The end of Riis?
Comments
-
^ *cracks open the aquavit to celebrate*0
-
Apparently he's left the Tour...
http://www.rtbf.be/sport/cyclisme/tourdefrance/detail_pourchasse-par-son-passe-bjarne-riis-a-quitte-le-tour?id=80329130 -
DeadCalm wrote:Apparently he's left the Tour...
http://www.rtbf.be/sport/cyclisme/tourdefrance/detail_pourchasse-par-son-passe-bjarne-riis-a-quitte-le-tour?id=8032913
He said on Monday that he would be popping in and out this year.
He's working on a new sponsor deal for the team, rumours are it will be Tinkof as solo sponsors next time.
I wouldn't read to much into him popping in and out - he knows he's going to affect the team focus when he's about so he's just keeping his head down as much as possible.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
No tA Doctor wrote:
Rasmussen has grassed him big time. He won't survive.
Indeed. I'm more interested in the other names. It would be significant for cycling if people who've passed through his teams are named.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Yellow Peril wrote:Agreed, so much implication of Riis by others that he is starting to creak. Doping aside he is a great tactician, best DS of the last 15 years?
He was always a good tactician. As a rider too. Well known for it.0 -
Is the Chicken just talking about Riis during his one year at CSC, or is it more than that?0
-
Bakunin wrote:Is the Chicken just talking about Riis during his one year at CSC, or is it more than that?
The Chicken said he was going to tell absolutely everything to the Danish anti doping people. That covers his time with CSC and every other team as well.
I think the investigation has spoken to Jacksche and Hamilton as well, but nobody is really saying much.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
iainf72 wrote:No tA Doctor wrote:
Rasmussen has grassed him big time. He won't survive.
Indeed. I'm more interested in the other names. It would be significant for cycling if people who've passed through his teams are named.
Difficult to know what the scope of the investigation is, really. Riis will be a big focus because the team have a Danish license. But it could go all over the place, Rasmussen rode for a few teams.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Right, might be a bit late to the party with this one, but Jaksche says he takes to Danish anti doping. He says they seemed very well informed. He told them Riis knew of his program and that he was assisted by the team doctors, who would tell him how to fit his program to his race schedule.
Expect this to go quiet for a couple of months, unless Hamilton wants to chip in publicly. Riis won't say anything, the chicken won't give details, Danish anti doping will keep zipped.
No word yet from Kimmage.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
No tA Doctor wrote:No word yet from Kimmage.
He needs someone else to do all the investigating and then talk about it when a camera is pointed his wayFckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
iainf72 wrote:No tA Doctor wrote:No word yet from Kimmage.
He needs someone else to do all the investigating and then talk about it when a camera is pointed his way
He he
0 -
-
Rick Chasey wrote:Am I the only person who enjoys Riis being part of the sport?
No, I think he quite likes being part of it as well...0 -
-
I can't follow who people don't like anymore, post Armstrong admission.
Seems like basically anyone who did well in the '90s.
He's the most tactically interesting DS by miles.0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:iainf72 wrote:No tA Doctor wrote:No word yet from Kimmage.
He needs someone else to do all the investigating and then talk about it when a camera is pointed his way
He he
There should be a "deadpan" emoticon, for when you want to deliver a punchline straight, but want everyone to know it's a punchline.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
what annoys me with all this is why the UCI let these people stay in the sport. The old guard who were brought up on doping to win need to be kicked out then the sport can start to move on0
-
Thanks for that. I fancied having a look at it but sure as hell wasn't going to pay for it.mmacavity wrote:
It's a 100+ page monument to bad science. The same people who think every cyclists must be viewed in the most suspicious of terms will lap that up with no regard whether it is credible. I'd love someone like Ben Goldacre to critique it.
From a Velonews interview (today I think):
VeloNews: Froome declined to release his power numbers publicly, why?
Dave Brailsford: It’s an interesting question. There is so much pseudo science out there right now. If you release the data, there are very few people who can properly interpret and understand that data. All you’re going to do is create is a lot of noise for people who are pseudo scientists. You can even write magazines about it. They’re so wide of the mark in what they’re doing, it’s quite scary. You can do anything with stats. You can use that with a cynical view.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Rick Chasey wrote:I can't follow who people don't like anymore, post Armstrong admission.
Seems like basically anyone who did well in the '90s.
He's the most tactically interesting DS by miles.
If you doped in the 80s you're ok e.g. Kelly.
If you rode in the 90s or early 00s you're not ok unless you're named Bassons or Boardman. e.g. Kloden
If you got caught doping after that then boo, otherwise you're fine.
Contador's victory in the Veulta was stunning. Some of the finest tactics never caught on camera.0 -
as much as i don't like the fact, the nature of cycling means there will always be dopers and there will always be suspicion. I struggle to believe Sky are morally clean I think they are on something not yet on the banned list.
Cat amongst the pigeons JTL had a mega year last year what has he done this year? No bio passport last year just saying.0 -
ozzzyosborn206 wrote:as much as i don't like the fact, the nature of cycling means there will always be dopers and there will always be suspicion. I struggle to believe Sky are morally clean I think they are on something not yet on the banned list.
The banned list is pretty broad in it's scope. Most new PEDs, while not explicitly named, will be on there as part of a family of drugs
He was winning .1 and .2 races. Now he's doing WT and HC races. It's a big step up.ozzzyosborn206 wrote:Cat amongst the pigeons JTL had a mega year last year what has he done this year? No bio passport last year just saying.Twitter: @RichN950 -
TheBigBean wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:I can't follow who people don't like anymore, post Armstrong admission.
Seems like basically anyone who did well in the '90s.
He's the most tactically interesting DS by miles.
If you doped in the 80s you're ok e.g. Kelly.
If you rode in the 90s or early 00s you're not ok unless you're named Bassons or Boardman. e.g. Kloden
If you got caught doping after that then boo, otherwise you're fine.
Contador's victory in the Veulta was stunning. Some of the finest tactics never caught on camera.
Pretty much sums it up ...
The 80's guys know when to shut up ... The 90's guys know they don't have to so cling onto tainted glory ...0 -
Is it even bad science?
Merely a poor use of numbers, or just flawed data, to arrive at some muddled thinking.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:I can't follow who people don't like anymore, post Armstrong admission.
Seems like basically anyone who did well in the '90s.
He's the most tactically interesting DS by miles.
Agreed though Cannondale have played a blinder so far this year (DS name escapes me for a moment)0 -
TBH it was in the past and i don't much care anyway. Glad that Armstrong got done but because he was a nasty negative sh ite more than the drugs.
Id have taken it as a younger guy without much hesitation. career enhancing- DEF, performance enhancing DEF, until relatively recently unlikely to get caught DEF. Horror stories on the internet about negative health consequences, NONE definitive or even close.
What wasn't to like.
And this is not meant to be a troll or flame or whatever its called, I'm just growing tired of witch hunts. they show an interesting side to human nature.0 -
That's exactly why it's bad science.mmacavity wrote:Is it even bad science?
Merely a poor use of numbers, or just flawed data, to arrive at some muddled thinking.
Things like when he justifies his claimed accuracy of +/-2% by comparison to Chris Horner's powermeter. There are seven data points, five are within 2%, but one is 5% and one 9%, which he discards for reasons due to certain vague characteristics of the climb. Well you can't do that.
And the whole underlying concept. The idea of judging what is and isn't humanly capable, when those who have ever done bike racing is probably less than 5% of Western Europeans and less than 1% of other caucasians and next to nothing the the other 6 and a half billion. Vayer's introduction, mentioning the men's 100m, and seemingly presenting Christophe Lemaitre (who is white) as the clean benchmark and others as 'Ben Jonhsons' was particularly troubling.Twitter: @RichN950 -
mmacavity wrote:
Mr Fuller should be sued until he lives in a cardboard box for this crap.
Apparently there is no benefit to drafting uphill. Better tell Sky as they should send Froome up a coll on his own and save the rest of the team for the flat.0 -
Riis was the first winner of the Tour after I started watching it. So yeah I do feel cheated in that I wasn't watching what I thought I was watching.0
-
Calculator monkeys, doing typewriter monkeys everywhere proud. If only I were given such liberties with data sets...
Expected something remotely explaining the algorithms, based upon ambient conditions, technology and such, instead got 40 pages of Skins and another 40 pages of colours. And for some reason expected that the 410 watts ~ Ben Johnson would be based on something, or anything, rather than just what appears a whim0
