Half the world are assuming Wiggo dopes. It's gettng me down

Eurostar

Not on this forum, but everywhere else. :evil: I wish I could prove he was clean. I can't think of anyone more outspoken on doping than him, except for Lemond and Kimmage. And he can't have doped his way through the IOC tests, can he? Or beaten the Slipstream regime? Or does that have no cred since the ACE folded?

FFS, he's pretty much left road racing twice in disgust at the doping and had to be dragged back. This is the first Tour he's trained for properly. I don't understand why people don't have more faith in him.

DaveyL

As many have said before, you can't prove a negative.

For me, it's nothing to do with his nationality, but the team he is on. If he was on any other team, I'd be suspicious. As it is, given the Tour's recent history, I'm still somewhat uncomfortable, which is a real shame but also a reflection of what's gone on int he past couple of decades.

Still, it is very credible if he has indeed lost 10% of his body weight (he always had the power and is now focussing it on the road), and if the top GC guys have "come back" to him by recent attempts to clean up the sport. E.g. in the early 2000s, Sastre was pretty much buried in the pack (though somewhere near the top), last year he won the Tour.

inseine

Nobodies ever going to be proven clean so we might as well get used to it.
If you haven't followed Wiggins it appears that he's come from nowhere to be a Tour contender so it's not surprising people are sceptical.

calvjones

I really hope Wiggo shows its getting cleaner. However, with UCI largesse re. Astana, it would be nice to see some decent VAM type analysis to demonstrate that climbing in this year's Tour is slower than comparable stages in earlier years.If it's not, then I suspect I'll suspect.

Let's hope for some balls-out* attacking from the bottom of Ventoux to give us some idea. And because its fun of course

*metaphorically, not literally.

Kléber

Objectively let's admit it though, if his name was Wiggini, Wiggoso or Viggens then we might be raising more eyebrows. Miracles in cycling are hard to believe these days.

If Wiggins is clean then he's just got to carry a heavy cross because of all those who have been before him, the ones who have done surprising rides only to get busted in time. Wiggins also banks more credibility from being on the right team.

As ocridersaid on another thread French radio's equivalent of Five Live had a debate about "can you become a climber". I went to listen to it this morning, it's here:
http://podcast.rmc.fr/channel166/200907 ... df_bfm.mp3.

It was really about Wiggins. The experts ranged from Guimard to Frederic Grappe, one of France's top sports scientist and the FdJ team coach, he had Wiggins on his team for a while. They all respected Wiggins and pointed to his past on French teams where he was respected for being a clean rider. Grappe is an outspoken guy, he has denounced certain riders, coaches and bad practices and if he's satisfied with Wiggins, then Eurostar, perhaps you can be too.

calvjones: some VAM analysis here:
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/07 ... ellow.html
...which suggests record breaking VAM levels, although this was based on the Verbier climb which is relatively short and so the numbers are skewed. The Romme and Colombiere numbers should be more revealing, and above all the Ventoux.

Pokerface

His overall standing on the GC has been partly influenced by Garmin's TTT - otherwise he might be further down and not subject to as much scutiny.

Not sure how much he prepared for previous Tours - given his dedication to track cycling - and similarly not sure how much that particular training has influenced his current riding performance.

I see him being interviewed by ITV4 almost every day now. It would seem a guy who wasn't clean wouldn't be as comfortable as he is in the spotlight. But then again...

I think a lot of non-British folk (the people you refer to as "half the world") simply haven't followed him the way the British public has, and maybe just don't know who he he. And therefore just suspect he's dirty.

We have seen what he can do, therefore are less suspect of him.

RichN95.

Pokerface wrote:

His overall standing on the GC has been partly influenced by Garmin's TTT - otherwise he might be further down and not subject to as much scutiny.
.

If you deducted the TTT times, he would still be third, but Le Mevel would be 2nd (I doubt they would have let him the break without the deficit though).

Top Ten without TTT

1. Contador
2. Le Mevel +0.23
3. Wiggins +1.28
4. Armstrong +1.37
5. A Schleck +1.46
6. Nibali +1.53
7. Sastre +2.15
8. Kloden +2.17
9. Astarloza +2.29
10. Vande Velde +2.41

F Schleck and Casar a couple of seconds behind CVV

blazing_saddles

I'll bet those throwing accusations, elsewhere, include a large proportion of Lance fans.
Haters! :P

iainf72

I was never a Wiggins fan - Yeah he could ride around a wooden circle fast but meh.

But in the last week I've got a lot of time for him. Outstanding ride, you can actually see he's lost weight and can churn out a lot of power. He should be able to ride high in the GC. The route has favoured him this year as well.

I think Grappe refered to him as one of the greatest ever roulers, which is high praise.

Eurostar

It seems logical to me that he's "come from nowhere" not just because he's lost 10% of his body weight and has applied his Team GB expertise to tour prep for the first time but because it's the first opportunity he's had to compete in a cleanish field. And he knows it. He was so cynical in previous tours, resigned to being beaten by cheats, It must have undermined his motivation and his willingness to tolerate the suffering. But he's a changed man now.

Here's another negative I can't prove, but I believe most people don't dare dope this year because they're scared of the tests. Look at Menchov - wins the Giro, falls under suspicion and is crap in the Tour. And Boonen - fantastic palmares this year, but a no-hoper in the Tour. And look how little attacking there's been. We've been bored and frustrated, but doesn't it say that the riders don't have artificial recovery aids? They're all having to measure their efforts. There haven't been any suspicious solo endeavours. (Though Hushovd's climbing suddenly seems a bit jaw-dropping.)

The elephant in the room is Bruyneel - the expert on beating the system. Four riders at the top of the GC! One should definitely have been booted out for his trips to Freiburg university etc. etc....another looks about 80 but is clinging to 2nd place. Bruyneel is so canny I bet the team are under orders not to draw attention to themselves...no implausible solo efforts, no yellow jersey until the last minute.

SunWuKong

I think he's clean based on his team, his attitude towards doping and the fact that he has always had a lot of power and has lost a lot of weight.

I cannot see how Contador can out gun him in TTs :?:

moray_gub

Eurostar wrote:

Not on this forum, but everywhere else. :evil: I wish I could prove he was clean. I can't think of anyone more outspoken on doping than him, except for Lemond and Kimmage. And he can't have doped his way through the IOC tests, can he? Or beaten the Slipstream regime? Or does that have no cred since the ACE folded?

FFS, he's pretty much left road racing twice in disgust at the doping and had to be dragged back. This is the first Tour he's trained for properly. I don't understand why people don't have more faith in him.[/quote

i am afraid there are so many accusations flung around so often at riders without much evidence at times that Brad is gonna suffer fom the same. Having said that he used to climb like an aerodynamic brick now he climbs cat 1s like they are motorway bridges so its not surprising people are suspicious..........

donrhummy

Eurostar wrote:

The elephant in the room is Bruyneel - the expert on beating the system.

LMAO! What a hypocrite! You're mad that people are assuming Wiggins is doping despite no evidence of that and you're convicting Bruyneel in EXACTLY the same way. Nice!

iainf72

donrhummy wrote:

Eurostar wrote:

The elephant in the room is Bruyneel - the expert on beating the system.

LMAO! What a hypocrite! You're mad that people are assuming Wiggins is doping despite no evidence of that and you're convicting Bruyneel in EXACTLY the same way. Nice!

Wrong Don.

There's not even a whiff around Brad. A lot of whiff around JB,.

donrhummy

iainf72 wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Eurostar wrote:

The elephant in the room is Bruyneel - the expert on beating the system.

LMAO! What a hypocrite! You're mad that people are assuming Wiggins is doping despite no evidence of that and you're convicting Bruyneel in EXACTLY the same way. Nice!

Wrong Don.

There's not even a whiff around Brad. A lot of whiff around JB,.

A whiff is NOT evidence. He's not saying that Bruyneel may or may not have been involved he said with certainty, that he IS an expert at beating the system as though he had concrete evidence of specific times where he did that. He doesn't have that evidence, so yes, it is the same.

moray_gub

iainf72 wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

Eurostar wrote:

The elephant in the room is Bruyneel - the expert on beating the system.

LMAO! What a hypocrite! You're mad that people are assuming Wiggins is doping despite no evidence of that and you're convicting Bruyneel in EXACTLY the same way. Nice!

Wrong Don.

There's not even a whiff around Brad. A lot of whiff around JB,.

Wrong Iain

He rode for Cofodis so going by the usual forum position there is a whiff by association...........or does that ony apply to johhny foreigner ?

RichN95.

donrhummy wrote:

Eurostar wrote:

The elephant in the room is Bruyneel - the expert on beating the system.

LMAO! What a hypocrite! You're mad that people are assuming Wiggins is doping despite no evidence of that and you're convicting Bruyneel in EXACTLY the same way. Nice!

I imagine sirens are now going off in Aurelio's house.

Kléber

Moray Gub wrote:

He rode for Cofodis so going by the usual forum position there is a whiff by association...........or does that ony apply to johhny foreigner ?

MG, note that Cofidis had a bad reputation and it got to the point where they had to throw out several riders and staff during one winter. Wiggins joined the "new" team under the management of Eric Boyer. There's no whiff around Cofidis these days.

Peakraider

calvjones wrote:

I really hope Wiggo shows its getting cleaner. However, with UCI largesse re. Astana, it would be nice to see some decent VAM type analysis to demonstrate that climbing in this year's Tour is slower than comparable stages in earlier years.If it's not, then I suspect I'll suspect.

Let's hope for some balls-out* attacking from the bottom of Ventoux to give us some idea. And because its fun of course

*metaphorically, not literally.

Contador's VAM up Verbier was the highest ever seen on the tour -- more than any other rider, ever, including the dopers'.


Surely the reason Wiggins is clean is that he's English, no? We never cheat. Nope. Never.

Peakraider

Eurostar wrote:

It seems logical to me that he's "come from nowhere" not just because he's lost 10% of his body weight and has applied his Team GB expertise to tour prep for the first time but because it's the first opportunity he's had to compete in a cleanish field. And he knows it. He was so cynical in previous tours, resigned to being beaten by cheats, It must have undermined his motivation and his willingness to tolerate the suffering. But he's a changed man now.

Here's another negative I can't prove, but I believe most people don't dare dope this year because they're scared of the tests. Look at Menchov - wins the Giro, falls under suspicion and is crap in the Tour. And Boonen - fantastic palmares this year, but a no-hoper in the Tour. And look how little attacking there's been. We've been bored and frustrated, but doesn't it say that the riders don't have artificial recovery aids? They're all having to measure their efforts. There haven't been any suspicious solo endeavours. (Though Hushovd's climbing suddenly seems a bit jaw-dropping.)

The elephant in the room is Bruyneel - the expert on beating the system. Four riders at the top of the GC! One should definitely have been booted out for his trips to Freiburg university etc. etc....another looks about 80 but is clinging to 2nd place. Bruyneel is so canny I bet the team are under orders not to draw attention to themselves...no implausible solo efforts, no yellow jersey until the last minute.

Sorry, but I don't believe this tour is any cleaner than the ones before. Micro-dosing of your own blood can't, for example, be caught yet.

Of course Bruyneel's got the system rapped up! Did it for seven tours with Lance.

The field hasn't come back to Wiggins -- VAM is at record-breaking levels. Wiggins has miraculously caught up with the field.

And, if you'll forgive me, the stories about weight loss, extra super training sessions, total focus on the tour, etc... are rather reminiscent of what most people discount in Armstrong's story. (Though I admit Wiggo at least looks thinner.)

Anonymous

The VAM up verbier is skewed mostly because of the ridiculous pace set at the beginning by Saxo Bank...

Kléber

Peakraider wrote:

Contador's VAM up Verbier was the highest ever seen on the tour -- more than any other rider, ever, including the dopers'.

That's because it was 20 minutes. I'm saying he's clean, only most VAM numbers come from longer climbs. A short and steep climb results in different VAMs to longer climbs.

Le Commentateur

After today half the world will have moved on and be suspecting someone else.

Peakraider

Kléber wrote:

Peakraider wrote:

Contador's VAM up Verbier was the highest ever seen on the tour -- more than any other rider, ever, including the dopers'.

That's because it was 20 minutes. I'm saying he's clean, only most VAM numbers come from longer climbs. A short and steep climb results in different VAMs to longer climbs.

Point taken.

In which case, let's wait till Ventoux and see what the VAM is. Assuming there are attacks and so on, it should give a clearer picture either way. Plus the VAM figures for Armstrong, Pantani et al on Ventoux must be pretty impressive (ahem).

What was Bertie's VAM going up Angliru? Anyone know?

Peakraider

Edit:

This guy http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2008/09/contador-is-pro.html reckons Angliru VAM was 1935!

iainf72

Peakraider wrote:

Edit:

This guy http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2008/09/contador-is-pro.html reckons Angliru VAM was 1935!

VAM on climbs like that are always monsterous due to the steepness.

Dr Ferrari explains on his site how to edit the values according to steepness etc.

Peakraider

iainf72 wrote:

Peakraider wrote:

Edit:

This guy http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2008/09/contador-is-pro.html reckons Angliru VAM was 1935!

VAM on climbs like that are always monsterous due to the steepness.

Dr Ferrari explains on his site how to edit the values according to steepness etc.

Yeah, have seen that. Not sure I quite get it (but maths never my strong point).

Anyway, VAM's only really relevant when compared with other riders' rides. So bring on Ventoux...

mididoctors

iainf72 wrote:

Peakraider wrote:

Edit:

This guy http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2008/09/contador-is-pro.html reckons Angliru VAM was 1935!

VAM on climbs like that are always monsterous due to the steepness.

Dr Ferrari explains on his site how to edit the values according to steepness etc.

isn't that sort of the point?

pedalpower

I also find Wiggins convincing. Especially since after today he seems to be tiring while some other riders seem to be getting stronger.

His weight loss is much more convincing a reason than, in my opinion, it was with Armstrong because he was always basically a skinny sort of guy but with a bit of a paunch, whereas Armstrong seems even now like a stronger, more muscley guy. I can easily believe Wiggins could have lost a lot of fat without really affecting his power output. For the same reason he's perhaps been more succesful transforming himself into a climber than his idol Boardman who's also a solid sort of guy, or than Cancelllera could ever do.

FJS

What I have found striking is that Wiggens has taught himself very much the climbing style with which Armstrong emerged back from cancer in 1998: very high rhytm but steady pace. So not the bursts of Contador or Andy Schleck, but also not the power-grinding of Ullrich, or Voigt

aurelio_-_banned

pedalpower wrote:

I also find Wiggins convincing. His weight loss is much more convincing a reason than, in my opinion, it was with Armstrong because he was always basically a skinny sort of guy but with a bit of a paunch...

We all know that Armstrong's 'weight loss' explanation for his miraculous transformation from Tour also-ran to multiple winner was nonsense, with his winning Tour weight actually being within a kilo or so of his weight when he won the world RR Championships. (And subsequently got his arse kicked all over France in the Tour, with 2 DNF's and one finish an hour and half behind the winner). However, to play devil's advocate, does Wiggins' 'weight loss' explanation of his improved climbing ability fare much better?

In the article below he says he is now 71 kg with 4% body fat when previously he was 78 kg. This means that he is now carrying 2.84 kg of body fat. Now assuming all that has changed is that he has lost body fat then at 78 kg he would have been carrying 2.84 plus another 7 kg or 9.84 kg of body fat. At 78 kg this would mean his body fat percentage was 12.6%. This seems to be very high for a 'skinny' pro bike racer!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... -de-france