collapse


The Hitch

  • Winner 2012 Tour de France prediction game
  • Road Captain
  • Country: pl
  • Posts: 2473
  • Liked: 841
  • Awards: 2013 Annual Prediction Game2013 CQ Ranking Vuelta Game Post of the Year 2013Race Preview of the Year 2013
Re: Sky
« Reply #870 on: July 11, 2013, 10:58 »

For sure, the vitriol that seems to occur on some forums is both childish and unneccesary.

Where is this vitriol you speak of? I haven't seen much of it here.
  • ReplyReply
  • Despite the self-serving data benders and associated propaganda to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers, even within 'new age' cycling teams. Personally, I don't accept that the 'dark era' has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise.

    Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #871 on: July 11, 2013, 11:08 »
    I said 'some forums', not 'this forum'.

    'This forum' is refreshingly free of it, and I'd hope that people can continue to hold differing views with recourse to childishness.
  • ReplyReply
  • "You can't handle the truth"

    Colonel Nathan R Jessup

    L'arri

    • Is on Dr Search's Green and Grey Diet
    • Grand Tour Winner
    • *
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 8066
    • Liked: 6777
    • Dopeology.org @DopeologyDotOrg @L_arriviste
      • Dopeology.org
    • Awards: Post of the year 2015Best Opening Post 2012
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #872 on: July 11, 2013, 11:22 »
    We need not concern ourselves with what has been said on other forums unless that adds something of genuine value to the thread.

    Please make your case with specifics rather than vague allusions to things unseen or otherwise diaphanous.

  • ReplyReply
  • Cycling is a Europe thing only and I only watch from Omloop on cause I am cool and sh*t
    RIP Craig1985 / Craig Walsh
    RIP KeithJamesMc / Keith McMahon / Larry Sarni

    Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #873 on: July 11, 2013, 11:58 »
    I'm hoping that what it adds is a reminder that inflammatory topics can be discussed in a pleasant way, with differing views maintained, provided that people holding those views work at it by not behaving disrespectfully.

    I'm sure that is what we all want, isn't it?
  • ReplyReply

  • L'arri

    • Is on Dr Search's Green and Grey Diet
    • Grand Tour Winner
    • *
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 8066
    • Liked: 6777
    • Dopeology.org @DopeologyDotOrg @L_arriviste
      • Dopeology.org
    • Awards: Post of the year 2015Best Opening Post 2012
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #874 on: July 11, 2013, 13:50 »
    I'm hoping that what it adds is a reminder that inflammatory topics can be discussed in a pleasant way, with differing views maintained, provided that people holding those views work at it by not behaving disrespectfully.

    I'm sure that is what we all want, isn't it?

    Don't worry about it. :) We can all continue to post respectfully without turning threads into head-to-head discussions and just leave any decisions about what is inflammatory to the moderators. Please carry on, folks!
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #875 on: July 11, 2013, 14:10 »
    Carry on?

    Ag just told us to stop!  :D
  • ReplyReply

  • AG

    • Monument Winner
    • *
    • Country: au
    • Posts: 6589
    • Liked: 4020
    • Awards: Winner, 2013 National Championships prediction gameFan of the Year 2013
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #876 on: July 11, 2013, 14:16 »
    settle down guys.

    trying to on-up each other isnt going to happen anymore.

    Talk about the topic (ie when Chris Froome developed his talent) ... not what each of you said when.

    thanks

    actually AG said carry on ... but about the topic    :D  :D  :D
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #877 on: July 11, 2013, 14:36 »
    Ok, so as I was saying......

    Regarding Havetts velonews link concerning Froome being noticed at the 06 Commonwealth Games, there is some documented evidence to support this in the form of Cyclingnews reports (links posted previously)
  • ReplyReply

  • doolols

    • Domestic Rider
    • Country: 00
    • Posts: 164
    • Liked: 33
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #878 on: July 11, 2013, 15:06 »
    I wonder if a lot of the animosity that people feel towards Sky, especially Wiggins and Froome, is because they haven't had the traditional European career, winning a minor race here and there, a stage of a GT occasionally, gradually improving.

    I remember when Wiggins won last year, I kept reading semi-hysterical rants about him coming from nowhere. Obviously, Wiggins has had a long and illustrious cycling career, especially on the track. Watch the Wiggins style, it's the steady tempo riding used with success on the boards, and last year's parcours suited him with the long time trials, after which his team doggedly defended him against all-comers.

    Now again, we have Froome who has come from "nowhere" to be a GT contender / winner maybe, when in fact he's been prominent for some years, but not via the 'traditional' route.

    Something I read a few days ago put forward the idea that Sky have been working on non-doping performance enhancement for years (on track and off), and yet most other pro tour teams have put all their efforts into doping-related developments. Without doping and other illegal enhancement, they are a year or two behind Sky / BC with their performance developments. This seems possible, to me. Maybe Sky are able to boost blood performance without doping / transfusing? Or maybe they're using methods and products which will be banned in years to come?
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #879 on: July 11, 2013, 15:24 »
    All those things are possible.

    In a nutshell, the sceptics think the (slight) performance edge over competitors that is needed for a win cannot be down to training. They might be right, but they might also be wrong. I think we will be able to make a clearer judgement in a couple of years when Sky is old enough to have lost more riders to other teams and training methods leak out.( or, indeed, doping methods)

    I will say two things. There have been some non-Sky riders who have commented on Sky's training methods with amazement, in a positive way. One of them was David Millar, and of course there will be those that don't regards anything he says as having any value or integrity.

    The other thing I will say is that Sandro Donati wrote a very interesting piece about the EPO years, and one of the most striking comments was that he found that EPO made riders lazy in their training.
  • ReplyReply

  • benotti69

    • Road Captain
    • Country: 00
    • Posts: 1697
    • Liked: 215
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #880 on: July 11, 2013, 20:04 »
    I wonder if a lot of the animosity that people feel towards Sky, especially Wiggins and Froome, is because they haven't had the traditional European career, winning a minor race here and there, a stage of a GT occasionally, gradually improving.

    I remember when Wiggins won last year, I kept reading semi-hysterical rants about him coming from nowhere. Obviously, Wiggins has had a long and illustrious cycling career, especially on the track. Watch the Wiggins style, it's the steady tempo riding used with success on the boards, and last year's parcours suited him with the long time trials, after which his team doggedly defended him against all-comers.

    Now again, we have Froome who has come from "nowhere" to be a GT contender / winner maybe, when in fact he's been prominent for some years, but not via the 'traditional' route.

    Something I read a few days ago put forward the idea that Sky have been working on non-doping performance enhancement for years (on track and off), and yet most other pro tour teams have put all their efforts into doping-related developments. Without doping and other illegal enhancement, they are a year or two behind Sky / BC with their performance developments. This seems possible, to me. Maybe Sky are able to boost blood performance without doping / transfusing? Or maybe they're using methods and products which will be banned in years to come?

    Froome was prominant a few years climbing with the help of motorbikes in the Giro, hanging on to them ;)

    Myths abound. Wiggins has been racing in europe since 2002, Froome with Barloworld 5 years ago. Some pros barely last 2 or 3 years. Froome was heading that way till the amazing jump to the podium of La Vuelta. Totally unforseen by everyone, even his team who were losing interest in him.
  • ReplyReply
  • "ahaha, ever had the feeling you been cheated?" JL SF Jan'78

    The Hitch

    • Winner 2012 Tour de France prediction game
    • Road Captain
    • Country: pl
    • Posts: 2473
    • Liked: 841
    • Awards: 2013 Annual Prediction Game2013 CQ Ranking Vuelta Game Post of the Year 2013Race Preview of the Year 2013
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #881 on: July 11, 2013, 22:57 »
    I wonder if a lot of the animosity that people feel towards Sky, especially Wiggins and Froome, is because they haven't had the traditional European career, winning a minor race here and there, a stage of a GT occasionally, gradually improving.

    I remember when Wiggins won last year, I kept reading semi-hysterical rants about him coming from nowhere. Obviously, Wiggins has had a long and illustrious cycling career, especially on the track. Watch the Wiggins style, it's the steady tempo riding used with success on the boards, and last year's parcours suited him with the long time trials, after which his team doggedly defended him against all-comers.

    Now again, we have Froome who has come from "nowhere" to be a GT contender / winner maybe, when in fact he's been prominent for some years, but not via the 'traditional' route.

    You are trying to make a black and white issue look ambiguous by rephrasing it . Froome had perhaps the most insane  transformation ever. Ever. He was average at best before August 2011, then overnight became the best rider in the world. At the age of 26.

    Its not a question of people having animosity towards him.  Its simple logic to scratch ones head over a rider mysteriously catapulting out of the bottle carrier role to beating the worlds best gt riders by minutes on both mountains and tts.

    And even people who dont question froome dont seem to have a problem with this in other cases. EG The bbc said that people should have known armstrong was doped  because he wasnt a gt rider before 1999. Half the British media including the BBC and the Daily Fail publicly accused olympic 1500m champion Taolik Makhloufi of doping because they didnt have him down as a favourite before the event. Kittel accused Mustafa Sayer of doping for the same reasons. Universal sports accused quintana who they thought had never won a race before Pais Vasco. Kwiatkowski is getting some of the same treatment now etc.

    Quote
    Something I read a few days ago put forward the idea that Sky have been working on non-doping performance enhancement for years (on track and off), and yet most other pro tour teams have put all their efforts into doping-related developments. Without doping and other illegal enhancement, they are a year or two behind Sky / BC with their performance developments. This seems possible, to me. Maybe Sky are able to boost blood performance without doping / transfusing? Or maybe they're using methods and products which will be banned in years to come?


    The bit about other teams being too reliant on doping   was started by Bailsford last year and is most notable for shockingly liberal "assume they are all doing it" attitude  to doping that Bailsford and the sky fans claim to oppose.

    Not to mention its very flawed. So all teams invested heavily in doping until 2011? Then overnight they stopped? For no reason. And sky allegedly opposed to doping the whole time, presumably the only team if they have such an advantage (what about garmin) have this advantage? Over everyone. Really?

    Anyway i read somewhere that Anti doping does not just talk about specific drugs and practices that already exist but also alludes to ones that may be discovered in the future that clearly cause health risks. Also what practise could they possibly have sole access to and manage to keep it a secret for 2 years?

  • ReplyReply

  • DinZ

    • 2.2 is where it is at
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: zm
    • Posts: 3476
    • Liked: 359
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #882 on: July 12, 2013, 00:26 »
    But the problem is every time anyone offers an explanation for why froome improved and to give examples of the fact that the improvement is not nearly as great as people are claiming are just ignored or you respond with well that is what someone who is doping would say. ignoring the fact that it is obviously what someone who is not doping would also say.

    You have decided that Froome is doping and sky are the new evil and no amount of logic will convince you otherwise.

    you are still churning out the same lines you were a year ago despite loads of stuff posted in that time that show that 'your viewpoint' (yes it is your viewpoint despite the way you through it around like it is fact) that froome went from donkey to race horse overnight with no explanation is flawed.

    I know your response will be 'what is all this evidence'
    it has been posted many times before, you have ignored it then, so i am not going to spend time digging it all out and posting again for you to ignore again.
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #883 on: July 12, 2013, 05:57 »
    "Froome came from nowhere"

    No, Froome can from Kenya, that well-known hotbed of cycling where potential talent is recognised at an early age and nurtured in the excellent Kenyan cycling academies renowned throughout the world for their excellent facilities and plethora of Kenyan ex-pros on hand to offer advice, from their Pro Tour experience.

    No wonder he thrived at such a young age. Hard not to, coming from a country with such a rich legacy in cycling.
  • ReplyReply

  • Arb

    • Road Captain
    • Country: an
    • Posts: 2370
    • Liked: 572
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #884 on: July 12, 2013, 06:25 »
    I thought his cycling development occurred in South Africa?
  • ReplyReply

  • DinZ

    • 2.2 is where it is at
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: zm
    • Posts: 3476
    • Liked: 359
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #885 on: July 12, 2013, 06:30 »
    Yeah a good chunk of it was in South Africa. think he moved there when 14 or 15. did not turn pro till 22 though and the point that has been made by many people that worked with him then was he was a long way from professional. he had very poor bike handling skills, had bad nutrition knowledge, and generally spent a fair amount of time just getting up to speed as a pro rider.

    He did not have the skills that most youngsters that came up through the Euro system had

    even with those issues he showed signs of promise. 16th in tour TT. 36th in Giro

    even when he joined Sky he had clear issues with tactical knowledge. he was frequently criticised for attacking every time he felt vaguely good then losing loads of time. As his knowledge improved so did his results but he still struggled. then he had two break throughs, one was finding the Bilharzia which has been discussed at length before, and that helped him physically and the second was the mental break through at Vuelta

    by having to work for Brad, Chris learnt loads about when to go and when to hold back. at times when he wanted to attack he couldn't because he had to wait for Brad and that showed him that by holding back at times he would be more successful. That race also gave him massive confidence.

    When you take all of that into account, his late development as a rider, his issues and then his progress it is not the miracle some make it out to be.

    the first was
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #886 on: July 12, 2013, 06:39 »
    I thought his cycling development occurred in South Africa?

    That other hotbed of cycling success.

    At about the same age, Contador left school and joined the youth team run by Manolo Saiz.  Manolo Saiz, manager of ONCE. A man with a channel straight into the peloton and years of experience of cycling at its highest level.

    Who did Froome have?

    Froome's detractors love to ridicule the almost total lack of bike handling skills he had on joining the euro pro peloton. They don't think deep enough to realise why that might be, and why he is a late bloomer.
  • ReplyReply

  • Arb

    • Road Captain
    • Country: an
    • Posts: 2370
    • Liked: 572
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #887 on: July 12, 2013, 06:41 »
    That seems purely subjective, he rode for a decent continental team, he had support from the WCC(?). By the time he turned pro he had raced on 4 continents from Commonwealth Games, Continental Championships to World Championships to the Asian circuit to the typical espoirs races in Europe. Keeping in mind he turned pro only into his 23rd year which is later than average these days (look at Gesink, or even Mollema who himself didn't start racing until he left school). Based purely on that there isn't a lot to say he was well behind the average neopro when he turned pro at an established team under good management.

    I mean everyone looks bad compared to the RB3 and AIS alumni.
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #888 on: July 12, 2013, 06:48 »
    . Based purely on that there isn't a lot to say he was well behind the average neopro when he turned pro at an established team under good management

    Why base it purely on that? Why not base it purely on the whole picture?

    Are we saying that being in a team aged 16, managed by Manolo Saiz gives no advantage over being in an unknown team managed by a nobody in a country with no cycling heritage? Really?

    I think his roughness as a bike rider in Barlo speaks volumes for the mentoring he didn't get.
  • ReplyReply

  • Arb

    • Road Captain
    • Country: an
    • Posts: 2370
    • Liked: 572
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #889 on: July 12, 2013, 06:49 »
    What does Contador have to do with anything?
  • ReplyReply

  • DinZ

    • 2.2 is where it is at
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: zm
    • Posts: 3476
    • Liked: 359
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #890 on: July 12, 2013, 07:34 »
    That seems purely subjective, he rode for a decent continental team, he had support from the WCC(?). By the time he turned pro he had raced on 4 continents from Commonwealth Games, Continental Championships to World Championships to the Asian circuit to the typical espoirs races in Europe. Keeping in mind he turned pro only into his 23rd year which is later than average these days (look at Gesink, or even Mollema who himself didn't start racing until he left school). Based purely on that there isn't a lot to say he was well behind the average neopro when he turned pro at an established team under good management.

    I mean everyone looks bad compared to the RB3 and AIS alumni.

    it was more based on comments i have seen that said he seemed to be behind the other riders in his 'racing knowledge' when he turned pro
    he had some raw talent but lacked the other stuff.
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #891 on: July 12, 2013, 08:25 »
    What does Contador have to do with anything?

    As a basis for comparison.

    Two talents, one mainlined into the heart of world pro cycling culture.

    The other in Kenya/SA.

    If you think nurturing and support doesn't matter and talent will break through on its own have a look at the history of UK cycling.

    70s, 80s, 90's pretty insignificant.

    Then British Cycling gets a bunch of funding, develops support systems and produces best in the world riders like Cavendish, plus a whole host of top pros like Stannard, G Thomas and Kennaugh.




  • ReplyReply

  • sublimit

    • National Champion
    • Country: eh
    • Posts: 887
    • Liked: 159
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #892 on: July 12, 2013, 08:32 »
    I agree that there wasn't anything to suggest he would become a GT contender from his performances at Konica and then Barloworld but there's nothing to suggest he wouldn't either.   The Vuelta performance he put 1.50 overall into Bauke Mollema and Maxine Monfort et al for heavens sake - not earth shattering but solid.   

    Personally I never thought of him as a contender from following his results at Barloworld but more a climbing domestique and a possible top 20 finisher in GT's.  Obviously he's taken that a stage further but if you take out the disastrous, illness hit first year at Sky its not the miraculous transformation that people want you to believe.   
  • ReplyReply

  • Arb

    • Road Captain
    • Country: an
    • Posts: 2370
    • Liked: 572
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #893 on: July 12, 2013, 09:27 »
    As a basis for comparison.

    Yeh, and Contador's results pre-comeback are hardly better than Froome's at Barloworld...

    Then he started doping like a maniac and within a few years became the dominant GT rider.

    Froome could have had far better results 2008-2009 and it would still make his 2011 Vuelta onwards performances extraordinary relative to his previous accomplishments. You would basically need a P-N top3, a GT top15, a Worlds TT top10 etc in the first couple of years to make the dominant GT rider of a period's progression appear "normal". Froome's ascension in 2011 was unbelievable, whether or not that makes him a doper is something I couldn't care less about, but it is what it is.
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #894 on: July 12, 2013, 09:34 »
    Yeh, and Contador's results pre-comeback are hardly better than Froome's at Barloworld...

    Is that sarcasm?

    If it is then you are supporting my argument, not yours. If it isn't sarcasm then you are factually incorrect.

    Quote
    Then he started doping like a maniac and within a few years became the dominant GT rider.

    Who? Froome or Contador? Either way, that is pure speculation, although of course Contador has had a doping ban, and there were the mysterious plasticisers in his blood.

  • ReplyReply

  • Arb

    • Road Captain
    • Country: an
    • Posts: 2370
    • Liked: 572
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #895 on: July 12, 2013, 09:36 »
    What results of Contador's 2003-2004 indicated GT greatness?

    Glad we are now bogged down discussing the progression of Contador instead of referencing the average development experience of professionals.
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #896 on: July 12, 2013, 09:49 »
    We weren't.

    We were comparing the relative levels of support of two riders who seem to have reasonable equal capabilities. You brought in results to the discussion.

    But since you ask about Contador 03-04, and ask for results demonstrating promise, you must surely know that there was no 03-04 for Contador. 03 was his first year as a pro, in which he won a stage in a tour, but in 04 he was out with serious brain issues by may.
  • ReplyReply

  • Arb

    • Road Captain
    • Country: an
    • Posts: 2370
    • Liked: 572
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #897 on: July 12, 2013, 09:52 »
    Yes, exactly my point... It was only after his comeback that he showed glimpses of being a superstar. All the training and expert help from Manolo wasn't enough in 03-04.

    Yet poor Froome who left his village in Kenya to take a pro contract in 2008-2009 performed at a level not too dissimilar from Contador.
  • ReplyReply

  • doolols

    • Domestic Rider
    • Country: 00
    • Posts: 164
    • Liked: 33
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #898 on: July 12, 2013, 10:03 »
    he had some raw talent but lacked the other stuff.

    I think so. Comments about bike handling skills and nutritional knowledge is nonsense. Like these things can't be learnt in a season.
  • ReplyReply

  • Joachim

    • National Champion
    • Country: be
    • Posts: 894
    • Liked: 290
    Re: Sky
    « Reply #899 on: July 12, 2013, 10:14 »
    @Arb

    Contador didn't have an 03-04. He was out of the peloton by May.

    I understand the point you are making. The corollary of that argument is that you must then align Contador with Froome as riders who 'came out of nowhere', which would then, of course, present difficulties for using that as an argument against Froome's progress.

    It's tricky, isn't it. In the absence of solid data we have to resort to making comparisons in order to be able to try and find a suitable metric by which to gauge Froome. Problem is, how do know that any of our assumptions are correct?

    Nice talking to you. Will catch up later.





  • ReplyReply

  •  

    * Dark Side Chatbox

    Sorry, this shoutbox does not exist.

    Recent Posts

    Re: Mens' transfers and Rumors 2019-20 by Armchair Cyclist
    [Today at 09:37]


    Re: The Academy of Cycling by Leadbelly
    [December 08, 2019, 19:58]


    Re: Man Down - Injury Reports 2019 by Echoes
    [December 08, 2019, 11:34]


    Re: Retirement announcements by Echoes
    [December 08, 2019, 11:19]


    Re: The Academy of Cycling by Leadbelly
    [December 08, 2019, 09:35]


    Re: Mens' transfers and Rumors 2019-20 by mudplugger
    [December 07, 2019, 21:10]



    Top
    Back to top