DS Forums

 
 

The Pro Cycling Thread (Part 2)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 15-07-2013, 22:27
Lucidia2011
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Mars
Posts: 6,393
Nothing like an co-sponsor losing the plot.


Wonder if he visits the Clinic too....

http://www.cyclismas.com/biscuits/ol...tter-meltdown/
Lucidia2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 15-07-2013, 22:54
SJB 2007
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dagenham, Essex.
Posts: 940
Must be something he's taken....
SJB 2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 06:29
The Wulfrunian
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,272
I feel sorry for Froome and Brailsford. They are just victims of their own success in a sport that is now chronically riddled with suspicion.

If you look at a poll on the clinic, over half believe Froome's success is either down a new undetectable wonder drug that nobody else has access to, or Sky and the UCI are in cahoots when it comes to doping tests. It's all just a bit David Icke.

As I read somewhere else, how would cricket fans feel if France/Italy/Spain put their mind to beating England at Lords in five years, and managed it in three? And there I think is the major reason for all this vitriol.
The Wulfrunian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 08:32
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
As a long time follower of the England cricket team, I'd be amazed it took that long <tongue in cheek smilie>

Why do they think Froome/Sky have some new super drug? Is it the time gaps? The only thing is, when Virenque came second in 1997, he was over 9 minutes down on Ullrich. Regardless of what was going on in the yellow camp, does anyone seriously believe, given what went on the next year, that Virenque (2nd on GC, winner of KoM and combativety award) was riding purely on a can of Gatorade and a mint humbug? Or that there is still a drug out there that has escaped detection for 15 years?

I think a lot of what is happening this year is down to something happens every few years - a changing of the guard. The older names are tailing off for whatever reason, and the new names are just starting to come through. If you look at the top 10, it must come as a shock to a number of teams. I imagine if you'd said to the DS of Belkin they would be second on GC at the second rest day he would have laughed in your face. Or told Movistar that their number one rider wouldn't be Valverde then tatics on at least one stage would have been significantly altered.

(PS why would the UCI be in cahoots with Sky? That is genuinely baffling me?)
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 08:52
swingaleg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 76,808
(PS why would the UCI be in cahoots with Sky? That is genuinely baffling me?)
Maybe they're all Lizards like the Royal Family
swingaleg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:00
John259
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Posts: 14,279
Why do they think Froome/Sky have some new super drug?
The way that Froome was able to accelerate ahead of everyone else on Mont Ventoux was certainly remarkable. Whether it should be considered as suspicious is perhaps a matter of opinion.
John259 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:13
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
The way that Froome was able to accelerate ahead of everyone else on Mont Ventoux was certainly remarkable. Whether it should be considered as suspicious is perhaps a matter of opinion.
Not really. Quintana did exactly the same thing, the difference is he did it further down the mountain and couldn't hold on. Froome waited, utilised all his team mates until they were completely spent then attacked. And note Froome wasn't the only one to attack in the last km either - Rodriguez came from nowhere.

Not rocket science, or any kind of suspicious science, just tactics that worked. Nothing different to what other clean riders have done in the past.

And of course many people are ignoring the simple fact that one person has to be the strongest - many different factors including metabolism, experience and training cause differences in the riders, that's just logic. And more often than not the strongest rider will be able to utilise that, and their team, and voila, they lead the race. Not hard to understand, and certainly not hard to understand that it's entirely possible to do whilst being completely clean.

But heaven forbid common sense, logic and cold hard facts prevail over suspicion and hysteria
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:14
John259
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Posts: 14,279
Nothing different to what other clean riders have done in the past.
But it's highly questionable whether there ever have been any clean riders in the past.
John259 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:21
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
But it's highly questionable whether there ever have been any clean riders in the past.
Wow. That's a sweeping generalisation if ever I saw one. I can't believe anyone would be so cynical as to suggest that every cyclist who ever lived doped. Of course there were eras when most people did, but even then, there will have been ones who didn't.

It's like athletics - yes, plenty of failed drugs tests, but equally there have been plenty of astonishing performances over the years by people who did not dope.


All of this reminds me why I despair at many cycling fans - all the suspicion and constant negativity gives off such a pathetic image. Ok, there have been problems, and people have been caught, but to undermine the achievements of those who have never been proven guilty of anything is not right. It's not their fault that others chose to cheat. Innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental rule of justice, and there's no justice in the attitude of very many cycling fans right now.


Also I note that you ignored my points about Quintana and Rodriguez, and the fact that I was talking about the tactical norms of racing, so what, exactly, are the counter-arguments to all of that to suggest Froome is doping rather than just that he played a sensible tactical game?
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:26
John259
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Posts: 14,279
Also I note that you ignored my points about Quintana and Rodriguez - do you think they're doping too?
My opinion (which isn't worth much) is that all the riders at that level of the sport are doping but some are doping more effectively than others. I see doping as being an integral part of the sport, along with training, diet and other similar factors - not something to condemn as cheating. I see no difference in principle between taking a banned performance enhancing drug and eating a Mars bar, or training at altitude.
John259 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:28
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
Maybe they're all Lizards like the Royal Family
Indurain was - is he a back room boffin at Sky?
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:36
Omraf
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 173
To me I don't think Sky are doping. The only real "evidence" is their results, someone has to win. There were always rumours about other riders but I have heard very little on any Sky riders or indeed many new riders of late. It's more likely that this is a cleaner peloton which is why some rides look comparatively brilliant. Froome has not come from no where and has always been a capable climber. He also was unable to do much more than sit in when Saxo attacked a few days ago.
Omraf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:36
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
But it's highly questionable whether there ever have been any clean riders in the past.
Chris Boardman was well known in the peleton to be clean - I remember reading an article that said everyone asked had him at the top of the definitely not on anything list.

I like to amuse myself by thinking that Team GB probably had their first offical tour winner in 1996.
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 09:48
Mystical123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
My opinion (which isn't worth much) is that all the riders at that level of the sport are doping but some are doping more effectively than others. I see doping as being an integral part of the sport, along with training, diet and other similar factors - not something to condemn as cheating. I see no difference in principle between taking a banned performance enhancing drug and eating a Mars bar, or training at altitude.
I have to say I feel sorry for you having such a negative image of the sport. And there's plenty of difference between taking a banned drug and developing efficient altitude training programmes (even going beyond the very basic fact that one's legal and one's not...), I'm staggered that you think they're similar!

To me I don't think Sky are doping. The only real "evidence" is their results, someone has to win. There were always rumours about other riders but I have heard very little on any Sky riders or indeed many new riders of late. It's more likely that this is a cleaner peloton which is why some rides look comparatively brilliant. Froome has not come from no where and has always been a capable climber. He also was unable to do much more than sit in when Saxo attacked a few days ago.
Exactly, well said.
Mystical123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 10:17
codeblue
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: A Sound Expert
Posts: 13,881
Who has won the tour clean?

I cannot recall anyone in the last 20 years doing so?
codeblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 10:22
John259
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Posts: 14,279
Who has won the tour clean?

I cannot recall anyone in the last 20 years doing so?
Wiggo didn't fail any tests.

The same for Andy Schleck in the year Contador was stripped of the title for eating his fictional steak, but brother Frank failed a test last year and was disqualified from the Tour which raises doubts.
John259 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 10:41
Englishspinner
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 5,005
Wiggo didn't fail any tests.

The same for Andy Schleck in the year Contador was stripped of the title for eating his fictional steak, but brother Frank failed a test last year and was disqualified from the Tour which raises doubts.
I was under the impression that one of the reasons Armstrong made his comeback was his contempt for the [clean?] Carlos Sastre's abilities in winning in 2008?
Englishspinner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 10:41
Mark F
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,248
Who has won the tour clean?

I cannot recall anyone in the last 20 years doing so?
Carlos Sastre.in 2008?

Cadel Evans in 2011 and baring in mind Wiggins won last year without being a known drug cheat maybe there is hope for very clean future...



Do many sprinters get caught or is it mainly the climbers/GC contenders?
Mark F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 11:03
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
Sprinters get caught as much as any other 'group'. Erik Zabel has at least one citation for his green jersey win (1996 for sure) that the Societe du Tour de France no longer consider him to be the winner, but the UCI have not changed the official status.
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 12:34
SJB 2007
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dagenham, Essex.
Posts: 940
I feel sorry for Froome and Brailsford. They are just victims of their own success in a sport that is now chronically riddled with suspicion.

If you look at a poll on the clinic, over half believe Froome's success is either down a new undetectable wonder drug that nobody else has access to, or Sky and the UCI are in cahoots when it comes to doping tests. It's all just a bit David Icke.

As I read somewhere else, how would cricket fans feel if France/Italy/Spain put their mind to beating England at Lords in five years, and managed it in three? And there I think is the major reason for all this vitriol.
Sadly it's 'it looks like Armstrong, it rides like Armstrong, it wins like Armstrong.... So it must be Armstrong.'

That lot over at the clinic just don't want to listen to the other side of the debate. I'm scared to post any kind of defence of Chris and Sky... It's a lost cause at the moment.

The more he tries to defend himself, the worse these allegations get.

Maybe it is time Sky let WADA monitor him or let a select group of unbiased journalists follow Sky around for the season.

It needs to be nipped in the bud once an for all... It's not fair on Chris or Sky. This is the greatest moment of his career and he is being labelled a cheat and a liar.
SJB 2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 12:34
The Net
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: St Albans
Posts: 3,547
Stage 16 underway. It looks like Pinot and Van Poppel ( Danny) are non starters.
The Net is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 12:49
swingaleg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 76,808
Just seem an interview with Nicholas Roche...........blimey, he sounds just like his dad !. Not just the accent but the pauses, the tone...............
swingaleg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 12:57
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
Just seem an interview with Nicholas Roche...........blimey, he sounds just like his dad !. Not just the accent but the pauses, the tone...............
It wouldn't be a proper Tour stage this year without an early breakaway group with him, Peter Sagan and Jens Voigt ...
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 13:11
swingaleg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 76,808
Not sure why I thought of this today but it's occurred to me that in the days before I started watching the Tour I wasn't at all clued up as to how it worked...........we only got a brief 30 second update on the radio sports news until C4 started showing some highlights

But I used to think that they set off each day in time order...........so on the radio they might say Froome has a 4 minute advantage on the second placed man and I assumed that at the start of the next day Froome would set off then the second man would set off 4 minutes later and so on down the field..............

I also used to think that for a sprint they all stopped and lined up and sprinted whatever the distance was.............
swingaleg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 13:20
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
Bet some of the sprinters like that idea

Have you read this http://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Won-Yell...s=ned+boulting
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 19:04.