Wiggins 2012 performance

frenchfighter

However much I dislike Wiggins' character (which isnt huge but is certainly a dislike) and however much I dislike Sky and everything about them (this is quite high), I have to congratulate Wiggins.

What he has worked to achieve through the last few years and especially this year is very impressive and I am happy for him. An English TdF win would be amazing (even if I do not go in for all that support them due to nationality). But not only that, he has raced this year, not just ridden; raced and won. He won everything he entered, he was calm and pro in the races, he showed some panache, he crushed the TTs and did well in the mountains, he tackled the descents with class and even won a sprint! He has ridden from the front and deserved his wins so far this year. He has even done a better job than most other GC riders of winning stage races prior to the Tour. Contador still is my out and out favourite by miles, but I still congratulate Wiggins on his racing this year.

I don't care if he absolutely crushes them this Tour and part of me wants him to, even to dropping them in the mountains (what little there are)!

mattshrops

Love you 8)

frenchfighter

edit

tremayne

Good post and I'm genuinely pleased to hear that from you (ie as someone I view as being far from a natural Wiggins fanboy)!

I truly believe he's put in an obscene amount of hard work and coupled to sky's almost OCD approach to training, and the whopping training budget - its really paying off.

TeamSky cant even be accused of not attacking this race. They are absolutely nailing it.

Squaggles

I knew you loved him really . Still not sure what is wrong with his character , I'm just pleased he actually has an opinion and isn't scared to voice it despite all the bland bland bland media training stuff sportspeople do these days

iainf72

tremayne wrote:

I truly believe he's put in an obscene amount of hard work and coupled to sky's almost OCD approach to training, and the whopping training budget - its really paying off.

This whole "amount of hard work" thing really bothers me. Have they done more than Evans or Nibali or anyone else? Even in the days of wierd blood people trained their backsides off.

mfin

iainf72 wrote:

tremayne wrote:

I truly believe he's put in an obscene amount of hard work and coupled to sky's almost OCD approach to training, and the whopping training budget - its really paying off.

This whole "amount of hard work" thing really bothers me. Have they done more than Evans or Nibali or anyone else? Even in the days of wierd blood people trained their backsides off.

Well, effort-wise yeah, but I suppose there is a lot of work potentially involved in training on a bunch of specific parts of your performance and hitting those aims, I think that's the general thing. Of course they all put in a ton of effort whilst training.

As for the congrats, Im sure that's made Wiggins' day more than anything else in the cycling itself.

tremayne

I hate to say it (and come across as naive) but I suspect they probably have. Not cause they are super heros or more committed. I honsestly believe it comes down to budget and sky/BC are prepared to throw what it takes at this.

My understanding is Millar himself came out and said he was v. Jealous of Sky being able to spend such a long time at Tiedes volcano, and that garmin simply didn't have the budget for it.

Similarly, Miller in his recent blog spelled out how little racing wiggo has had to suffer this year. Very selective, very good for training. Again, only a big bucks operation could possibly afford to sideline their grand fromage in this way.

My thoughts, anyway.

dave_1

iainf72 wrote:

tremayne wrote:

I truly believe he's put in an obscene amount of hard work and coupled to sky's almost OCD approach to training, and the whopping training budget - its really paying off.

This whole "amount of hard work" thing really bothers me. Have they done more than Evans or Nibali or anyone else? Even in the days of wierd blood people trained their backsides off.

who should lead sky now?? You fence sit at times Iainf

iainf72

Dave_1 wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

tremayne wrote:

I truly believe he's put in an obscene amount of hard work and coupled to sky's almost OCD approach to training, and the whopping training budget - its really paying off.

This whole "amount of hard work" thing really bothers me. Have they done more than Evans or Nibali or anyone else? Even in the days of wierd blood people trained their backsides off.

who should lead sky now?? You fence sit at times Iainf

Wiggins. I'm not on the fence at all.

I don't want him to win, but he's their best guy.

slim_boy_fat

iainf72 wrote:

tremayne wrote:

I truly believe he's put in an obscene amount of hard work and coupled to sky's almost OCD approach to training, and the whopping training budget - its really paying off.

This whole "amount of hard work" thing really bothers me. Have they done more than Evans or Nibali or anyone else? Even in the days of wierd blood people trained their backsides off.

Form the way they all talk it would appear they have done more work than they themselves have done in the past so maybe they have. And it's not just about working harder but working smarter. I guess that is what the Sky money and experience does for you.

P_Tucker

iainf72 wrote:

tremayne wrote:

I truly believe he's put in an obscene amount of hard work and coupled to sky's almost OCD approach to training, and the whopping training budget - its really paying off.

This whole "amount of hard work" thing really bothers me. Have they done more than Evans or Nibali or anyone else? Even in the days of wierd blood people trained their backsides off.

Exactly. Training "differently and harder" than the competition was a load of bolleaux fed repeatedly by Lance to the idiot public who lapped it up like starving pigs bobbing for apples in sh!te.

frenchfighter

Re the Sky and the money thing, its part of what I don't like. Their riders are privileged. Yes it goes to show what can be achieved with funds, organistation and focus etc but I don't like them having that advantage. Yes some teams had more than others in the past, but I feel that Sky are a league apart and nothing this sport has seen before.

Crankbrother

Until Wiggins wins a mountain top finish he doesn't get my respect ... He needs to show the one thing missing from his stage racing palmares, a show of strength man-against-man with his closest rivals and bossing it rather than just the coattails stuff we've had so far ...

I know that sounds harsh but everyone after Indurain (I count Landis as the winner of 'that' tour) managed one somewhere (it doesn't have to be the Tour, just a mtf) ...

tremayne

frenchfighter wrote:

Re the Sky and the money thing, its part of what I don't like. Their riders are privileged. Yes it goes to show what can be achieved with funds, organistation and focus etc but I don't like them having that advantage. Yes some teams had more than others in the past, but I feel that Sky are a league apart and nothing this sport has seen before.

Totally agree, and there is a part of me too that sees it as a little unfair. I'd use the rocky4 analogy apart from;

Drugs connotations
Ivan eventually loses!

Seriously though, it's a little like the English premiership. Money talks.

iainf72

Crankbrother wrote:

Until Wiggins wins a mountain top finish he doesn't get my respect ... He needs to show the one thing missing from his stage racing palmares, a show of strength man-against-man with his closest rivals and bossing it rather than just the coattails stuff we've had so far ...

wasn't his win at the Tour de l'Avenir on a mountain stage?

Bit harsh as this race is very light on mountain top finishes.

plectrum

frenchfighter wrote:

Re the Sky and the money thing, its part of what I don't like. Their riders are privileged. Yes it goes to show what can be achieved with funds, organistation and focus etc but I don't like them having that advantage. Yes some teams had more than others in the past, but I feel that Sky are a league apart and nothing this sport has seen before.

FF,

I'm not sure that Sky have any more cash at their disposal than Quickstep or BMC and I'm sure Radioshack aren't hard up. Also Wiggins was quoted recently as saying that the salaries of the guys at Sky would surprise many and aren't anywhere near as high as thought.

I can understand why some may not like the Sky corporation but am unsure why you'd not like the cycling team. They are overtly anti doping and so they must be doing things better in ever other division from equipment, training, eating, regimes, preparation, reconnaissance etc.

plectrum

iainf72 wrote:

tremayne wrote:

I truly believe he's put in an obscene amount of hard work and coupled to sky's almost OCD approach to training, and the whopping training budget - its really paying off.

This whole "amount of hard work" thing really bothers me. Have they done more than Evans or Nibali or anyone else? Even in the days of wierd blood people trained their backsides off.

I just don't understand what you don't get - where in life does everyone work the same? Take the industry you work in, does everyone work the same hours, with the same intensity?

The desire to win is different within all, they are sportsman but it is also their job and many are happy to get up perform get paid stop. Yes they try harder but there will always be better teams that have a better work ethic.

Also within teams I'm sure there are individuals with the necessary desire to push themselves but this may not be supported by everyone and not just the cyclists but all other members.

Brailsford isn't a flash in the pan, he has history and is gaining much experience in building a perfect team inside and out, from top to bottom. Also he pulls people, sacks people and changes things very swiftly when it isn't working.

RichN95.

plectrum wrote:

I'm not sure that Sky have any more cash at their disposal than Quickstep or BMC and I'm sure Radioshack aren't hard up. Also Wiggins was quoted recently as saying that the salaries of the guys at Sky would surprise many and aren't anywhere near as high as thought.

It would be wrong to suggest that money isn't a factor here - they are certainly one of the richer teams. However, they also seem to be spending it well (especially on coaching and on riders to do specific jobs rather than stars), unlike some others.

frenchfighter

Yeah Return on capital in Sky is pretty high compared to a BMC for instance ; )

plectrum

frenchfighter wrote:

Yeah Return on capital in Sky is pretty high compared to a BMC for instance ; )

Yep, Evans must be thinking damn it what if we hadn't spent all the sweetie money on Gilbert.

heavymental

So glad to find no trolls have marched into this thread... yet.

I think Sky can be compared to Woodwards England leading up to the 2003 World Cup. 1% improvement in 100 different areas. A big budget and a very focused approach usually gets results.

Woodwards England were also accused of being a bit dull but they got the job done and were able to turn the style on now and again. Lets hope Sky can do something a bit special at some point but I wouldn't mind if they ground out the win for now.

jerry3571

frenchfighter wrote:

Re the Sky and the money thing, its part of what I don't like. Their riders are privileged. Yes it goes to show what can be achieved with funds, organistation and focus etc but I don't like them having that advantage. Yes some teams had more than others in the past, but I feel that Sky are a league apart and nothing this sport has seen before.

...nothing this sport has seen before....??? US Postal???

Jerry

Ps- who came up with UK Postal anyway; love that!

alanp23

I've been feeling pretty punch drunk in the last few days with all the cynicism on the forum. I know it comes with the territory but it has been pretty relentless.

So I was genuinely pleased to see this thread and delighted to see who the OP was. It resonates with my thoughts, though far better expressed.

Good work, Sir. I tilt my hat to you.

mattshrops

Is'nt this sort of success similar to other sports or even business. It's a combination of factors occuring at the same time in favour of one particular team. No contador, no Schlek, Flatter parcours, more TT mileage, money spent well on supporting cast, proper team spirit within camp. etc
Look at last year -one crash game over.
One team rises ,one falls- someone has to win, not usually by a massive margin but...

Dont we have to accept innocent until proven otherwise -or else why bother?

Still drama to come -I give you a moneyback guarantee

heavymental

alanp23 wrote:

I've been feeling pretty punch drunk in the last few days with all the cynicism on the forum. I know it comes with the territory but it has been pretty relentless.

Indeed. And its a no-win because the way the debates have been going, as soon as you express faith you get treated like an ignorant Armstrong fan. Hard work.

plectrum

Heavymental wrote:

So glad to find no trolls have marched into this thread... yet.

I think Sky can be compared to Woodwards England leading up to the 2003 World Cup. 1% improvement in 100 different areas. A big budget and a very focused approach usually gets results.

Woodwards England were also accused of being a bit dull but they got the job done and were able to turn the style on now and again. Lets hope Sky can do something a bit special at some point but I wouldn't mind if they ground out the win for now.

the scary aspect to Woodward's 03 team is how their bodies fell apart in the years after, so many injuries. I'm sure they all think it was worth it but it wasn't great for the long term development of English rugby.

LeicesterLad

Nooooooooooooo! Frenchie what have you done!

















Only joking, I like Wiggins too. Sort of.

MrTapir

plectrum wrote:

Heavymental wrote:

So glad to find no trolls have marched into this thread... yet.

I think Sky can be compared to Woodwards England leading up to the 2003 World Cup. 1% improvement in 100 different areas. A big budget and a very focused approach usually gets results.

Woodwards England were also accused of being a bit dull but they got the job done and were able to turn the style on now and again. Lets hope Sky can do something a bit special at some point but I wouldn't mind if they ground out the win for now.

the scary aspect to Woodward's 03 team is how their bodies fell apart in the years after, so many injuries. I'm sure they all think it was worth it but it wasn't great for the long term development of English rugby.

This is actually a very good point, and something I've been mulling over the last few days. Especially seeing Froome after his win. It seems that they are moulding their bodies to be the most extreme adaptation to cycling possible. If you look at their backs when they are riding there is hardly any muscle there at all, as its not needed. So i think there is definitely some credence to their statements of training very specifically and losing weight and things. Compare to Evans or Nibali for instance, these two are not as skinny at all.

RichN95.

Arguments concerning 'hard-work' are irrelevant. What is important is not the quantity of training but the quality - and the focus of that training. Traditionally, teams don't have coaches (as opposed to DSs). Riders have their own guru (dubious or not) and are left to do their own thing - a good cost saver for the team. Sky on the other hand, have a whole team of coaches - Kerrison, Ellingworth, Julich, Sutton, Arvesen - and all coaching and training programs are done in-house, with constant feedback from the numbers. This allows a coherent and specific plan can be formulated over a season, with riders training for specific roles. (By contrast, the Schlecks are trained by their dad).

It is notable that almost all Sky's success in the last couple of seasons have come in stage races - races which are more predictable and can simply broken up into sections and understood by numbers and for which specific roles can be assigned and trained for. They have been less successful in the classics, despite having a strong team, because those races can't easily be split into predictable chunks. If they are genuinely doping, why couldn't four of them reel in Boonen at Paris-Roubaix?

iainf72

Because those 4 were 3'rd tier cobble riders and Tom is a Flemish god?

EBH had his own coach until recently, didn't he?