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 02, 2017, 10:20:07 pm
He was interviewed on Australian radio.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on January 03, 2017, 10:04:36 am
My post wasnt reacting to yours, it was an analysis of Veloman's increasingly desperate attempts to avoid the reality of what went on in France in 2012.

Of course, Veloman's final point is actually wrong. Somebody has spilled the beans, which is why we know about the 'package' delivery to Wiggins at the Dauphiné.

Whilst we are on the subject of the package, the journalist at the centre of the exposé has said that he knows the contents of the package but cannot reveal the contents for legal reasons. Of course, the implication of this is that it isnt Fluimicil. Then again, if we accept as true that Brailsford tried to beg and bribe his way out the the story being released we can reasonably assume that the contents of the package were not an over the counter decongestant.
Ah, fair enough. I hadn't actually seen Veloman's post at that point. I'll stop trying to make sense of it now!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on January 03, 2017, 12:04:41 pm
Here's a David Walsh interview

http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/Highlights_from_Off_The_Ball/172278/David_Walsh_on_Team_Sky_Brailsford_Froome_Leinders

He still believes in Froome but has big questions regarding Wiggins, Sutton, Sir Dave and Team Sky.

Interestingly at the end he says that doping is about money. Have enough cash and there are ways around drug testing, the implication being that Wiggins' TUE is an example of such behaviour. Whereas in Russia money isn't as preveleant and so there's no way to easily cover up doping.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on January 03, 2017, 01:52:47 pm
If Wiggins has the 2012 Tour taken off him, that leaves Froome one win nearer a record. That's good for Sky and good for Britain, but I'd rather have Wiggins, as he's more Rock 'n Roll.

I'm not particularly bothered about the patriotic stuff surrounding sport, especially when it's professional. It's a spectacle, and one with a whole host of parasitic entities feeding off the public's interest.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on January 03, 2017, 03:58:41 pm
Here's a David Walsh interview

http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/Highlights_from_Off_The_Ball/172278/David_Walsh_on_Team_Sky_Brailsford_Froome_Leinders

He still believes in Froome but has big questions regarding Wiggins, Sutton, Sir Dave and Team Sky.

Interestingly at the end he says that doping is about money. Have enough cash and there are ways around drug testing, the implication being that Wiggins' TUE is an example of such behaviour. Whereas in Russia money isn't as preveleant and so there's no way to easily cover up doping.

David Walsh is always interesting to listen to (there was a very good short lecture from him at the end of the TED radio hour on 4 extra at the weekend; just rememebr that he does have a tendancy to make up his mind on things and then look for evidence afterwards). The radio interviewer was awful though.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 04, 2017, 12:28:17 am
Here's a David Walsh interview

http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/Highlights_from_Off_The_Ball/172278/David_Walsh_on_Team_Sky_Brailsford_Froome_Leinders

He still believes in Froome but has big questions regarding Wiggins, Sutton, Sir Dave and Team Sky.

Interestingly at the end he says that doping is about money. Have enough cash and there are ways around drug testing, the implication being that Wiggins' TUE is an example of such behaviour. Whereas in Russia money isn't as preveleant and so there's no way to easily cover up doping.

David Walsh is always interesting to listen to (there was a very good short lecture from him at the end of the TED radio hour on 4 extra at the weekend; just rememebr that he does have a tendancy to make up his mind on things and then look for evidence afterwards). The radio interviewer was awful though.

Listening to it now and they really, really want to nail Froome and blame Leinders for everything.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Relayer on January 04, 2017, 07:30:40 am
^^^^^

Are we to assume that BC is tainted with the drug culture, otherwise how do we explain the rise from what you describe as no tradition, champions etc, then the likes of Laura and Jason Kenny are also on the PED treadmill?

Or perhaps they got their rewards by hard work, better facilities with good support and dedication to the sport. Not such an interesting story perhaps, although their book gives an insight to what it takes.

My challenge is that too many cyclists have achieved greatness in terms of medals etc and if that was achieved by PED the story would have been spilled by now as there are too many folk involved.

Jason Kenny is a very interesting case, especially when you look at Gregory Bauge's questions directly to Jason Kenny in the press conference at the london Olympics http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/bauge-leads-press-conference-following-sprint-defeat/

... especially since Bauge said "If I understand, you'll relax for the next four years and then when it comes to Rio you'll be on top again, right?"  ....  "Not at all," replied Kenny. "The Games is the main one for us but for me, I still want to win world championships. They mean a lot for me as a rider. So I'll just go forward."

... and as far as I can understand the Wikipedia summary of Kenny's performances between 2012 and 2016 Bauge's prediction was absolutely correct.

So, I ask how do we explain Jason Kenny's rise from nowhere to win gold in 2012, and then do precious little for another 4 years, only to sweep the board in Rio? I haven't read his book and I wouldn't waste my money on it, but I find it extremely hard to believe that the "rewards by hard work, better facilities with good support and dedication to the sport." only kick in every 4 years.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on January 04, 2017, 09:30:20 am
^^^^^

Are we to assume that BC is tainted with the drug culture, otherwise how do we explain the rise from what you describe as no tradition, champions etc, then the likes of Laura and Jason Kenny are also on the PED treadmill?

Or perhaps they got their rewards by hard work, better facilities with good support and dedication to the sport. Not such an interesting story perhaps, although their book gives an insight to what it takes.

My challenge is that too many cyclists have achieved greatness in terms of medals etc and if that was achieved by PED the story would have been spilled by now as there are too many folk involved.

Jason Kenny is a very interesting case, especially when you look at Gregory Bauge's questions directly to Jason Kenny in the press conference at the london Olympics http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/bauge-leads-press-conference-following-sprint-defeat/

... especially since Bauge said "If I understand, you'll relax for the next four years and then when it comes to Rio you'll be on top again, right?"  ....  "Not at all," replied Kenny. "The Games is the main one for us but for me, I still want to win world championships. They mean a lot for me as a rider. So I'll just go forward."

... and as far as I can understand the Wikipedia summary of Kenny's performances between 2012 and 2016 Bauge's prediction was absolutely correct.

So, I ask how do we explain Jason Kenny's rise from nowhere to win gold in 2012, and then do precious little for another 4 years, only to sweep the board in Rio? I haven't read his book and I wouldn't waste my money on it, but I find it extremely hard to believe that the "rewards by hard work, better facilities with good support and dedication to the sport." only kick in every 4 years.

Never heard a Gold and Silver at the Olympics to be called 'nowhere'.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 04, 2017, 10:02:00 am
Kenny didnt come from nowhere.....but this is beside the point. The thread is about Sky and in particular Wiggins road wins. 

We now know that Wiggins used a costicosteriod, via the TUE system, in exactly the same manner as confessed dopers used it, also via the TUE system. We know he did this and we also know that there is no evidence to show that he was actually ill on the three occasions that he used it prior to major races. We know that Wiggins lied in his own autobiography about never having received an injection (other than holiday vaccinations).

It would take a pretty massive bout of cognitive dissonance to fail to accept that Wiggins took this drug for its performance enhancement qualities.

But we dont have any evidence about the rest of Team Sky, and just because we know that Brailsford was in on the TUE, doesnt mean he doped up BC track riders. 

I'd suggest that the suspicions towards the BC track wins are in part a result of Wiggins, Frokme and Team Sky, by association via Brailsford. There is no evidence of unscrupulous use of known PEDs in the BC track team, whereas there is pretty clear evidence of such a thing happenning at Sky.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 07, 2017, 12:46:52 pm
Ouch.

Ukad chair adds to pressure on Sir Dave Brailsford over mystery package proof

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jan/07/ukad-pressure-dave-brailsford-team-sky-david-kenworthy?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard


So, in other words, a big WTF from the head of UKAD on hearing Brailsford's 'explanation' of the package story.  At the same time, Froome is refusing to endorse Brailsford.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on January 07, 2017, 01:57:40 pm
It's nosediving for Brailsford.  His stories are coming apart at the seams and it looks likely he'll take Wiggins' reputation down with him.  His explanation of the mystery package is frankly farcical.  It's so ridiculous that either it's true (in the way that fact is stranger than fiction) or (more likely IMO) it's the delusional nonsense of a man caught in a web of lies and desperately trying to extricate himself from the s**t.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 07, 2017, 02:04:51 pm
It certainly looks as if its Brailsford who is going under the bus
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on January 07, 2017, 02:18:42 pm
It'll be interesting to see who else gets hit.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 07, 2017, 02:50:49 pm
Mind you, I think everyone, BC, UKAD, let alone Team Sky are trying to dodge the bus!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 08, 2017, 06:46:55 am
Mind you, I think everyone, BC, UKAD, let alone Team Sky are trying to dodge the bus!

It's too bad. It was the same when CSC started up, with being the 'new clean team, first to introduce biological passports', etc and it turned out that they were just better at cheating than the rest.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 08, 2017, 07:21:07 am
Thats the problem, isnt it.

If you rock up as a newbie and you grandstand about just how clean you are going to be, how you aren't going to employ any ex-dopers be it riders or staff, how you aren't going to let riders on a TUE race,  how you are going to produce a clean British TdF winner, you arent just saying something about yourself, you are also by implication saying something about everybody else.

So when it turns out that half your ex-pro staff are ex-doping riders, and some of your current riders are from notoriously dirty teams, and your turnaround moment in terms of success comes after you employ a doctor who masterminded a sophisticated doping system in his previous team, and your star rider is abusing the TUE system in exactly the same way that confessed-dopers did in order to win races (and lies about it in his autobiography) and all this has happenned under the aegis of the national federation because of a strong linkage, the only thing that you can bank on to stop an almighty shitstorm from happenning is the continued ignorance of the general public, because you sure as hell wont get any support from your peers. It speaks volumes that nobody, even his own team mates, are coming out in support of Wiggins, and its pretty clear that the only people coming out in support of Team Sky in general, are ex-Sky riders.

The british public, or at least those whose nationalistic hubris has kept their fingers firmly in their ears in happy ignorance, are being exposed to details and facts that are impossible to glibly dismiss.


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on January 08, 2017, 01:04:00 pm
If you rock up as a newbie and you grandstand about just how clean you are going to be, how you aren't going to employ any ex-dopers be it riders or staff, how you aren't going to let riders on a TUE race,  how you are going to produce a clean British TdF winner, you arent just saying something about yourself, you are also by implication saying something about everybody else.

Yeah, it's not a great way to make friends when you're new to the business.

Brailsford was never really the 'mastermind' of British cycling success anyway, and he's starting to look like a middle manager who got promoted beyond his capabilities. His handling of the media has always been appalling and his man-management skills have been shown to be lacking on many occasions too.

Peter Keen is out of work at the moment. They should kick Brailsford out of Sky and bring him in - although he might be horrified at what he finds...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 08, 2017, 07:47:38 pm
Froome rejected a TUE in 2015 on 'moral' grounds

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38534318


Funny that Froome should have had an attack of morality during the 2015 Tour.

He had no such qualms one year earlier when he applied for a TUE for banned corticosteroids prior to the Tour de Romandie and had it fast-tracked, so that he could compete in that race.

He must have really needed it, poor lamb. Must be terrible having to race against world class competitors when you are so poorly that you need 40mg per day of Prednisolone.

Still, winning the overall race and winning the final time trial in front of world TT champion Tony Martin probably made up for feeling so poorly.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LEE on January 10, 2017, 05:34:21 pm
This is starting to have the hallmark of, "Everyone else was abusing TUE so we were just trying to level the playing field", to paraphrase a famous cyclist who didn't win 7 TdFs.

I'm not saying they did, just that it's the de facto justification, by team bosses, when massaging the conscience of their riders.


The one thing I take from all this is that it's worth waiting 20 years or so before buying any cycling memorabilia with a rider's name on it (How much are Rapha's "Wiggo" T-shirts?)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on January 10, 2017, 05:45:23 pm
It looks more to me like someone trying categorically to prove that there's no such thing as Santa Claus. And in the meantime killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 10, 2017, 05:59:04 pm
Golden eggs are of little use if a little later it turns out that they are rotten inside.

Ask Lance Armstrong.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on January 10, 2017, 06:06:41 pm
It depends if you see the Tour as more than a fairy story. I'm inclined to take my lead from 'Frozen' and 'Let it Go'.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: zigzag on January 10, 2017, 06:15:14 pm
It looks more to me like someone trying categorically to prove that there's no such thing as Santa Claus. And in the meantime killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li3N-eYt4g8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li3N-eYt4g8) :D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 10, 2017, 07:11:12 pm
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

Brailsford talking more bollocks
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on January 12, 2017, 04:30:00 pm
I read this via google translate but it sums up some of the main problems facing Brailsford at the moment.

http://www.lemonde.fr/cyclisme/article/2017/01/12/cyclisme-le-mysterieux-colis-qui-fait-tanguer-le-navire-sky_5061543_1616656.html
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 12, 2017, 08:59:22 pm
Has anyone asked Wiggins if he knew what was in the 'package'?. Or is he still a protected species?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on January 12, 2017, 09:48:58 pm
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

Brailsford talking more bollocks

That was cringe worthy. Almost felt sorry for him as it was so plain to see he didn't have any replies. I think he'd have been better off not saying a thing.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 12, 2017, 09:52:41 pm
Its what happens when the lies stop working
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 12, 2017, 10:15:18 pm
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

Brailsford talking more bollocks

Lol. Yeah. He's not answering a single one of the questions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on January 13, 2017, 09:19:46 am
It's very hard to see how he can continue now.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 13, 2017, 09:32:53 am
He's pretty isolated. Whether Froome distancing himself is a mutually-agreed tactic we may never know. I dont think anybody is behind him. Wiggins is just hiding. Meanwhile, Marcel Kittel is telling it like it is.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on January 13, 2017, 09:42:33 am
While I must admit I find the whole thing very amusing since the whiter then white thing has always pee'd me off, probably because I'm so cynical, I wouldn't want to see the death of the team since I do think it would be a massive body blow to the sport.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LEE on January 13, 2017, 11:21:22 am
While I must admit I find the whole thing very amusing since the whiter then white thing has always pee'd me off, probably because I'm so cynical, I wouldn't want to see the death of the team since I do think it would be a massive body blow to the sport.

It's a shame that it tarnishes the whole of British Cycling. 
Whether there's truth in the rumours or not, Brailsford  is seen as "British Cycling", not just team Sky's principle.

I'm fairly sure this will end up as being morally wrong rather than illegal but, as implied above, that makes "We're whiter than white" Brailsford's position untenable.
Let's be frank.  Froome knows they were doing things that were, at the least, morally wrong.

It certainly seems a lot of effort doesn't it?, to transport a package that nobody has any idea what was inside.  Maybe it's sandwiches.  Maybe it's just acceptable to take medication without knowing what it is.  I mean who knew that the cycling authorities liked to know what medication you were taking? 


I have no problem in seeing any of Murdoch's ventures fail and I would be happy to see British riders being successful under another banner.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 13, 2017, 05:40:21 pm
Yes. It does unfortunately tarnish everyone in BC as well, with the exception of women, as they were clearly ignored by Brailsford.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 13, 2017, 05:49:24 pm
In so as we now know that Wiggins used banned substances to win races, via an abuse of the TUE system, all under the aegis of Brailsford, it begs the question as to whether Brailsford employed similar tactics with all those who have ridden under his management in Team GB.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Giropaul on January 13, 2017, 06:13:04 pm
In so as we now know that Wiggins used banned substances to win races, via an abuse of the TUE system, all under the aegis of Brailsford, it begs the question as to whether Brailsford employed similar tactics with all those who have ridden under his management in Team GB.

A substance isn't banned if it is used under a TUE . What we do know is that very few TUEs are allowed, only after detailed evidence is independently reviewed. Many more are refused. If the TUE process is abused, it isn't by teams or riders, it could only be by independent qualified reviewers, who by definition have nothing to gain from a decision either way.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 13, 2017, 06:17:21 pm
We know the TUE process wasnt followed for Froome's TUE in 2014.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 13, 2017, 06:22:29 pm
If the TUE process is abused, it isn't by teams or riders, it could only be by independent qualified reviewers, who by definition have nothing to gain from a decision either way.

Mario Zorzoli have already been accused by Rasmussen for being involved with doping and how do we know he didn't get a brown envelope for his (lack of) effort?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on January 20, 2017, 05:21:51 pm
British cycling, rather than sky, but posting here as it follows the thread


British Cycling: Ian Drake steps down (http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/38694814)

Sounds like some someones turned on the fan and is taking aim.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on January 20, 2017, 06:25:17 pm
I've been browsing the Rapha sale; I have no idea why, but loads of the Team Wiggins gear is amongst the most heavily discounted.

( I nearly bought some, but couldn't stomach the SKy logo on my arse. )
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on January 20, 2017, 06:30:47 pm
Are you saying the sun doesn't shine out of the Sky?

I'll get my coat.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Relayer on January 21, 2017, 08:02:06 am
Never heard a Gold and Silver at the Olympics to be called 'nowhere'.

There was no Gold and Silvedr at the Olympics prior to 2012.

Kenny didnt come from nowhere.....but this is beside the point. The thread is about Sky and in particular Wiggins road wins. 

British Cycling begat Team Sky begat Team Wiggins .... all the same to me.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 21, 2017, 08:10:28 am
Kenny won Gold and Silver in 2008 Olympics (and 7 World and European championship medals prior to 2012 Olympics) so you need to concede that you were mistaken.

And no, Wiggins's TUE and mystery package has no bearing whatsoever on even Froome or his Sky team mates, let alone Team Wiggins or Team GB.

Of course they might have cheated too, but its not a given just because Wiggins did.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Relayer on January 21, 2017, 09:41:22 am
Kenny won Gold and Silver in 2008 Olympics (and 7 World and European championship medals prior to 2012 Olympics) so you need to concede that you were mistaken.

And no, Wiggins's TUE and mystery package has no bearing whatsoever on even Froome or his Sky team mates, let alone Team Wiggins or Team GB.

Of course they might have cheated too, but its not a given just because Wiggins did.

Having checked again,I now see that he won Gold in the Team Sprint, and a Silver in the Sprint ... so yes, I was mistaken.   

Going off now to wipe this egg off my face.  :-[
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on January 24, 2017, 12:36:28 pm
Cookie seems to have torn into just about everyone  :demon:
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 24, 2017, 06:16:16 pm
Yep. Here it is:

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/culture-media-and-sport-committee/combatting-doping-in-sport/written/45898.pdf

Will make for interesting reading for all those stuffed shirts who posted early on this thread, banging on about rules and the implementation of them by the bodies charged with their implementation  ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on January 24, 2017, 06:34:13 pm
The comparison of Simon Cope to Simon Lillistone and the reference to the Linda Mac team makes her thoughts plain.

I also note BC's response only addresses the gender imbalance issue, nothing on governance or PED's. Head in the sand stuff.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on January 24, 2017, 07:45:24 pm
Cookie seems to have torn into just about everyone  :demon:

Torn? I think she used something like an apple corer. She excoriated them all a new one, that's for sure. Epic.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on January 24, 2017, 08:17:25 pm
I'd take issue with this.

Quote
The fundamental problem appears to be that Sports Governance in the UK has not moved sufficiently from a model that suited small-time amateur club operations with small National Federation (NF) budgets funded out of modest levies on activities by participants, to that of an organisation responsible for the equitable distribution of millions of pounds of public money each year. Methods of oversight and consequent accountability are not effective.
Policies, rules and regulations are based on the NF, in my case BC, being the ultimate arbiter of everything to do with the sport,

CTT still functions as a National Federation funded out of rider levies, and is not subject to British Cycling. A large part of cycle sport in Britain is independent, and has a tradition of looking upon professional cycling as suspect in principle. It also practices sexual equality, with mixed fields.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on January 24, 2017, 08:46:20 pm
CTT still functions as a National Federation funded out of rider levies, and is not subject to British Cycling... It also practices sexual equality, with mixed fields.

Audax UK likewise, of course.

I suspect all the HPV stuff is much the same, but they're even weirder than time-triallists and audaxers.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on January 24, 2017, 08:59:10 pm
There is crossover though. Who can forget the Zipp 1080 controversy on the Levens 10 course in 2009? He's always been a wrong un that Wiggins.

http://www.thewestmorlandgazette.co.uk/sport/4462700.Cycling___Olympian_Wiggins_runs_in_trouble_at_Levens/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on January 25, 2017, 09:39:38 am
Thank goodness for needle and thread!

If her allegations are correct, WADA is not only toothless but set up as a smokescreen.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LEE on January 25, 2017, 10:04:22 am
( I nearly bought some, but couldn't stomach the SKy logo on my arse. )

If it was on the arse, on the inside, I may buy some.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: rob on January 25, 2017, 10:10:42 am
I suspect all the HPV stuff is much the same, but they're even weirder than time-triallists and audaxers.

Ah good.   I was looking for something to do next year.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on January 25, 2017, 10:34:46 am
I suspect all the HPV stuff is much the same, but they're even weirder than time-triallists and audaxers.

Ah good.   I was looking for something to do next year.

Those circuits of Romney Marsh would be a lot more fun on a fully faired recumbent.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Mr Larrington on January 25, 2017, 11:27:11 am
I suspect all the HPV stuff is much the same, but they're even weirder than time-triallists and audaxers.

Ah good.   I was looking for something to do next year.

My grate frend Mr Woolrich already has a rider lined up for the machine he's revamping ATM but he has a longer-term plan to rebuild his old machine Oscar the Egg ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 30, 2017, 06:58:19 pm
Unwitting Flumucil courier, Simon Cope, and the Sky doctor at the centre of this 'nothing-to-see-here' controversy have been asked to attend the Parliamentary hearing in late february.

I cant begin to imagine what answers Cope will conjure up to explain why he couriered a medical package of unknown content across international borders.

I wonder if the good doctor will be asked to account for the almost unimaginable coincidence of Wiggins 'pollen allergy' flaring up, so badly as to warrant a PED, at different times of the year, but always before a major multiday tour. Hmmm.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on January 30, 2017, 07:09:44 pm
Unwitting Flumucil courier, Simon Cope, and the Sky doctor at the centre of this 'nothing-to-see-here' controversy have been asked to attend the Parliamentary hearing in late february.

I cant begin to imagine what answers Cope will conjure up to explain why he couriered a medical package of unknown content across international borders.

I wonder if the good doctor will be asked to account for the almost unimaginable coincidence of Wiggins 'pollen allergy' flaring up, so badly as to warrant a PED, at different times of the year, but always before a major multiday tour. Hmmm.

I'd like to see the treatment guidelines he was following for its use.

These don't suggest "big race coming up, am a bit sniffy" will cut it.

http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/media/230935/Triamcinolone%20in%20adults%20Difficult%20Asthma%20Advice%20Note%20June%2013_with_Header.pdf
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on January 30, 2017, 07:36:19 pm
You're right.

But the rules don't reflect this. So they probably weren't cheating. The rules need changing.

... and round we go again ...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 30, 2017, 07:36:49 pm
Unwitting Flumucil courier, Simon Cope, and the Sky doctor at the centre of this 'nothing-to-see-here' controversy have been asked to attend the Parliamentary hearing in late february.

I cant begin to imagine what answers Cope will conjure up to explain why he couriered a medical package of unknown content across international borders.

I wonder if the good doctor will be asked to account for the almost unimaginable coincidence of Wiggins 'pollen allergy' flaring up, so badly as to warrant a PED, at different times of the year, but always before a major multiday tour. Hmmm.

I'd like to see the treatment guidelines he was following for its use.

These don't suggest "big race coming up, am a bit sniffy" will cut it.

http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/media/230935/Triamcinolone%20in%20adults%20Difficult%20Asthma%20Advice%20Note%20June%2013_with_Header.pdf

I think they ought to amend the 'known side effects' section to include:
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 30, 2017, 07:37:19 pm

http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/media/230935/Triamcinolone%20in%20adults%20Difficult%20Asthma%20Advice%20Note%20June%2013_with_Header.pdf

This is actually extremely handy, as my wife's asthma is barely controlled and prednisiolone, while effective, only works for a couple of weeks. I shall print this out and hand it to our doctor.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on January 30, 2017, 07:37:51 pm
Matt, the TUE rules do and did reflect this. It is just that TUEs were getting signed regardless.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 30, 2017, 07:38:13 pm
You're right.

But the rules don't reflect this. So they probably weren't cheating. The rules need changing.

... and round we go again ...

If Wiggins didn't need the treatment, then they were cheating.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 30, 2017, 07:38:40 pm
You're right.

But the rules don't reflect this. So they probably weren't cheating. The rules need changing.

... and round we go again ...

Sky cheated the TUE system.

With the complicity of the UCI.

Edit:LWAB got there first
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on January 30, 2017, 07:40:59 pm
You're right.

But the rules don't reflect this. So they probably weren't cheating. The rules need changing.

... and round we go again ...

If Wiggins didn't need the treatment, then they were cheating.
Define "need".
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 30, 2017, 07:49:19 pm
Doubtless Wiggins's history of repeated hospitalisations due to his 'pollen allergy' will be proof enough that this drug was absolutely necessary.

Errr....
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on January 30, 2017, 07:51:49 pm
Doubtless Wiggins's history of repeated hospitalisations due to his 'pollen allergy' will be proof enough that this drug was absolutely necessary.

pointless hyperbole! Let us know when you've thought about real sport and the real rules that govern them  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on January 30, 2017, 07:56:45 pm
TUE applications need to meet all of the following criteria before a TUE will be granted:

• The rider would experience significant health problems without taking the prohibited substance or method

• The therapeutic use of the substance would not produce enhancement of performance

• There is no reasonable therapeutic alternative

• Use of the prohibited substance or method is not needed because of previous doping.

The following evidence is needed to support a TUE application:

• Medical history

• An accurate diagnosis. For chronic conditions, up-to-date review letters that confirm treatment monitoring should be provided.

• Alternatives have been considered or trialled.

Some things to note:

Need to meet all of the criteria.

Would experience significant health problems, not could.

Not produce enhancement of performance.

No reasonable therapeutic alternative.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on January 30, 2017, 08:00:16 pm
Doubtless Wiggins's history of repeated hospitalisations due to his 'pollen allergy' will be proof enough that this drug was absolutely necessary.

pointless hyperbole! Let us know when you've thought about real sport and the real rules that govern them  :thumbsup:

Perhaps you should read the NICE guidelines for the administration of this drug, and then have a long hard think about whether a pro cyclist could ever fit those descriptions of a valid user.

After youve done that, maybe open your ears to those of Wiggins's racing peers who've raised their heads above the parapet to give their opinion. Think you'll find not too many in support of him.

I know from your posting history that you've naff all in the way of understanding of this issue, matt. Its a bit silly of you to try and argue from a position of ignorance, because even as an intellectual exercise you are on a loser.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on January 30, 2017, 08:01:22 pm
You're right.

But the rules don't reflect this. So they probably weren't cheating. The rules need changing.

... and round we go again ...

If Wiggins didn't need the treatment, then they were cheating.
Define "need".

As in that he didn't need the treatment in order to function normally. Although he did need it in order to win a TdF.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on January 30, 2017, 09:24:54 pm
You're right.

But the rules don't reflect this. So they probably weren't cheating. The rules need changing.

... and round we go again ...

If Wiggins didn't need the treatment, then they were cheating.
Define "need".

As in that he didn't need the treatment in order to function normally. Although he did need it in order to win a TdF.

But winning a TdF is defined as functionning normally; therefore he did need it!! M'lud I rest my case (and while the jury's retired he will as well).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on January 31, 2017, 11:29:54 am
Wiggins, his doctor and the others involved in Team Sky doping were probably only doing what the UCI expected and wanted. Which isn't to say that excuses them, just the whole system is rigged.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Bledlow on January 31, 2017, 12:13:36 pm
The way I read it is that Sky took the opportunity presented by Wiggo's exercise-induced asthma and a quite-likely genuine medical issue to obtain the strongest possible medication allowed under the TUE rules extant at the time - even Wiggins said it was to 'level the playing field'. The moral question of whether anyone should be able to medically compensate for an illness in order to compete is arguable - and will be into eternity, no doubt.

However, the fact is what they did was within the rules, declared as happening at the time, and raised no objection from the governing bodies responsible - who had every opportunity to do so had they wished. There was no subterfuge, no attempt to hide what was happening. Therefore, as I see it, there is no reason for Sky or Wiggins to feel under any threat. The rules were subsequently changed, and will no doubt change again. But you can't judge people for actions which were legal and open at the time, but would not now be so.
EXACTLY!

I remember reading an article, from donkey's years ago about the US track team, their training, diet, equipment and prep for olympics.

They used helium in their tyres.
During training they stored blood and reinjected their own red blood cells before competition. It was legal at the time, so all above board.

Absolutely banned now. Talked about as if it were on a par with murdering babies.
Should they give their medals back? OFFS
I recall reading a press report of the doping strategies of the teams in the FA cup, complete with interviews with the coaches, who freely admitted that they had amphetamines to hand, ready to give to players as & when they thought it might aid their performance. Late 1940s, IIRC. Totally legal & within the rules of the game at the time.

Same-same. If you game the system within the rules at the time, & win, you should keep any medals you won. If it's decided that those rules need to be changed to stop what you did, then new standards apply as soon as the changes take effect - not retrospectively.

Records (world, national, etc.) might need some adjustment, e.g. a classification into pre- & post- drug ban records, but definitely not the medals.


If it turns out that something was done that was only accepted as being within the rules because of a twisted, perhaps corrupt, interpretation & application of a rule (& I can see why that is suspected in this case), then perhaps there might be grounds for retrospective redistribution of awards - but only if the dubious interpretation had skewed benefits. If everyone took advantage of it, then despite the nasty taste it leaves, let wins stand.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: asterix on January 31, 2017, 08:02:46 pm
Quote
They used helium in their tyres.

 ;D LOL
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on January 31, 2017, 08:10:20 pm
Matt, the TUE rules do and did reflect this. It is just that TUEs were getting signed regardless.
but Wiggins wasn't signing them (or Brailsford) - unless I missed another exciting tweet?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on January 31, 2017, 08:31:11 pm
Why was Sky asking for TUEs that weren't in accordance with the TUE rules? A team renowned for thoroughly investigating all of the details would have known that their TUE requests didn't comply with the rules and should have been rejected but they applied anyway.

Why were these inappropriate TUEs approved when they didn't comply with the rules? Can you think of some reasons why that might have happened?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on February 01, 2017, 08:21:22 am
The very fact that the discussion runs to twenty pages says it all really, whether it was right or wrong, Sir Brad's reputation has taken a massive hit along with that of Sky and BC by association. In the minds of a significant number of fans the result will always have an asterisk against it.

As to the result standing, of course it will, after all Riis', Ullrich's et al results still stand.
 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 01, 2017, 02:44:25 pm
Isn't everyone asked to sign a declaration when they fly that they know the contents of their luggage?

Cope has just admitted to the parliamentary committee that he misled airport security staff by not admitting that he didn't know what was in his luggage.

UK Anti-Doping authority say Wiggins' medical records for that period are either missing or incomplete (contrary to BC and Sky stated policy) and that Sky were "resistant" to enquiries about his medical records & it took them 4 months to get to see what they needed for their enquiry (i.e. nothing!).  UKAD suggest "doctor-patient confidentiality" needs amending in such cases in future.

There are no records whatever that support Freeman's claim that it was Fluimucil in the package, which itself is illegal as Flumacil was an unregulated drug in the UK at that time and required documentation if prescribed.

No explanation from BC or Sky why no records were kept by Freeman, despite Sky's trumpeted anti-doping stance being based on full & detailed records, particularly for prescription drugs.  UKAD find this incomprehensible!

The GMC are expected to launch their own investigation.

Quote
Freeman, who received the package on behalf of the team in 2011, missed the hearing on Wednesday because of ill health.
!!!

So we have lies, obfuscation, illegality, and we're only just getting started.  Squeaky clean Sky indeed!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on March 01, 2017, 09:48:36 pm
At best it's incompetent.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 01, 2017, 09:52:20 pm
No records of Fluimucil purchase, but records of big purchase of Kenacort.

No records of who Kenacort was used on.

Clean and transparent team?   ::-)

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 01, 2017, 09:59:11 pm
Indeed. Chief of UKAD said there were large quantities of triamcinolone bought by BC/SKY but no record of where, when or to whom it had been administered (other than what we know due to the Fancy Bears leak), but it was far more than required for a single cyclist (i.e. Wiggins) and could indicate widespread use by other team members.  Without any records who knows!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 01, 2017, 11:36:33 pm
Indeed. Chief of UKAD said there were large quantities of triamcinolone bought by BC/SKY but no record of where, when or to whom it had been administered (other than what we know due to the Fancy Bears leak), but it was far more than required for a single cyclist (i.e. Wiggins) and could indicate widespread use by other team members.  Without any records who knows!

Fancy bears could only leak the 'approved' use under the TUEs.

In a previous investigation is was said that one team had used corticosteroids across several team members, including the protected leader, to help them lose weight prior to a significant world tour event that was won.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on March 01, 2017, 11:48:12 pm
Triamcinolone is only banned in-competition, isn't it? In which case TUE only required for use during or before a race.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 02, 2017, 08:26:24 am
Triamcinolone is only banned in-competition, isn't it? In which case TUE only required for use during or before a race.

In season, that is going to be most of the time.

Looks to me like Brailsford and Cope are throwing Dr Freeman under the bus. And where was Freeman yesterday when supposed to be in front of the Committee?

Absent from school with note from mummy.

And where were Freeman's records of drugs administered to Wiggins?

On laptop that was eaten by his dog stolen whilst in Greece in 2014.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on March 02, 2017, 08:26:31 am
I think we need to reassess Moto Man in the light of Sky: he was probably only going for a nice touring holiday around France, after all.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on March 02, 2017, 08:23:23 pm
I think we need to reassess Moto Man in the light of Sky: he was probably only going for a nice touring holiday around France, after all.

Or just making up the trip to fiddle his expenses. We all do that, don't we?


And where were Freeman's records of drugs administered to Wiggins?

On laptop that was eaten by his dog stolen whilst in Greece in 2014.

Although the information would have been on Dropbox, had he uploaded the relevant documents as he was supposed to have done.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 03, 2017, 07:08:39 pm
I heard a rumour about 3 years ago, from somebody with connections, that Team Sky were abusing cortisone for performance enhancing reasons.

Puts this into perspective:

Team Sky rival’s medic says TUE claims of Bradley Wiggins doctor are ‘flimsy’

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/03/cycling-tue-bradley-wiggins-richard-freeman?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: slope on March 03, 2017, 07:39:06 pm
Whilst all these shenanigans are regretably expected of 'professional' sport?

Is there any suggested alternative medication in 'the jiffy bag'?

Given that it was administered AFTER a race??
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 04, 2017, 03:40:38 pm
Whilst all these shenanigans are regretably expected of 'professional' sport?

Is there any suggested alternative medication in 'the jiffy bag'?

Given that it was administered AFTER a race??

After one race and before another:

- Testosterone aids recovery;) or other steroid
- EPO or one of the modern versions
- L-Carnitine
- Kenacort
- Human Growth Hormone
...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 04, 2017, 06:44:24 pm

My support for Sky is really the support of rational thought and the rule of law over innuendo and unhinged ranting. I’m afraid I now read everything Flatus writes in the voice of his avatar.

The rule of law, eh?

Not looking so clever, are you,  now that the Parliamentary Committee AND UKAD have collectively said WTF to Sky's bullshit, and even Wiggins's former doctor has called bollocks on it. Not to mention just about any confessed doper who has commented, including Saint David Millar....brother of Team Sky's PR manager.

Not surprised you've not been back to repeat your personal attacks on me.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on March 04, 2017, 06:55:45 pm
Whilst all these shenanigans are regretably expected of 'professional' sport?

Is there any suggested alternative medication in 'the jiffy bag'?

Given that it was administered AFTER a race??
Non-performance enhancing alternatives of the sort approved for medical use in the state of Colorado, and which Wiggins is alleged to indulge in during the off-season, on holiday in Spain?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on March 04, 2017, 07:01:22 pm
Sky have worked it, but for me, the TUE system is what seems mental. If I can set PBs when fighting off a chest infection with a handful of pred, I can't imagine how awesome triamcinolone makes you feel.

Since I've had access to "emergency" pred and antibiotics, I've gone from being the sickliest member of the house to being the most robust - first sign of anything, down go the drugs, and nothing takes hold.

I think the trigger has pulled the finger.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 04, 2017, 07:17:15 pm
Sky cheated the TUE system. But with Zorloli signing off a fast-tracked TUE for Froome, when it should have followed the procedure of a three person panel, we know the UCI is complicit...just as they were with that other cash cow, Armstrong, and his successor, Contador. Remember that Froome had the TUE for the Tour of Romandie, which, despite being so ill as to need large doses of Prednisolone, he not only won, but in the course of doing so beat the world TT champion, Tony Martin, in the event's TT....whilst ill.

We still don't know what was in the 'package'...
I don't think we've seen the end of this yet.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 05, 2017, 09:57:45 am
Now it transpires that a consignment of testosterone patches was delivered to Team Sky/BC base in Manchester.

A 'mistake' by the pharmaceutical company, apparently...and they were sent straight back.

Fancy that. Of all the things the pharmaceutical company could send by mistake...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 05, 2017, 10:58:32 am
It should be enlightening, once the full details emerge of how the blood passport could be evaded with careful dosing of commonplace drugs (probably combined with other measures), just like microdosing of EPO was a revelation to me.
Title: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 05, 2017, 12:36:58 pm
Fancy that. Of all the things the pharmaceutical company could send by mistake...

As bad luck stories go, it's up there with "I slipped and my trousers fell off and somehow I ended up with my cock stuck in the vacuum cleaner".
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 05, 2017, 12:43:31 pm
But in this case the cock didn't actually get sucked up the nozzle. It was just waved around the end of the pipe a bit.

It's important to not jump to conclusions


(   ;D   )

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on March 05, 2017, 03:59:35 pm
Anyone able to provide a scan or photograph of the Sunday Times article that Flatus refers to about the testosterone?

Cycling News have rehashed the Sunday Times article into their own article: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ukad-reveals-freeman-received-delivery-of-testosterone-in-2011/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 05, 2017, 04:08:14 pm
It's in The Mail.

Precis:

Staff member opens package and discovers it's testosterone. Freeman challenged by Steve Peters.  Peters satisfied that it is an administrative mistake. Package sent back to supplier. Brailsford not informed.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on March 05, 2017, 04:14:02 pm
Ah, OK. I thought it was in the Sunday Times because David Walsh had made reference on twitter to an article he was also publishing:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3917/32883454010_d833a3a2cc_o.png)

https://twitter.com/DavidWalshST/status/838173995920916480

I'd still like to find out what David Walsh has to say.
Here's the Walsh article: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/focus/team-sky-ride-deeper-into-storm-over-drugs-vcgqtrlcn  It's now possible to subscribe to The Times and get to view two articles per week for free, which is what I've just done.

And here's the Daily Mail article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-4282644/Crisis-Team-Sky-deepens-dealing-blow-cycling.html
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on March 05, 2017, 04:16:19 pm
It should be enlightening, once the full details emerge of how the blood passport could be evaded with careful dosing of commonplace drugs (probably combined with other measures), just like microdosing of EPO was a revelation to me.
Yep. "Top athlete takes PEDs" is almost par for the course. "Top cleaner than clean team on PEDs" is more interesting, but the real interest is in the collusion between athletes and the authorities supposedly keeping them clean.

Also
Quote
medicines ordered by both Team Sky and British Cycling were held in the same store room at the National Cycle Centre.
It's a bit like "Drugs ordered for the England team (which of course weren't drugs at all) given to Manchester Utd players."
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 05, 2017, 06:46:28 pm
Just seen this on CN

"The Sunday Times article also claims that in 2013 former Sky doctor Alan Farrell withheld the team’s password for the online ADAMS system from Freeman in order to prevent him from applying for a fourth TUE for Wiggins ahead of that year’s Tour of Britain."


Hmmm.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 05, 2017, 06:51:17 pm
It sounds like Freeman is the one being hung out to dry here. Though how tenable Brailsford's position is remains to be seen.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 05, 2017, 06:59:18 pm
Dont worry, David. It'll all blow over. It is just a conspiracy theory, after all.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 05, 2017, 07:50:53 pm
Dont worry, David. It'll all blow over. It is just a conspiracy theory, after all.

 ;D

I presume David no longer thinks of you as a "classic conspiracy theorist or clinic inhabitant" now he is being presented with the evidence he was keenly seeking last year.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 05, 2017, 08:34:16 pm
Indeed there seems to be specific evidence of an individual pushing the boudaries of the system. And evidence of much of the team aiming to uphold a high ethical standard.

I suppose the justification for BW is that if it is medicine that is approved by the doctor and a TUE then it is not a breach of the rules. And technically he may be correct. Though an improved policy on requiring 2 doctors for a TUE application.

How long before Richard Freeman is chastised by the GMC?

His CV is available online. One wonders how much was driven by him and how much by BW. It is entirely plausible that the testosterone package was sent in error. It doesn't appear to have raised any further questions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 05, 2017, 08:38:12 pm

Indeed there seems to be specific evidence of an individual pushing the boudaries of the system. And evidence of much of the team aiming to uphold a high ethical standard.

Much of the team?

I think you mean two of them.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 05, 2017, 08:39:24 pm
DM, that seems a quite limited interpretation of the known facts and the actions of various Sky staff.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on March 05, 2017, 08:42:37 pm
It is entirely plausible that the testosterone package was sent in error. It doesn't appear to have raised any further questions.

It is plausible that the testosterone package in question was sent in error.

I wonder if there where other testosterone packages that weren't sent in error.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 05, 2017, 09:45:22 pm
It would seem very careless to have it sent direct to the team where people would raise questions. If you were doing something ultra vires you would not do it with a paper trail.
DM, that seems a quite limited interpretation of the known facts and the actions of various Sky staff.
It's not an overinterpretation, which many seem to prefer.

You start to bring a lot of folk into the circle of conspiracy - at least two team doctors, Steve Peters and so on. Freeman is being hung out to dry on this. Brailsford is either complicit or naive in not setting appropriate policies.

It certainly belies the image of a slick and efficient cyborg like management team.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 05, 2017, 10:07:33 pm
So far we have several people involved with this package that has the contents supposedly identified by only one person who hasn't been questioned yet. The doctor is being lined up to fall on his sword.

To date, Sky has consistently deflected, obfuscated and flat-out blocked all attempts to find the truth. It seems that more than one or two rogue Sky folk are involved. At the very least, there have been a lot of improbably naive staff in the team that have avoided being open about potential rule infringements.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 06, 2017, 01:34:15 am
Whilst all these shenanigans are regretably expected of 'professional' sport?

Is there any suggested alternative medication in 'the jiffy bag'?

Given that it was administered AFTER a race??

After one race and before another:

- Testosterone aids recovery;) or other steroid
- EPO or one of the modern versions
- L-Carnitine
- Kenacort
- Human Growth Hormone
...


This was timely!

So Sky and Wiggins are finished, which rider's next. Motor doping as well?

Funny thing is, Brailsford/Sky have been so unpleasant and arrogant over the years - spouting their corporate bol.... - that their downfall is welcome, even though it doesn't change any other team's methods. A bit like Lance and USPS.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 06, 2017, 06:04:05 am
It would seem very careless to have it sent direct to the team where people would raise questions. If you were doing something ultra vires you would not do it with a paper trail.
DM, that seems a quite limited interpretation of the known facts and the actions of various Sky staff.
It's not an overinterpretation, which many seem to prefer.

You start to bring a lot of folk into the circle of conspiracy - at least two team doctors, Steve Peters and so on. Freeman is being hung out to dry on this. Brailsford is either complicit or naive in not setting appropriate policies.

It certainly belies the image of a slick and efficient cyborg like management team.


BC and Team Sky shared some facilities at that point, including the 'medicine' room. It sounds as if the person who opened the testosterone package was a BC employee, who then alerted another BC employee, Peters.

With regards to Freeman's trigger happy use of the TUE system to administer PEDs, it is reported that Brailsford knew about the misgivings of the other Sky doctors but chose to ignore them.

Should we be surprised that Brailsford ignored them? Not  really.  After all, it was around the same time that he was employing notorious doping doctor, Geert Leinders.  Knowing how tiny a community is the pro cycling circuit, and also knowing that because team members, staff and riders, frequently change teams, and therefore knowledge and acquaintance, it seems unlikely that Brailsford didn't know about Leinders recent past*

But then Brailsford seems to have memory problems. When Wiggins TUE issue first popped, Brailsford said he didn't know what Kenacort was.  Now, when it is revealed that Sky had a massive stock of the stuff, Freeman says it was used on non-cyclist staff and Brailsford pops up and says he had some for a knee issue in 2008. Used on other staff???  It's Kenacort, not aspirin.

 Mind you, Brailsford isn't alone in having memory problems. despite having intramuscular shots of this stuff before major tours, Wiggins claimed never to had an injection.

It's a farce. But then I'm just a conspiracy theorist.  ;D


*of course he knew... that's why he employed him.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 06, 2017, 09:53:56 am
I have little but contempt for the media in these hero-humbling feeding-frenzies. They built up our Olympic athletes to make copy, and their hunger for copy drives these witchhunts.

I'm firmly of the 'when did we become East Germany?' persuasion. Australia was the first nation down that particular road, after the fall of the Iron Curtain. Rowing was the first British sport to expose the conjunction of TUE's and East German coaches.

For me the question comes down to how well Wiggo did within the specific context of the whole environment he was performing in. That includes lottery funding, the rise of British track cycling, the influence of Armstrong's media profile, and the hysteria surrounding the 2012 Olympics. If I was writing a script for a film about all this, I'd concentrate on Heiko Salzwedel.

(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03333/bradley-wiggins_3333322b.jpg)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 06, 2017, 11:18:23 am
That's a bit of a binary view. The media? You do know who the Sky in Team Sky are, don't you?  They've absolutely milked the media to build up their Sky-branded heroes.

Remember, Sky heroes aren't just any ordinary heroes.  They are clean heroes. ;) Nobody obliged Team Sky to come out with all that shite.

The media are horrid, but for all parties involved it's a symbiotic relationship. The heroes enjoy the hagiography on the way up from the likes of Sky/News international journalist David Walsh, as well as all the other journos, now the heroes must play the other part of their role during their downfall.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 06, 2017, 11:26:39 am
As professional cycling is largely about brand awareness, Sky are doing very well, with five references in your last post, not counting the thread title.

I pushed Wiggo off in a Southport evening 10, and then timed myself in 2007. That was when he was preparing for the Tour, during which he went on a breakaway to show the Cofidis colours, the team pulled out later after a drug bust.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2007/jul/27/cycling.tourdefrance1
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 06, 2017, 12:24:50 pm
I pushed Wiggo off in a Southport evening 10, and then timed myself in 2007. That was when he was preparing for the Tour, during which he went on a breakaway to show the Cofidis colours, the team pulled out later after a drug bust.

I remember that breakaway very well - fantastic solo effort for almost 200km, caught with less than 10km to go. Probably the first thing he did that really endeared him to me as a road rider.

I also remember the pictures of him throwing his Cofidis jersey in the bin in disgust.

It just makes the revelations about his abuse of the TUE system all the more disappointing.

You can't blame the media for Wiggins lying about not using needles. Wiggins isn't being branded a witch, he's being called out for stuff he has actually said and done.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 06, 2017, 12:39:09 pm
Whenever I'm in a builder's merchant I always spot the name Mapei, and no the other building chemical brands. That's because of a deliberate strategy.

Quote
Instead, with its massive, multinational roster (44 riders of ten different nationalities in 2001) they “reigned supreme over one-day races” and “gave a massive return on the 100 million-plus euros we invested over ten years, as an integral part of our corporate globalisation strategy.”

Here, perhaps, Squinzi gets to the crux of what made Mapei truly unique. Other sponsors have also owned their teams, rather than relying on a separate management company as per the current model, but maybe nowhere has that team been such an integral part of the company’s day-to-day business, culture and image.

“Castorama did something similar but only in France – we did it on a worldwide level,” says Squinzi.

“You really felt like the team was another department of the company, or a part of the marketing department,” Tegner adds. “It wasn’t just a case of sticking the company name on the jersey, they used it as a real tool. And in that respect, too, they really influenced a lot of things in cycling today. Team presentations, for example, had always been and are often still just glorified press conferences. Well, [at Mapei] they were these big show business extravaganzas…”


Mapei never won the Tour, and the story makes interesting reading. http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/mapei-the-greatest-ever-team/

My favourite Mapei rider was Franco Ballerini, a Paris Roubaix great. Did he use a Brooks in 1998?

(http://www.cyclinside.com/upload/Category_3/Sector_21/Holder_65/Content_2746/16122007-c40%20ballerini2.jpg)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 06, 2017, 12:52:24 pm
As professional cycling is largely about brand awareness, Sky are doing very well, with five references in your last post, not counting the thread title.


Yes....in a post about doping and dishonesty, in a thread about doping and dishonesty.

What is it, exactly, about this brand that people are now aware?

 ::-)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 06, 2017, 01:01:38 pm
Just the name, as opposed to Netflix for instance.

In the minds of the public the whole brand of professional cycling is about doping and dishonesty. That distaste is diluted if our riders win, a suspension of disbelief, followed by the frisson of betrayal.

What I'd really like is a completely honest three-way discussion between Chris Boardman, Jens Voigt and Wiggo.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 06, 2017, 01:08:02 pm
This is a PR/ Brand disaster for Sky.

There are two reasons why Sky haven't pulled the plug on cycling sponsorship. If they did, it would be tantamount to an acceptance of guilt, whereas so far their game has been entirely about smoke and mirrors and damage limitation. They also have a live asset in Froome, who they are hoping will come out of this examination of Team Sky without any shit sticking to him.

I somehow doubt there will be many Sky jerseys on display at your average sportive. Team Wiggins kit is 50-60% off on the Rapha website.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 06, 2017, 01:24:43 pm
I do wonder why I don't care about these doping storms.i think it's down to an interest in the historical dimension as at Mapei in the 90s.

Quote
With regard to doping, some would argue that Squinzi himself isn’t immune to a spot of historical revisionism. To brag that Mapei ruled themselves out of major tours by ruling out blood-doping, then boast about riders such as Johan Museeuw’s performances in the classics, is almost as rich as Squinzi. It’s also odd that, having decided three-week tours weren’t a happy hunting ground for riders without the right chemical artillery, he and his team were so committed to winning the 2002 Giro with Stefano Garzelli.

But then Squinzi, of course, remains of the view that his rider’s wasn’t a straightforward case of cheating – although he stops short of dredging up old conspiracy theories centering on Pantani and Garzelli’s old Mercatone Uno team. “I still think someone stitched us up there,” is all Squinzi will say. “There were a lot of strange things, like the fact we heard Stefano was positive even before they’d tested the sample.”

Crespi defended Garzelli at the time but, curiously, nine years later, has a slightly different take on what proved for Squinzi to be the last straw. “I don’t know, I honestly don’t,” he says, before pausing. “Thinking about it now, I just would have expected a more lively reaction from the rider. Okay, when some people take a hit, they can go a little bit numb, but he seemed cold…”

Whatever really went on, Squinzi has no cause to regret his decision. Mapei’s profits have suffered in the worldwide economic crisis that crippled the building industry but the company retains clear global leadership in the chemical adhesive industry, with a turnover of well in excess of a billion euros.


Disillusion with the reality of professional sport is understandable, especially when you've been led to believe it's now 'clean'. But long-term fans often don't see it in those terms.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 06, 2017, 01:26:09 pm
Brand growth doesn't come from long term fans
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 06, 2017, 01:39:13 pm
I don't think that brand awareness is aimed at the cognoscenti, it's a by-product of success. I don't have the slightest desire to subscribe to Sky, and I've never bought a Mapei product.
I do know that Barloworld are a company selling materials handling products, based in South Africa. So if I suddenly need to handle materials in South Africa, I'll know who to call.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Phil W on March 06, 2017, 03:33:37 pm
Team Wiggins kit is 50-60% off on the Rapha website.

Can't you get Wiggins kit for free with each NHS prescription?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 06, 2017, 04:01:05 pm
Brand growth doesn't come from long term fans
I read that as "beard growth":  What has Wiggo been upto now???
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on March 06, 2017, 05:03:51 pm
Mutiny is drawing closer: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/exclusive-team-sky-riders-consider-asking-brailsford-to-resign/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 06, 2017, 08:25:00 pm
Mutiny is drawing closer: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/exclusive-team-sky-riders-consider-asking-brailsford-to-resign/

Resign to protect everyone else? After throwing several others under the us first.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 06, 2017, 08:41:59 pm
It's a bit of a problem for Sky because a resignation is a tacit acceptance of guilt.

They cant wipe the slate clean because Froome is hiding in plain sight on the slate. He was a key part of Wiggins Tour campaign, not to mention Vuelta etc etc etc. Froome is still a bankable talent, but if Brailsford takes a bullet for the team it won't be long before the finger gets pointed at Froome...not least because his physical transformation (puppy fat to vascular waif with major  loss of unused muscle) that occurred after his move from Barlow to Sky bears all the hallmarks of fat and muscle stripping Kenacort usage.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 06, 2017, 09:20:38 pm
It's a bit of a problem for Sky because a resignation is a tacit acceptance of guilt.

They cant wipe the slate clean because Froome is hiding in plain sight on the slate. He was a key part of Wiggins Tour campaign, not to mention Vuelta etc etc etc. Froome is still a bankable talent, but if Brailsford takes a bullet for the team it won't be long before the finger gets pointed at Froome...not least because his physical transformation (puppy fat to vascular waif with major  loss of unused muscle) that occurred after his move from Barlow to Sky bears all the hallmarks of fat and muscle stripping Kenacort usage.


Fingers are already being pointed at Froome. It just feels to be a matter of waiting and watching.

Very good piece this morning in the Irish Independent on Sky, Salazar, Wiggins, Froome and Farah. Hopefully they'll get to tennis, football and rugby next
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 06, 2017, 09:27:04 pm
He's managed to avoid any guilt by association with this Wiggins TUE/Package debacle. Largely down to not doing a Wiggins and openly lying about injections, only to be caught out by the unforeseeable hack of TUE data by the Fancy Bears.  We know he won the Tour de Romandie on a TUE, but that seems to have been forgotten in the furore surrounding Wiggins.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: rafletcher on March 07, 2017, 03:42:49 pm
Mutiny is drawing closer: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/exclusive-team-sky-riders-consider-asking-brailsford-to-resign/

Resign to protect everyone else? After throwing several others under the us first.

But not all are wanting him gone (at least in public)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39185863
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 07, 2017, 04:52:31 pm
Mutiny is drawing closer: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/exclusive-team-sky-riders-consider-asking-brailsford-to-resign/

Resign to protect everyone else? After throwing several others under the us first.

But not all are wanting him gone (at least in public)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39185863

...and I wonder who put them up to that???

Strange that they all used similar language in their tweets (I back Dave 100%)

And then there's Froome's tweet of support...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on March 07, 2017, 04:54:31 pm
It's a bit of a problem for Sky because a resignation is a tacit acceptance of guilt.

They cant wipe the slate clean because Froome is hiding in plain sight on the slate. He was a key part of Wiggins Tour campaign, not to mention Vuelta etc etc etc. Froome is still a bankable talent, but if Brailsford takes a bullet for the team it won't be long before the finger gets pointed at Froome...not least because his physical transformation (puppy fat to vascular waif with major  loss of unused muscle) that occurred after his move from Barlow to Sky bears all the hallmarks of fat and muscle stripping Kenacort usage.


Fingers are already being pointed at Froome. It just feels to be a matter of waiting and watching.

Very good piece this morning in the Irish Independent on Sky, Salazar, Wiggins, Froome and Farah. Hopefully they'll get to tennis, football and rugby next
Or perhaps cycling is easier to expose because there is less money in it? Not just in the sport itself, but much less associated betting and probably less opportunity for result fixing (easy and traditional to fix who wins in the minor post-Tour races, but not who comes third etc).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 07, 2017, 05:29:25 pm
Strange that they all used similar language in their tweets (I back Dave 100%)

"We all love the Glorious Leader!"
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 07, 2017, 06:08:54 pm
Sky have posted a couple of documents relating to the events around the Dauphine. These are well worth reading.
https://www.teamsky.com/article/team-skys-medical-and-anti-doping-practices

They answer, with readily verifiable facts, the issues surrounding Flumicil. Kenacort is a broader issue and there will surely be questions asked of how Freeman was mixing his BC, Sky, and private practice. He does seem to have been rather keener to go with the TUE than was comfortable for the other medical staff and to have been a bit of an IT dinosaur. GMC will no doubt be investigating and I would expect he will get a chastisement of some sort. (3 years to not upload records - that can't be good practice).

There is an element of reading too much into this. of over interpretation. Kimmage complains that he gets a hostile response from the team when he just tries to be an honest investigative journalist. I wonder if he has looked in the mirror and considered that the reason he gets a bad response and David Walsh has a far better time of it is becasue David Walsh isn't an arse.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 07, 2017, 06:19:18 pm
Sky have posted a couple of documents relating to the events around the Dauphine. These are well worth reading.
https://www.teamsky.com/article/team-skys-medical-and-anti-doping-practices

They answer, with readily verifiable facts, the issues surrounding Flumicil. Kenacort is a broader issue and there will surely be questions asked of how Freeman was mixing his BC, Sky, and private practice. He does seem to have been rather keener to go with the TUE than was comfortable for the other medical staff and to have been a bit of an IT dinosaur. GMC will no doubt be investigating and I would expect he will get a chastisement of some sort. (3 years to not upload records - that can't be good practice).

There is an element of reading too much into this. of over interpretation. Kimmage complains that he gets a hostile response from the team when he just tries to be an honest investigative journalist. I wonder if he has looked in the mirror and considered that the reason he gets a bad response and David Walsh has a far better time of it is becasue David Walsh isn't an arse.

There is an element of desperate genuflexion to find any possible reason to bury this. of wilful ignorance of what key players are saying, and why they are saying it.

People like Walsh  ;)

(http://i63.tinypic.com/1hckso.png)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 07, 2017, 07:47:59 pm
Meanwhile, here's what Kimmage has to say:

https://cyclingtips.com/2017/03/interview-paul-kimmage-team-skys-charade-exposed/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 07, 2017, 09:37:08 pm
Quote of the day:
Quote
"There is a fundamental difference between process failures and wrongdoing," said Team Sky principal Sir Dave Brailsford

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39198422 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39198422)

I don't think "process failures" accurately describes what went on, Dave! 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 07, 2017, 09:46:41 pm
I agree with Kimmage that it's really strange the way that Wiggins improved in 2009. I have way more faith in Garmin/Slipstream/whatever than I do in Sky, but it was while he was there he went from being a rubbish climber to someone who could survive with the best in the mountains (he wasn't at that stage bossing things). The story is that he lost weight after leaving the track, but I don't believe that a few kg can make the difference between walking up mountains and keeping up with Contador/Schleck(s).
I guess we'll just have to wait and see what drips out over the next few months/years.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 07, 2017, 10:35:38 pm
The Sky document is spin. Very obvious that they have been making things up as they go along, reacting, rather than proactively being open and transparent. If they were open and transparent they would have kept a tight rein on anything contentious, like massive stocks of a classic PED that has very restricted clinical use. An open and transparent team wouldn't have been caught out at every turn of their story.

Telling the truth is really easy. Sky are finding all of this very difficult.



Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on March 07, 2017, 10:38:47 pm
Telling the truth is really easy. Sky are finding all of this very difficult.
Will that have anything to do with being part of the Murdoch brand...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 07, 2017, 10:56:32 pm
No, I don't think so. They are struggling because if they tell the truth it's game over.

Of course, the irony is that Sky are being held accountable to their own, much-vaunted, standards.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 07, 2017, 11:17:44 pm
No, I don't think so. They are struggling because if they tell the truth it's game over.

Of course, the irony is that Sky are being held accountable to their own, much-vaunted, standards.

Indeed, we accept Astana for example.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 08, 2017, 02:25:34 am
I think we all (well maybe not all) remember when Astana were kicked out of the MPCC for not following its rules (ignoring Labs Boom's low cortisol levels and rostering him to race)

We probably all ( well maybe not all) wondered  why Sky never even joined the MPCC.

Now we know.(well, maybe some of us dont)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on March 08, 2017, 08:12:45 am
Meanwhile, here's what Kimmage has to say:

https://cyclingtips.com/2017/03/interview-paul-kimmage-team-skys-charade-exposed/

Great piece.

I think a Phillip Deignan interview with Kimmage could be really interesting. I hope it happens.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 08, 2017, 12:08:18 pm
I think we all (well maybe not all) remember when Astana were kicked out of the MPCC for not following its rules (ignoring Labs Boom's low cortisol levels and rostering him to race)

We probably all ( well maybe not all) wondered  why Sky never even joined the MPCC.

Now we know.(well, maybe some of us dont)

Nah, as I've said before, the MPCC thing is a massive red herring.

I mean, you have to wonder why they allowed Astana to become members in the first place.

And Katusha weren't kicked out, they left of their own volition.

A good number of other teams didn't join in the first place, not just Sky.

The MPCC is a joke. Voluntary self-regulation never works - just look at the British press.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 08, 2017, 01:17:23 pm
And yet MPCC rules would have precluded Wiggins from contesting the 2012 Tour...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 08, 2017, 01:39:59 pm
And yet MPCC rules would have precluded Wiggins from contesting the 2012 Tour...

Looking at the evidence, you have to say that existing UCI rules at the time probably should have excluded him.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 08, 2017, 01:50:17 pm
I think it's fair to say that the MPCC was predominantly supported by French teams. There is probably a reason for that.  ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 08, 2017, 02:21:22 pm
Yes, one of the chief architects of the MPCC was Vincent Lavenu. It's all very well him telling other teams to abide by his high ethical standards, but I'd like to see him get his own house in order first.

Although, to be fair, AG2R did voluntarily withdraw from the 2013 Dauphiné after Sylvain Georges was busted. Unlike fellow MPCC members Lampre, who carried on racing in 2010 despite having three members suspended for doping.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 08, 2017, 02:34:30 pm
No, I don't think so. They are struggling because if they tell the truth it's game over.

Of course, the irony is that Sky are being held accountable to their own, much-vaunted, standards.

We probably all ( well maybe not all) regarded those as normal marketing baloney.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 08, 2017, 02:39:03 pm
Kimmage is bitter and is, in his own words on that interview, stating conjecture as fact based on his 'gut instinct'. ANd feeling a little aggreived when his rather abrasive style gets a poor response.

There is a perfectly clear and verifiable explanation for the flumicil, how it is sourced and used. I don't see how that can be construed as spin. The issue of granting the TUE's is separate and there are now clear policies. Check the timelines for when the team started and when policies were put in place.  I don't know of any organisation that starts ground up with all the correct policies in place.

For some people there is nothing that Sky can do to be seen as clean.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 08, 2017, 03:19:51 pm
Kimmage is bitter and is, in his own words on that interview, stating conjecture as fact based on his 'gut instinct'. ANd feeling a little aggreived when his rather abrasive style gets a poor response.

Some of what Kimmage says is conjecture, and that is because he has been asked by the interviewer so to do. With regards to Kimmage being bitter, maybe he is, but that has no bearing on whether what he says is actually true. I'm surprised at somebody such as yourself, who makes great play of science and evidence, is now trying to use emotion as an argument. You can't have it both ways, David. Besides which, the tactic you are employing is trying to devalue the message by denigrating the messenger.

Quote
There is a perfectly clear and verifiable explanation for the flumicil, how it is sourced and used. I don't see how that can be construed as spin.

And all of that hinges on the content of the package containing Fluimucil.

As yet Sky have produced no evidence that it was, because surprise surprise there are no records kept.  Again, you cant have it both ways, David. There is no evidence to prove or even suggest that the content of the package was Fluimucil. It's pure conjecture.

Despite the courier remembering the exact circumstances and packaging of the package, it took many weeks before Sky suggested what was in the package. The courier remembered all of the details of the package and it's delivery, bar the contents, and yet Brailsford tried to suggest that the courier didn't even go to the Dauphiné, and when corrected tried to suggest that Wiggins had already left the race when the courier arrived, until video evidence showed this to be untrue. Why didn't Brailsford just ask the courier? The courier remembered everything.

Mind you, Wiggins didnt even remember that he'd ever had an injection until the Fancy Bears hackers reminded him, so perhaps all this Kenacort that Sky's doctor used on team staff has affected their memories.

If Sky can get so many of the simple, verifiable details wrong, so wrong that they look like lies, how can we have any confidence whatsoever about their statements on the contents of the package.

Quote
For some people there is nothing that Sky can do to be seen as clean

In itself, that statement is of no value. People who believe that Sky can do nothing to be seen as clean do so because they think Sky are abusing PEDS. Of course, that belief only emerged when Sky riders started producing performances that were highly out of character. And when the inevitable questions were asked, answers were given that were inconsistent. What we have now is the beginning of the meat on the bones.

People were saying similar things as you about Armstrong, right up until he actually confessed. Armstrong didn't suddenly become a doper the moment he confessed. He always was a doper. The lack of concrete evidence didn't make him clean.

Of course, there are also some people for whom Sky can never be seen as dirty. These people have to examine their own motivations and ask themselves that if they replaced the word 'Sky' with the word ' Astana', would they be quite so willing to dismiss the concerns of just about everybody who has commented -including the Head of UKAD, the Parliamentary Committee, a bunch of confessed dopers AND David Walsh- quite so glibly...

Frankly, David, you believe what Sky are saying because it's what you want to believe.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 08, 2017, 03:20:21 pm
Kimmage is bitter and is, in his own words on that interview, stating conjecture as fact based on his 'gut instinct'. ANd feeling a little aggreived when his rather abrasive style gets a poor response.

There is a perfectly clear and verifiable explanation for the flumicil, how it is sourced and used. I don't see how that can be construed as spin. The issue of granting the TUE's is separate and there are now clear policies. Check the timelines for when the team started and when policies were put in place.  I don't know of any organisation that starts ground up with all the correct policies in place.

For some people there is nothing that Sky can do to be seen as clean.

You would really have to have watched the whole select committee hearing to get a measure of how disturbing the "discrepancies" appear.  Cope looked out of his depth and was very unconvincing regarding the "package" - you almost felt sorry for him!  He admitted the whole thing was inexplicable (including his own behaviour in not asking questions) and felt he was being made a scapegoat.

But far more damning IMO was the evidence from the UKAD chair.  She certainly was of the belief that this went far further than "procedural errors" and again said many aspects of what they had investigated so far were (again) "inexplicable" and deeply disturbing.  Strong words from someone who didn't strike me as someone prone to hyperbole.  She was choosing her words extremely carefully, but you had the sense that she would like to say a lot more!

And as for Freeman's absence - that spoke louder than either of the two witnesses.  I've yet to hear when/how he will be giving his evidence.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 08, 2017, 09:41:52 pm
Where is Kimmage coming from and why?

There are significant gaps in the record keeping that have been identified as procedural fails. We have more nudge, nudge wink wink for events that happened 6 years ago.  I would be far more concerned if in the absence of specific written records, everyone had the same neat story.

Failure to update the central medical records is in itself concerning, but is not evidence of wrongdoing (except for failure to keep proper records).

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. 'Belief' is not hard evidence. 'inexplicable' is not evidence of wrongdoing. For someone like Sky to be doing something illicit you would think they would do a better job of covering things up.

I've not seen any evidence that they were abusing PED beyond the boundaries of the rules. There is  lots of innuendo.  The silence of SKy is taken to be damning when in fact they were asked to remain silent during the investigation.

Has anyone verified that Freemans laptop was reported stolen? Has anyone asked whoever was handling the medicine store at BC what was in that package?  Lots of gaps, a credible and testable (to some extent) set of explanations (does Freeman have a license to prescribe in Berlin? Is that formulation only available in Germany?)

In Freeman I see a medic who has learned and is familiar with certain approaches in treatment. One tends to stick with the tools one knows work, so he uses Kenacort for much of his practice. He is keen to see the athletes progress so ushes the boundaries with the TUE's and Kenacort is his effective therapy of choice.  A bit of an IT dinosaur, but respected for his practice and indeed treats many of the staff as well. 

BTW I had a steroid injection in my shoulder a few years back. I don't know what that drug was. Could have been Kenacort, probably something else. Doesn't surprise me that Brailsford didn't know what he had been given - it didn't matter much at the time as you trust the doctor and unless you are a pharmacologist, the names are so much alphabet soup.)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 08, 2017, 10:45:40 pm
For whatever reason, you aren't viewing this with a critical eye, David. Perhaps you feel that you can't countenance the possibility that the Sky 'marginal gains' mantra is just bullshit. Perhaps, you are just playing the contrarian and trying to defend the increasingly indefensible as an intellectual challenge.  You certainly aren't trying to ask any key critical questions, and are blithely dismissing or ignoring some hard facts that point to attempts at cover up, blatant lying, and a complete lack of openness and transparency.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: drgannet on March 08, 2017, 11:06:01 pm
A good, pertinent article from Mr INRNG http://inrng.com/2017/03/sky-tue-epistemology-known-unknowns/#more-30604 (http://inrng.com/2017/03/sky-tue-epistemology-known-unknowns/#more-30604)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 08, 2017, 11:18:49 pm
55 doses over 4 years for a doctor whose private practice is predominantly the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries? It appears that Dr Freeman has been mixing different business streams with his ordering.
There is a comment that there are no records of the prescriptions for these drugs. That is incorrect. There are records but they are not accessible due to patient confidentiality for those that were treated.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 08, 2017, 11:47:45 pm
For whatever reason, you aren't viewing this with a critical eye, David. Perhaps you feel that you can't countenance the possibility that the Sky 'marginal gains' mantra is just bullshit. Perhaps, you are just playing the contrarian and trying to defend the increasingly indefensible as an intellectual challenge.  You certainly aren't trying to ask any key critical questions, and are blithely dismissing or ignoring some hard facts that point to attempts at cover up, blatant lying, and a complete lack of openness and transparency.


I would disagree. It is easy to countenance anything you don't like as spin etc. It is easy to take a bunch of observations and draw whatever narrative you want through them, with more or less credibility. It is a mistake to presume that because you consider one narrative to lack credibility that the alternative must be more true.

What we know is:
1. A package was taken somewhat naively from BC/Sky medical in Manchester to the Dauphine.
2. it was claimed it contained Flumicil, a drug used as a decongestant in treating cyclists.
3. Flumicil is not available in UK. It is not available on prescription in France as the doctor does/did not have prescribing rights in France. It is alleged that the formulation was sourced from Berlin where it was available in the correct formulation and the doctor was authorised to purchase it.
4. Dr Freeman had three separate practices - Team Sky, BC and a private practice. He specialised in musculoskeletal issues and treated a number of patients, including members of team sky and BC staff.
5. He was familiar with and used corticosteroids as part of his practice. These can also be used as an anti allergy treatment.
6. he obtained TUE and treated BW with corticosteroids as has been recorded.
7. The events around the Dauphine happened 6 years ago. It is reasonable to expect some confusion over precise details in that timeframe.
8. The laptop theft should be verifiable from the Greek authorities. Whether it was the only repository of BW medical records for that time period or not remains in doubt.
9. Freeman appeared to mix the three strands of his professional life with little separation between them. I am surprised there was not a stricter policy and oversight.
10. There is no evidence of the administration route of any of the compounds. There are multiple administration routes, some of which are banned without a TUE and others of which are fine.

The Sky narrative is that it was a growing organisation and they were learning as they went, putting in place new stable door bolts in many cases. (requiring 2 doctors for TUE, better recording of information). I don't consider this to be 'PR fluff' as it is verifiable fact that can be checked as to when and how those policies were put into place. It is part of the growing pains of any organisation, experience is what you get just after you needed it.

There is a narrative of realising that things were not ideal on board and managing the issues away through improved process, hoping that the issues raised were not serious.
There is no evidence that that there was illicit activity - poor practice yes, but not illicit activity.  Therefore there is no evidence for disbelieving the Sky narrative.

The alternative narrative suffers from overreading into events and into what can be explained by incompetence. There is no strong evidence to believe it. Without the missing records and knowledge of the package from party directly involved then there is no strong evidence to believe Sky's narrative.

So we are in a state of not proven and leaning towards whichever way the prejudices lie. I'm quite happy with the benefit of the doubt and an amount of incompetence in a realtively new and inexperienced setup. I work with very smart people and we still make screwups, everyone does if they are entering into new areas. There is a clear and verifiable evidence that there has been a recognition that performance in certain areas was poor and a subsequent development in proces.

I don't think Sky handled it as well as they could have done, but once the incident had occurred they were in a no-win situation.

Personally I think the benefit of the doubt rests with Sky but that it is essentially unproven. Others prefer to see it as some master doping plot. If anything it was a Freeman/Wiggins pushing the boundaries (whether Wiggins fully understood the pharmaceutical options or not). I'm sure Wiggins thought it was above board and within the rules.

So in summary, yes I do consider this with a critical mind, one which refuses to jump to conclusions which are not fully supported. I retain a skepticism for drawing any narrative through the facts, however well it may fit with our prejudices. Which does sound like a bit of a cop out. Sometimes things do look strange in hindsight, but that is how the hand played out.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 09, 2017, 05:49:03 am
You are missing some other data points.

Sky hired a doctor that systematically doped riders in Rabobank. Sky team folk had been employed by Rabobank while doping occurred. The Rabobank doctor was fired by Sky only when the Rabobank doping was publicly proven.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 09, 2017, 06:23:59 am
David, you are being very selective in your evidence, and waving away inconsistencies far too easily.

We've discussed Wiggins's claim never to have had an injection (other than vaccinations) before and IIRC you attempted to say that it was a simple confusion due to the book having been ghost written.

Let's think about that for a moment. Wiggins writes a page in a section about doping, essentially a massive refutation of the accusations of doping made against him. In it he makes a key assertion that he'd never had an injection.

In fact what he meant to say was that he'd had loads of injections of a massive classic PED 3 days before every major stage race....but the ghost writer confused that with "never had an injection". Come on.

When the package story surfaces, Brailsford tells us it wasn't for Wiggins, it was for Pooley. Pooley contradicts that. Brailsford then tells us Wiggins had already left the Dauphiné when Cope arrived so it wasnt administered post race. Video evidence contradicts that.

You are discounting this as incompetence due to the incident occurring a few years previously. That is very selective and convenient incompetence, David, and you are ignoring the fact that Cope didn't contradict it even though he knew it was untrue. It was left out there as fact, and only rescinded when other people disproved it. Interestingly, Cope remembered the tiniest details about the package, the exact location in the building where he picked it up from and what it was wrapped in. But he didn't remember exactly where he went in France until Pooley reminded him, and he didn't remember whether Wiggins was still at the race until somebody else disproved Brailsford's claim.

Even the nature of the product doesn't add up. Wiggins needed Fluimucil during a race, and it took 4 days for it to be delivered at a cost of £600 and only got there when it was too late to be of any use to Wiggins in the race.

It is literally unbelievable, which is why we are seeing several sessions of Sky being interrogated by a Comittee of MPs, and the Head of the UK Anti-doping organisation and the head of the Parliamentary committee giving a damning assessment of Team Sky's account. Off the back of this, WADA are considering banning Kenacort because they belive it to have been abused.

Perhaps, David, given that you feel Sky are being misjudged, you should contact Team Sky and offer to attend the next Parliamentary committee and explain to the MPs and UKAD why they are so wrong to doubt Team Sky.



Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 09, 2017, 09:03:52 am
You are missing some other data points.

Sky hired a doctor that systematically doped riders in Rabobank. Sky team folk had been employed by Rabobank while doping occurred. The Rabobank doctor was fired by Sky only when the Rabobank doping was publicly proven.
What is a "data point" ??

These facts are not evidence in this case - they're just history at best. More mud, that's all.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 09, 2017, 09:07:46 am
Occam's Razor might be usefully applied here.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 09, 2017, 09:10:49 am
Occam's Razor might be usefully applied here.
Relevance?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 09, 2017, 09:17:00 am
If Sky is doping, that explains the difficulty that Sky has in presenting evidence that they are not doping.

If Sky is not doping, they are doing a remarkably poor job of presenting evidence and consistent testimony to back up their assertions.

Sky had access to appropriate knowledge regarding doping without testing positive. They also had easy access to dope and (allegedly) a method to deliver dope to riders without records being kept. Means, motive and opportunity all seem to apply.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Whitedown Man on March 09, 2017, 09:42:26 am
The Cycling Podcast - which for months has gone out of its way to present a balanced view - pretty much concludes "guilty" this week.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 09, 2017, 11:42:17 am
The whole purpose of record-keeping post-Armstrong was to avoid suspicion of doping.  Sky, of all teams, must have been acutely aware of this.  Sky's lack of record keeping, as presented to the select committee last week, was so shocking it bordered on illegality and is likely to prompt a GMC investigation, and yet some people are still willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, in spite of all the evidence (or lack of it). They are in danger of appearing as apologists for doping.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 09, 2017, 11:56:47 am
Of course, lack of records equals lack of definitive proof either way, of innocent use of the drugs or of abusive use of the drugs.

It seems strange that an open, transparent, and squeaky clean team like Sky, who were already raising overt suspicion in 2011 with the Froome miracle transformation from nowhere to podium, would overlook an obvious opportunity to gather evidence that any use of a classic PED was legitimate.

Of course a dirty team, like Astana, would ensure that there was no paper trail.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 09, 2017, 01:10:52 pm

Of course a dirty team, like Astana, would ensure that there was no paper trail.

Precisely.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 09, 2017, 01:14:29 pm
You are missing some other data points.

Sky hired a doctor that systematically doped riders in Rabobank. Sky team folk had been employed by Rabobank while doping occurred. The Rabobank doctor was fired by Sky only when the Rabobank doping was publicly proven.

Sky had access to appropriate knowledge regarding doping without testing positive.

.... which leads you to conclude guilt.

But it isn't evidence, it's not a "data point" and it proves nothing. Ex-dopers are not automatically guilty of anything LWAB suspects them of!

(another "data point"; in a UK court, past offences cannot be taken into account when assessing innocence/guilt. Dunno about other jurisdictions.)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 09, 2017, 01:20:05 pm
in a UK court ... Dunno about other jurisdictions.)

The standards that Sky are required to adhere to are clearly set out in WADA and UKAD regulations. UK courts don't come into it.

I believe LWaB's previous comments about Sky's use of TUEs relate to these standards.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 09, 2017, 01:22:10 pm
Read this:

https://cyclingtips.com/2017/03/commentary-team-skys-clarification-documents-leave-much-still-unclear/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: IJL on March 09, 2017, 01:26:17 pm
Quote
5. He was familiar with and used corticosteroids as part of his practice. These can also be used as an anti allergy treatment


This type of steroid is very commonly used for joint injections and most GP surgery will have a healthy stock.  We don't have any special systems for accounting for our stock but I would have expected any professional sports team to be able to account for every vial of a medication open to such abuse.

Its use in asthma is rare, in fact I have only discovered it can be used for asthma in the last few days, in the past I have given intravenous steroids to asthmatics (hydrocortisone) but most of those people had such severe symptoms that they were in A&E resus rooms.

In the past Kenalog has been used for allergies and hayfever, this is becoming ever less common, a dose of kenalog will often get rid of hayfever symptoms for a whole summer but the potential side affects are fairly dramatic and hard to justify.  I work at a surgery of 10,000 patients and we have about 5 people who are so disabled by hayfever symptoms that they still have Kenalog but its given with a very frank warning about what it can do.


As to gaming the system, of course they were, the surprise is that the TUE was approved and that the whole TUE system is so secretive.  Make it public and none of this would have happened.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 09, 2017, 01:29:54 pm
A couple of thoughts:

1. Sky's whole marketing demeanor and 'business style' approach is absolutely aligned with an expectation that they would keep records. I am required to retain records, emails, hours worked for charging purposes etc. The business relies on this data to function. That is how Sky portrayed themselves and it was manifestly not the case (or the records have been hidden).

2. Although previous convictions are not allowed to influence the verdict in the UK, they do influence sentencing. Are we there yet?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 09, 2017, 01:34:20 pm
in a UK court ... Dunno about other jurisdictions.)

The standards that Sky are required to adhere to are clearly set out in WADA and UKAD regulations. UK courts don't come into it.
So are ex-dopers always guilty in those regs? Interesting.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Whitedown Man on March 09, 2017, 01:43:41 pm
(another "data point"; in a UK court, past offences cannot be taken into account when assessing innocence/guilt. Dunno about other jurisdictions.)
True in most circumstances, but by no means all
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 09, 2017, 01:46:36 pm
But it isn't evidence, it's not a "data point" and it proves nothing.

Eventually you'll join the dots and be able to see the full picture, probably only after a 'mea culpa' from Sky.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 09, 2017, 01:56:06 pm
So are ex-dopers always guilty in those regs? Interesting.

Effectively, yes. That's why Leinders now has a life ban from the sport.

It's a measure of the hubris of Brailsford that he seemed surprised when his ill-considered decision to give Leinders a job came back to bite him on the arse.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 09, 2017, 02:14:25 pm
2. Although previous convictions are not allowed to influence the verdict in the UK, they do influence sentencing. Are we there yet?

Are we at sentencing? Nope, not yet!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 09, 2017, 06:39:00 pm
(another "data point"; in a UK court, past offences cannot be taken into account when assessing innocence/guilt. Dunno about other jurisdictions.)
True in most circumstances, but by no means all
pointless pedantry unless it applies to the Wiggo case:

I don't know exactly how WADA run their investigations. Is there any precedence of a case being turned on the fact that the accused's doctor was previously involved in doping? If so, these doctors are relevant.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Whitedown Man on March 09, 2017, 07:28:48 pm
(another "data point"; in a UK court, past offences cannot be taken into account when assessing innocence/guilt. Dunno about other jurisdictions.)
True in most circumstances, but by no means all
pointless pedantry unless it applies to the Wiggo case
Never has a pot so called a kettle black!  ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 09, 2017, 09:45:27 pm
I prefer Hanlon's Razor rather than Occams in this case.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 09, 2017, 09:57:01 pm
Sure, if this was once only but Sky would have to be improbably stupid too many times to end up in this situation while riding clean.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 09, 2017, 10:06:57 pm
I really don't think that it is that outrageous to think Team Sky are dirty.
They've won 4 Tours. When has that ever been done clean?

It's worse than that though. They've won four Tours with riders with almost no pedigree.

Pro cycling in my lifetime has always been about suspension of disbelief. Team Sky are making it so much more difficult to do this. Perhaps that is why they are so hated.

Bring back more plausible dope cheats!  :thumbsup:

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 09, 2017, 10:27:34 pm
You are looking at a team starting from scratch in the second season of their existence. After 6 years there must be some willing to spill the beans..
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 09, 2017, 10:40:00 pm
It took 11 years for someone to spill the beans on Armstrong.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on March 10, 2017, 08:39:42 am
Go Sky !  ;D

Team Sky's Geraint Thomas claimed a fine solo victory on stage two of Tirreno-Adriatico (http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/39222526)

A fine win regardless of everything else in this thread.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 09:36:04 am
Go Sky !  ;D

Team Sky's Geraint Thomas claimed a fine solo victory on stage two of Tirreno-Adriatico (http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/39222526)

A fine win regardless of everything else in this thread.

Problem is, he IS tarred with the same brush.

I've two things to say about Thomas. Firstly, it is unfair that he is being asked questions that should be asked of others. He complained  about it yesterday saying that "Freeman and Brad" are getting to "Swan around" when they should be the ones being quizzed. He was supportive of DB but seemed very peeved about Wiggins and Freeman.

Secondly, when I think of Thomas I always think of the number 6.  ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on March 10, 2017, 10:31:25 am
I've two things to say about Thomas. Firstly, it is unfair that he is being asked questions that should be asked of others. He complained  about it yesterday saying that "Freeman and Brad" are getting to "Swan around" when they should be the ones being quizzed. He was supportive of DB but seemed very peeved about Wiggins and Freeman.

Secondly, when I think of Thomas I always think of the number 6.  ;)

I can appreciate a win like this irrespective of what I think of Sky.  (and I'm not convinced he should be considered differently from the rest of the Sky machine)  I saw he was peeved about those others.   
Whats the number 6 ?   http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/british-riders-year-2014-number-6-geraint-thomas-150228  ?
Players number 6 ?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 10:46:36 am
It was a reference to Thomas's score on a leaked UCI ranking of suspicious riders in 2010 TdF. Thomas scored 6/10, which was reported variously as inconclusive to definitely doping  ;D

Yes, I agree with you. I can appreciate all (well, nearly all) wins too but that is because I view it all with the same suspension of disbelief  that I have employed forever.

I got a degree of enjoyment from Wiggins's doped wins too.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 10, 2017, 11:21:18 am
Yes, I agree with you. I can appreciate all (well, nearly all) wins too but that is because I view it all with the same suspension of disbelief  that I have employed forever.

Which I assume means that whoever wins you will employ the suspension of disbelief that you have always had and always will have.

The enjoyment appears to be that although someone won, they were just better at concealing something than the other riders or teams in the race.  The inherent disbelief would appear to be a significant factor in how you view the sport of competitive professional cycling.

Surely an admission of a 'closed mind'?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 11:54:52 am
Yes, I agree with you. I can appreciate all (well, nearly all) wins too but that is because I view it all with the same suspension of disbelief  that I have employed forever.

Which I assume means that whoever wins you will employ the suspension of disbelief that you have always had and always will have.

The enjoyment appears to be that although someone won, they were just better at concealing something than the other riders or teams in the race.  The inherent disbelief would appear to be a significant factor in how you view the sport of competitive professional cycling.

Surely an admission of a 'closed mind'?

So, three assumptions leading to a conclusion.
Nice little strawman you've built there.



Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 10, 2017, 11:59:51 am
OK

Statement of fact from your words: I view it all with the same suspension of disbelief that I have employed forever.

What is not 'closed mind' about this statement?

You are admitting your view, interpretation of results is always viewed with the same suspension of disbelief.  Willing to accept the result may be genuine effort?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: IJL on March 10, 2017, 12:07:45 pm
Quote
So, three assumptions leading to a conclusion.
Nice little strawman you've built there.


It's can be hard to be optimistic if you've been a cycling fan over the last 15 years. Sky had a TUE so it seems rules have not  been broken but their ethical stance and moral high ground seems to have crumbled into the swamp.

It feels like groundhog day for cycling, we've been here so often in the past.  Great wins fuelled by drugs that have no place in sport, the stench of suspicion,  endless online debates.  Is there less doping or are people getting better at getting away with it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 12:14:19 pm
OK

Statement of fact from your words: I view it all with the same suspension of disbelief that I have employed forever.

What is not 'closed mind' about this statement?

You are admitting your view, interpretation of results is always viewed with the same suspension of disbelief.  Willing to accept the result may be genuine effort?

I literally cannot be arsed with this.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 12:21:27 pm
Quote
So, three assumptions leading to a conclusion.
Nice little strawman you've built there.


It's can be hard to be optimistic if you've been a cycling fan over the last 15 years. Sky had a TUE so it seems rules have not  been broken but their ethical stance and moral high ground seems to have crumbled into the swamp.

It feels like groundhog day for cycling, we've been here so often in the past.  Great wins fuelled by drugs that have no place in sport, the stench of suspicion,  endless online debates.  Is there less doping or are people getting better at getting away with it.

But it's still possible to enjoy the spectacle. I enjoyed the drama Armstrong injected, even though I knew his battles with Ullrich et al were more about who had the better doctor, connections, and willingness to take risks.

Now? Who knows....but with an unknown like Froome becoming dominant overnight on the back of a story about Bilharzia, and Wiggins winning through abuse of the TUE system, plus ça change.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on March 10, 2017, 01:14:58 pm
....but with an unknown like Froome becoming dominant overnight on the back of a story about Bilharzia

I don't think that's really fair.  A rapid rise, but nothing too extraordinary.  He'd been around for a while and picked up wins and high placings for in his three pro seasons before 2011.  Anyone who gets to the top is by definition going to have a rapid rise.

Not that that exonerates him, but I'm less uneasy about Froome's 2011 than about Wiggins' 2009.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 01:19:55 pm
Srsly? Wins and high placings....but in what?

From this:

2005
1st Stage 2 Tour of Mauritius
2006
1st
Jersey yellow.svg
Overall Tour of Mauritius
1st Stages 2 & 3
2nd Anatomic Jock Race
2007
1st
Jersey yellow.svg
Overall Mi-Août Bretonne
1st Stage 5 Giro delle Regioni (Under-23)
1st Stage 6 Tour of Japan
2nd Berg en Dale Classic
2nd Time trial, B World Championships
3rd Road race, All-Africa Games
8th Tour du Doubs
2008
2nd Overall Giro del Capo
3rd Giro dell'Appennino
4th Overall Herald Sun Tour
6th Overall Volta ao Distrito de Santarém
2009
1st Stage 2 Giro del Capo
1st Anatomic Jock Race
4th National Road Race Championships
9th Gran Premio Nobili Rubinetterie
2010
5th Time trial, Commonwealth Games
9th Overall Tour du Haut Var


To this:

Second place in Vuelta in 2011.

Have you even heard of any of those races pre-2011?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Pingu on March 10, 2017, 01:24:34 pm
Anatomic Jock Race  ???
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 01:28:40 pm
Quite. Not exactly grand tour level, is it...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 10, 2017, 01:58:50 pm
To be fair, that was when he was a 21yo amateur. He turned pro aged 22 in 2007.
I understand the questions that come about from a jump in performances, but there are numerous examples of athletes performing well at very young ages who turned out to be on the juice from the beginning (eg Armstrong, VdB.) So I don't know whether it's more reasonable to see a progression from average pro to top class or to see someone jump in the deep end as top class from the start.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on March 10, 2017, 02:03:15 pm


It's can be hard to be optimistic if you've been a cycling fan over the last 15 years.

On the other hand, if you've been following cycling for 40 years or more,  you probably do no more than raise an eyebrow. 

When did cycling "fans" become a thing?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 02:14:14 pm
To be fair, that was when he was a 21yo amateur. He turned pro aged 22 in 2007.
I understand the questions that come about from a jump in performances, but there are numerous examples of athletes performing well at very young ages who turned out to be on the juice from the beginning (eg Armstrong, VdB.) So I don't know whether it's more reasonable to see a progression from average pro to top class or to see someone jump in the deep end as top class from the start.

Amazing to shit= possible
Amazing to Amazing= possible
Shit to Amazing= ????

Surely if his world-beating talent is 'natural' then he would have had some semblance of it pre-2011. He'd have won all the shit races he entered.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 10, 2017, 02:15:23 pm
Should be 2 to 3 years to see quality, at the most. Usually it's pretty obvious from the start (or at least physical maturity) and the two to three years is how little my it takes to build an athlete. There may be further gains, but if the training is basically ok they're really marginal;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 10, 2017, 02:25:11 pm


It's can be hard to be optimistic if you've been a cycling fan over the last 15 years.

On the other hand, if you've been following cycling for 40 years or more,  you probably do no more than raise an eyebrow. 

When did cycling "fans" become a thing?

Indeed, if you've been around cycles my or athletics for any length of time it's not really a shock. It's just the chutzpah of Sky and the wholesale swallowing of the bullshit by 'performance coaches' in business and other areas of life that makes it so sickening.

Having said that, I understand modafinil is popular in universities and business.

To be clear, the race is still the race, the riders work harder than ever and it's a beautiful and glorious sport. But when one team is so ruthlessly efficient at optimizing their whole group of riders and has Sky's attitude a fall is due.

And finally, if it emerges that Froome really is motorboy, they should be closed down. That's not beautiful suffering or even risk taking, it's just cheating.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on March 10, 2017, 02:30:59 pm


It's can be hard to be optimistic if you've been a cycling fan over the last 15 years.

On the other hand, if you've been following cycling for 40 years or more,  you probably do no more than raise an eyebrow. 

When did cycling "fans" become a thing?

Indeed, if you've been around cycles my or athletics for any length of time it's not really a shock. It's just the chutzpah of Sky and the wholesale swallowing of the bullshit by 'performance coaches' in business and other areas of life that makes it so sickening.

Having said that, I understand modafinil is popular in universities and business.

To be clear, the race is still the race, the riders work harder than ever and it's a beautiful and glorious sport. But when one team is so ruthlessly efficient at optimizing their whole group of riders and has Sky's attitude a fall is due.

And finally, if it emerges that Froome really is motorboy, they should be closed down. That's not beautiful suffering or even risk taking, it's just cheating.

Yes.  Sky's approach is probably the result of more money coming into the sport, resulting in it becoming more... er... 'professional'.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 10, 2017, 02:34:07 pm
To be fair, that was when he was a 21yo amateur. He turned pro aged 22 in 2007.
I understand the questions that come about from a jump in performances, but there are numerous examples of athletes performing well at very young ages who turned out to be on the juice from the beginning (eg Armstrong, VdB.) So I don't know whether it's more reasonable to see a progression from average pro to top class or to see someone jump in the deep end as top class from the start.

Amazing to shit= possible
Amazing to Amazing= possible
Shit to Amazing= ????

Surely if his world-beating talent is 'natural' then he would have had some semblance of it pre-2011. He'd have won all the shit races he entered.

Which is more likely - 21yo turns pro and wins the world champs that year; or 21yo turns pro, does his time as a domestique producing average results for a while and then gets to shine when duties are taken off him and he's had a few years of living and training like a pro?
The majority of pro cyclists turn pro after being good as a junior/amateur, struggle as a domestique for a while and never make it to the top of the sport, so we are talking outliers here. But if Froome was so crap before, and the drugs at Sky made him amazing, why have all the other Sky riders (eg Kwiatkovsky, who was WC when he joined, or Geraint Thomas, who has serious track pedigree) not blasted straight past him?
NB I'm not saying he's clean. But cycling is complex - it's not like 100m sprinting where you can basically measure the effectiveness of an individual and plot their times/progress on a chart.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 02:42:54 pm
Can you find me another 3 time TdF winner with similar lacklustre palmares?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 10, 2017, 03:07:52 pm
Nope. It's definitely odd - most riders get to be team leader by winning smaller races, and then they perform in a grand tour. He skipped from being a mountain domestique to being the leader, and in the current environment that meant he targets GTs to the exclusion of everything else. Guys like Tyler Hamilton followed a similar path (with similar lack of results when not leading), though without the success when they became the leader.

I'm curious - do you think there has ever been a clean Tour de France winner? I'm not convinced.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Foghat on March 10, 2017, 03:25:23 pm
Given the continued stream of revelations, it's probably worth re-watching Brailsford's January 2017 BBC interview (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38570591), and then asking oneself: does his performance in that interview match what you'd expect from someone who may (indeed ought to) be feeling justifiably aggrieved that his 100% clean proclamation is being impugned?

Bearing in mind, of course, that:
Regardless of whether 'concrete' evidence exists or may come to light that Sky is systematically doping and getting away with it, and regardless of his riders' wins, Brailsford has spectacularly succeeded in portraying himself (and going out of his way, somewhat imbecilically it seems, to portray himself) as an untrustworthy bullshitter.  People rightly object to all the grandstanding on a clearly false and deliberately diversionary 'transparent, 100% clean' platform.....and to the lauding, rewards and accolades founded on this platform in the face of what it has taken a parliamentary select committee investigation, into misuse of public funds on the way to all the success, to (start to) unravel. 

For those whose rose-tinted spectacles filter out the lies and bullshit, it would be curious to wonder what kind of narrative they think does or should explain all the lies, bullshit and (mounting) circumstantial evidence.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 04:38:56 pm
Indeed. As I've mentioned before, it all sounds  like somebody with quite a lot to hide who is also in the dark as to how much of it might surface.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 10, 2017, 05:30:42 pm
Indeed. As I've mentioned before, it all sounds  like somebody with quite a lot to hide who is also in the dark as to how much of it might surface.


When it goes down, quite a lot if not all will surface. There'll be books you know
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 05:57:47 pm
I'm curious - do you think there has ever been a clean Tour de France winner? I'm not convinced.

In my lifetime? I doubt it, although Lemond has never been openly tainted with even a tangible rumour. Hinault is rumoured to have been fond of Wiggins's PED of choice, and once refused a dope test, along with 4 other riders at a criterium. Cadel Evans is linked to Ferrari. Sastre has no dirt against other than the level at which he rode in a notoriously doped era.

I'm sure some of them have raced clean, but won the TdF clean? Not so sure.

Pre 1970s? Well, I suppose it depends to an extent on what you mean by clean. Merckx wasn't.  Coppi wasn't, but the attitude was different in that era.

Was Wiggins clean? Definitely not. Legal? Maybe. Immoral? Certainly.  The only one doing it? Almost certainly not.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 10, 2017, 06:11:33 pm
Indeed. As I've mentioned before, it all sounds  like somebody with quite a lot to hide who is also in the dark as to how much of it might surface.


When it goes down, quite a lot if not all will surface. There'll be books you know

(http://i68.tinypic.com/2mr8a69.jpg)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 10, 2017, 07:55:00 pm


Not that that exonerates him, but I'm less uneasy about Froome's 2011 than about Wiggins' 2009.

Wiggins had a good prologue, a good Team TT, and was on the right side of the splits caused by the wind on Stage 5. Van Garderen wasn't a big enough name for Garmin to stick with as the team leader. Lots of fancied riders fell by the wayside during the 2009 Tour.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on March 11, 2017, 10:26:38 am

Indeed, if you've been around cycles my or athletics for any length of time it's not really a shock. It's just the chutzpah of Sky and the wholesale swallowing of the bullshit by 'performance coaches' in business and other areas of life that makes it so sickening.

Having said that, I understand modafinil is popular in universities and business.

This and that.

1. I found the whole "add up lots of non-significant effects to get a significant effect" marginal gains thing preposterous. Either the non-sig effects are noise, or you underpowered your trial. I had a clinician tell me that if they could get patients to change 10 things, it would reduce their risk - duh - if they could change 10 things at once they wouldn't be at risk!

2. Look on Yik Yak when you are on campus - adverts for Modafinil in the loos of the library - pickup / drop off on demand. Same for Ket, whipped cream gas, weed. This is a Russell Group uni. I'm sure it's the same everywhere.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 12, 2017, 12:50:26 pm
Each Tour de France has its own character. 2012 was relatively benign, as the Olympics weren't long after.

It didn't surprise me that Wiggins won, given the course. What did surprise me was that Sky won too many of the later stages, so that Cavendish was sure of a kicking in the Olympic Road Race.

It's in the nature of a sprinter to be combative though, as it falls to a classy rouleur to be more diplomatic. Alliances are their game.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 14, 2017, 09:41:17 pm
Sky have now disclosed that Freeman actually bought Fluimucil himself (he had prescription rights abroad) in Switzerland just a few weeks before the "package" was flown over with Cope.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/14/team-sky-fluimucil-switzerland-bradley-wiggins-commons (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/14/team-sky-fluimucil-switzerland-bradley-wiggins-commons)

That begs the obvious question, doesn't it!  ;)

Still no real clarity on the 55 ampoules of triamcinolone ordered.  Could have been used on staff (!) or private patients, or possibly the team.  Who knows without the records they were supposed to keep.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 14, 2017, 09:48:00 pm
I can't possibly imagine what possessed them not to keep records. Mind you, for the sake of patient confidentiality it's probably better not to keep records because records can be hacked.  :facepalm:
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 14, 2017, 10:08:22 pm
Interesting statement from the Guardian article:

The team emphasised “we would only ever allow triamcinolone to be provided as a legitimate and justified medical treatment in accordance with anti-doping rules” (http://The team emphasised “we would only ever allow triamcinolone to be provided as a legitimate and justified medical treatment in accordance with anti-doping rules”)

So I assume when it was used it was used legally?  Questions of ethics and morality can remain, but cycling is strewn with such questions.

At the university last Friday we had a debate about ethical leadership and some sports students were present which made matters more interesting.  We discussed how the 'professional foul' is used along with pushing the boundaries up to the very limit without actually breaking them (underarm bowling etc).  Group of staff interested in cycling also discussed the paperwork factor at Sky and how could they possibly had such seemingly shabby systems in place.  I reminded everyone of how the university staff often failed to submit various forms associated with evaluation and moderation and how it was common practice to 'back date' a number of forms in preparation for the external visit.  No malice or wrongdoing in terms of evaluation or moderation, just shabby practice that should be picked-up but often is not.  Rather like someone not complying with all the necessary ISO 2001 requirements but still producing a quality product.

If Sky have broken the law so far as doping is concerned then punish them once the evidence is available.  If they have been incompetent with their minds focussed elsewhere then perhaps they were not as competent as everyone expected them to be and took their eye off the ball for an area they should have been somewhat more savvy.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 14, 2017, 10:22:10 pm
Sky have made sure the evidence isn't available. No records kept, except on Freeman's laptop which, very conveniently, was never backed up, and was very conveniently stolen. Very conveniently, Freeman never submitted the details online.

But they never accounted for hacking.

Remember, the only reason you know about Wiggins use of Kenacort is because of the Russian hackers. Before the hack, Wiggins had lied about never having had an injection.

How inconvenient.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 14, 2017, 10:30:09 pm
Interesting statement from the Guardian article:

The team emphasised “we would only ever allow triamcinolone to be provided as a legitimate and justified medical treatment in accordance with anti-doping rules” (http://The team emphasised “we would only ever allow triamcinolone to be provided as a legitimate and justified medical treatment in accordance with anti-doping rules”)

So I assume when it was used it was used legally?

Why would you assume that? How many dopers, at the first suggestion that they might have doped, respond with 'you got me dead to rights'? If only it wasn't for those pesky kids...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 14, 2017, 10:39:20 pm
tails online.

But they never accounted for hacking.

Remember, the only reason you know about Wiggins use of Kenacort is because of the Russian hackers. Before the hack, Wiggins had lied about never having had an injection.

How inconvenient.

That's my favourite bit. The self righteous get to attack a Murdoch organisation on the basis of hacked information.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 14, 2017, 10:44:17 pm
And the pompous get to pontificate on the irony.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 14, 2017, 10:48:33 pm
Remember, the only reason you know about Wiggins use of Kenacort is because of the Russian hackers. Before the hack, Wiggins had lied about never having had an injection.

How inconvenient.

But was it illegal or did he break any regulations regarding the use of a banned or prohibited substance?  Might not be ethical, but that does not make it illegal.

Why would you assume that? How many dopers, at the first suggestion that they might have doped, respond with 'you got me dead to rights'? If only it wasn't for those pesky kids...

But was it illegal or did he break any regulations regarding the use of a banned or prohibited substance?  Might not be ethical, but that does not make it illegal.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 14, 2017, 10:56:43 pm
Remember, the only reason you know about Wiggins use of Kenacort is because of the Russian hackers. Before the hack, Wiggins had lied about never having had an injection.

How inconvenient.

But was it illegal or did he break any regulations regarding the use of a banned or prohibited substance?  Might not be ethical, but that does not make it illegal.

Why would you assume that? How many dopers, at the first suggestion that they might have doped, respond with 'you got me dead to rights'? If only it wasn't for those pesky kids...

But was it illegal or did he break any regulations regarding the use of a banned or prohibited substance?  Might not be ethical, but that does not make it illegal.

What substance? Wiggins has never had an injection.

But...it's good that you are (finally) recognising that Sky are an unethical team.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on March 16, 2017, 07:11:10 pm

But was it illegal or did he break any regulations regarding the use of a banned or prohibited substance?  Might not be ethical, but that does not make it illegal.

I would say that it was, as the medical reasons for using it were extremely flimsy at best. Freeman should never had requested it and it should never have been signed off by the UCI doctor. (And they really should look into his financial records).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: slope on March 16, 2017, 07:18:37 pm

But was it illegal or did he break any regulations regarding the use of a banned or prohibited substance?  Might not be ethical, but that does not make it illegal.

I would say that it was, as the medical reasons for using it were extremely flimsy at best. Freeman should never had requested it and it should never have been signed off by the UCI doctor. (And they really should look into his financial records).

Should is a very silly word?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 16, 2017, 07:35:14 pm
It's very clear that Team Sky abused the TUE system in order to circumvent anti-doping regulations whilst using a PED.

There is also an allegation that Sky committed a doping violation by administering the very same PED without a TUE. This is alleged to have been carried out at the end of the Dauphiné...which is why we now have a convoluted series of
constantly revised details concerning the delivery and administration of a substance.

Here is a rather amusing explanation of the situation:

(http://i66.tinypic.com/zmdq8j.jpg)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on March 16, 2017, 07:49:18 pm
Was Wiggins tested after Dauphine? You'd think it would show up there.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 16, 2017, 08:25:44 pm
The mystery substance was administered in the team bus, after the race. Dope testing would have been soon after Wiggins had crossed the line. Nothing to show up.

Administer substance....leave for pre-Tour training camp.

Problem with the Fluimucil story is that Cope had begun his role and collecting it 4 days previously. Therefore the need for it would have been recognised four days previously, whilst he was racing and winning the Dauphiné.  And yet it was only delivered after the race. So its use would only have been to help with the training camp.

A decongestant? ( Contraindicated against asthma  ;) ). Four days and many hundreds of pounds to deliver, when a 2 hour drive to Geneva could have sourced it. 

As the outgoing head of UKAD remarked, and the lead MPS of the DCMS said...."extraordinary".

They don't buy it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on March 16, 2017, 08:52:34 pm
More cracks appear: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39293763

Sky rider starts injecting vitamins illegally and without the team's knowledge. Rider gets caught with the gear but says "I didn't inject". Sky don't report the story to the UCI. Rider leaves Sky.

Quote
Edmondson now claims he did tell Team Sky's senior management he had self-injected at the time, but that there was a "cover-up".

"I think that would have meant a bigger admission for them," he said.

"They'd have had to say publicly a kid was injecting. Injecting anything's bad. It's not like they were banned substances but injecting is against the rules - to self-administer anything, I believe."

Team Sky firmly deny the claim. Dr Peters said: "It's not a cover-up. Once you use that word you are saying there was an intent behind us to conceal and that was never the case."

So much for the no-needles policy. And this is Sky who are whiter than white.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 16, 2017, 10:46:01 pm
More cracks appear: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39293763

Sky rider starts injecting vitamins illegally and without the team's knowledge. Rider gets caught with the gear but says "I didn't inject". Sky don't report the story to the UCI. Rider leaves Sky.

Quote
Edmondson now claims he did tell Team Sky's senior management he had self-injected at the time, but that there was a "cover-up".

"I think that would have meant a bigger admission for them," he said.

"They'd have had to say publicly a kid was injecting. Injecting anything's bad. It's not like they were banned substances but injecting is against the rules - to self-administer anything, I believe."

Team Sky firmly deny the claim. Dr Peters said: "It's not a cover-up. Once you use that word you are saying there was an intent behind us to conceal and that was never the case."

So much for the no-needles policy. And this is Sky who are whiter than white.

His vitamins included (L-)Carnitine - banned for infusion above certain doses. Salazar and Farahare under suspicion currently
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 16, 2017, 11:27:13 pm
A neo-pro feeling under extreme pressure. Dobbed in by team mate. Management take a sympathetic view for the riders mental health and manage him out of the world tour to a more appropriate level. No indication at the time that they had evidence beyond the rider purchasing injection equipment and (legal) drugs. Without  hard evidence or the riders admission, there was little anyone could do differently. If anything it reinforces the status of the team.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 05:56:58 am
The problem for Sky is that their reputation is "in tatters" (Damien Collins Mp, DCMS), and the two top people at UKAD have given a pretty damning assessment of Team Sky. Wiggins has been caught lying, and Brailsford has been caught attempting to lie several times after failing to bribe a journalist to bury the 'package' story. On top of which, several of the people called to give evidence at the DCMS (Cole and Sutton) gave a performance that convinced nobody.

Team Sky have been exposed as lying hypocrites, who claimed to be the cleanest team ever, but were abusing a medical protocol in order to dope to win races. Therefore anything and everything that emerges will be viewed with suspicion, and any statement from Team Sky is quite rightly not going to be taken at face value.  David's assessment of the case of this young rider is deliberately generous. David is not asking himself why it is that in a team with such a much vaunted ZTP, openness and transparency, and anti-doping culture running through every fibre of the team  that this rider even considered breaking the no-needle rule.

Of course, the accusation of Sky doing a 'cover up' has come from the rider himself, but David will have it that we should accept the words of Team Sky over anybody else. If I didn't think that David's arguments on this thread were in bad faith I'd be wondering if he was suffering from a nasty case of cognitive dissonance.


P.s. forgot to mention cleenteem  Sky handing out Tramadol like smarties
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 17, 2017, 08:34:49 am
What about the line that the team doctor blindly accepted his story that he didn't inhale use the needles? (A story that the rider himself denies.)

Ah hae ma doots.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 08:49:09 am
Rider alleges cover up. Team says no.

Naturally we should accept what the team says without question.  ::-)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LEE on March 17, 2017, 09:47:13 am
I can only hope that the Murdochs are somehow involved in this, maybe through pressure to succeed for the benefit of the SKY brand. 

The Murdoch association with team SKY has never sat well with me (I certainly wouldn't ever contemplate wearing the evil logo). I hope the SKY brand is tarnished.

However Brailsford set his stall out.  "No tolerance", "100% clean".   
They would have got massive respect if Josh Edmondson had been kicked off the team, just for having needles in his room. 
They could have (rightly) been proud to demonstrate a lack of tolerance for a relatively minor offence.


But they didn't.  Ah well.  Reputations are slow to build and quick to destroy.

Apocryphal tale about reputations:

I approached a sad-looking man looking out to sea. "What's your name?" I asked.

"Simon", he replied. "I build 200 fishing boats for the village, but do they call me Simon the Boat Builder?  No.  I build 200 houses for these people but do they call me Simon the House builder? No.  I save 5 children from drowning but do they call me Simon the Child Saver? No".

He paused for a moment before turning to me.

"I Shagged ONE fucking Sheep!!!"
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 17, 2017, 12:19:22 pm
What about the line that the team doctor blindly accepted his story that he didn't inhale use the needles? (A story that the rider himself denies.)

Ah hae ma doots.


What about the team doctor seeing someone who feels the pressure so much on stepping up to the team that they feel the need to try to gain every legal advantage? recognises the mental fragility and treats the patient in what they consider to be the most appropriate way? Sure, a team and UCI policy (but not rule) has been allegedly breached, and intent to breach policy was clearly there. Hanging, drawing and quartering might appeal to some, but it is ultimately a matter of ensuring the best outcome for all.

There does seem to be a 'Sky can do nothing right' attitude with a very rigid right/wrong approach. The real world is messier than that.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LEE on March 17, 2017, 12:30:30 pm
There does seem to be a 'Sky can do nothing right' attitude with a very rigid right/wrong approach. The real world is messier than that.

I would agree except it was Team SKY who started the whole, "We do everything right"  thing.

If the rider can't deal with the intense pressures of pro cycling then the right thing to do would have been to refer him for treatment/therapy after dropping him from the team.

Their PR lately has been terrible.  They say they have nothing to hide and yet they try to hide things.  Nobody would have an issue if they'd come clean about TUEs..etc.

I honestly think this is how Lance/Cycling ended up where he/it did, incrementally stepping over a line by a fraction until, one day, you find yourself miles over the line.

Wiggo's team-mates will obviously start thinking, "Well if Brad can load up on TUEs just before the start of a TT then I don't see what's wrong with innocent Vitamin injections".
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 01:16:42 pm
Yep. Team Sky's lack of credibility is their fault.  It's what happens when you lie, get caught out, and try and lie again...only to be caught out again.


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on March 17, 2017, 01:43:05 pm
A neo-pro feeling under extreme pressure. Dobbed in by team mate. Management take a sympathetic view for the riders mental health and manage him out of the world tour to a more appropriate level. No indication at the time that they had evidence beyond the rider purchasing injection equipment and (legal) drugs. Without  hard evidence or the riders admission, there was little anyone could do differently.

Pretty much agree with this. They could have / perhaps should have made a big deal of chucking him out.

If anything it reinforces the status of the team.

Don't understand this: Its another -ve story for sky, how can it reinforce the "status" of the team ?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 17, 2017, 02:49:57 pm
What about the line that the team doctor blindly accepted his story that he didn't inhale use the needles? (A story that the rider himself denies.)

Ah hae ma doots.


What about the team doctor seeing someone who feels the pressure so much on stepping up to the team that they feel the need to try to gain every legal advantage? recognises the mental fragility and treats the patient in what they consider to be the most appropriate way? Sure, a team and UCI policy (but not rule) has been allegedly breached, and intent to breach policy was clearly there. Hanging, drawing and quartering might appeal to some, but it is ultimately a matter of ensuring the best outcome for all.

There does seem to be a 'Sky can do nothing right' attitude with a very rigid right/wrong approach. The real world is messier than that.


Whilst I understand your point, I think that Sky is in very deep muck of its own creation. Even if we give Josh Edmondson and Sky's response the benefit of the doubt in this case, their subsequent media communication when they let him go was not consistent with the story that they were concerned about his mental fragility:

Rod Ellingworth, performance manager at Team Sky, explained that Edmondon’s disorganization, lack of professionalism and poor communication was behind his release from the squad.

Again, could be read as self serving, when silence would have been fine.

The real issues go far beyond one junior pro trying to improve his position by injecting vitamins and L-Carnitine
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 05:26:34 pm
Thing is, you cannot give both Josh's and Sky's statements the benefit of the doubt because they are conflicting.
No-needle violations are supposed to be reported within 24 hours.
Sky didn't submit any report.
Now that the story is out Sky are saying that they didn't report it because there was nothing to report-the rider didn't admit to injecting.
And yet this is precisely what the rider is admitting. He said he told them he had injected.
So, to whom do we give the benefit of the doubt, because up to this point we are being asked to give it to Team Sky at every turn of their doping story.

By the way, David has tried to blithely wave this away as a potential breach of 'policy', rather than breach of a rule.

And yet breaching this 'policy' can ultimately lead to a lifetime ban. Josh faced a potential 6 month ban.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 17, 2017, 06:23:28 pm
Sure, a team and UCI policy (but not rule) has been allegedly breached, and intent to breach policy was clearly there. Hanging, drawing and quartering might appeal to some, but it is ultimately a matter of ensuring the best outcome for all.

There does seem to be a 'Sky can do nothing right' attitude with a very rigid right/wrong approach. The real world is messier than that.

If I took what Steve Peters said at face value, I might think there's some sense in the approach. But I have two problems with his statement...

1. Rider on top pro team is found in possession of needles, team doctor asks if he used them, he says no. If you were that team doctor, would you just take the rider's word for it? Would you expect the public to believe that's as far as it went?

2. Edmondson says he did admit to using the needles, in direct contradiction to the team doctor's statement. Who do you believe? Why is Edmondson coming out with this now? What axe does he have to grind?

There are lots of questions that remain unanswered and I'm not all that interested in a witch hunt, but in light of other recent stories about lack of pastoral care of Team Sky riders, I know which way my sympathies are leaning on this one.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 06:59:19 pm
Steve Peters is a much respected clinical psychiatrist who has considerable experience in dealing with both behavioural challenges and sport.  Josh Edmondson was a cyclist who did not make the grade.  Who do I believe?  Hmmmmm, tough one that.  Interesting article to read with interview:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39293763 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39293763)


Article also states:

Team Sky say they took legal advice at the time of the incident and say that, although Edmondson had been in breach of team rules by possessing the equipment, they were under no obligation to report the case to the authorities.

And:

Asked whether Team Sky should have handled the case differently, Dr Peters said: "We could have reported it. We could have made a different decision. We'll never know in hindsight. I suppose if I'm looking at safety issues I did think there was a really big risk this lad would be pushed over the edge. I stand by my decision.

If I was going to consider the comments of Peters, or the comments of postings on YACF, I think I would go with the clinical psychiatrist as offering a better analysis of the situation.  As for Edmondson, no doubt he is reflecting on his current situation and I seem to recall he was fairly quite during the JTL affair when I assume that would have been the appropriate time to speak about such matters (although I believe Edmondson was still on the books of NTFO at the time and perhaps that explains his absence from the debate).  Edmondson could not have timed his comments better if he was seeking to damage a former employer who released him as he was simply out of his depth.  What do I read into that?  Hmmmmm!  Again, Sky do not appear to have violated any regulations or laws and while aspects of care and appropriateness will ensue, Peters seems to have fulfilled his clinical duty and Sky do not appear to have acted in an illegal matter.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 07:46:01 pm
(Reply edited by me due to factual inaccuracy)

I think you should watch the video you linked to. Edmundson comes across as thoughtful and articulate. You infer that his motivation is bitterness and a desire to exact revenge upon Sky, and yet he barely mentions Sky, and above all he does not seek to blame them for his situation...so I think your characterisation of him is inaccurate and you would do well to reconsider your verdict as to his lack of trustworthiness. 

It's quite striking that he does not take the opportunity this exposure brings to damage Sky, his motivation seems to be to give a salutary message to others, particularly regarding Tramadol use. His Tramadol use was independent and without the knowledge of the team, so another example where he is not trying to blame others.

This fits in with his attitude at the time of his release from Sky. Here's an excerpt from an interview in 2015:

"Sky released Edmondson at the end of his two-year neo-professional contract last season with coach Rod Ellingworth reportedly critical of his work ethic.

“It was good most of the time but then certain things weren’t quite right for me. It was just a bit of a clash,” Edmondson told Cycling Weekly before the start of today’s 2.1km prologue, that Will Clarke (Drapac) won in two minutes and 35.53 seconds.

“They’re very, very organised, like, Rod is the most organised guy in the world. He’s really good at his job and I’m just useless most of the time. I’d be off in my own little world and it just didn’t really work.”

....does this sound like a bitter liar, or somebody blaming himself for his own failure?


Quoted from: http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/josh-edmondson-prove-himself-herald-sun-tour-155731#3IqpPTbGJwRipqYg.99
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 07:49:39 pm
You should watch the interview with Edmondson you linked to. He comes across as articulate and thoughtful. He isn't spending the interview repeatedly blaming Sky is he, so your portrayal as him as a vengeful failure isn't borne out at all. His motivation seems to be educating other riders, particularly about Tramadol use. The Tramadol thing sounds infinitely worse than the vitamins. We know from Barry and others that Team Sky dished out Tramadol liberally. We also know that in typical Team Sky fashion when they were exposed they tried to turn it into a PR opportunity by calling for a ban on Tramadol.

I'm sure that the usual apologists will start telling us that Tramadol use was legal, but listen to this young man's words.

They gave him a powerful opioid to help him in races. It's really quite amazing what this clean, ethical team will do.
  My bold

Or from the report:

Edmondson also told the BBC he had severe depression after independently using controversial painkiller Tramadol.

I don't think Edmondson is saying Sky gave him Tramadol and it was given to him during a race by the race doctor.  Edmondson appears to have used Tramadol of his own volition:

He independently took powerful opioid Tramadol during the 2013 Tour of Britain. Team Sky say this was given to him without their knowledge by the race doctor, rather than their own team doctor.

I don't suppose reading the report is of any use when you have a closed mind regarding Sky.

I did watch the interview with Edmondson and also the one with Peters.  I would be interested to hear what Peters, the clinical psychiatrist, has to say about the interview based on the numerous interviews he has done with folk as part of his professional work.  However, Peters will not be commenting on the interview as that would not be appropriate from a professional stance.  Again, who would I believe?  Hmmmm, tough one when Edmondson admitted he did not leave the house for 2 months after leaving Sky due to depression.  Also like the bit at 5'35" where he states he is not trying to pass the buck and it was something he was doing.  But he did not go and inform anyone of what he was doing which I assume means it was not sanctioned by anyone other than himself.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 07:57:02 pm
If you look really closely you'll see I edited my post (before you posted) as I became aware of the factual inaccuracy.  You are quite right, Edmundson is saying the Tramadol was not supplied by Sky. 

Again, this counters your assertion that Edmundson is motivated by revenge. There doesn't seem to be much of a hint about it. We don't need Peters words about Edmundson's mental state as Edmundson is quite open about it. Edmundson is going out of his way to highlight his own mistakes...but he is issuing a correction of Sky's account.

You might want to read this report of Dr Peters words on the matter and see if you can spot the glaring self-contradiction:

"However, the BBC says that the incident was not reported by Team Sky, because Edmondson told Peters he had not used the paraphernalia found in his room.

Peters said: “He fell apart at the seams quite dramatically. A number of things I asked him during that interview really alarmed me.”

Peters: "The welfare of the athlete was number one"

"I was now in a position where I can say the welfare of the athlete was number one,” added Peters, who spoke of how Edmondson had told him that he hadn’t injected himself with the vitamins because he didn’t know how to.

"This didn't quite ring true to me,”
said Peters, who suspects that Edmondson may have been ill at the time. “I felt this is very odd from what I've experienced in the past when I've been involved with anti-doping issues. So I said to the team: 'I want to stop here’.”

Team Sky, who sought legal advice on the issue, did not report it to the relevant authorities, a decision Peters still supports.

“I suppose if I'm looking at safety issues I did think there was a really big risk this lad would be pushed over the edge,” he said. “I stand by my decision. I think I'd definitely have told them if I thought this young man was trying to cheat, but I don't think he was doing that. I think it was a panic reaction.”

He added: "We did it on good faith and decided on two counts. One, we didn't think he'd violated any rules and second and, most important, he was not in a good place."




So Peters didn't believe Edmundson's claim that he hadn't injected, and Peters though Edmundson hadn't violated any rules.

Nice one, Steve.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 08:06:18 pm
If you look really closely you'll see I edited my post (before you posted) as I became aware of the factual inaccuracy.  You are quite right, Edmundson is saying the Tramadol was not supplied by Sky. 

Perhaps not the first time you have jumped to a conclusion and been wrong!

..... We don't need Peters words about Edmundson's mental state as Edmundson is quite open about it.

I was referring to the recent interview between Edmondson and Roan.  No doubt Peters will have watched that and drawn his own view on the current state of mind or motivation regarding Edmondson's timing and willingness to speak on such matters.

Team Sky, who sought legal advice on the issue, did not report it to the relevant authorities, a decision Peters still supports.

“I suppose if I'm looking at safety issues I did think there was a really big risk this lad would be pushed over the edge,” he said. “I stand by my decision. I think I'd definitely have told them if I thought this young man was trying to cheat, but I don't think he was doing that. I think it was a panic reaction.”

He added: "We did it on good faith and decided on two counts. One, we didn't think he'd violated any rules and second and, most important, he was not in a good place."

So Peters didn't believe Edmundson's claim that he hadn't injected, and Peters though Edmundson hadn't violated any rules.

Nice one, Steve.
My bolds

Professional view of Peters or that of Flatus.  Hmmmmm, tough one that!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 08:11:32 pm
You aren't getting it are you.

Peters says that Edmundson's claim not to have injected "did not ring true". Therefore he did not believe that Edmundson had not injected. He believed he had injected. Therefore he will have believe that Edmundson had violated a rule.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 08:13:38 pm
If you look really closely you'll see I edited my post (before you posted) as I became aware of the factual inaccuracy.  You are quite right, Edmundson is saying the Tramadol was not supplied by Sky. 

Perhaps not the first time you have jumped to a conclusion and been wrong!

Perhaps you'd like to put some meat on the bones and list the other instances where I have done as you claim...

Given that Barry detailed how Team Sky had given out Tramadol like sweets it was not an unreasonable mistake on my part, but I know you rely on scoring cheap points.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 08:48:46 pm
You aren't getting it are you.

Peters says that Edmundson's claim not to have injected "did not ring true". Therefore he did not believe that Edmundson had not injected. He believed he had injected. Therefore he will have believe that Edmundson had violated a rule.
My bold

Peters also states:

"Wearing my hat as a doctor, for somebody to be culpable they cannot be ill and I suspect he was ill. If he's not able to give informed consent to what he is doing and say, 'I understand this', then in my world, as a psychiatrist, you are not culpable, because your illness is talking."

Perhaps this explains the action that was taken for the good of the individual (Edmondson) particularly when:

Team Sky say they took legal advice at the time of the incident and say that, although Edmondson had been in breach of team rules by possessing the equipment, they were under no obligation to report the case to the authorities.

Again, I am tempted to believe the analysis of the professional in this matter, namely Peters, rather than some views floated on YACF.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 17, 2017, 09:00:41 pm
Hypothetically, short of either a Sky mea culpa or a cast-iron positive dope test, what would be sufficient evidence for you to conclude that Sky riders probably took dope?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 09:02:11 pm
It is not Peters's place to abuse his position and professional standing in deciding whether Edmundson was 'culpable'.
Peters believed Edmondson to have injected. He did not report it.  Edmondson says he told Peters he had injected.
Peters is, in effect, discounting anything Edmundson said because mental. To be fair, Edmundson is also recognising this in himself, but that doesnt mean that his current assertion that he informed Peters of actually injecting is untrue.


Again, I am tempted to believe the analysis of the professional in this matter, namely Peters, rather than some views floated on YACF.

I'm mildly amused by your constant appeal to authority throughout this thread. You are impressed by titles, and you assume they bestow integrity. I'm sure your life spent in the forces where you will have been conditioned to accept authority can't be helping you move towards a more open-minded critique of the actions of Sir Bradley Wiggins, Sir David Brailsford, Dr Steven Peters and not to mention Dr Richard Freeman.

I'm sure you hold in equal esteem Dr Michele Ferrari, Dr Geert Leinders et al.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 09:29:30 pm
It is not Peters's place .....
Again, I am tempted to believe the analysis of the professional in this matter, namely Peters, rather than some views floated on YACF.
I'm mildly amused  ..........

I’m not mildly amused by your comments, I’m totally rolling about the floor laughing!  Good to see a personal attack being used to justify opinion.  For the record, Professor Peters might be a more appropriate title for Peters, but let’s not get too bogged down with facts.  Your reference to my former life and authority compliance, or indeed me being impressed with titles, is very amusing as anyone who knows me, and indeed my time in my former life, will know that I am soooo 180 when it comes to such matters as authority compliance and being impressed by titles.  Good to see you can highlight apparent shortcomings in others with such ease and make such sweeping outcomes without even taking time to find out much about the subject.  Can I assume you have a similar deft ability when analysing yourself?  Self-awareness is a very interesting subject and no doubt something that Steve Peters could write a book about.

I base my opinion on evidence and as yet I have yet to see anything that Sky have done that has transgressed the law or regulations.  I assume that is why no formal action has been taken against them.

I’m not impressed by titles or authority and do not appeal to authority as you suggest.  I am rather keen to listen to a subject matter expert regarding the mental health of someone and what constitutes appropriate action regarding an incident, particularly when ]Team Sky say they took legal advice at the time of the incident and say that, although Edmondson had been in breach of team rules by possessing the equipment, they were under no obligation to report the case to the authorities.  Much rather consider evidence and subject matter expert opinion over the popular views of folk on YACF.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 09:41:37 pm
You like to hear the views of experts and you choose to listen to the views of a man at the centre of the possible rule infringement.  And yet you don't seem interested in the views of the former and current head of UKAD. Nor the head of the Parliamentary Committee. Somewhat selective in your choice of evidence.


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 17, 2017, 09:42:54 pm
It would improve the thread if everyone could simply not make or respond to personal attacks or comments.

We all have our views and make our own, sometimes biased, judgements. There is no evidence of wrongdoing yet, either because it's been destroyed or there was no wrongdoing. To me, the weight of what we have seen smells really bad, but those who want to take a more cautious stance are entitled to their view - even if I think it would be wise to avoid the nationalistic hubris we've been treated to over the last few years.

Mike
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 09:45:24 pm
You carry on. But I'm pretty sure Veloman is enjoying himself and so am I.  It's hardly personal attack, just a bit of gentle friday night sparring with no insults thrown.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 09:46:49 pm
Hypothetically, short of either a Sky mea culpa or a cast-iron positive dope test, what would be sufficient evidence for you to conclude that Sky riders probably took dope?

I would like evidence rather than supposition or pointed fingers.  Perhaps if Thomas confessed that Sky were a dope fuelled and results obsessed organisation that operated under such secrecy and cunning that no matter who looked through the looking glass they would find no evidence.

So I believe they are not the doped riders of the past and no doubt they push to the limits of the envelope in every aspect of their operations.  Are they ethical?  All depends on how you define ethical.  Was Contador ethical when he attacked Schleck after Schleck dropped his chain?  Was Hindes acting ethically when he fell off in the team sprint final thereby forcing a restart?  Was it ethical for Porte to drop back and give Froome gels knowing they would incur a 20s time penalty that was better than time that could have been lost had he not have taken the gels?  The list goes on and folk will have an opinion on what constitutes ethical behaviour and whether Sky are ethical or just push the envelope to the limit. 

One thing appears certain, Sky are not liked due to the ruthless pursuit of results and tactics.  The way Contador attacked in the last Paris-Nice was the racing of the old school and would no doubt have impressed Hinault.  But not Sky and many other commentators have said while it is good for spectators, it will not win TdF as the tactics of Sky appear to exert such control.  Although I don’t follow F1, I suppose that Sky are akin to Mercedes, and no doubt viewed in the same light.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 09:50:43 pm
None of the ethical conundrums you have posited involved drugs.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 09:51:56 pm
You carry on. But I'm pretty sure Veloman is enjoying himself and so am I.  It's hardly personal attack, just a bit of gentle friday night sparring with no insults thrown.

Actually, I disagree as you impugn my reputation and take liberties with assuming I behave in a particular manner regarding my response to authority.  You also suggest I have been conditioned to accept authority due to time spent in a particular organisation.  A very personal attack and quite unnecessary.

Happy to debate whether Sky are gaming the system without the need to resort to personal attack.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 17, 2017, 09:53:14 pm
The times has published an article saying uci has opened an investigation into a possible rules breach with respect to the needles


Contador is a great racer, but his power to weight the other day raised some eyebrows - 6.85w/kg for 15 minutes apparently. Good work!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 17, 2017, 09:55:33 pm
You carry on. But I'm pretty sure Veloman is enjoying himself and so am I.  It's hardly personal attack, just a bit of gentle friday night sparring with no insults thrown.

Actually, I disagree as you impugn my reputation and take liberties with assuming I behave in a particular manner regarding my response to authority.  You also suggest I have been conditioned to accept authority due to time spent in a particular organisation.  A very personal attack and quite unnecessary.

Happy to debate whether Sky are gaming the system without the need to resort to personal attack.

Didn't realise you were so sensitive. Oh well.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 09:59:40 pm
None of the ethical conundrums you have posited involved drugs.

The use of TUEs has been extensively debated earlier in the thread and no legal action has resulted from abuse of TUEs so far as Sky are concerned.  Whether it is ethical will be debated for many moons to come as the whole point of ethics is that it is opinion based.  If something is illegal, that is different.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on March 17, 2017, 10:27:42 pm
Legality is opinion based too.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 17, 2017, 10:35:07 pm
Legality is opinion based too.

Less so under statute law, and we are talking about the Tour de France mainly.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 17, 2017, 10:39:23 pm
Legality is opinion based too.

Agreed.  But case law and precedent is a good guide.

The debate regarding "is doing something legal also considered unethical" is often the question and whether Sky acted in an unethical manner will be opinion based.  Whether they acted unlawfully will be based on rules/regulations/law and require evidence to enable action.  No doubt about the legality of the gel example as both Porte and Froome were docked 20s and fined 200 Swiss francs while the DS (Portal) was fined 1000 Swiss francs.  Whether it was ethical is another debate.  Similar to Hindes falling off, legal yes, but ethical?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 17, 2017, 11:17:58 pm
I suppose the question is whether sport is more or less interesting if it's entirely ethical.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bVGTVrQd6M

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Say_It_Ain%27t_So,_Joe_(song)

As a cultural phenomenon, it's supposed to be flawed. So carry on.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on March 18, 2017, 04:04:54 am


There does seem to be a 'Sky can do nothing right' attitude with a very rigid right/wrong approach. The real world is messier than that.

Pure nonsense. If Sky hadn't continuously lied, evaded and done all kinds of fancy footwork every single time one of these issues appear (and there's been several by now!), you might have had a point.
 As it is, you have a fucking commitee looking into their way of operating and they still can't give a single straight answer. (or don't bother turning up).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 18, 2017, 07:08:43 am
Hypothetically, short of either a Sky mea culpa or a cast-iron positive dope test, what would be sufficient evidence for you to conclude that Sky riders probably took dope?

I would like evidence rather than supposition or pointed fingers.  Perhaps if Thomas confessed that Sky were a dope fuelled and results obsessed organisation that operated under such secrecy and cunning that no matter who looked through the looking glass they would find no evidence.

So nothing short of a Sky confession of doping would do it?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jaded on March 18, 2017, 07:42:11 am
Legality is opinion based too.

Agreed.  But case law and precedent is a good guide.

erm... case law and precedent are opinion based.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Pedal Castro on March 18, 2017, 08:18:36 am
I suppose the question is whether sport is more or less interesting if it's entirely ethical.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bVGTVrQd6M

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Say_It_Ain%27t_So,_Joe_(song)

As a cultural phenomenon, it's supposed to be flawed. So carry on.

This prompted me to revisit the story of Shoeless Joe. The interesting thing is that history seems to be absolving him, and maybe he was simply the scapegoat falsely accused by the powers that be. Parallels to be drawn?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 18, 2017, 09:07:51 am
It's been said before but worth repeating.  I wonder if any of the Sky apologists here - those prepared to bend over backwards and contort themselves in knots to give Sky the benefit of the doubt on every new release of damning evidence - would be so generous to a foreign team?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 18, 2017, 12:34:37 pm
It's been said before but worth repeating.  I wonder if any of the Sky apologists here - those prepared to bend over backwards and contort themselves in knots to give Sky the benefit of the doubt on every new release of damning evidence - would be so generous to a foreign team?
[ I'm not sure repeating it has any value, but it's more interesting than just repeatedly posting the same mud, so I'll happily respond:]

I am in no way convinced that Sky are innocent (legally or ethically) so I cannot speak for these "apologists", whoever they are. If there is bias, or favouritism, causing fans to give Sky some leeway, it is a stretch to call it nationalistic. Sports fans all have loyalty to SOME degree to the team/players that they follow. (there are a few self-proclaimed "neutrals", but in reality I find they always have bias towards someone!)

I've never thought of Sky as being primarily British - they have plenty of foreign riders and doctors. And Geraint is one of my favourites :) They just happen to have employed several Brits that I follow (including Sir Wiggo); so I probably do have a "bias" towards Sky vs other teams, but it's not fanatical. There are several riders who I'd rather see win races/stages than the Sky train.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on March 18, 2017, 09:38:54 pm
It's been said before but worth repeating.  I wonder if any of the Sky apologists here - those prepared to bend over backwards and contort themselves in knots to give Sky the benefit of the doubt on every new release of damning evidence - would be so generous to a foreign team?
[ I'm not sure repeating it has any value, but it's more interesting than just repeatedly posting the same mud, so I'll happily respond:]

I am in no way convinced that Sky are innocent (legally or ethically) so I cannot speak for these "apologists", whoever they are. If there is bias, or favouritism, causing fans to give Sky some leeway, it is a stretch to call it nationalistic. Sports fans all have loyalty to SOME degree to the team/players that they follow. (there are a few self-proclaimed "neutrals", but in reality I find they always have bias towards someone!)

I've never thought of Sky as being primarily British - they have plenty of foreign riders and doctors. And Geraint is one of my favourites :) They just happen to have employed several Brits that I follow (including Sir Wiggo); so I probably do have a "bias" towards Sky vs other teams, but it's not fanatical. There are several riders who I'd rather see win races/stages than the Sky train.

Since when has ethics had anything to do with sport, particularly professional sport? Winning for your sponsors is what counts (which means exposure by whatever means) and anything which isn't clearly against the rules must be not against the rules.

I'm not sure that the "Sky train" wins that many races these days (compared to the other team "trains" at least).
Legality is opinion based too.

Less so under statute law, and we are talking about the Tour de France mainly.

Tour de France - that's not a cycle race is it? More about crowds waiting for the free giveouts from the caravan (where ethics have no place at all :demon:) and big business doing deals.

Why is a confirmed doper like Virenque still a much loved commentator and a high profile star for Festina watches - while it would be difficult to see Armstrong in the same role?

Why is the Sky thing tearing the UK scene apart when it doesn't even get a mention on "Les Rois de la Pédale"?

Is Sky falling into the same trap as Armstrong did, namely acting like axxxholes, when a straighter, more transparent approach might have given a more credible result?
FWIW I remain convinced that if Armstrong had not insisted on coming back after 2005 he would probably still have his TdF record. If he had stopped after 5 wins I am sure he would have got away with it. Too high a profile doesn't win friends or even respect.

As someone who has had to use Tramadol in fairly high doses (I think) for pain relief I cannot think of anything more dangerous than a peloton well doped-up negotiating a tight finish at road-racing speeds with riders rubbing shoulders, wheels etc. No wonder there are crashes!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on March 19, 2017, 01:28:22 am
I'm not sure that the "Sky train" wins that many races these days (compared to the other team "trains" at least).
They've won the last two monuments in a row ...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on March 19, 2017, 07:33:36 am
They've won the last two monuments in a row ...

No, you've forgotten about Giro di Lombardia that's held in Oct and was won by Chaves.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 19, 2017, 08:32:37 am
Since when has ethics had anything to do with sport, particularly professional sport? Winning for your sponsors is what counts (which means exposure by whatever means) and anything which isn't clearly against the rules must be not against the rules.

IMO you are wrong there for a number of reasons. Perhaps most of all, pro sport doesnt exist without fans, and many fans have some sort of "sporting values" or "ethics" if you prefer. Debate is a major part of the fan experience (which drives viewing and ticket purchases), and if we just discussed the dry facts, there wouldn't be very much debate, punditry, newspaper coverage, books written ... etc ... etc ...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on March 19, 2017, 01:03:18 pm
Since when has ethics had anything to do with sport, particularly professional sport? Winning for your sponsors is what counts (which means exposure by whatever means) and anything which isn't clearly against the rules must be not against the rules.

IMO you are wrong there for a number of reasons. Perhaps most of all, pro sport doesnt exist without fans, and many fans have some sort of "sporting values" or "ethics" if you prefer. Debate is a major part of the fan experience (which drives viewing and ticket purchases), and if we just discussed the dry facts, there wouldn't be very much debate, punditry, newspaper coverage, books written ... etc ... etc ...

I am not sure to what extent the fans are actually a driving force in pro road-racing; it's basically free spectacle. OK a lot of riders have fan clubs (even some of the less successful french boys) but I'm not sure they drive the sport (mostly they drive big campervans and apéro sales AFAICS). It is the free aspect that stops track cycling taking off the way it ought to in France. Perhaps I am being contaminated by french sports commentators.

Coming back to an old point, riders who won TdF clean, the only one that springs to my mind is Gino Bartali (for whom everything I have read points in that direction). Two other names who come to mind are Eugène Christophe and Raymond Poulidor, who both never won it. I had a clubmate who raced amateur races in Poulidor's period and his story was that Poulidor was a tight-fisted Limousin peasant who would have if it was free but would never spend his hard-earned cash on dope (this is the sort of son of the earth who is so greatly appreciated in this part of the world, without the reasons being too evident). The same clubmate said that all the pros used to dope in the post-Tour crits just to make sure the amateurs didn't get a sniff of the prizemoney - and I believe him!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 19, 2017, 05:53:53 pm
Since when has ethics had anything to do with sport, particularly professional sport? Winning for your sponsors is what counts (which means exposure by whatever means) and anything which isn't clearly against the rules must be not against the rules.

IMO you are wrong there for a number of reasons. Perhaps most of all, pro sport doesnt exist without fans, and many fans have some sort of "sporting values" or "ethics" if you prefer. Debate is a major part of the fan experience (which drives viewing and ticket purchases), and if we just discussed the dry facts, there wouldn't be very much debate, punditry, newspaper coverage, books written ... etc ... etc ...

I am not sure to what extent the fans are actually a driving force in pro road-racing; it's basically free spectacle.
We must be talking at cross-purposes, because that seems to make no sense! :)

Without fans watching - whether they pay or not - you would not have sponsors. => no wages, no professional cycle-sport.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 19, 2017, 07:42:37 pm
Coming back to an old point, riders who won TdF clean, the only one that springs to my mind is Gino Bartali (for whom everything I have read points in that direction). Two other names who come to mind are Eugène Christophe and Raymond Poulidor, who both never won it. I had a clubmate who raced amateur races in Poulidor's period and his story was that Poulidor was a tight-fisted Limousin peasant who would have if it was free but would never spend his hard-earned cash on dope (this is the sort of son of the earth who is so greatly appreciated in this part of the world, without the reasons being too evident). The same clubmate said that all the pros used to dope in the post-Tour crits just to make sure the amateurs didn't get a sniff of the prizemoney - and I believe him!

Lemond is highly likely to have won clean, given the size of the bounty offered by Armstrong for evidence of Lemond doping. Virtually every other living TdF winner has doping doubt or certainty.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Peter on March 19, 2017, 07:54:48 pm
Didn't he have a TUE for small doses of lead?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 19, 2017, 08:01:54 pm
Marginal gains of mass, to ensure he remained above the UCI minimum weight limit.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Peter on March 19, 2017, 08:08:35 pm
 :)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 19, 2017, 08:21:03 pm
Lemond is an outlier in so far as there has never even been a whisper, as LWAB suggests.

Ironically if he had doped, it would have been likely to have been the same drug of choice that Wiggins used to win his TdF.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on March 21, 2017, 11:13:23 am
What about Anquetil? Pheasant and alcohol aren't controlled substances!  :D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: spesh on March 21, 2017, 11:35:13 am
What about Anquetil? Pheasant and alcohol aren't controlled substances!  :D

Anquetil doped, and he was quite open about it. Put it like this - there's no way that he could have done the Dauphiné and Bordeaux–Paris double on bread and water alone.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on March 21, 2017, 12:02:48 pm
Of course he did. I was joking but your point is a serious one; we are in many ways more puritanical now. And hypocritical, because society in general is probably more accepting of drugs (both performance enhancing, not necessarily physically, and purely recreational) than it used to be – but not for professional athletes.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 21, 2017, 01:12:40 pm
AFAIR, doping only became illegal in cycling in 1965. It isn't too surprising that riders racing professionally before then were dismissive of dope tests.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 21, 2017, 01:29:32 pm
in many ways more puritanical now

I'm not sure about that - I think it's possibly more a reflection of the different types of drugs that are predominantly used now. The traditional Pot Belge seems somehow more innocent than the high-tech pharmaceuticals that are knocking about these days.

I have to admit I was slightly amused by Edmondson's confession - didn't think riders still went in for such quaint practices as injecting vitamins.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on March 21, 2017, 02:06:56 pm
Josh's brother leads our turbo sessions (he's a sports physio, i think - the sessions were photographed in CW a few months back).

It's not immediately obvious to me what Josh has to gain. On the other hand, Peters has plenty to lose if he's covered up.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 21, 2017, 03:38:48 pm
It's very hard to know how, by whom,  and why the story actually broke. Did he break it, or was unearthed by a journalist?

There are a gamut of possible motivations for him breaking it, such as payment, revenge, a desire for exposure, a desire to help others as well as the fact that somebody else may have leaked the story and forced him to talk about it on the best terms he could for himself.

Peters may be telling the truth, or he may not. It could be redolent or symptomatic of a dishonest and unethical team, of the type that lead Wiggins and his doctor to cheat the TUE system, or we may just have two examples of two individuals acting more or less individually. We don't know yet.

The only thing I think about all of these issues is that unlike Veloman et al (sorry to impune your good character and reputation again) who view this as an open and shut, black and white issue, I think we are still in a process. I don't think we know all there is to know about what has been going on.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: slope on March 21, 2017, 04:00:44 pm
It could be redolent or symptomatic of a dishonest and unethical team, of the type that lead Wiggins and his doctor to cheat the TUE system

But let's not forget the UCI (and their Dr Mario) openly ALLOWED/PASSED/GRANTED the Wiggins TUEs
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on March 21, 2017, 04:08:50 pm
openly?

Why did we only hear about it after a hack?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on March 21, 2017, 04:55:07 pm
Since when has ethics had anything to do with sport, particularly professional sport? Winning for your sponsors is what counts (which means exposure by whatever means) and anything which isn't clearly against the rules must be not against the rules.

IMO you are wrong there for a number of reasons. Perhaps most of all, pro sport doesnt exist without fans, and many fans have some sort of "sporting values" or "ethics" if you prefer. Debate is a major part of the fan experience (which drives viewing and ticket purchases), and if we just discussed the dry facts, there wouldn't be very much debate, punditry, newspaper coverage, books written ... etc ... etc ...

I am not sure to what extent the fans are actually a driving force in pro road-racing; it's basically free spectacle.
We must be talking at cross-purposes, because that seems to make no sense! :)

Without fans watching - whether they pay or not - you would not have sponsors. => no wages, no professional cycle-sport.

Yes, I am sure I have a much narrower definition of fan than you. I don't count the hundreds who watched the TdF tt between Bergerac and Périgeux with me as necessarily fans - nor the millions who are fed TdF bulletins after the news on their tellys. I certainly wouldn't call my mother-in-law a fan of pro-cycling when she takes the bus to watch the Tour of Limousin finish (which is 300m from our house). (On the other hand the supporters of the CSP are quite definitely fans.)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 21, 2017, 06:48:26 pm
Sky must join anti-doping group to silence doubters, says president

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/21/team-sky-cyling-anti-doping-group-silence-doubters-credibility?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Sky not joining the MPCC meant that Wiggins could abuse Kenacort to win his TdF, Sky could dish out the Tramadol, and Froome doesn't have to do extra anti-doping tests.

Can't imagine why Sky never joined, can you?

Oh...it's because they have a strict ZTP policy.  ;D

Mind you...if they'd joined the MPCC they could have saved money by buying 52 doses of Kenacort instead of 55 (because they'd still have need 52 doses to treat all those non-riding staff and Freeman's private patients 😉 ) and there probably wouldn't have been an accidental delivery of testosterone.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 21, 2017, 07:07:06 pm
Sky must join anti-doping group to silence doubters, says president

Surely Roger Legeay has his own credibility issues to worry about.

Sky aren't members of the Tufty Club either, which clearly suggests a wanton disregard for the safety of children crossing the road. The callous bastards.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: slope on March 21, 2017, 07:22:56 pm
meant that Wiggins could abuse Kenacort to win his TdF

Which was allowed under the 'rules' by the UCI and their Dr Zorzoli at the time
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 21, 2017, 08:09:50 pm
meant that Wiggins could abuse Kenacort to win his TdF

Which was allowed under the 'rules' by the UCI and their Dr Zorzoli at the time

Not "openly" though, as you claimed earlier.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 21, 2017, 08:11:50 pm
If the rules had actually been followed, the drug was allowed. They weren't and it wasn't.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on March 21, 2017, 10:48:01 pm
Well, technically the rules were followed, you disagree wiht the officials interpretation of the rules. The officials and medics who had access to Wiggins medical history chose to interprete the rules differently.

Cycling has a history of flexible boundaries. Sky pushed but did not cross (in that the requests were approved). I share the distaste for that particular choice of therapy from what little I know as a non-medic (I should have a chat with my learned friends at the medical school).

My personal view is that a TUE should exempt from OOC testing and if you need a TUE then you are unfit to race.  End of.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on March 21, 2017, 10:51:13 pm
Well, technically the rules were followed, you disagree wiht the officials interpretation of the rules. The officials and medics who had access to Wiggins medical history chose to interprete the rules differently.

And why did they do that? Has anyone asked Zorzoli why he signed off on that TUE?.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Whitedown Man on March 22, 2017, 04:46:47 am
My personal view is that a TUE should exempt from OOC testing and if you need a TUE then you are unfit to race.  End of.

Generally sympathetic to this point of view, but does that mean you'd not allow diabetics or haemophiliacs to ride professionally? Both groups need in-competition TUEs.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on March 22, 2017, 04:51:39 am
My personal view is that a TUE should exempt from OOC testing and if you need a TUE then you are unfit to race.  End of.

Generally sympathetic to this point of view, but does that mean you'd not allow diabetics or haemophiliacs to ride professionally? Both groups need in-competition TUEs.

I wouldn't. If you need drugs that can be abused for competitive advantage, then no, you should not be allowed to compete.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 22, 2017, 07:16:15 am
Sky must join anti-doping group to silence doubters, says president

Surely Roger Legeay has his own credibility issues to worry about.

That would depend on whether you think that MPCC is some sort of sop to anti-doping. I think a certain element of pragmatism is needed here which is why Legeay 's own positive for amphetamine, nor O'Grady's admission of doping whilst on Legeay's team (and Legeay's rather unlikely claim to have been unaware) should not be used to beat the MPCC over the head, although in the case of O'Grady it is true that Legeay's response damaged the MPCC.

The mere fact of Lampre's resignation from the MPCC, or rather the real reason why they did it, shows you that the MPCC has an impact.

 
Quote
Sky aren't members of the Tufty Club either, which clearly suggests a wanton disregard for the safety of children crossing the road. The callous bastards.

Not quite sure what you point you are making good here. I find Sky's stated reason for not joining the MPCC to be wholly incredible. It's clear that a team determined to be cleaner than the rest would have nothing to lose by joining.

An unethical team could lose a Tour victory.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 22, 2017, 08:48:20 am
The mere fact of Lampre's resignation from the MPCC, or rather the real reason why they did it, shows you that the MPCC has an impact.

I'd say the opposite - they pulled out of the MPCC but carried on racing, which suggests that the MPCC has no impact at all. And they refused to fire their rider because Italian labour laws trump the MPCC's voluntary self-regulation.

Quote
Quote
Sky aren't members of the Tufty Club either, which clearly suggests a wanton disregard for the safety of children crossing the road. The callous bastards.

Not quite sure what you point you are making good here.

Anyone can set up a club with lofty ideals and then criticise anyone who doesn't want to join the club.

Quote
I find Sky's stated reason for not joining the MPCC to be wholly incredible.

I find Sky's reasons for not joining the MPCC to be totally irrelevant. Only 8 out of 18 WT teams are members. Is that evidence that those other 10 teams all have something to hide?

Quote
It's clear that a team determined to be cleaner than the rest would have nothing to lose by joining.

I'd look at it another way. I would say that a team that was involved in doping would have a lot to gain by joining the MPCC - indeed, Legeay himself said as much when he described Katusha, Lampre and Astana's decision to join the MPCC as opportunism.

I applaud the MPCC's lofty ideals, and it's great that some of their ideas have been adopted by the UCI and made official, but ultimately the MPCC is little more than a talking shop, and Sky's non-membership is a massive red herring.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 22, 2017, 08:55:25 am
That would depend on whether you think that MPCC is some sort of sop to anti-doping.

Perhaps I'm just a bit jaded - we've seen it all before, eg in 1998 when teams all signed bits of paper promising us that we were entering a new era of clean cycling.

And tbh, I find your faith in the MPCC a little surprising - I would have expected you to be more cynical. But maybe you're right - maybe the need for pragmatism overrides the natural inclination towards cynicism.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 22, 2017, 09:03:32 am
My personal view is that a TUE should exempt from OOC testing and if you need a TUE then you are unfit to race.  End of.

Generally sympathetic to this point of view, but does that mean you'd not allow diabetics or haemophiliacs to ride professionally? Both groups need in-competition TUEs.

I wouldn't. If you need drugs that can be abused for competitive advantage, then no, you should not be allowed to compete.
I think there ought to be some sort of allowance for long term/lifelong conditions. I also think you'd be on very dodgy legal discrimination grounds if you were to take away the livelihood of people based purely on a medical condition they have.
Off topic - as a (non competitive) member of BC, does that mean I need a TUE for my thyroxine?
Cheers
Duncan
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 22, 2017, 09:08:56 am
I also think you'd be on very dodgy legal discrimination grounds if you were to take away the livelihood of people based purely on a medical condition they have.

Quite. It's always going to be a tricky area to regulate but the real problem in Sky's case is that it seems the people responsible for enforcing the regulations were complicit in helping them abuse the system.

Quote
Off topic - as a (non competitive) member of BC, does that mean I need a TUE for my thyroxine?

The clue is in the words 'non competitive'.

I think the only likely scenario where you would need to apply for a TUE would be if you entered a Gran Fondo such as the Tour of Cambridgeshire in the racing category and expected to be placed high enough to qualify for the amateur World Championships.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: benborp on March 22, 2017, 09:40:54 am
I think the only likely scenario where you would need to apply for a TUE would be if you entered a Gran Fondo such as the Tour of Cambridgeshire in the racing category and expected to be placed high enough to qualify for the amateur World Championships.

I believe as an amateur, in those circumstances it is only necessary to apply for a TUE retroactively if required. I think you have five days grace. I have a condition that means I would fall foul of the UCI no needle rule even though the substance is not a PED. Without clear NICE guidelines on the required treatment for my condition I would have to shop around for a doctor that would agree that my treatment was necessary. 90% of GPs wouldn't. I don't race anymore.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 22, 2017, 09:45:31 am
Quote
Off topic - as a (non competitive) member of BC, does that mean I need a TUE for my thyroxine?

The clue is in the words 'non competitive'.
I think the only likely scenario where you would need to apply for a TUE would be if you entered a Gran Fondo such as the Tour of Cambridgeshire in the racing category and expected to be placed high enough to qualify for the amateur World Championships.
This guy took part in no competitions, but got a 4 year ban for taking PEDs:
http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/another-british-amateur-cyclist-banned-anti-doping-offences-297031
Obviously his case is a bit different to taking medically required banned drugs, but it is interesting he got tested out of competition having never entered one...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 22, 2017, 09:57:24 am
Obviously his case is a bit different to taking medically required banned drugs, but it is interesting he got tested out of competition having never entered one...

The only reason the anti-doping authorities were interested in him was because he was attempting to import controlled substances. And the ban was in fact for refusing to take the test.

Also note that the ban only applies to competitive events - he can still ride sportives, audaxes etc.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on March 22, 2017, 10:40:52 am
Quote
Quote
Sky aren't members of the Tufty Club either, which clearly suggests a wanton disregard for the safety of children crossing the road. The callous bastards.

Not quite sure what you point you are making good here.

Anyone can set up a club with lofty ideals and then criticise anyone who doesn't want to join the club.

Quite.  This is another version of "You can only be a good person if you join our gang".  It's an implicit threat with more than a whiff of the school playground.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 22, 2017, 10:50:20 am
That would depend on whether you think that MPCC is some sort of sop to anti-doping.

Perhaps I'm just a bit jaded - we've seen it all before, eg in 1998 when teams all signed bits of paper promising us that we were entering a new era of clean cycling.

And tbh, I find your faith in the MPCC a little surprising - I would have expected you to be more cynical. But maybe you're right - maybe the need for pragmatism overrides the natural inclination towards cynicism.

I've quoted this post rather than your lengthy one to save space.

Of course the MPCC is a talking shop, and of course it is toothless. The key point is that it had several aims, one of which was to stop the abuse of TUES and cortisone.  We now know that Wiggins massively abused the TUE system and Cortisone to win races. Had Sky joined the MPCC they would not have been able to do so. I'm amazed you aren't seeing this. It is not a red herring at all because it puts Sky's promises to be cleaner than clean into perspective.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on March 22, 2017, 11:17:14 am
Obviously his case is a bit different to taking medically required banned drugs, but it is interesting he got tested out of competition having never entered one...

The only reason the anti-doping authorities were interested in him was because he was attempting to import controlled substances. And the ban was in fact for refusing to take the test.

Also note that the ban only applies to competitive events - he can still ride sportives, audaxes etc.
He doesn't ride competitive events but he feels the need for PEDs. Why? Does it really make sense to demand professional athletes compete without them when people are using them on (I'm reliably informed by people who've done these events) LEL and PBP?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 22, 2017, 11:39:46 am
Because PBP and LEL aren't actually races and aren't worth money to riders, sponsors, etc?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on March 22, 2017, 11:47:51 am
Obviously his case is a bit different to taking medically required banned drugs, but it is interesting he got tested out of competition having never entered one...

The only reason the anti-doping authorities were interested in him was because he was attempting to import controlled substances. And the ban was in fact for refusing to take the test.

Also note that the ban only applies to competitive events - he can still ride sportives, audaxes etc.
He doesn't ride competitive events but he feels the need for PEDs. Why? Does it really make sense to demand professional athletes compete without them when people are using them on (I'm reliably informed by people who've done these events) LEL and PBP?

I presume his name registered because he's a British Cycling member, so holds some kind of licence.  I know of amateur TTers who dope, and there were a couple recently caught and banned since CTT started more regular testing. 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 22, 2017, 12:09:32 pm
Obviously his case is a bit different to taking medically required banned drugs, but it is interesting he got tested out of competition having never entered one...

The only reason the anti-doping authorities were interested in him was because he was attempting to import controlled substances. And the ban was in fact for refusing to take the test.

Also note that the ban only applies to competitive events - he can still ride sportives, audaxes etc.
He doesn't ride competitive events but he feels the need for PEDs. Why? Does it really make sense to demand professional athletes compete without them when people are using them on (I'm reliably informed by people who've done these events) LEL and PBP?

I presume his name registered because he's a British Cycling member, so holds some kind of licence.  I know of amateur TTers who dope, and there were a couple recently caught and banned since CTT started more regular testing.
So if my club organises a TT and I want to ride for the lolz (as I hear the young people say!) it I need a TUE? I guess I should ask the club person responsible...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 22, 2017, 12:19:02 pm
Had Sky joined the MPCC they would not have been able to do so.

From what I've seen, other teams who are (or have been) members of the MPCC seem to pick and choose which of its rules they follow.

I'm afraid I remain unconvinced that the MPCC's pronouncements on Sky are anything other than a distraction. But, you know, YMMV and all that.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Ian H on March 22, 2017, 12:22:39 pm

So if my club organises a TT and I want to ride for the lolz (as I hear the young people say!) it I need a TUE? I guess I should ask the club person responsible...

This very amateur TTer has ridden events where there has been testing.  They haven't yet picked on me.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on March 22, 2017, 12:26:35 pm
Because PBP and LEL aren't actually races and aren't worth money to riders, sponsors, etc?
But how does that make sense and why did it come about in, according to what you said earlier, the mid 1960s? It's as if moving away from the Corinthian or Olympian ideal in one area necessitated a compensatory reinforcement in others.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on March 22, 2017, 12:33:52 pm
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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 22, 2017, 12:39:19 pm
Dope bans and testing came in because people died (Simpson for one). People are allowed to make decisions that adversely affect their health but being competitive against doped riders virtually requires that choice to be made.

PBP and LEL aren't races and aren't worth money, so you don't need to dope to compete against other PBPers. If you choose to, it is only for your own reasons.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on March 22, 2017, 01:00:15 pm
Yeah, keeping people alive seems a good reason! Unfortunately it seems it doesn't always work.  :(
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 22, 2017, 02:30:00 pm
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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 22, 2017, 02:44:03 pm
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/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 22, 2017, 03:36:22 pm
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
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: marylogic on March 22, 2017, 11:03:03 pm
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

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on March 23, 2017, 08:23:17 am
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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 25, 2017, 06:26:59 pm
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.

 ;D ;D ;D 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
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DrMekon on March 25, 2017, 07:14:02 pm
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.

 ;D ;D ;D 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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 25, 2017, 07:32:18 pm
So does Brailsford...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on March 25, 2017, 07:36:54 pm
So does Brailsford...

You know what? I'm beginning to suspect you're not a Brailsford fan.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: rob on March 25, 2017, 08:35:18 pm
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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on March 25, 2017, 09:16:42 pm
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?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on March 25, 2017, 09:29:55 pm
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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 27, 2017, 11:52:05 am

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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 27, 2017, 02:45:02 pm
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
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 29, 2017, 05:23:34 pm
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.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 29, 2017, 06:43:17 pm
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/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 29, 2017, 07:00:46 pm
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!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 29, 2017, 07:15:37 pm
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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 29, 2017, 07:20:51 pm
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  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 29, 2017, 07:48:33 pm
https://sportsscientists.com/2017/03/sports-science-marginal-gains-common-sense/ (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
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 29, 2017, 08:21:10 pm
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  ;D

Turns out it was Triamcinolone.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 08:47:49 pm
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 (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/23/team-sky-tour-de-france-dominance-chris-froome)

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 08:51:53 pm
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. 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 30, 2017, 08:57:22 pm
Triamcinolone.

Enough said.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 09:05:42 pm
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.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 (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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 09:10:29 pm
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.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 30, 2017, 09:11:25 pm
Do you think the Triamcinolone made a difference?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 09:18:53 pm
Do you think the Triamcinolone made a difference?

Was it taken in an illegal manner and is there evidence to support this?

If Sky realise they can introduce something that is sanctioned then so be it.  If the appropriate authorities subsequently deem it inappropriate they will take action to ban it.  Examples exist regards equipment. Remember the aero saddles that were banned?  Aero water bottles banned:

http://www.velonews.com/2011/12/news/saddlegate-revisited_200823 (http://www.velonews.com/2011/12/news/saddlegate-revisited_200823)

In the meantime Sky will do whatever they are permitted to do to improve performance including fancy cycling kit and using warm-down routines which other teams appear to have followed.

Still waiting for Sky to be sanctioned and I assume that will happen as the proof is out there.  Or is it?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 30, 2017, 09:21:43 pm
It seems that is one question you are desperate not to answer...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 09:28:39 pm
It seems that is one question you are desperate not to answer...

Whether it improves performance or not is not a key question.  The key questions appears to be whether taking Triamcinolone was permitted and within the legal framework/rules covering the competition.

We all know food improves performance and the effect that a lack of energy can have on a riders performance has been dramatically demonstrated by Froome.  Porte gave him food outside the legal framework/rules and the riders were punished.  Key point is that taking food in designated zones is permissible and if taking Triamcinolone was permitted then no case to answer.  Unless you wish to consider the ethics/morality of taking Triamcinolone which opens a somewhat larger debate.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 30, 2017, 09:35:52 pm
Taking that drug is only within the rules if you have an appropriate condition at that specific time that cannot be treated another way and taking the drug doesn't improve your performance. Do you think that all of those conditions were met in this case?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 09:41:04 pm
^^^^  Not my decision and I was not involved in the process.  I'll leave it to those with that responsibility to decide.  Opinions will differ and as I have stated before, if it stinks then strip Wiggins of wins credited to him when taking something that folk may consider was unnecessary, but appears to have been legal.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 09:42:28 pm
Some expert opinion here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/09/20/sir-bradley-wigginss-last-resort-drug-was-utterly-bonkers-say-me/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/09/20/sir-bradley-wigginss-last-resort-drug-was-utterly-bonkers-say-me/)

But not sure how expert opinion is viewed.

Millar has his views suggesting it should be banned, which I assume acknowledges it is perfectly legal to take when deemed appropriate:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/09/19/drugs-used-by-sir-bradley-wiggins-should-be-banned-says-david-mi/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/09/19/drugs-used-by-sir-bradley-wiggins-should-be-banned-says-david-mi/)


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 30, 2017, 09:49:55 pm
Why do you think there is a parliamentary inquiry into Sky (amongst other things) and do you have any ideas why they aren't impressed with Sky's replies to date?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 10:01:11 pm
^^^  They may not be impressed and wish answers to be provided in a similar fashion to the Public Accounts Committee in 2012 discussing matters with Google, Starbucks and Amazon regarding the tax protocols they adopted which were legal, but not necessarily liked.  Again, questions asked, but no sanctions as they were doing nothing illegal or outside the boundaries set by the appropriate authority.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 30, 2017, 10:06:49 pm
Let's stick with the subject - potential doping.

How easy is it to provide cast-iron evidence of doping if there were no records of the drug stocks held and information about the drugs dispensed by team doctors and other organisation staff has big holes? We can't even use a process of elimination to rule out drugs issued to other team members/ staff because of patient confidentiality. Are no Sky folk prepared to waive confidentiality to show how clean the team actually is? Every step of the way Sky has lied or obfuscated about what has actually happened and when evidence to the contrary has emerged, they repeat the performance until contrary evidence pops up again.

There is no point in talking about positive dope tests. That appears to be the exception, rather than the rule, for discovering high performance doping.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 30, 2017, 10:07:50 pm
^^^  They may not be impressed and wish answers to be provided in a similar fashion to the Public Accounts Committee in 2012 discussing matters with Google, Starbucks and Amazon regarding the tax protocols they adopted which were legal, but not necessarily liked.  Again, questions asked, but no sanctions as they were doing nothing illegal or outside the boundaries set by the appropriate authority.

"May not be impressed".

Understatement of the year  ;D ;D

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2017/03/01/team-sky-british-cycling-left-reeling-questions-answer-bruising/

The chair of the committee stated that the reputation of Team Sky is "in tatters".

Try and spin that one away...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 10:14:01 pm
Let's stick with the subject - potential doping.

How easy is it to provide cast-iron evidence of doping if there were no records of the drug stocks held or any information about the drugs dispensed were kept by team doctors and other organisation staff? There is no point in talking about positive dope tests. That appears to be the exception, rather than the rule, for discovering high performance doping.

Potential being the appropriate word.  If Sky can avoid being caught then everyone can avoid being caught and we all await for the real story behind the emerging enigma called Sagan.  Or we wait for the story behind Cavendish or the story behind Hoy, Kenny, Trott etc etc.  But until there is hard evidence then everything is supposition and folk are all tarred with the same brush.  On the basis that hard evidence is the exception, I don't think we can rely on opinion without any evidence.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 30, 2017, 10:34:06 pm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2017/03/01/team-sky-british-cycling-left-reeling-questions-answer-bruising/

The chair of the committee stated that the reputation of Team Sky is "in tatters".

Try and spin that one away...

No need to as BC have commented on circumstances and I have already opined on the failure of organisations to keep records at post #643 (14 Mar) which does not imply malice just because records were not maintained.

Sky appear to have accepted the shortcomings regarding record keeping and are responding with their riders doing the talking in terms of results.  Perhaps that is how they do 'spin'.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 30, 2017, 10:45:00 pm
Hypothetically, short of either a Sky mea culpa or a cast-iron positive dope test, what would be sufficient evidence for you to conclude that Sky riders probably took dope?

I would like evidence rather than supposition or pointed fingers.  Perhaps if Thomas confessed that Sky were a dope fuelled and results obsessed organisation that operated under such secrecy and cunning that no matter who looked through the looking glass they would find no evidence.

So nothing short of a Sky confession of doping would do it?

You've already made it clear that a failed dope test or explicit confession are the only forms of evidence that would influence your opinion. So Katusha is the only pro team to have doped recently...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on March 30, 2017, 11:09:07 pm


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.

That's because Sky is hiding behind the 'doctor/patient privilege'. It's abundantly clear that they should never have requested that TUE and that it should never have been approved. Again, why hasn't anyone asked Zorzoli why he approved the TUE? At this stage, I don't think a financial background investigation would be out of order.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 30, 2017, 11:46:11 pm
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 (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/23/team-sky-tour-de-france-dominance-chris-froome)


Fantastical comparisons of Sky with US Postal and Banesto, with no mention of their doping. As well as having his own palmares (iirc) Fotheringham wrote of Banesto's system of doping in 2000. He does know something of cycling and made some interesting comparisons in this rather breathless article.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 30, 2017, 11:49:34 pm
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.


I'm not convinced that's driving Tucker here. He's well respected and has an interest in doping across sports, as well as other areas of research.

You may recall that he was one of the experts that Seb Coe described as being 'so called', before some (but not all) of the doping news in his sport emerged blinking into the light
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on March 30, 2017, 11:57:18 pm
Let's stick with the subject - potential doping.

How easy is it to provide cast-iron evidence of doping if there were no records of the drug stocks held or any information about the drugs dispensed were kept by team doctors and other organisation staff? There is no point in talking about positive dope tests. That appears to be the exception, rather than the rule, for discovering high performance doping.

Potential being the appropriate word.  If Sky can avoid being caught then everyone can avoid being caught and we all await for the real story behind the emerging enigma called Sagan.  Or we wait for the story behind Cavendish or the story behind Hoy, Kenny, Trott etc etc.  But until there is hard evidence then everything is supposition and folk are all tarred with the same brush.  On the basis that hard evidence is the exception, I don't think we can rely on opinion without any evidence.


Well, we are waiting for the stories - Froome as well;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Foghat on March 30, 2017, 11:58:37 pm
But until there is hard evidence then everything is supposition and folk are all tarred with the same brush.  On the basis that hard evidence is the exception, I don't think we can rely on opinion without any evidence.

How much more evidence do you need?  There's plenty just in Wiggins' own writings and utterances.

He lied about taking the Triamcinolone until he had to admit it following the Fancy Bears unearthing of the truth.

In his autobiography, he wrote that he was 100% healthy and winning all his races in the lead-up to the 2012 Tour de France.  Therefore any application for a TUE cannot have been for an emergency or exceptional circumstances, which are the two principal available mandatory criteria for being granted a TUE.  Sky's application was therefore dishonest and incorrect, and as such contravened the rules.  That the TUE was granted shows Zorzoli/UCI was either duped by the dishonest application or complicit, and negligent in either case.  And of course, UCI negligence/complicity/corruption does not absolve the dishonest application.

After being caught out, Wiggins then stated that the TUE was required to level the playing field so he could compete at the highest level - he didn't say it was needed for an emergency or exceptional circumstances.  His argument was that his specialist medical advisor told him it would cure his lifelong allergy and respiratory problems, i.e. circumstances so exceptional that he'd, by his own admission, managed to remain 100% healthy throughout the entire lead-up to the Tour, and won all the races too.

So....clearly banged to rights (well, compelling evidence at least) that the Triamcinolone TUE was dishonestly applied for, inappropriately authorised and therefore obtained and administered in contravention of the rules.  Ergo, Wiggins won the 2012 Tour using Triamcinolone as a performance-enhancing drug, but under the guise of a TUE due to Sky dishonesty and UCI negligence/corruption.  Why anyone would continue to hope/believe that Wiggins and Sky are honest, genuine and correct on the TUE matter, given all this, defies logic.....especially having seen and heard Brailsford's compulsive bullshitting on Sky medical and '100% clean zero-tolerance' matters, and the shifty, bullshitting performances of Sky management in front of the select committee, and the admissions/accusations of ex-Sky riders.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on March 31, 2017, 09:24:23 am
Let's not forget that Freeman excused himself from attending the select committee at the last minute due to a "cold" (did he write his own sick-note?). 

As per usual with this story, his subsequent written evidence poses more questions than gives answers.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 31, 2017, 09:52:33 am
How much more evidence do you need?  There's plenty just in Wiggins' own writings and utterances.

I've tried to give Sky the benefit of the doubt as much as possible, but I can't argue with anything you say. I just can't see any plausible excuse that would exonerate the team - or the UCI, who I'm certain must have been complicit.

Wiggins should not have been granted that TUE. Whether or not Sky "broke the rules" is an irrelevant nicety.

Is the Triamcinolone the reason he won the Tour in 2012? That I'm not so sure about - it's just one of many factors that possibly contributed to his success - but either it had no effect, in which case he needn't have taken it, or it enhanced his performance, in which case he shouldn't have taken it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 31, 2017, 09:59:54 am
No matter what the folk on YACF think or believe, no matter what others may think such as Kimmage, the fact remains that no evidence has been presented to warrant the relevant authorities to take action or sanctions against either Sky or Wiggins.  Folk may believe it stinks like a rotting fish and there are lies stacked atop of lies.  All well and good and folk are entitled to their opinion.  However, until it is proven that Wiggins and Sky, or indeed UCI, did something illegal regarding what Wiggins took, then everything is just hot air and does not change the records.

If Sky pushed the limits of a system to the absolute boundary, then so be it.  If UCI are dishonest or corrupt then every team has the option to exploit them.  If folk don't like it then consider what you can do about it other than post on YACF.  I can only assume that posting on YACF enables a vent for frustration or anger which might help folk.  Alternatively, what was done was legal and while poor protocol and practices have been identified, there is a lack of evidence to support sanctions.

Very easy to make noise about something.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 31, 2017, 10:23:51 am
folk are entitled to their opinion.

Yes, and this is an internet forum, an appropriate arena for the expression and discussion of opinions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 31, 2017, 10:46:53 am
folk are entitled to their opinion.

Yes, and this is an internet forum, an appropriate arena for the expression and discussion of opinions.

Indeed.  And having a different opinion does not mean someone is the Devil, an idiot, an apologist or whatever.

32 pages and almost 800 postings of debate on whether something was appropriate or not.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on March 31, 2017, 10:59:10 am
It's not just about appropriateness or not.
Sky came into road racing with a bunch of people from the track saying that they were going to prove that you could win the biggest races while riding clean and pledged to be transparent and have zero tolerance for doping.

So far, they have won stuff. I don't think they have fulfilled the rest of that ambition. In my view, much of the focus on them is because of their hubris and their success - without the original mission statement (and the constant puff pieces about their brilliant management) they would be just another (successful) cycling team.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on March 31, 2017, 11:07:37 am
No matter what the folk on YACF think or believe, no matter what others may think such as Kimmage, the fact remains that no evidence has been presented to warrant the relevant authorities to take action or sanctions against either Sky or Wiggins.  Folk may believe it stinks like a rotting fish and there are lies stacked atop of lies.  All well and good and folk are entitled to their opinion.  However, until it is proven that Wiggins and Sky, or indeed UCI, did something illegal regarding what Wiggins took, then everything is just hot air and does not change the records.

If Sky pushed the limits of a system to the absolute boundary, then so be it.  If UCI are dishonest or corrupt then every team has the option to exploit them.  If folk don't like it then consider what you can do about it other than post on YACF.  I can only assume that posting on YACF enables a vent for frustration or anger which might help folk.  Alternatively, what was done was legal and while poor protocol and practices have been identified, there is a lack of evidence to support sanctions.

Very easy to make noise about something.

Tell that to the Parliamentary  Committee
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 31, 2017, 11:19:02 am
When Armstrong finally threw in the towel over his doping I compared it to the scene in 'The Wizard of Oz' when the curtain is pulled back, and the wizard is revealed as a product of smoke and mirrors.

The moral of the story was that the protagonists were changed by the journey, and became what they admired through their trials. Millions got on their bikes because of Lance, and that didn't change because of his fall from grace. Germany went on the same journey through Ullrich, and Denmark through Riis.

I'm actually more concerned about Health and Safety. I expect the teams to game the system, but I don't want to see riders dying. The example of Tommy Simpson is interesting, he still has a heroic quality. There obviously has to be a system for looking after the health of the athletes, and we have to expect that the authorities  allow TUE's.

Getting Wiggins to Paris in yellow struck me as an amazing achievement, mainly due to his highly-strung temperament. The most interesting dynamic was his relationship with Cavendish. Wiggins seem to fixate on compensating for Cav's lack of an Olympic medal, and that diverted his nerves. It also led to a lot of resentment of Sky, who took too much out of the 2012 Tour.


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 31, 2017, 11:52:35 am
Tell that to the Parliamentary  Committee

Clearly Veloman doesn't consider them a "relevant authority", nor does he consider that what they are investigating amounts to "evidence".

He is entitled to his opinion.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 31, 2017, 11:57:03 am
Even if his opinion is wrong, which it is.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 31, 2017, 11:58:23 am
Even if his opinion is wrong, which it is.

You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment. ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 31, 2017, 11:59:38 am
Getting Wiggins to Paris in yellow struck me as an amazing achievement, mainly due to his highly-strung temperament.

Maybe he just rode his bike faster to get away from idiots banging on about chimps and trying to make him drink beetroot juice.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on March 31, 2017, 12:11:03 pm
Even if his opinion is wrong, which it is.

You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment. ;)

It doesn't matter. As always, Veloman and I will enjoy each other's company the next time we meet.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 31, 2017, 12:20:21 pm
Getting Wiggins to Paris in yellow struck me as an amazing achievement, mainly due to his highly-strung temperament.

Maybe he just rode his bike faster to get away from idiots banging on about chimps and trying to make him drink beetroot juice.

Wiggins was never as bad as Cadel Evans, the temptation to medicate for temperament must be enormous.

Speaking as someone who has a problem sleeping before a big event, I've always found that aspect of the Tour the most interesting. The best stage ever may have been when Landis regained yellow.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 31, 2017, 12:21:31 pm
It doesn't matter. As always, veloman and I will enjoy each other's company the next time we meet.

Luckily, there are always other subjects to talk about that don't generate so much heat.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on March 31, 2017, 12:22:08 pm
Wiggins was never as bad as Cadel Evans, the temptation to medicate for temperament must be enormous.

I always thought Wiggo's choice of medication came in a bottle rather than a syringe though.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on March 31, 2017, 12:28:06 pm
He likes the odd cigarette as well.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 31, 2017, 09:27:29 pm
No matter what the folk on YACF think ........

Tell that to the Parliamentary Committee

Parliamentary Committees are sub-legislative and have very little bite, although their bark may attract the attention of many, they are in essence a fairly tame breed.  Information here:

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/role/ (http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/role/)

Quite surprised the politicians on the many committees are seen in such high esteem considering the comments politicians often receive on YACF!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 31, 2017, 09:32:12 pm
It doesn't matter. As always, veloman and I will enjoy each other's company the next time we meet.

And I very much look forward to that, particularly if I am following your wheel!  Very pleased to hear you are back on the bike and making progress.  (I have even acquired a bike with mudguards and tried a Brookes saddle but, alas, swopped it as it was creaking too much and I was informed by those I ride with to "sort it!")

Good to agree to disagree!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Veloman on March 31, 2017, 09:38:37 pm
Maybe he just rode his bike faster to get away from idiots banging on about chimps and trying to make him drink beetroot juice.

Which goes to show that inclusion of mind coaching and subtle changes of diet can result in a marked improvement in performance within the team.  Marginal gains by reverse psychology and physiology!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on April 04, 2017, 11:06:30 am
Tell that to the Parliamentary  Committee

Clearly Veloman doesn't consider them a "relevant authority", nor does he consider that what they are investigating amounts to "evidence".

He is entitled to his opinion.
It's their job to look for evidence, and to assess what they find.

It's debatable whether the hearsay they have found so far is more than circumstantial. Applying for a TUE is within the rules, even if they employ people with a dodgy past record.

I say debatable quite deliberately; it seems very possible at this stage that they might be swayed by what they've already heard, and they might find out more damning stuff. We just don't know. This is not affected by posters on this thread announcing the guilt of Team Sky and all who sail in her.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on April 04, 2017, 12:06:41 pm
What hearsay?  There isn't any hearsay.

There would be no DCMS inquiry including Team Sky were it not for the Fancy Bears hack revealing Wiggins's multitude of TUES before major stage races. Prior to that, all we had to go on was Wiggins telling us he'd never had an injection. Now we know that is a lie. The revelations of the "package" came off the back of this. We still don't really know what happened, but we do know that the story Sky attempted to tell has been contradicted several times by people involved, we also know that it is inconsistent. Now we know that the reason that there is little evidence is because records were either not kept, or records went missing.

We also now know that other Sky doctors prevented Wiggins doctor from applying for more TUES.  So clearly THEY felt something was very wrong.

DCMS have assessed the evidence, and as a result have been pretty damning of Team Sky.

That's a pretty big indictment of the self-professed 'cleanest team ever'.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on April 13, 2017, 01:37:52 pm
Ukad investigates claim Team Sky breached ‘no needles’ policy

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/13/ukad-team-sky-breached-no-needles-allegation?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Well, well, well.

The most ethical team has been breaking UCI rules, according to ex-employee
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on April 13, 2017, 01:45:09 pm
Ukad investigates claim Team Sky breached ‘no needles’ policy

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/13/ukad-team-sky-breached-no-needles-allegation?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Well, well, well.

The most ethical team has been breaking UCI rules
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on April 13, 2017, 02:29:43 pm
I had thought that the UCI no-needles policy was a blanket ban. That article suggests otherwise, i.e. it's only around races.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on April 13, 2017, 06:49:28 pm
I don't see how it could be a blanket ban.

What if an athlete legitimately needed an injection of powerful steroids normally intended for hospitalised patients, in order to cure their hayfever prior to a Grand Tour?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on April 14, 2017, 09:25:04 am
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-4408938/UKAD-look-claim-Team-Sky-breached-no-needles-policy.html

"there is also a claim that medical exemptions were used ‘tactically’ by Team Sky ‘to support the health of a rider with an ultimate aim of supporting performance’. The whistleblower added: ‘Using TUEs was openly discussed in hushed voices.’"

A.k.a. cheating.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on April 14, 2017, 09:45:35 am
The UCI approved the TUEs, so it is all above board and a clever/ legal use of loopholes/ medical necessities.

It isn't cheating. Or so it will claimed. Why did the UCI approve these TUEs anyway?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on May 29, 2017, 12:09:06 pm
I didn't realise until someone mentioned it on twitter yesterday but Dumoulin is the first GT winner from an MPCC team.

No doubt Flatus and others will be pleased. I have to say that the racing certainly looked very 'human' at times.

ETA: our fact-checking department says Garmin were members when Hesjedal won the Giro in 2012, while Astana were provisional members when Nibali won in 2013, and afaict full members when he won the Tour in 2014. Oh well!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on May 30, 2017, 11:08:23 pm
I would've needed a TUE on Sunday to use the medication I bought at the chemist on Friday. Instead I used something marginally less effective that isn't banned in competition. Not competing in the next month or so, so I can have the steroids now.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on June 15, 2017, 03:27:32 pm
Sky / BC   Lines are blurred. This is a bit off topic to Sky's TUEs etc, but similar bad practice and attitudes by the same people.
British Cycling: Jess Varnish 'insulted' by report into alleged bullying  (http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/40286214)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on June 15, 2017, 04:45:08 pm
The attitudes are deeply ingrained. Not sure if you followed the link into the leaked report, but the obvious conclusion was that the board very significantly doctored the original to avoid the damning. Inclusions becoming known.

I'm glad the parliamentary committee looks like being robust in its conclusions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on June 15, 2017, 06:00:12 pm
Yeah, I've been following the links on this, and agree this has been systemic for years at BC.

I hope the parliamentary committee are able to effect real change there.  One problem is how UCI, BC, Sky and funding are all interlinked. 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on June 15, 2017, 07:36:43 pm
Went round to watch the Dauphiné last week at a mates house. Halfway through one of his mates turned up...a former professional cyclist who had ridden through the ranks in the 90s and turned pro at the end of the decade.  He'd ridden on teams with Wiggins, Millar to name but two.

He'd also had dealings with Shane Sutton. He described him as a thick, racist, sexist bully bighead. Also said that Sutton was a notorious doper, and knew people who had ridden with Sutton and had to talk him down off the ceiling at midnight after races because he was still high from all the drugs hed used.

Just as well Brailsford never found out....what with Sky's really stringent anti-doping culture and ZTP of anybody with a doping history  ::-)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on June 15, 2017, 08:20:32 pm
Sutton and pot belge was never considered a good mix.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: fd3 on July 02, 2017, 11:49:07 am
If sky were a govt funded organisation, would they be allowed to seek external sponsorship, leading to their massive amounts of cash and potential to buy the success they currently have?  As BC could not create a road team without the cash and exposure to continental racing, seems the sky model is in no way outrageous.

Recently reading the Nicole Cooke autobiography.  Interesting POV on what was going on and the positives (and downsides) of the BC->Sky transition.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on July 02, 2017, 11:55:24 am
Oh whoops...

http://www.straitstimes.com/sport/fresh-doping-claims-cast-cloud-over-team-sky

Incredible weight loss by Froome and Wiggins, and the ordering of huge and unaccounted for quantities of Cortisone coincides with employment of a doctor who's expertise in his previous team was using cortisone for weight loss.

Umm...errr....
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on July 02, 2017, 01:22:50 pm
Oh whoops...

http://www.straitstimes.com/sport/fresh-doping-claims-cast-cloud-over-team-sky

Incredible weight loss by Froome and Wiggins, and the ordering of huge and unaccounted for quantities of Cortisone coincides with employment of a doctor who's expertise in his previous team was using cortisone for weight loss.

Umm...errr....w

This could be very interesting if it wasn't obliterated on my phone by advertising for investments un Singapore. Oh well shouldn't believe everything you can('t) read on the internet.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on July 02, 2017, 01:48:29 pm
Oh whoops...

http://www.straitstimes.com/sport/fresh-doping-claims-cast-cloud-over-team-sky

Incredible weight loss by Froome and Wiggins, and the ordering of huge and unaccounted for quantities of Cortisone coincides with employment of a doctor who's expertise in his previous team was using cortisone for weight loss.

Umm...errr....w

This could be very interesting if it wasn't obliterated on my phone by advertising for investments un Singapore. Oh well shouldn't believe everything you can('t) read on the internet.

Here you go...

Team Sky faced fresh embarrassment from their employment of Geert Leinders after more revelations about the doctor's doping practices surfaced yesterday, as this year's Tour de France began.

In The Descent, serialised in The Times Magazine, Thomas Dekker, the former Rabobank rider who has served a two-year ban for doping, sets out the scale of drug-taking in the Dutch cycling team.

He noted the active involvement of Leinders, who went on to become Team Sky's medical consultant between 2010 and 2012.

Leinders is said to have knowingly administered a banned drug to stimulate cortisone production and advised using a saline drip to cover up a high level of red blood cells caused by abuse of erythropoietin (EPO). Dekker also talks of the team falsifying medical conditions to allow riders to take cortisone to lose weight, calling the system of therapeutic use exemptions "a sham".

Leinders, banned for life in 2015 by the United States Anti-Doping Agency, was employed for 80 days a year by Team Sky, who insisted that they did background checks.

The team's general manager Dave Brailsford was forced to subsequently admit the mistake, while insisting that Leinders did nothing untoward with the British team.

And their retired rider Bradley Wiggins has claimed that Leinders had nothing to do with his controversial injections of a corticosteroid before grand Tours in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

THE TIMES, LONDON

Funny that.



Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on October 20, 2017, 01:08:16 am
And Dr Freeman resigns, so he doesn't have to face the music.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/oct/19/british-cycling-doctor-jiffy-bag-scandal-richard-freeman
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on October 20, 2017, 08:40:43 am
And Dr Freeman resigns, so he doesn't have to face the music.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/oct/19/british-cycling-doctor-jiffy-bag-scandal-richard-freeman

You would have to be a pretty staunch Sky supporter to think this is above board.  Any doubt was cleared for me the day he failed to turn up to the MP's enquiry because he'd given himself a doctor's note.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 20, 2017, 09:14:42 am
It all absolutely stinks. The cognitive dissonance of those who write it all off as above board is astounding.

Seriously, a box of testosterone patches delivered "by mistake". Really? Wonder what it was mistaken for in the suppliers warehouse...a box of tissues?

We have had literally a string of lies that has been exposed one by one:

Wiggins lie about never receiving injections
Brailsford's lie about intended recipient and destination of package
Brailsford's lie about doctor not administering content of package at race

Why should we believe the reasons given that are as yet unprovable because Sky have not kept records:
that the package contained Fluimucil
that the delivery of Testosterone was a 'mistake'


This is about doping. Seriously, this is THE one contentious issue that can bring a team down, so I absolutely dont believe that this string of errors, oversights, omissions, mistakes were such. I dont believe a team that trumpets its fastidiousness and attention to detail would make a string of errors over the most contentious issue in the sport.

Whiter than white?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on October 20, 2017, 12:34:57 pm

Seriously, a box of testosterone patches delivered "by mistake".

That's the really difficult part, we're talking about something covered by Misuse of Drugs Act / Regulations, control mechanisms are stringent.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on October 20, 2017, 02:53:52 pm

Seriously, a box of testosterone patches delivered "by mistake".

That's the really difficult part, we're talking about something covered by Misuse of Drugs Act / Regulations, control mechanisms are stringent.


Not that difficult - the chance of that error is so close to zero as to be instantly dismissible - therefore, the very strong likelihood is that an order was placed.

Testosterone doesn't even share sufficient common letters with kenacort for auto complete to catch you out - although I suppose you might order a large quantity of triamcinolone as that begins with a T. But then, that's also controlled so no cycling team would seek to obtain industrial quantities of that either;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 20, 2017, 03:03:56 pm
If you keep no records it doesn't matter what you order....
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mzjo on October 20, 2017, 06:27:35 pm
If you keep no records it doesn't matter what you order....


No paper trail at the recipient end, perhaps time to look at the supplier end. Do they order in RPC like Jeannie Longo's husband used to? (Of course we all know about Chinese goods declarations and how to avoid import duty).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on October 25, 2017, 09:22:05 am
It's in the post...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/select-committee-report-to-reflect-concerns-over-team-sky-and-british-cycling/

The mood music doesn't sound all that positive.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on November 15, 2017, 11:19:59 am
http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/41996027

Move along now folks, nothing to see here...

There will be no charges over a 'mystery' medical package delivered to Sir Bradley Wiggins at the Criterium du Dauphine in 2011, says UK Anti-Doping.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 15, 2017, 12:00:32 pm
"A  statement on the organisation's website said: "Put simply, due to the lack of contemporaneous evidence, UKAD has been unable to definitively confirm the contents of the package.

"The significant likelihood is that it is now impossible to do so."

Ukad chief executive Nicole Sapstead added: "Our investigation was hampered by a lack of accurate medical records being available at British Cycling. This is a serious concern."




Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on November 15, 2017, 12:13:40 pm
In the same way as a missed test carries the same sanctions as a failed test, lost medical records should carry the same penalty as dodgy medical records.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: De Sisti on November 15, 2017, 12:59:08 pm
Looks like Sky and Wiggins have got away with it. This should really be in the Bad News thread.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 15, 2017, 02:26:40 pm
Does any of this sound like the actions of an ethical team?

Claiming that package was for Pooley

Then, once this claim had been proven false, claiming that Wiggins had left race before doctor arrived with package.

Then, once this claim had been proven false, claiming that the package contained a decongestant.

Then, when challenged about why a team GB staff member would be sent on a 600 mile journey to deliver a medicine that could have been purchased over the counter in a local pharmacy, said it was normal.


Then when it transpires that Sky/BC had ordered in huge numbers of doses of a known PED, Triamcinolone, but couldn't account for its administration, claimed that all medical records pertaining to administration of substance were on Freeman's laptop, which, surprise surprise, had been stolen.

Then, it transpires, a consignment of Testosterone had been delivered to Sky/BC "accidentally".

Then Freeman refused to appear in front of DCMS.

And all this after the Fancy Bears leak revealed that Wiggins had been injected with steroids prior to major wins, having previously denied ever having received any injections.


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Pieman on November 15, 2017, 02:53:17 pm
They have lost all credibility with me and many others I'm thinking, it's getting as bad as politics ☠️☠️☠️
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 15, 2017, 03:04:06 pm
Its embarrassing.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Foghat on November 15, 2017, 03:49:47 pm
Add in to Flatus's list:

Sky made dishonest TUE applications.

Brailsford tried to kill the jiffy bag story.

Brailsford and Wiggins both conducted very unconvincing interviews with the BBC.

Sky and British Cycling representatives all put on very unconvincing (and in some cases seemingly guilt-ridden) performances in front of the select committee.

Sky, and possibly BC, obstructed the UKAD investigation.

Any one of all those faults, just on its own, from that very long list, is cause for serious doubt about Sky's ethics at that time.  Add them all together and the only sensible conclusion, regardless of UKAD's inability to prove guilt re the jiffy bag, is that at the very least Sky thought it could get away with a way to scam the TUE system such that certain riders including Wiggins could be pumped with Triamcinolone in significant doses whenever required to enhance performance.  There is no reasonable explanation of the evidence other than Wiggins cheated his way to certain victories/results with performance-enhancing drugs.......and it would seem likely that he was not unique at Sky in this.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on November 15, 2017, 04:16:22 pm
Have we all seen Wiggo's statement? Laughable.

I'm not going to copy it here. You can guess exactly what it says - you've heard it all before...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Charlie Polecat on November 15, 2017, 05:27:50 pm
The really sad thing about all of this, is not what effect it has on professional racing (disastrous enough), but that if Wiggins, etal are not justly sanctioned, the public will taint the rest of us with the same belief that we all dope for racing or indeed any cycling.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 15, 2017, 05:34:24 pm
I dont think anybody is going to suspect me of doping for my commute.  ;D

I just think it harms the reputation of British sport as a whole, British cyclists and cycling as a sport.

Wiggins, Brailsford and all their lies and bullshit can fuck off.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on November 15, 2017, 06:50:08 pm
I dont think anybody is going to suspect me of doping for my commute.  ;D

I just think it harms corrects the reputation of British sport as a whole, British cyclists and cycling as a sport.

Wiggins, Brailsford and all their lies and bullshit can fuck off.

That's better, though like USPostal, they do seem better at it than the others
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on November 15, 2017, 10:14:28 pm
If he feels so badly treated, why doesn't he just say what was in the bag?
I wonder how much Sky is paying Dr. Freeman for ruining his own career?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on November 15, 2017, 10:18:11 pm
If he feels so badly treated, why doesn't he just say what was in the bag?
I wonder how much Sky is paying Dr. Freeman for ruining his own career?

I would have thought there are grounds for having him struck off for professional negligence (at the very least)?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on November 15, 2017, 11:05:25 pm
Presumably someone high up is protecting him as part of the deal whereby he agreed to be the scapegoat?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Charlie Polecat on November 15, 2017, 11:18:10 pm
Presumably someone high up is protecting him as part of the deal whereby he agreed to be the scapegoat?

British Cycling by all appearances.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on November 16, 2017, 01:18:25 am
Presumably someone high up is protecting him as part of the deal whereby he agreed to be the scapegoat?

British Cycling by all appearances.

Brailsford got far more to lose.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on November 16, 2017, 01:14:58 pm
Quite staggered that Wiggins appears to be asking for the identity of the whistleblower to be revealed. Given the lack of any records being kept, the accidental delivery of testosterone and deliberate ordering of large amounts of Kenacort, and consequent complete inability of UKAD to find out what had gone on it seems at best a smokescreen and at worst to be looking for an opportunity to 'make someone pay'.

Has he not read the press recently. At least one CEO has been censured for trying to obtain the identity of a whistleblower.

Mike
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 16, 2017, 02:05:32 pm
It seems a weird response, from Wiggins, given that Sky admitted there had been a package delivered.

So is this the big reveal Wiggins had been promising, with his "some people will be shocked" outburst a few months back?
Doesn't sound like it. Sounds like he was preparing for a much worse outcome than the one he got...

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on November 18, 2017, 01:48:13 pm
I reckon Wiggins could do without Shane Sutton's idea of helping (https://amp.theguardian.com/sport/2017/nov/18/shane-sutton-bradley-wiggins-tues). Even Super David Millar says they were obviously gaming the system.

UKAD have been shown to be toothless and pointless. Mind you if Tyson Fury has his way, they could well be bankrupt, which would be interesting.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on November 18, 2017, 03:15:38 pm
Millar says "gaming the system", Sutton says "marginal gains". Others might say "exploiting loopholes" or "being creative within the rules", all the same thing. All successful sports teams find ways to push the rules as far as they can without incurring penalties, and using TUEs is one of those ways. Unfortunately, lying on the TUE is not within the rules and testosterone is not a therapeutic use. Perhaps being caught shows British cycling (and Cycling) still haven't caught up with the Continental teams – but I'm sure they'll get caught out too. And the Chinese might be a team to watch! 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on November 18, 2017, 03:39:34 pm
I found Heiko Salzwedel's sudden departure more interesting.


Quote
A coach for East Germany in the 1980s, Salzwedel has never directly addressed the systematic doping that went on in that country during that period, although this was his third stint at British Cycling, so if that was a concern, it seems odd he kept on being brought back in. Salzwedel told Telegraph Sport last year he could “not help” where he came from. He added: “It is something I am quite proud about that I was never involved in any systematic [doping] situation in any professional teams. I preferred working for federations. There is more regulation.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2017/10/12/mystery-heiko-salzwedels-future-escorted-velodrome/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on November 18, 2017, 04:07:25 pm
SO, we're on p35 of this:

Is Wiggins guilty or not?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 18, 2017, 04:17:54 pm
Doping? Yes, of course. That was obvious ages ago but there is enough wiggle room left for apologists to give Sky a pass.

Wiggo's Olympic comeback - shades of Armstrong 2.0?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on November 18, 2017, 04:36:04 pm
Doping? Yes, of course. That was obvious ages ago but there is enough wiggle room left for apologists to give Sky a pass.

Wiggo's Olympic comeback - shades of Armstrong 2.0?

And whether Sky and British Cycling go down is the question, not whether there was doping or even if it was systematic.

Plus ca change...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on November 18, 2017, 06:08:50 pm
Doping? Yes, of course. That was obvious ages ago
So he's been prosecuted/banned/fined I assume?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 18, 2017, 06:27:35 pm
Ho hum, how unexpected.

In some circumstances, a lack of evidence can be presumed to be a doping positive e.g. avoiding taking a dope test. Sky has managed to obscure or lose every bit of evidence that might prove or disprove doping. Why should they get off for (hypothetically) destroying evidence?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on November 18, 2017, 06:32:18 pm
Why should they get off for (hypothetically) destroying evidence?
Of course they shouldn't! (I assume you mean evidence of hypothetical doping offences?)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 18, 2017, 06:59:56 pm
Hypothetically speaking, Sky destroyed evidence that could have proved that doping had occurred. Clear enough?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 18, 2017, 09:04:43 pm
According to the Sky whistleblower, one of the Sky doctors (who had previously worked for UKAD) told him that UKAD had a file on Freeman because of previous suspicions.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on November 18, 2017, 09:27:09 pm
Is this a case of Freeman, as the medical expert, being a bad apple who was brought in by a slightly naive Brailsford as the BC Doctor who should have been a safe pair of hands (and who are laymen to tell doctors how to practice their profession, ie record keeping)? Or is it a deliberate choice of management who micromanage everything?

Or somewhere between the two - a willing blind eye whilst there are more important things to worry about?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 18, 2017, 09:51:06 pm
Quite deliberate, I'm sure. Just as Leinders employment was quite deliberate. Apparently Sutton frequently bullied Freeman into doing things that were unethical.

I doubt very much that Brailsford was ever naive.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: eck on November 18, 2017, 10:05:01 pm
Scots Law allows for a verdict of "not proven".
Which means, "We know you did it. We just can't prove it."
That.  :-X
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on November 20, 2017, 09:24:42 am
The really sad thing about all of this, is not what effect it has on professional racing (disastrous enough), but that if Wiggins, etal are not justly sanctioned, the public will taint the rest of us with the same belief that we all dope for racing or indeed any cycling.
I agree

There are people who I believe raced clean (Nicole Cooke for one).

It's a bloody terrible thing for them to be tainted with the rest.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on November 21, 2017, 10:28:49 am
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-5101799/Team-Sky-British-Cycling-drug-storm-erupts-again.html

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 21, 2017, 10:48:34 am
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-5101799/Team-Sky-British-Cycling-drug-storm-erupts-again.html

"In a BBC documentary, Shane Sutton, who coached Wiggins to Tour de France glory and until last year was technical director at British Cycling, defended Wiggins's use of TUEs. Asked if 'finding the gains might mean getting the TUE', Sutton said: 'Yes, because the rules allow you to do that.'

But on Monday Olympic star Katie Archibald and Paralympic gold medallist Jody Cundy expressed their angry disagreement with Sutton's comments. 'If that's the attitude people are taking to medical things, then it's a good job he's gone,' said Cundy.

Archibald described Sutton's comments as 'outrageous'. 'That's completely against the ethics of the sport,' she added. 'And attaching a term like "marginal gains" to that sort of practice is also quite distressing because it's almost a trademark British Cycling phrase, isn't it?'



Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Mr Larrington on November 21, 2017, 11:49:04 am
I just caught the end of the BBC thing.  SD Brailsford's entire schtick in front of the select committee was "some big boys did it then ran away".  Not very convincing.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 21, 2017, 12:45:50 pm
He basically says over and over "I don't know for sure, I have to rely on what I've been told by our doctor (and he's lost his laptop with his notes)".
It's such a contrast between the bombastic attitude of "We manage all the tiny little details which aggregate to a noticeable improvement - have you seen our super cool pillows?".

To me, they've always been just another bike team. With a giant pile of cash to throw around. Slipstream are much more credible IMO.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on November 21, 2017, 12:56:48 pm
I just caught the end of the BBC thing.  SD Brailsford's entire schtick in front of the select committee was "some big boys did it then ran away".  Not very convincing.
It certainly is not.

But the select committee - and the Court of YACF - dealt with this many moons ago.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on November 21, 2017, 01:36:44 pm
He basically says over and over "I don't know for sure, I have to rely on what I've been told by our doctor (and he's lost his laptop with his notes)".
It's such a contrast between the bombastic attitude of "We manage all the tiny little details which aggregate to a noticeable improvement - have you seen our super cool pillows?".

To me, they've always been just another bike team. With a giant pile of cash to throw around. Slipstream are much more credible IMO.

Really? The same Slipstream that JV repeatedly said he'd close if anyone on the team ever tested positive? And didn't. The same slipstream that Sir Brad rode for in his breakthrough year and was racing, like really racing, Lance. Vaughters did some pro-active bullet dodging there methinks saying he rode for them for a year with essentially zero oversight from Slipstream.

It's pro-cycling, no-one's got any credibility, the show just goes on. 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 21, 2017, 01:58:13 pm
I didn't say that they were 100% clean, just that they are significantly more credible than Sky IMO. No cortisone is a major deal to me.
Wiggins wasn't exactly out climbing anyone in 2009 - he got dropped on most of the major mountaintop finishes, and despite time trialling well he finished almost 4 minutes back.
But yes, I agree that pro cycling has very little credibility due to the past, and also the nature of the endeavour. Same is true of track and field.

I was somewhat surprised that documentary didn't have anything from Nicole Cooke in it.  She is scathing of British Cycling, and (maybe this is just me being naive) I think she genuinely was clean. They used footage of her crossing the line in Beijing during the program, but it's not like BC supported her in any way...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on November 21, 2017, 08:15:44 pm
Wiggins was outclimbing most of the field when he finished 4th. Sure he was dropped, but only by the race winners. 4 mins back on the winner in 2009 is actually a very credible result. That type of performance had been seen at the Giro where he was up there on the mountain stages till the end of week 2. Much of the difference can be attributed to the weight changes - quite significant changes - in moving from a track cyclist with a lot of power but quite a lot of weight to a road physique with a similar amount of power and much less (can't remember but it was in the order of 8-10 kg) weight which is considerable. The weight makes a huge difference and the increase in performance from his track focussed days is unsurprising there.

The good thing is that Sutton is gone, a man whose competitive instincts exceed his intelligence, and Dr Freeman who appears to have been seen as initially a safe pair of hands but really was a liability who was amenable to pushing the boundaries. Bear in mind that any TUE is also signed off by UCI so has more than just the team involved.

My personal view is that TUE should only be acceptable for out of competition tests and if you need a TUE for anything that is substantive prior to starting then you are not fit to race. Something acute requiring immediate intervention, e.g. a bee sting, would also be acceptable but should cause a withdrawal from racing.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 21, 2017, 08:28:19 pm
Endurance track riders traditionally are heavier than stage racers because they have extra muscle that let them put out more power but knocks them around on long climbs. So why are world class track riders carrying around extra weight that doesn't actually make them faster? Drop significant amounts of weight but maintain power output is quite possible for those of us further down the food chain with excessive fat but by somebody who is at Olympic level? It doesn't add up.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on November 21, 2017, 09:40:08 pm
Endurance track riders traditionally are heavier than stage racers because they have extra muscle that let them put out more power but knock them around on long climbs. So why are world class track riders carrying around extra weight that doesn't actually make them faster? Drop significant amounts of weight but maintain power output is quite possible for those of us further down the food chain with excessive fat but by somebody who is at Olympic level? It doesn't add up.

A 4km pursuit event surely has different requirements in terms of aerobic vs anaerobic power compared to a 200km tour stage. Since I took up rowing I've gained muscle mass, but I think my ability to produce long power has dropped.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on November 21, 2017, 09:41:29 pm
When I look at the website of the company that the Daily Mail article seems to refer to, I see things like bandages. No pharmaceuticals at all.

Most strange. What business would they have supplying T patches to anyone?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 21, 2017, 09:46:49 pm


The good thing is that Sutton is gone, a man whose competitive instincts exceed his intelligence, and Dr Freeman who appears to have been seen as initially a safe pair of hands but really was a liability who was amenable to pushing the boundaries. Bear in mind that any TUE is also signed off by UCI so has more than just the team involved.



Its quite interesting to filter this through what we know from several sources.

Wiggins's doctor at Garmin, Prentice Steffen, commented that whilst at Garmin, Wiggins was never a very 'medical rider. The implication being that whilst at Sky he was moved towards so being.

The whilstle-blower told of how Freeman was bullied into medicating riders....by Sutton.

Perhaps most interesting of all is the connection we can now make over the hiring of Leinders. When this was first exposed, Brailsford used the death of a Spanish soigneur on Team Sky as justification for hiring Leinders ("we realised we didn't know enough about riding in the heat....bla...bla...bla"). Today, I read that the death of Txema, the soigneur, was used to get rid of an *existing team doctor.....one who took an ethical stance and wouldn't give in to pressure to dope medicate riders unecessarily.

*I'll go back and find the names later

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 21, 2017, 09:48:17 pm
Endurance track riders do big miles and use road races as part of their training. Many pursuit riders crossed over to become professional road sprinters and domestiques. Only one became a good enough climber to win the Tour. Dropping weight to climb better is common, maintaining the same power output while doing so isn't normal (at Olympic level).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on November 21, 2017, 10:04:50 pm
Many pursuit riders crossed over to become professional road sprinters and domestiques. Only one became a good enough climber to win the Tour.

I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on November 21, 2017, 10:44:43 pm
Endurance track riders do big miles and use road races as part of their training. Many pursuit riders crossed over to become professional road sprinters and domestiques. Only one became a good enough climber to win the Tour. Dropping weight to climb better is common, maintaining the same power output while doing so isn't normal (at Olympic level).

A measure of an ultimate rouleur is the hour record. There are a few holders who won the Tour as well. Indurain would be the prime example. We don't see as many TTs these days, the public likes climbing stages.

I'm happy enough with a big tester holding on in the mountains with the help of an expensive team, and cementing victory against the clock. They should bring back the TTs.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on November 22, 2017, 06:57:35 am
The BBC documentary can be seen here (For those of us without iPlayer).
https://youtu.be/J1WTw6nYSmA

Shane Sutton is extremely slimey. Brailsford is very good at staying neutral until his little speech at the end.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 22, 2017, 08:17:33 am
Sutton really is very very thick, isn't he.  He (unwittingly, I'm sure) admitted that Sky used the TUE system to gain an advantage (ie. doping rather than treatment)

I remember when he declared at the DCMS that Sky is the cleanest team he'd ever worked with. He was then asked if he'd ever witnessed doping at any other team he'd worked with and he said "No".

What a dunce. He had no idea just how stupid he'd made himself look.

On the documentary, he laughed off bullying accusations by saying he is a 5'6" 60 year old.   This, the man in charge of team selection and allocation of resources....

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 22, 2017, 09:18:10 am
On the documentary, he laughed off bullying accusations by saying he is a 5'6" 60 year old.   This, the man in charge of team selection and allocation of resources....
Exactly.  How could I bully someone, when I have absolute power over their career and income?  ::-)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on November 22, 2017, 07:15:47 pm
Just re-watched this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzjQoxjqG_8 (Since it was referenced in the documentary).

I'm pretty sure that the TUE procedure that Wiggins describes is the one that's in place now and at the time when he got his TUEs, they did not need a specialists recommendation and only one doctor at UCI needed to sign off on it. (Who has now long resigned, most likely with a healthy bank account).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 22, 2017, 07:21:35 pm
Without checking, I think you are correct.

The scandal erupted over Froome's "fast track" TUE which he used to win a race because it had been signed off by zorzoli and hadnt been considered by the 3 person panel as per policy.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: mattc on November 23, 2017, 05:22:44 pm
I hope they only allow this "Fast Track" system for very important races, and very important riders.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TigaSefi on November 23, 2017, 05:31:12 pm
Get rid of TUE's completely. if you're not fit on race day, tough titties! Still race or drop out altogether!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on November 23, 2017, 05:35:26 pm
Well that is the thing.

According to various physicians, if Wiggins actually needed the drug with which he was treated, he should have been in hospital in an emergency....not getting ready to ride a WT  bike race....

...and win.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on November 23, 2017, 06:44:45 pm
I hope they only allow this "Fast Track" system for very important races, and very important riders.

I believe that's how it works [\irony]
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 23, 2017, 08:28:17 pm
Get rid of TUE's completely. if you're not fit on race day, tough titties! Still race or drop out altogether!
It makes life simpler, but it's not something that you can get through WADA.
Are they OK out of competition?
What about people who require medication for lifelong conditions?
Title: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TigaSefi on November 23, 2017, 08:36:18 pm
Get rid of TUE's completely. if you're not fit on race day, tough titties! Still race or drop out altogether!
It makes life simpler, but it's not something that you can get through WADA.
Are they OK out of competition?
What about people who require medication for lifelong conditions?

If you need medication, retire from said race or races and get treated under WADA. TUEs are just simply removed from WT and one day races. Aren’t people who have lifelong treatments already banned from competing professionally. Their system would never be clean enough.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: joy of essex on November 23, 2017, 08:39:37 pm
It  did seem to be an exercise in hanging Shane Sutton out to dry by Sky , BC and Brailsford.

It missed  out on  BC's neglect of  the Women's team in that period. The use of Nicole Cook winning in Bejing was unintentionally ironic.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 23, 2017, 08:44:11 pm
Perhaps people with lifelong conditions/ treatments shouldn't race if their medication is performance enhancing, which is why they would need a TUE.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on November 23, 2017, 10:06:26 pm
It missed  out on  BC's neglect of  the Women's team in that period. The use of Nicole Cook winning in Bejing was unintentionally ironic.

It annoyed me when they said it all started with the team sprint in Beijing, NC was the first gold medal there.
I know, I'm easily annoyed when it comes to british cycling.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on November 23, 2017, 10:19:26 pm

What about people who require medication for lifelong conditions?

If they require drugs that are considered performing enhancing, then they shouldn't compete.

For out of competition, there needs to be a substantial period between the drug and the competition (months).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on November 23, 2017, 10:25:53 pm
It missed  out on  BC's neglect of  the Women's team in that period. The use of Nicole Cook winning in Bejing was unintentionally ironic.

It annoyed me when they said it all started with the team sprint in Beijing, NC was the first gold medal there.
I know, I'm easily annoyed when it comes to british cycling.

I don't agree with the presence of top-flight professionals in the Olympics. I might be persuaded that there's a place for espoirs, as in soccer. The presence of pros in the  Commonwealth games is even worse. All it's done is to muddy the ethical waters.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on November 23, 2017, 11:14:11 pm

What about people who require medication for lifelong conditions?

If they require drugs that are considered performing enhancing, then they shouldn't compete.

For out of competition, there needs to be a substantial period between the drug and the competition (months).

For some anabolic steroids, I think there's evidence it should be lifetime.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 09:07:05 am
Get rid of TUE's completely. if you're not fit on race day, tough titties! Still race or drop out altogether!
It makes life simpler, but it's not something that you can get through WADA.
Are they OK out of competition?
What about people who require medication for lifelong conditions?

If you need medication, retire from said race or races and get treated under WADA. TUEs are just simply removed from WT and one day races. Aren’t people who have lifelong treatments already banned from competing professionally. Their system would never be clean enough.

TUEs are part of the WADA code.
And people who require lifelong medication aren't banned automatically.  There is a team of diabetcis in the pro peleton: https://www.teamnovonordisk.com/
My entire family requires thyroid medication because the gland is rubbish - does that mean we just can't compete?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TigaSefi on November 24, 2017, 09:11:23 am
Get rid of TUE's completely. if you're not fit on race day, tough titties! Still race or drop out altogether!
It makes life simpler, but it's not something that you can get through WADA.
Are they OK out of competition?
What about people who require medication for lifelong conditions?

If you need medication, retire from said race or races and get treated under WADA. TUEs are just simply removed from WT and one day races. Aren’t people who have lifelong treatments already banned from competing professionally. Their system would never be clean enough.

TUEs are part of the WADA code.
And people who require lifelong medication aren't banned automatically.  There is a team of diabetcis in the pro peleton: https://www.teamnovonordisk.com/
My entire family requires thyroid medication because the gland is rubbish - does that mean we just can't compete?

By the letter of the law (rules) you can’t compete with WT riders.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on November 24, 2017, 09:12:21 am
Get rid of TUE's completely. if you're not fit on race day, tough titties! Still race or drop out altogether!
It makes life simpler, but it's not something that you can get through WADA.
Are they OK out of competition?
What about people who require medication for lifelong conditions?

If you need medication, retire from said race or races and get treated under WADA. TUEs are just simply removed from WT and one day races. Aren’t people who have lifelong treatments already banned from competing professionally. Their system would never be clean enough.

TUEs are part of the WADA code.
And people who require lifelong medication aren't banned automatically.  There is a team of diabetcis in the pro peleton: https://www.teamnovonordisk.com/
My entire family requires thyroid medication because the gland is rubbish - does that mean we just can't compete?

Not yet, you're only on WADA's watch list  ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 09:35:25 am
Thyroid is particularly awkward, because misuse of the synthetic hormone can cause the problems that mean you need synthetic hormone for the rest of your life. So you can literally take a healthy person, feed them medicine until their body breaks, and then they require the medicine forever. That's messed up. But, if you are a pro athlete, and then your doctor says you have a legit medical condition that's easily managed, but that you're not allowed to take the medication for because then you lose your livelihood, that's messed up too. Imagine the conversation - "you've got thyroid cancer. The good news is that it's localised and easily solved, you will be perfectly healthy in 6 months. The bad news is that you can't race ever again because your medication is on the banned list."
I was diagnosed with Graves disease at 28 (with a resting HR of 122!). My daughter has just been diagnosed aged 8, which makes her the 5th generation that we know of to have had thyroid issues.

PS if it were to be banned, then it's not just I can't ride with WT, but I can't get a Cat 4 BC license (or ride local TTs?).
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on November 24, 2017, 09:46:25 am
Thyroid is particularly awkward, because misuse of the synthetic hormone can cause the problems that mean you need synthetic hormone for the rest of your life. So you can literally take a healthy person, feed them medicine until their body breaks, and then they require the medicine forever. That's messed up. But, if you are a pro athlete, and then your doctor says you have a legit medical condition that's easily managed, but that you're not allowed to take the medication for because then you lose your livelihood, that's messed up too. Imagine the conversation - "you've got thyroid cancer. The good news is that it's localised and easily solved, you will be perfectly healthy in 6 months. The bad news is that you can't race ever again because your medication is on the banned list."
I was diagnosed with Graves disease at 28 (with a resting HR of 122!). My daughter has just been diagnosed aged 8, which makes her the 5th generation that we know of to have had thyroid issues.

PS if it were to be banned, then it's not just I can't ride with WT, but I can't get a Cat 4 BC license (or ride local TTs?).

If it were banned you'd need a TUE to ride Cat 4 and TT's.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TigaSefi on November 24, 2017, 09:49:27 am
Thyroid is particularly awkward, because misuse of the synthetic hormone can cause the problems that mean you need synthetic hormone for the rest of your life. So you can literally take a healthy person, feed them medicine until their body breaks, and then they require the medicine forever. That's messed up. But, if you are a pro athlete, and then your doctor says you have a legit medical condition that's easily managed, but that you're not allowed to take the medication for because then you lose your livelihood, that's messed up too. Imagine the conversation - "you've got thyroid cancer. The good news is that it's localised and easily solved, you will be perfectly healthy in 6 months. The bad news is that you can't race ever again because your medication is on the banned list."
I was diagnosed with Graves disease at 28 (with a resting HR of 122!). My daughter has just been diagnosed aged 8, which makes her the 5th generation that we know of to have had thyroid issues.

PS if it were to be banned, then it's not just I can't ride with WT, but I can't get a Cat 4 BC license (or ride local TTs?).

If it were banned you'd need a TUE to ride Cat 4 and TT's.

And therefore would be viewed with suspicion along with Wiggins etc!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 11:01:07 am
Thyroid is particularly awkward, because misuse of the synthetic hormone can cause the problems that mean you need synthetic hormone for the rest of your life. So you can literally take a healthy person, feed them medicine until their body breaks, and then they require the medicine forever. That's messed up. But, if you are a pro athlete, and then your doctor says you have a legit medical condition that's easily managed, but that you're not allowed to take the medication for because then you lose your livelihood, that's messed up too. Imagine the conversation - "you've got thyroid cancer. The good news is that it's localised and easily solved, you will be perfectly healthy in 6 months. The bad news is that you can't race ever again because your medication is on the banned list."
I was diagnosed with Graves disease at 28 (with a resting HR of 122!). My daughter has just been diagnosed aged 8, which makes her the 5th generation that we know of to have had thyroid issues.

PS if it were to be banned, then it's not just I can't ride with WT, but I can't get a Cat 4 BC license (or ride local TTs?).

If it were banned you'd need a TUE to ride Cat 4 and TT's.

And therefore would be viewed with suspicion along with Wiggins etc!
Hence why I find this less black and white than most. I can't stop taking my thyroxine for a few weeks so I can ride TTs! :) And it would suck if my daughter is never allowed to play competitive sport.
But I understand why they want to monitor it and why TUEs (especially for stuff that has previously been used to dope) have such a bad rep.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on November 24, 2017, 11:23:36 am
DuncanM, I'm sure we all understand that there are people such as yourself and your daughter who have genuine long-term conditions that require medication, and those people are who the TUE system is designed for - eg Alex Dowsett has a needle exemption because of his haemophilia and AIUI requires hormone therapy to prevent potentially fatal bleeding in a crash.

But that's not what's being discussed here. Dowsett is not the one under suspicion.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 12:47:47 pm
I agree that Dowsett or myself might be the sort of person for whom TUE is designed. And it's even more annoying that Sky then use it to game the system, because it brings all TUEs into disrepute.
It also means that at least 2 people on this thread have said that all TUEs should be banned, and if you can't compete without your medication, that's just tough. I understand why that's appealing, I'm just trying to provide the counterpoint.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 24, 2017, 01:08:14 pm
I was disadvantaged in my racing career because I don't have a naturally high hemocrit level (which aids sustained power output) or a naturally high testosterone level (which aids strength development and recovery). Should I take medication to correct/ increase those levels? No, I accept that I am unable to naturally put out the performance that would let me be a professional cyclist. Does it change anything if I had a short-term lowering of those levels, perhaps due to overtraining or illness?

By the way, my partner HK was diagnosed with Graves ages ago. She used to race at a decent level but stopped racing sometime after being diagnosed. She still does a significant number of Audax miles though.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 02:58:08 pm
There's a difference between genetically having a lower ceiling than a competitor and having a condition that affects your ability to live (eg Dowsett could die if he doesn't take his meds and gets cut in a crash).
And yeah, IMO, get a bee sting which makes you swell up, or a saddle sore, or allergies? HTFU or quit the race.

Graves was unpleasant. When it came back after the initial treatment I had my thyroid removed - now I am drug dependant.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 24, 2017, 03:06:36 pm
If your medical treatment isn't performance enhancing, go ahead, take it and race. If your treatment is performance enhancing when taken in excessive quantities or by a healthy athlete, then you don't get to race at any significant level.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 03:43:42 pm
If your medical treatment isn't performance enhancing, go ahead, take it and race. If your treatment is performance enhancing when taken in excessive quantities or by a healthy athlete, then you don't get to race at any significant level.
Fixed :). BC cat 4, local club TT or cross race are subject to the same rules.
I believe WADA have thyroxine on the watch list because of reports of athletes using it to turn up their metabolism and burn weight out of competition. Idiots.  ::-)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 24, 2017, 04:11:46 pm
Let me know when you get drug-tested at a local club TT.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 04:19:33 pm
It's been done.  This guy was clearly targeted for some reason (presumably a tip-off). http://road.cc/content/news/219702-british-amateur-cyclist-aged-55-handed-two-year-doping-ban

It's kinda beside the point though. If the rules say that taking my drugs is cheating, then to my mind, I have 2 choices - stop taking the drugs (not happening for obvious reasons) or stop competing. Just carrying on assuming I won't get tested is for all intents and purposes cheating. It also means that anyone with the same condition cannot aspire to any level of sporting competition. That's ridiculous.
Besides, imagine getting done for doping while doing a 29 minute 10! ;)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 24, 2017, 04:41:19 pm
We have different definitions of a local club TT. I think of them as the mid-week TTs intended for the members of the organising club. That fellow was picked up at an open event typically ridden by members of several clubs with the results logged by CTT for BAR, etc. Club level racing is like 'hit and giggles' cricket - it doesn't even count for bragging rights, so the concept of cheating is pretty much meaningless.

There are heaps of reasons why somebody might not be able to take part in their preferred pastime of low-level racing. Performance enhancing medication being necessary for their health is just another reason.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: simonp on November 24, 2017, 04:52:12 pm
I have had to stop taking a prescribed medication in order to compete.

Seemed simpler than getting a TUE.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 05:10:25 pm
There are heaps of reasons why somebody might not be able to take part in their preferred pastime of low-level racing. Performance enhancing medication being necessary for their health is just another reason.

Sure, but creating another reason to restrict a grass roots person as an alternative to enforcing the rules on the pros properly seems draconian to me. It's not like it'll stop the pros from gaming the system (probably using drugs that are yet to be banned, or taking in small enough dosages to be undetectable).
I guess you could create 1 rule for anyone in the whereabouts system and another for everyone else, if you really do want to destroy the TUE system?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 24, 2017, 05:37:41 pm
I believe the rules for the pros should be 'No TUE' ever. If the required medical treatment is performance enhancing, they don't race at all. Low level racing may well allow TUEs as currently. You will still get folk (pros or otherwise) trying to dope, even with no money at stake.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 06:20:01 pm
DuncanM, I'm sure we all understand that there are people such as yourself and your daughter who have genuine long-term conditions that require medication, and those people are who the TUE system is designed for - eg Alex Dowsett has a needle exemption because of his haemophilia and AIUI requires hormone therapy to prevent potentially fatal bleeding in a crash.
But that's not what's being discussed here. Dowsett is not the one under suspicion.
I believe the rules for the pros should be 'No TUE' ever. If the required medical treatment is performance enhancing, they don't race at all. Low level racing may well allow TUEs as currently. You will still get folk (pros or otherwise) trying to dope, even with no money at stake.
You want to ban all haemophiliacs from pro cycling (or, if this is at the Wada level, all pro sport)? Should thyroxine be decided to be performance enhancing, you would just ban all hypothyroid people from pro sport? And if WADA decide that other medical products that individuals need are actually performance enhancing then you would happily ban them too.
After banning all those people who have done nothing wrong, you agree it won't stop the professionals from doping. What's the point?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 24, 2017, 06:24:07 pm
Because it stops the edge cases (e.g. Wiggo's TUEs) that have brought us to this point in the thread.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 06:30:20 pm
Because it stops the edge cases (e.g. Wiggo's TUEs) that has brought us to this point in the thread.
Wiggo's "edge cases" wouldn't be legal under the current TUE rules. You need independent doctors to sign it off now. Whether you trust the UCI to actually apply the rules is another question entirely...

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: pdm on November 24, 2017, 06:38:23 pm
You want to ban all haemophiliacs from pro cycling (or, if this is at the Wada level, all pro sport)? Should thyroxine be decided to be performance enhancing, you would just ban all hypothyroid people from pro sport? And if WADA decide that other medical products that individuals need are actually performance enhancing then you would happily ban them too.
After banning all those people who have done nothing wrong, you agree it won't stop the professionals from doping. What's the point?

FWIW,
The treatment for haemophilia is either clotting factor VIII or clotting factor IX depending on type or disease, neither of which are, or ever will be, remotely performance enhancing - they do need to be given intravenously. (Hence need for an "allow needles" exemption)
Thyroxine is not currently on the WADA list of performance enhancing substances.

Both need to be prescribed by a doctor but neither need TUEs.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Jakob on November 24, 2017, 07:36:28 pm
It missed  out on  BC's neglect of  the Women's team in that period. The use of Nicole Cook winning in Bejing was unintentionally ironic.

It annoyed me when they said it all started with the team sprint in Beijing, NC was the first gold medal there.
I know, I'm easily annoyed when it comes to british cycling.

I don't agree with the presence of top-flight professionals in the Olympics. I might be persuaded that there's a place for espoirs, as in soccer. The presence of pros in the  Commonwealth games is even worse. All it's done is to muddy the ethical waters.

I know this is a completely different issue, but the lines between professionals and amateurs are now so blurred that I don't see how that could be enforced. You would have to ban all sponsorship of any sort.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Peter on November 24, 2017, 07:46:50 pm
Nothing wrong with that.  Bring back the FA Amateur Cup, too.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 24, 2017, 07:57:05 pm
You want to ban all haemophiliacs from pro cycling (or, if this is at the Wada level, all pro sport)? Should thyroxine be decided to be performance enhancing, you would just ban all hypothyroid people from pro sport? And if WADA decide that other medical products that individuals need are actually performance enhancing then you would happily ban them too.
After banning all those people who have done nothing wrong, you agree it won't stop the professionals from doping. What's the point?

FWIW,
The treatment for haemophilia is either clotting factor VIII or clotting factor IX depending on type or disease, neither of which are, or ever will be, remotely performance enhancing - they do need to be given intravenously.
Thyroxine is not currently on the WADA list of performance enhancing substances.

Both need to be prescribed by a doctor but neither need TUEs.
Thyroxine is currently not on the banned list despite USADA and UKAD fighting for it to be banned: http://roidvisor.com/wada-to-athletes-go-ahead-use-t3-thyroid-drugs-to-enhance-your-performance/
How long it remains legal without a TUE is clearly in doubt given the documented abuses.
I was confused by cityoen's post, so I've checked now... Needles are banned in cycling, but there are some exemptions listed in the rules - what he has and takes is described in here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/get-inspired/32434988
I assume the same exemption (13.3.052) applies to the novo nordisk team (they are a diabetic team).
http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/26/69/13-SEC-20150101-E_English.pdf
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on November 24, 2017, 08:41:12 pm
It's interesting that this discussion has turned towards thyroid medication because The Secret Pro has suggested in his latest article for Cycling Tips that people are using thyroid medication to decrease their mass. Whilst legal at the moment he suggests it's a grey area and is potentially going to give longer term health issues to those riders abusing this medication. See here: https://cyclingtips.com/2017/11/the-secret-pro-sketchy-thyroids-confused-commissaires-and-more/

Quote
What is potentially more concerning is the rumoured use of thyroid medication. It hasn’t gotten much press but there’s lots of chatter about it. It’s a hormone that is not even on the watched list, it basically speeds up thyroid function massively making your metabolism go through the roof allowing guys to drop massive amounts of weight.

These days, body weight is where guys are getting the sketchiest gains. Or losses, I guess. Guys that used to be rouleurs are dropping 10kg and taking on the lightweights. If they’re doing it with thyroid meds, it’s something that will haunt these guys for life because taking it unnecessarily (some guys do actually have genuine hypothyroidism) will give you hypothyroidism. Stop taking it and you will become very fat very quickly. There is a large problem in America with teenage girls taking it as a way to keep weight off.

Racing grand tours and training like maniacs can already slow thyroid function; it’s one of the reasons we self-destruct. If they are to ban the use of thyroid medication they will have to work out a way to decipher between those who have a genuine thyroid problem or those who have given themselves one from living in the grey area. It has echoes of the cortisone issue, in that it can be used legitimately but prevalence among us elite athletes seems awfully high.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Exit Stage Left on November 24, 2017, 09:53:27 pm
It missed  out on  BC's neglect of  the Women's team in that period. The use of Nicole Cook winning in Bejing was unintentionally ironic.

It annoyed me when they said it all started with the team sprint in Beijing, NC was the first gold medal there.
I know, I'm easily annoyed when it comes to british cycling.

I don't agree with the presence of top-flight professionals in the Olympics. I might be persuaded that there's a place for espoirs, as in soccer. The presence of pros in the  Commonwealth games is even worse. All it's done is to muddy the ethical waters.

I know this is a completely different issue, but the lines between professionals and amateurs are now so blurred that I don't see how that could be enforced. You would have to ban all sponsorship of any sort.

You don't have to accept the heroes offered to you by the media. You certainly don't need to spend time trying to find flaws in the ones you are presented with.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on November 24, 2017, 10:26:32 pm
If anyone is interested Richard Williams makes some good points in The Guardian about TUEs and also raises the question whether TUEs should be abolished.

Use of TUEs negate an intrinsic part of sport – the overcoming of exhaustion

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2017/nov/24/use-of-teus-negate-sport-overcoming-exhaustion
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on November 24, 2017, 10:31:35 pm
Because it stops the edge cases (e.g. Wiggo's TUEs) that has brought us to this point in the thread.
Wiggo's "edge cases" wouldn't be legal under the current TUE rules. You need independent doctors to sign it off now. Whether you trust the UCI to actually apply the rules is another question entirely...

So who gets the bungs now? Froome seemed to get a fast-track TUE when he wanted it not so long ago.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on November 25, 2017, 06:53:21 pm
You want to ban all haemophiliacs from pro cycling (or, if this is at the Wada level, all pro sport)? Should thyroxine be decided to be performance enhancing, you would just ban all hypothyroid people from pro sport? And if WADA decide that other medical products that individuals need are actually performance enhancing then you would happily ban them too.
After banning all those people who have done nothing wrong, you agree it won't stop the professionals from doping. What's the point?

FWIW,
The treatment for haemophilia is either clotting factor VIII or clotting factor IX depending on type or disease, neither of which are, or ever will be, remotely performance enhancing - they do need to be given intravenously. (Hence need for an "allow needles" exemption)
Thyroxine is not currently on the WADA list of performance enhancing substances.

Both need to be prescribed by a doctor but neither need TUEs.

Yes, I looked this up and meant to post a clarification but hadn’t got round to it yet. I thought the treatment Dowsett used was a hormone but it’s not, it’s a protein. The reason for the TUE is that it needs to be administered by injection.

Clearly this is not an ‘edge’ case. There is no ‘performance enhancing’ element.


Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on November 25, 2017, 07:54:40 pm
Some hormones are proteins. (Because biology is confusing) Dowsett may be on any one of a number of treatments for haemophilia. Potentially recombinant FVIII, maybe recombinant FVII. I don't recall if FIX is available as a therapy. Depends on whether it is Haemophilia A or B.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on November 25, 2017, 08:45:46 pm
According to the article I linked above,
Quote
Dowsett - who has special dispensation to inject himself every 48 hours with an engineered version of the clotting protein Factor VIII as his body doesn't naturally produce it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/get-inspired/32434988
The rules don't require a TUE for an injection, they include a special clause that allows certain types of injections:
Quote
. The injection must be reported immediately and in writing not later than 24
hours afterwards to the UCI Doctor (via email [medical@uci.ch] or fax [+41 24
468 59 48]), except for riders
a. With a valid TUE;
b. Vaccination
c. When the injection is received during hospital treatment or clinical
examination;
d. When normal practice is that the patient with a disease requiring injections
injects him/herself.
It's all on page 21 of this document:
http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/26/69/13-SEC-20150101-E_English.pdf
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: David Martin on November 25, 2017, 09:40:27 pm
That would be Haemophilia A then.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sg37409 on December 06, 2017, 01:10:40 pm
Not strictly Sky, but confirming my disappointment in ex-UCI lead, Brian Cookson.

Sir Bradley Wiggins' reputation 'must be reinstated' - ex-UCI boss Brian Cookson (http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/42246162)
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on December 06, 2017, 06:03:26 pm
Given he says he has no idea what was in the package and that no 'anti-doping violation' took place he is clearly struggling with logic... unless you can do what you like as long as no one can prove it?

In my view, they'd do well to keep him as far as possible from the launches of major events.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: αdαmsκι on December 13, 2017, 07:09:18 am
Nothing to see here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froome-returns-adverse-analytical-finding-for-salbutamol/
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 13, 2017, 07:12:32 am
Just think how fast he could go if he wasn't ill enough to need treatment.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: TigaSefi on December 13, 2017, 07:31:01 am
Let’s not be hasty.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Karla on December 13, 2017, 08:36:51 am
Just imagine if his inhaler forces him to leave cycling:

"Froome goes out with an extra big puff"  :demon:
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: sojournermike on December 13, 2017, 08:40:37 am
Just think how fast he could go if he wasn't ill enough to need treatment.

:)

Asthma seems that be a necessary precondition for high performance sport these days. I told my you ngestbthat - gives her hope that with suitable medications n she can level the playing field with anyone...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on December 13, 2017, 09:13:52 am
Petacchi and Ulissi are probably watching with interest, fair play says a ban is the only option, but this is the UCI.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: ijsbrand on December 13, 2017, 09:38:52 am
WADA set a threshold of 1000 ng/ml, just so anyone needing a therapeutic dose of salbutamol could use it. Froome apparently had 2000 ng/ml in his piss. Cue: a long drawn out lawsuit showing Froome has a special metabolism too, so numbers could become that high.


Anyway, the stuff seems to have a known positive effect on submaximal exercise endurance in trained athletes. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10926623) Provided those would take high doses.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on December 13, 2017, 10:06:52 am
And still the Russians whine that people are picking on them!
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on December 13, 2017, 10:59:28 am
Just think how fast he could go if he wasn't ill enough to need treatment.

I was thinking much the same thing while listening to the report on the radio this morning. They were saying he had a severe asthma attack so was taking the medication on doctor's advice... was it doctor's advice to take enough medicine to make sure he could win the race? Some serious cognitive dissonance going on at Team Sky.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 13, 2017, 11:27:19 am
Veloman has been a bit quiet recently. Can't imagine why. There has been plenty to talk about.   ;)

I see Brailsford is already spinning away.  Not sure he's going to get away with it this time.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on December 13, 2017, 11:47:35 am
All the top riders seem to be asthmatic. I read a study somewhere that the quantity of training required to be a top cyclist created the conditions that cause asthma, but I'm not in a position to be able to verify that. I know that Indurain was one who used it.

How much salbutamol do you need to take to get above 1000 ng/ml? Is it a case that you are allowed 4 puffs a day, but if you take 6 then you go over the limit?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: IJL on December 13, 2017, 11:48:08 am
From WADA

Quote
The presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is presumed not to be an intended therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) unless the Athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of the use of the therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above.


Not sure if the rules have changed since Petachi's ban but it leave's a fair bit of wiggle room, on the other hand if its still rumbling on does it mean that the pharmacokinetic tests didn't support Froome's case ?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on December 13, 2017, 11:54:32 am
How much salbutamol do you need to take to get above 1000 ng/ml? Is it a case that you are allowed 4 puffs a day, but if you take 6 then you go over the limit?

I heard on the radio this morning that it's around 16 puffs on an inhaler per day. I don't know how accurate that is but it's a lot of puffs. Even when she's having a bad attack, my wife never takes that much. If it got so bad as to need that many puffs in one day, she'd be in hospital, not racing her bike up Spanish mountains.

Clearly it is going to vary between individuals, but when you've got double the legal limit in your blood, it's hard to explain that away as being a quirk of your metabolism.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on December 13, 2017, 11:56:25 am
How much salbutamol do you need to take to get above 1000 ng/ml? Is it a case that you are allowed 4 puffs a day, but if you take 6 then you go over the limit?

It depends on the inhaler dose and your metabolism but I've seen numbers bandied about of 16 puffs will keep you under, excretion is a non-linear response but to double the permissible amount it's not an extra puff or two.

x-post with citoyen
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: ijsbrand on December 13, 2017, 12:00:35 pm
Nibali, who has asthma too, states (http://m.tuttobiciweb.it/index.php?page=news&cod=107398): it was raining those days. There were no pollen in the air bothering me. I did not need any Ventolin.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 13, 2017, 12:03:10 pm
How much salbutamol do you need to take to get above 1000 ng/ml? Is it a case that you are allowed 4 puffs a day, but if you take 6 then you go over the limit?

I heard on the radio this morning that it's around 16 puffs on an inhaler per day. I don't know how accurate that is but it's a lot of puffs. Even when she's having a bad attack, my wife never takes that much. If it got so bad as to need that many puffs in one day, she'd be in hospital, not racing her bike up Spanish mountains.

Clearly it is going to vary between individuals, but when you've got double the legal limit in your blood, it's hard to explain that away as being a quirk of your metabolism
.

Oh I dont know. People bought the Bilharzia bullshit, didn't they  ;D

Besides, its all going to be ok. Brailsford has said that the metabolism thing is far too complicated for us to understand, and Team Sky will look into it all and explain it to us later.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on December 13, 2017, 12:06:08 pm
Not sure if the rules have changed since Petachi's ban but it leave's a fair bit of wiggle room, on the other hand if its still rumbling on does it mean that the pharmacokinetic tests didn't support Froome's case ?

It's unclear from the wording of WADA's statement whether any such tests have been conducted yet. Is it not merely a statement of the results of the initial urine test, as confirmed by the B sample?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Si S on December 13, 2017, 12:16:28 pm
Not sure if the rules have changed since Petachi's ban but it leave's a fair bit of wiggle room, on the other hand if its still rumbling on does it mean that the pharmacokinetic tests didn't support Froome's case ?

It's unclear from the wording of WADA's statement whether any such tests have been conducted yet. Is it not merely a statement of the results of the initial urine test, as confirmed by the B sample?

That's my understanding, it took a long time for Ulissi's pharmokinetic study to be performed at Luasanne, 8 months between finding and back dated ban. It could make next season very interesting for him, and if Sky drag it out long enough he could well have an asterisk against every GT  ;D
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: citoyen on December 13, 2017, 12:33:06 pm
Besides, its all going to be ok. Brailsford has said that the metabolism thing is far too complicated for us to understand, and Team Sky will look into it all and explain it to us later.

Maybe whatever he was taking it in conjunction with affected the way his body absorbed the salbutamol?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: hillbilly on December 13, 2017, 12:47:12 pm
Pity.  I quite like the role he carved out as the sport's ambassador.  A nice chap, articulate and fair minded.  But now tainted, regardless of the eventual outcome based on technical and process arguments from his legal team and expert. 
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on December 13, 2017, 02:25:22 pm
Nibali, who has asthma too, states (http://m.tuttobiciweb.it/index.php?page=news&cod=107398): it was raining those days. There were no pollen in the air bothering me. I did not need any Ventolin.
There was a certain amount of "I've been misquoted" coming from Nibali now. ;)
Plus temperature change (from say a hot day to a cold one) is something that triggers asthma in some people (not just pollen).

However it ends up, this is going to go on for ages, and it's not good for the sport. :(
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on December 13, 2017, 02:40:36 pm
Which is why these leaks and for that matter total transparency by the various governing bodies are harmful. Trial by media or mob is the new normal. No one cares about facts or process or wrongdoing or experts, just gut instinct and clickbait and what celebrities think (Nibali in this case, Millar in the last) and cutting tall poppies.

The public has proven itself unable to distinguish between allowed use of a specified substance and doping, and even between an adverse analytical finding and doping. Leaks wreck reputations in this environment.

INRNG has a summarising piece up (http://inrng.com/2017/12/chris-froomes-salbutamol-case/), by the way.

I suppose this must have been an error by Sky or Froome, unless the high urine concentration was caused by his metabolism and circumstances despite a dose below the allowed threshold – in which case he’s flatly innocent of all wrong technical and otherwise, not that the baying crowd will ever accept that. But since Froome has known about this for nearly three months, you’d expect him and Sky to already have proven to their satisfaction how he responds to salbutamol. Then again, maybe they have done that and we’re yet to know – the leak has forced a premature statement (https://www.teamsky.com/article/ts-statement) but there’s surely more to come.

2000 ng/ml is a nice round number, isn’t it? Not Petacchi’s 1320 ng/ml. Easy to remember.

I question what the Petacchi case can tell us, because salbutamol has since been downgraded from needing a TUE to being a specified substance despite doping regs generally getting tougher. This tells you something else about salbutamol if you think hard.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 13, 2017, 02:47:55 pm
Which is why these leaks and for that matter total transparency by the various governing bodies are harmful.

Remember Contador's ban for Clenbutarol?

How did that come about?  Oh yes. The UCI tried to bury it, and it only came to light after a leak.  You don't seem to understand the corrupt nature of sports governing bodies, do you.

Quote
Trial by media or mob is the new normal. No one cares about facts or process or wrongdoing or experts, just gut instinct

You can include yourself in this because the very next thing you say is...

Quote
I suppose this must have been an error by Sky or Froome, unless the high urine concentration was caused by his metabolism and circumstances despite a dose below the allowed threshold – in which case he’s flatly innocent of all wrong technical and otherwise, not that the baying crowd will ever accept that. But since Froome has known about this for nearly three months, you’d expect him and Sky to already have proven to their satisfaction how he responds to salbutamol. Then again, maybe they have done that and we’re yet to know – the leak has forced a premature statement (https://www.teamsky.com/article/ts-statement) but there’s surely more to come.

2000 ng/ml is a nice round number, isn’t it? Not Petacchi’s 1320 ng/ml. Easy to remember.

So the general public aren't allowed by you to make suppositions, but you give yourself permission.   ;D ;D ;D

Best follow your own advice. Be quiet, and wait until more details emerge.

Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: trekker12 on December 13, 2017, 02:54:03 pm
Pity.  I quite like the role he carved out as the sport's ambassador.  A nice chap, articulate and fair minded.  But now tainted, regardless of the eventual outcome based on technical and process arguments from his legal team and expert.

Although, when Contador rode his final Vuelta last year he was regarded as a hero in his own country and the tainted meat thing and subsequent ban hardly got mentioned.

The British press aren't quite so kind on our sporting heroes though especially those who aren't exactly seen as particularly British. Not that he will be particularly bothered and he wasn't going to anyway but his chances of winning SPOTY have just disappeared.

I suspect he will get a slap on the wrist and the headlines are louder than the reality but it will now always get mentioned every time he wins something and the Triple Crown to include the Giro next year will now be regarded with suspicion.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on December 13, 2017, 03:34:37 pm
I cannot see a possibility for a slap on the wrist. Either he shows he took salbutamol below the allowed dose or he gets his Vuelta stripped and a ban of months to years (although presumably toward the low end of that: the Norwegian skier Johnsrud Sundby recently got a two-month ban for unjustified salbutamol above 1000 ng/ml in his urine in a case where the CAS criticised this salbutamol rule).

Although 2000 ng/ml sounds greatly higher than the presumably already high allowable urine concentration, there’s still a possibility for Froome to show that his urine legitimately had that concentration of salbutamol, which is why this AAF should not be in the public domain. If he can’t, people won’t make much of a distinction between salbutamol, even a mistakenly high dose of salbutamol, and EPO. We’re at that level of inanity, unfortunately.

It’s interesting to consider whether the new media-induced terror of applying for a TUE provoked this AAF, since he’d have been allowed any sane dose of salbutamol with a TUE.

Cycling is being ruined by this combination of overzealous rules, leaks of confidential process, and trial by media. It’s become nigh on impossible to navigate these booby traps while competing at the top. Essentially the rules are constantly changing. Perhaps salvation lies in amateur sport, but if so, what a shame that we cannot have nice things.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 13, 2017, 03:45:58 pm
Bollocks
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Samuel D on December 13, 2017, 03:52:10 pm
Bollocks

All of it?

I’d forgotten this thread was you doing this. I can’t be bothered with that attitude or style of discourse, so learn some manners or you’ll be talking to yourself some more.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Sergeant Pluck on December 13, 2017, 04:05:23 pm
Pity.  I quite like the role he carved out as the sport's ambassador.  A nice chap, articulate and fair minded.  But now tainted, regardless of the eventual outcome based on technical and process arguments from his legal team and expert. 

Agreed, very sad whatever the outcome. And surely, doctor's advice or not, Froome must have known when he was pushing the limits. More so as I suspect that it is hard to achieve such salbutamol levels in the urine by inhaling it.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: toontra on December 13, 2017, 04:06:05 pm
Cycling is being ruined by this combination of overzealous rules, leaks of confidential process, and trial by media. It’s become nigh on impossible to navigate these booby traps while competing at the top.

I thought it was drug cheating that was ruining the sport, not leaks to the press.
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 13, 2017, 04:09:10 pm
Bollocks

All of it?

I’d forgotten this thread was you doing this. I can’t be bothered with that attitude or style of discourse, so learn some manners or you’ll be talking to yourself some more.

Well I won't really be talking to myself, will I.  Just not you.  How will I ever cope.

But yes, to answer your question, apart from your first sentence, pretty much all bollocks as usual.

Quote
Although 2000 ng/ml sounds greatly higher than the presumably already high allowable urine concentration, there’s still a possibility for Froome to show that his urine legitimately had that concentration of salbutamol, which is why this AAF should not be in the public domain. If he can’t, people won’t make much of a distinction between salbutamol, even a mistakenly high dose of salbutamol, and EPO. We’re at that level of inanity, unfortunately.

It doesn't sound greatly higher, it is greatly higher. Its twice as high.  Given that the threshold is set above a therapeutic dose, getting to double the limit takes some explaining away.

Quote
It’s interesting to consider whether the new media-induced terror of applying for a TUE provoked this AAF, since he’d have been allowed any sane dose of salbutamol with a TUE.

There is no media-induced terror of applying for a TUE. There is a media-induced terror of trying to abuse the TUE system.

Quote
Cycling is being ruined by this combination of overzealous rules, leaks of confidential process, and trial by media. It’s become nigh on impossible to navigate these booby traps while competing at the top. Essentially the rules are constantly changing. Perhaps salvation lies in amateur sport, but if so, what a shame that we cannot have nice things.

Which rules are constantly changing?
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: DuncanM on December 13, 2017, 04:15:09 pm
This is interesting:
https://sportsscientists.com/2017/12/brief-thoughts-froomes-salbutamol-result/

Somewhere, someone has fscked up. The most charitable answer, that it's just too many inhaler puffs, means Froome + the doctor screwed up horribly. Unless they can demonstrate in a lab setting that a permitted dose causes this urine concentration, he should be banned. The innr ring article shows a graph which demonstrates this as a possibility. The worst possible screw up is that it was as a result of some other doping (see the jorg jacshe tweet about the blood bag residue). If that's the case, I doubt we'll ever find out.
Old school cycling has numbers stories of being caught because the cheating was messed up. Who was it who produced a urine sample that proved he was pregnant? Or got one from the mechanic, who was doped up to the eyeballs to drive across europe all night? That was back when it was assumed everyone was doped though, and being caught didn't have such consequences...
Title: Re: Sky - gaming the system?
Post by: Hot Flatus on December 13, 2017, 04:29:56 pm
This is interesting:
https://sportsscientists.com/2017/12/brief-thoughts-froomes-salbutamol-result/

Somewhere, someone has fscked up. The most charitable answer, that it's just too many inhaler puffs, means Froome + the doctor screwed up horribly. Unless they can demonstrate in a lab setting that a permitted dose causes this urine concentration, he should be banned. The innr ring article shows a graph which demonstrates this as a possibility. The worst possible screw up is that it was as a result of some other doping (see the jorg jacshe tweet about the blood bag residue). If that's the case, I doubt we'll ever find out.
Old school cycling has numbers stories of being caught because the cheating was messed up. Who was it who produced a urine sample that proved he was pregnant? Or got one from the mechanic, who was doped up to the eyeballs to drive acr