Wiggins 2012 performance
Comments
-
Daz555 wrote:It makes no odds what Sky does and with which journos. It is impossible for them to prove they are not doping.
It will take time - maybe another decade of clean winners in the major road races before people start accepting what should be the default - namely assumed innocent until proven otherwise.
No one puts much doubt on track cyclists for example. Hoy has been smashing the rest of the world up for a decade but in 2008 was on a different planet to everyone else - and yet there was no suspicion.
Or in 10 years we might find out Wiggins was doping...
It will never end.0 -
ddraver wrote:
Daz - no money in Track cycling though...
In my professional capacity, I am party to how much Sir Chris' people charge for a day of his time. There's a lot of money in that."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
ddraver wrote:Well yeah, but unfortuantly, the trouble is you can connect the dots to everyone in cycling. There is no team that you could nt do that with. Only the actions they re doing today are what we can judge...
Daz - no money in Track cycling though...
Highly suspect that you hire a guy who was as blatant as Ferrari when it came to doping but on a team level. I'm pretty sure Wiggins doesn't check every bottle he consumes.0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:ddraver wrote:
Daz - no money in Track cycling though...
In my professional capacity, I am party to how much Sir Chris' people charge for a day of his time. There's a lot of money in that.
Well ok, but not in generally compared to the road scene. How much would Jason Kenny for example...
Who are you on about 2580?We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
cycling5280 wrote:ddraver wrote:Well yeah, but unfortuantly, the trouble is you can connect the dots to everyone in cycling. There is no team that you could nt do that with. Only the actions they re doing today are what we can judge...
Daz - no money in Track cycling though...
Highly suspect that you hire a guy who was as blatant as Ferrari when it came to doping but on a team level. .
Evidence please!"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:cycling5280 wrote:ddraver wrote:Well yeah, but unfortuantly, the trouble is you can connect the dots to everyone in cycling. There is no team that you could nt do that with. Only the actions they re doing today are what we can judge...
Daz - no money in Track cycling though...
Highly suspect that you hire a guy who was as blatant as Ferrari when it came to doping but on a team level. .
Evidence please!
What part of my statement needs evidence?0 -
cycling5280 wrote:disgruntledgoat wrote:cycling5280 wrote:ddraver wrote:Well yeah, but unfortuantly, the trouble is you can connect the dots to everyone in cycling. There is no team that you could nt do that with. Only the actions they re doing today are what we can judge...
Daz - no money in Track cycling though...
Highly suspect that you hire a guy who was as blatant as Ferrari when it came to doping but on a team level. .
Evidence please!
What part of my statement needs evidence?
The statement I quoted."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:cycling5280 wrote:Kimmage connects the dots....
Wiggins on the doping team Cofidis years ago
Geert Leinders - Rabobank's Dr. Ferrari
Michael Barry - US Postal doper now on UK Postal
Sean Yates - US Postal now UK Postal
"Do you have any actual evidence M. Hutz?"
"I have plenty of conjecture and hearsay... Those are kinds of evidence"
To be fair, very few of you guys have a problem with this when it does not involve Sky or Wiggins.0 -
Rich, the top 5 threads, based on number of replies, not including GT prediction threads are about doping. In those threads there is plenty of conjecture and hearsay being bandied about. Despite you, and a few others, trying to deny it, there is a lot of hypocrisy when it comes to any doping talk about Sky and Wiggins. Almost all of stanley222's post above could have been posted about USPS back in the early 2000's by a fan of theirs and he would have been attacked on all sides. Deny all you want, but that is the plain truth.0
-
I'm a fair minded sort, I may voice concerns, but I will never flat out accuse somebody of something without any solid evidence IE a failed test, a summons to respond to wiretap evidence in front of a national Olympic committee or the sworn testimony to a federal investigator of 10 independent witnesses.
Any more strawmen?"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
-
Rich, that's disingenuous as you know there is plenty of conjecture and hearsay in those threads.
disgruntled, what strawman did I present?
The most telling thing about the three responses I have received to my comment is that they are all involve misdirection and do not actually do anything to refute my statement.0 -
Rundfahrt wrote:Rich, that's disingenuous as you know there is plenty of conjecture and hearsay in those threads.
disgruntled, what strawman did I present?
The most telling thing about the three responses I have received to my comment is that they are all involve misdirection and do not actually do anything to refute my statement.
I say we generally only talk about actual doping cases.
You say what about these threads.
I say they're actual cases - just like I said.
You, as usual, do the disingenuous/strawman/misdirection nonsense, all buzz words straight off the 'what to do when you're losing an internet arguement' factsheet. (PS you forgot 'ad hominem')Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:Rundfahrt wrote:Rich, that's disingenuous as you know there is plenty of conjecture and hearsay in those threads.
disgruntled, what strawman did I present?
The most telling thing about the three responses I have received to my comment is that they are all involve misdirection and do not actually do anything to refute my statement.
I say we generally only talk about actual doping cases.
You say what about these threads.
I say they're actual cases - just like I said.
You, as usual, do the disingenuous/strawman/misdirection nonsense, all buzz words straight off the 'what to do when you're losing an internet arguement' factsheet. (PS you forgot 'ad hominem')
1) What does that have to do with my original comment? Nothing, your response had nothing to with it, it was simply trying to get people to look away from the fact I pointed out.
2) I wasn't the one who used "strawman." I guess you will now tell disgruntled that he is "losing" on the internet.
3) It's pretty sad that you have made it clear that you are looking to chalk up "wins" on the internet.
4) Your kilt and little, curvy stick must be getting tangled again as I see you are getting riled up, so I'll leave you to get it sorted.0 -
Why is everyone letting the fahrt guy wind them up? He's a troll FFS.More problems but still living....0
-
This Kimmage fellow needs a good slap round the face with a f..king oil tanker. What a whinger, crying for attention.
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12357 ... rency.aspx'I started with nothing and still have most of it left.'0 -
amaferanga wrote:Why is everyone letting the fahrt guy wind them up? He's a troll FFS.
Yep, I am just a troll, conveniently I am only called a troll when I point out a fact that does not reflect well on Sky or Wiggins. Reminds me of 99-05 when posting about Armstrong...same types of reactions and insults.0 -
Rundfahrt wrote:amaferanga wrote:Why is everyone letting the fahrt guy wind them up? He's a troll FFS.
Yep, I am just a troll, conveniently I am only called a troll when I point out a fact that does not reflect well on Sky or Wiggins. Reminds me of 99-05 when posting about Armstrong...same types of reactions and insults.
Strange, commenting on Armstrong in 99-05, you've only been a member since 2012?
I do think that the reaction/tone on Sky threads is different, perhaps both ways. Some posters do relish in bringing them down, whilst others, well, react in an extremely hostile manner to any possible criticism.You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Jez mon wrote:Rundfahrt wrote:amaferanga wrote:Why is everyone letting the fahrt guy wind them up? He's a troll FFS.
Yep, I am just a troll, conveniently I am only called a troll when I point out a fact that does not reflect well on Sky or Wiggins. Reminds me of 99-05 when posting about Armstrong...same types of reactions and insults.
Strange, commenting on Armstrong in 99-05, you've only been a member since 2012?
Why would it be strange? Did I miss where I specified that all of this was going on at this particular forum or was only talking about this forum? You guys seem to make a lot of assumptions...usually in response to anything remotely negative about Sky/Wiggins and in a way to suit your defenses of them.
I do think that the reaction/tone on Sky threads is different, perhaps both ways. Some posters do relish in bringing them down, whilst others, well, react in an extremely hostile manner to any possible criticism.
Which was exactly what was happening 99-05 in Armstrong/Postal threads. See if you can dig up some of those threads and it's clear you will be quite surprised.0 -
I think everyone can see the similarities in what might be said from some people now regarding Sky as they were then with US Postal, BUT... US Postal were actually doing suspect performances, time and time again, SKY on the other hand are not really are they? I mean, where are these stages where they are absolutely destroying everyone?? They're dominant yes, but we haven't seen Wiggins shoot off up a mountain for 10 minutes, out of the saddle for minutes on end... when we do see something like that, perhaps there will be some relevance in the Sky/US Postal thing, until then, its irrelevant.
Comparing a good dominant performance with one where everyones jaws drop is completely stupid.
If anyone wants to criticise Sky, fair enough, but have the intelligence to do it with some degree of fact.
(I don't care about Sky by the way, I saw a k**bhead in full sky kit only yesterday and thought the word which I just used. But then again, I don't care for any team or rider, just good racing)0 -
mfin wrote:I think everyone can see the similarities in what might be said from some people now regarding Sky as they were then with US Postal, BUT... US Postal were actually doing suspect performances, time and time again, SKY on the other hand are not really are they? I mean, where are these stages where they are absolutely destroying everyone?? They're dominant yes, but we haven't seen Wiggins shoot off up a mountain for 10 minutes, out of the saddle for minutes on end... when we do see something like that, perhaps there will be some relevance in the Sky/US Postal thing, until then, its irrelevant.
Comparing a good dominant performance with one where everyones jaws drop is completely stupid.
If anyone wants to criticise Sky, fair enough, but have the intelligence to do it with some degree of fact.
(I don't care about Sky by the way, I saw a k**bhead in full sky kit only yesterday and thought the word which I just used. But then again, I don't care for any team or rider, just good racing)
Do you mean like Froome suddenly becoming a GT contender and a top ITT guy at the Vuelta or Wiggins dominating almost every race he has been in this year or Sky dominating those races? Let's be honest while just about everyone else was falling apart today Sky had four in the front until Rogers flatted on the descent and rode tempo all day including riding down a top GC guys attack on a climb. Nothing to be even remotely suspicious about there. Of course then we have the LA like angry response to doping questions by Wiggins. The reasoning used by multiple Sky people about working harder and smarter, "dedication and sacrifice=results, end of story" etc. All very Postal like.
If everyone can see the similarities then why, when I have mentioned am I repeatedly told that it's not true, called a troll, misdirected to try to make it sound like I am talking about Armstrong now, etc.? Why is Kimmage a smart man when talking about Armstrong but a loon when talking about Wiggins? I could go on but you get the point. There is plenty to be suspicious about and this forum is defending Sky/Wiggins just like the Armstrong/Postal fans back in their day.0 -
Rundfahrt wrote:Why would it be strange? Did I miss where I specified that all of this was going on at this particular forum or was only talking about this forum? You guys seem to make a lot of assumptions...usually in response to anything remotely negative about Sky/Wiggins and in a way to suit your defenses of them.
I do think that the reaction/tone on Sky threads is different, perhaps both ways. Some posters do relish in bringing them down, whilst others, well, react in an extremely hostile manner to any possible criticism.
Which was exactly what was happening 99-05 in Armstrong/Postal threads. See if you can dig up some of those threads and it's clear you will be quite surprised.
Sorry, about the first bit, I was having a bit of a dig. TBF, I'm in full agreement with your point about the parallels between LA threads and Sky threads! Having said that I do hope that the negativity to Sky will be proven misplaced, plus I don't see any smoking gun with regards to Sky doping atm.You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Jez mon wrote:Rundfahrt wrote:Why would it be strange? Did I miss where I specified that all of this was going on at this particular forum or was only talking about this forum? You guys seem to make a lot of assumptions...usually in response to anything remotely negative about Sky/Wiggins and in a way to suit your defenses of them.
I do think that the reaction/tone on Sky threads is different, perhaps both ways. Some posters do relish in bringing them down, whilst others, well, react in an extremely hostile manner to any possible criticism.
Which was exactly what was happening 99-05 in Armstrong/Postal threads. See if you can dig up some of those threads and it's clear you will be quite surprised.
Sorry, about the first bit, I was having a bit of a dig. TBF, I'm in full agreement with your point about the parallels between LA threads and Sky threads! Having said that I do hope that the negativity to Sky will be proven misplaced, plus I don't see any smoking gun with regards to Sky doping atm.
Thanks, I do enjoy discussing with you because you seem to be one of the few people who argue about this that actually tries to discuss it honestly and intelligently. I appreciate that.
I think we most of us hope that the suspicions are wrong, just as most did with Contador, Landis, Armstrong, Basso, etc. Those of us who love the sport want it to be as clean as possible. Unfortunately any time there is competition there will be cheating, whether it is pro sport, school, the beach, etc.0 -
Rundfahrt wrote:Do you mean like Froome suddenly becoming a GT contender and a top ITT guy at the Vuelta or Wiggins dominating almost every race he has been in this year or Sky dominating those races?
No, I don't. Cos I don't see those points as either odd or true.
Let's be honest while just about everyone else was falling apart today Sky had four in the front until Rogers flatted on the descent and rode tempo all day including riding down a top GC guys attack on a climb. Nothing to be even remotely suspicious about there. Of course then we have the LA like angry response to doping questions by Wiggins. The reasoning used by multiple Sky people about working harder and smarter, "dedication and sacrifice=results, end of story" etc. All very Postal like.
Yes, I agree, Postal-like in the fact of having a team doing well, but hardly 'blowing the race apart' like you intimate, Nibs still piled off the front didn't he for a while???
If everyone can see the similarities then why, when I have mentioned am I repeatedly told that it's not true, called a troll, misdirected to try to make it sound like I am talking about Armstrong now, etc.? Why is Kimmage a smart man when talking about Armstrong but a loon when talking about Wiggins? I could go on but you get the point. There is plenty to be suspicious about and this forum is defending Sky/Wiggins just like the Armstrong/Postal fans back in their day.
The similarities are a team being the top performing team, that infers nothing else.
Come back with some evidence, that's all. Compare it with power outputs etc if you like. I reaaaaally don't mind hearing solid arguments on any team being suspect, but don't just base it on US Postal used to have people on the front. I suggest you watch Lance Hautacam on Youtube and compare that with ANYTHING youve seen Froome or Wiggins do.
So, if I agree with you the language of Sky and Postal can be the same, you can agree it doesn't mean anything but the language is the same. Let's just wait for some evidence. If they are rotten, I'll be the first to say f**k em, I assure you, but Im not gonna make judgements on any of this conjecture and speculation rubbish... and if you want to say the US Postal stuff was conjecture and rubbish, you will get laughed at.0 -
mfin wrote:Rundfahrt wrote:Do you mean like Froome suddenly becoming a GT contender and a top ITT guy at the Vuelta or Wiggins dominating almost every race he has been in this year or Sky dominating those races?
No, I don't. Cos I don't see those points as either odd or true.
What isn't true about those statements? Why is none of it odd?
Let's be honest while just about everyone else was falling apart today Sky had four in the front until Rogers flatted on the descent and rode tempo all day including riding down a top GC guys attack on a climb. Nothing to be even remotely suspicious about there. Of course then we have the LA like angry response to doping questions by Wiggins. The reasoning used by multiple Sky people about working harder and smarter, "dedication and sacrifice=results, end of story" etc. All very Postal like.
Yes, I agree, Postal-like in the fact of having a team doing well, but hardly 'blowing the race apart' like you intimate, Nibs still piled off the front didn't he for a while???
Riders went off the front against Postal as well and they let them when they wanted to and reeled them in when they wanted to...just like Sky did today. Sky did blow things apart today, if this had been tomorrows stage it would have been massive carnage by the end.
If everyone can see the similarities then why, when I have mentioned am I repeatedly told that it's not true, called a troll, misdirected to try to make it sound like I am talking about Armstrong now, etc.? Why is Kimmage a smart man when talking about Armstrong but a loon when talking about Wiggins? I could go on but you get the point. There is plenty to be suspicious about and this forum is defending Sky/Wiggins just like the Armstrong/Postal fans back in their day.
The similarities are a team being the top performing team, that infers nothing else.
The similarities are much more, but you, (an others) conveniently ignore them because it is Sky/Wiggins. Don't try to deny it because it is blatantly obvious. Hell, you are even now referring to Postals efforts being ones where "everyone's jaws drop" in the name of hyperbole and downplaying what Sky is doing.
Come back with some evidence, that's all. Compare it with power outputs etc if you like. I reaaaaally don't mind hearing solid arguments on any team being suspect, but don't just base it on US Postal used to have people on the front. I suggest you watch Lance Hautacam on Youtube and compare that with ANYTHING youve seen Froome or Wiggins do.
So, if I agree with you the language of Sky and Postal can be the same, you can agree it doesn't mean anything but the language is the same. Let's just wait for some evidence. If they are rotten, I'll be the first to say f**k em, I assure you, but Im not gonna make judgements on any of this conjecture and speculation rubbish... and if you want to say the US Postal stuff was conjecture and rubbish, you will get laughed at.
First it was criticize with some degree of fact and then, after I do, the demand becomes having specific numbers.
Just more of the defense of LA/Postal back in their day. That's the great thing about the guys who are arguing with me so vociferously, you guys are doing so in the exact manner the LA/Postal defenders did back then and guys like you relished ripping on them (and yes I know who you and your dd buddy are and which forums you used to post on. But no I am not the poster you think I am!).
I think I will bid you adieu on this topic as it's clear that you are dead set on saying anything you have to say to keep pushing your opinion as the only right one. Feel free to keep going if you must, but you really could learn a thing or two from Jez about discussing topics with someone you don't agree with.0 -
Rundfahrt wrote:mfin wrote:Rundfahrt wrote:Do you mean like Froome suddenly becoming a GT contender and a top ITT guy at the Vuelta or Wiggins dominating almost every race he has been in this year or Sky dominating those races?
No, I don't. Cos I don't see those points as either odd or true.
What isn't true about those statements? Why is none of it odd?
Let's be honest while just about everyone else was falling apart today Sky had four in the front until Rogers flatted on the descent and rode tempo all day including riding down a top GC guys attack on a climb. Nothing to be even remotely suspicious about there. Of course then we have the LA like angry response to doping questions by Wiggins. The reasoning used by multiple Sky people about working harder and smarter, "dedication and sacrifice=results, end of story" etc. All very Postal like.
Yes, I agree, Postal-like in the fact of having a team doing well, but hardly 'blowing the race apart' like you intimate, Nibs still piled off the front didn't he for a while???
Riders went off the front against Postal as well and they let them when they wanted to and reeled them in when they wanted to...just like Sky did today. Sky did blow things apart today, if this had been tomorrows stage it would have been massive carnage by the end.
If everyone can see the similarities then why, when I have mentioned am I repeatedly told that it's not true, called a troll, misdirected to try to make it sound like I am talking about Armstrong now, etc.? Why is Kimmage a smart man when talking about Armstrong but a loon when talking about Wiggins? I could go on but you get the point. There is plenty to be suspicious about and this forum is defending Sky/Wiggins just like the Armstrong/Postal fans back in their day.
The similarities are a team being the top performing team, that infers nothing else.
The similarities are much more, but you, (an others) conveniently ignore them because it is Sky/Wiggins. Don't try to deny it because it is blatantly obvious. Hell, you are even now referring to Postals efforts being ones where "everyone's jaws drop" in the name of hyperbole and downplaying what Sky is doing.
Come back with some evidence, that's all. Compare it with power outputs etc if you like. I reaaaaally don't mind hearing solid arguments on any team being suspect, but don't just base it on US Postal used to have people on the front. I suggest you watch Lance Hautacam on Youtube and compare that with ANYTHING youve seen Froome or Wiggins do.
So, if I agree with you the language of Sky and Postal can be the same, you can agree it doesn't mean anything but the language is the same. Let's just wait for some evidence. If they are rotten, I'll be the first to say f**k em, I assure you, but Im not gonna make judgements on any of this conjecture and speculation rubbish... and if you want to say the US Postal stuff was conjecture and rubbish, you will get laughed at.
First it was criticize with some degree of fact and then, after I do, the demand becomes having specific numbers.
Just more of the defense of LA/Postal back in their day. That's the great thing about the guys who are arguing with me so vociferously, you guys are doing so in the exact manner the LA/Postal defenders did back then and guys like you relished ripping on them (and yes I know who you and your dd buddy are and which forums you used to post on. But no I am not the poster you think I am!).
I think I will bid you adieu on this topic as it's clear that you are dead set on saying anything you have to say to keep pushing your opinion as the only right one. Feel free to keep going if you must, but you really could learn a thing or two from Jez about discussing topics with someone you don't agree with.
No problem.
Have you seen my posts on CN Forums then?0
