Wiggone!!
Comments
-
According to the Steephill list of riders, Wiggins is to ride the ENECO. :roll:pinarello001 wrote:So back to the Wiggo conundrum. How do you cross the aspirations of the track (power, speed, intensity) with a classic (stamina, luck, tactical nous, determination) ?Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 19720 -
I remember an interview Wiggins did at the end stage 7 in 2009 TDF at the top of Andorra-Arcalis where he finished with the main GC contenders.
He said something like "I hope people will now think of me as a Roadie and not just a Trackie."
Well I think he has finished that train of thought after he went through the card in 2012.
I think he knows his palmares still need a monument race.Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 19720 -
deejay wrote:The indigenous people of this insular island are a proud people that have stood apart from Europe.....
But we weren't talking about the Gaels, I'm fairly sure they were first, to be pushed back by the Celts..... etc till 1066...I do as an Anglo-Saxon
Oh you are a German. Bloody foreigners, coming here,taking our jobs...
0 -
philwint wrote:deejay wrote:The indigenous people of this insular island are a proud people that have stood apart from Europe.....
But we weren't talking about the Gaels, I'm fairly sure they were first, to be pushed back by the Celts..... etc till 1066...I do as an Anglo-Saxon
Oh you are a German. Bloody foreigners, coming here,taking our jobs...
Then the bloody Normans came in a ruined everything.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Why do Sky keep hold of Wiggins? Becasue the BBC write articles like this -http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-28730183
You ll note that Wiggins gets a photo and a line whereas Adam Blythe - the winner - gets half a line. Both of them are upstaged by a couple who got married on the sportive (no disrespect the couple, congratulations to them, but...)We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0
-
ddraver wrote:Why do Sky keep hold of Wiggins? Becasue the BBC write articles like this -http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-28730183
You ll note that Wiggins gets a photo and a line whereas Adam Blythe - the winner - gets half a line. Both of them are upstaged by a couple who got married on the sportive (no disrespect the couple, congratulations to them, but...)
My biggest issue with the BBC coverage was that they treated it like the London Marathon and kept doing interviews with people riding the sportive instead of concentrating on the race.0 -
I guess the interviews with non-cycling celebrities gives it some broader appeal. I'm frankly still a bit amazed it has full afternoon live coverage on the BBC. Wonder whether they'll do the same for the Yorkshire Tour...Pross wrote:ddraver wrote:Why do Sky keep hold of Wiggins? Becasue the BBC write articles like this -http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-28730183
You ll note that Wiggins gets a photo and a line whereas Adam Blythe - the winner - gets half a line. Both of them are upstaged by a couple who got married on the sportive (no disrespect the couple, congratulations to them, but...)
My biggest issue with the BBC coverage was that they treated it like the London Marathon and kept doing interviews with people riding the sportive instead of concentrating on the race.0 -
Gazzaputt wrote:Back on topic. So Wiggo gets drafted in to Ride Surrey Classic and I bet Sky will want him at ToB all for marketing purposes.
Is it a disgrace that he isn't allowed to ride one grand tour this year? Just because Froome can't handle a bike for toffee and now wants to ride the Vuelta Froome being there vetos Wiggos participation.
I hope he gets a good salary from Sky for the next 2 years while he prepares for Rio as they owe him that at least.
Spot on. Brailsford sticks the boot in once more...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins ... a-a-espana"He'll ride in a couple of one-day races, then he'll ride the Tour of Britain," Brailsford said, according to bbc.co.uk. "We hope that will give him the right training preparations to go to the World Championships, and try to deliver in the individual time trial again, which he did so brilliantly last year. We hope he'll do the same again this year."
Classic 'management speak'. Someone pass the sick-bucket, please."an original thinker… the intellectual heir of Galileo and Einstein… suspicious of orthodoxy - any orthodoxy… He relishes all forms of ontological argument": jane90.0 -
'We hope that will give him the right training preparations' - that's hardly classic Sky / BC type behaviour is it? 'Brad, don't worry about all that structured training and racing crap we've done for years with you. We're chucking you into these races, with a bit of luck they'll get you ready for your main target for the year (fingers crossed, touch wood)'0
-
Pross wrote:'We hope that will give him the right training preparations' - that's hardly classic Sky / BC type behaviour is it? 'Brad, don't worry about all that structured training and racing crap we've done for years with you. We're chucking you into these races, with a bit of luck they'll get you ready for your main target for the year (fingers crossed, touch wood)'
Perhaps all that stuff about 'structured training' being the explanation for Wiggins' results really was 'crap', and he will go just as well with an old-school 'racing into form' approach.
"an original thinker… the intellectual heir of Galileo and Einstein… suspicious of orthodoxy - any orthodoxy… He relishes all forms of ontological argument": jane90.0 -
Duplicate post. :oops:"an original thinker… the intellectual heir of Galileo and Einstein… suspicious of orthodoxy - any orthodoxy… He relishes all forms of ontological argument": jane90.0
-
It was all bollox, so I deleted it.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0
-
ddraver wrote:How about you be honest with what you posted before Bender?
To be honest, I slightly changed the emphasis in my earlier post in order to avoid provoking an unproductive 'debate' about how Sky achieves their results. Not that it would be much of a debate given that on such a Brit / 'Sky fan' dominated forum such as this, most people are willing to uncritically swallow almost anything Brailsford and the rest of the Sky PR machine comes out with!
Whatever, suffice to say that I have my doubts that the successes of Wiggins, Froome and co. have much to do with any special 'training plan' they follow. As such it probably hardly matters if Wiggins prepares for the World championships by way of the racing programme that Brailsford has laid out for him in an apparent attempt to keep him as far away as possible from Froome."an original thinker… the intellectual heir of Galileo and Einstein… suspicious of orthodoxy - any orthodoxy… He relishes all forms of ontological argument": jane90.0 -
BenderRodriguez wrote:ddraver wrote:How about you be honest with what you posted before Bender?
To be honest, I slightly changed the emphasis in my earlier post in order to avoid provoking an unproductive 'debate' about how Sky achieves their results. Not that it would be much of a debate given that dominateon such a Brit / 'Sky fan' d forum such as this, most people are willing to uncritically swallow almost anything Brailsford and the rest of the Sky PR machine comes out with!
Whatever, suffice to say that I have my doubts that the successes of Wiggins, Froome and co. have much to do with any special 'training plan' they follow. As such it probably hardly matters if Wiggins prepares for the World championships by way of the racing programme that Brailsford has laid out for him in an apparent attempt to keep him as far away as possible from Froome.
Classic troll. If I dont agree with a team being constantly bombarded with childish comments I am by default " A Brit Sky fan". Grow up. Form a proper argument for taking a dislike to any rider or team, and we can all discuss it. A proper argument means being prepared to present a reasoned explination, not simply "I hate Sky and everything to do with them".
Pick on anyone, for no good reason, and most will defend them out of a sense of fair play, It has nothing to do with being a "Brit" or a "Fan".0 -
mike6 wrote:Pick on anyone, for no good reason, and most will defend them out of a sense of fair play, It has nothing to do with being a "Brit" or a "Fan".
Unless the rider happens to be Italian, or Spanish, or from Eastern Europe, then the 'fair play' afforded to Team Sky is suddenly much less apparent!
"an original thinker… the intellectual heir of Galileo and Einstein… suspicious of orthodoxy - any orthodoxy… He relishes all forms of ontological argument": jane90.0 -
Except that isn't true, plenty of posters lined up to defend Nibali, who isn't British, Kenyan, or even a sky rider...
Heck, before that, long ago, posters used to defend a certain Texan...You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
BenderRodriguez wrote:mike6 wrote:Pick on anyone, for no good reason, and most will defend them out of a sense of fair play, It has nothing to do with being a "Brit" or a "Fan".
Unless the rider happens to be Italian, or Spanish, or from Eastern Europe, then the 'fair play' afforded to Team Sky is suddenly much less apparent!
No it isn't. Once again you fail to read the post properly so you can stick to your agenda. "Pick on anyone, for no good reason, and most will defend them out of a sense of fair play".
If you could find the time to throw bile at another team or rider you would find out where others stand on the subject. :roll:0 -
mike6 wrote:If you could find the time to throw bile at another team or rider you would find out where others stand on the subject.
Of course! After all, anyone on here who even implies that a rider might be doped without conclusive proof, irrespective of whether or not that rider is Spanish or Italian, once worked with a 'dodgy doctor' or failed a dope test, is immediately shouted down by everyone else, keen to a man to uphold the principle of 'fair play'.
Meanwhile back in the real world... "an original thinker… the intellectual heir of Galileo and Einstein… suspicious of orthodoxy - any orthodoxy… He relishes all forms of ontological argument": jane90.0 -
BenderRodriguez wrote:mike6 wrote:If you could find the time to throw bile at another team or rider you would find out where others stand on the subject.
Of course! After all, anyone on here who even implies that a rider might be doped without conclusive proof, irrespective of whether or not that rider is Spanish or Italian, once worked with a 'dodgy doctor' or failed a dope test, is immediately shouted down by everyone else, keen to a man to uphold the principle of 'fair play'.
Meanwhile back in the real world...
You're not in the real world. With no evidence you're just passing off your own opinion as if it holds up to scrutiny just because of other riders doping and the history of doping in cycling. There's very few people on here whatsoever who would defend any rider when evidence is clear. Somehow you manage to twist this round into being a pro-Sky thing. There is no evidence. It's all completely uninformed theory you are offering and nothing else. (I don't like Sky at all by the way).0 -
BenderRodriguez wrote:mike6 wrote:If you could find the time to throw bile at another team or rider you would find out where others stand on the subject.
Of course! After all, anyone on here who even implies that a rider might be doped without conclusive proof, irrespective of whether or not that rider is Spanish or Italian, once worked with a 'dodgy doctor' or failed a dope test, is immediately shouted down by everyone else, keen to a man to uphold the principle of 'fair play'.
Meanwhile back in the real world...
Another classic Troll statement. Anyone not agreeing with your point of view has no idea what they are talking about??? Get real. :roll:0 -
mfin wrote:There's very few people on here whatsoever who would defend any rider when evidence is clear.
But there are plenty willing to 'question' the performances of riders on no more basis than they are riding well without them being shouted down as 'trolls' and so forth - as long as that rider is not with Sky! For example, Nibali's performances have frequently being 'questioned' this way and it is much the story with riders such as Contador and even Voeckler. For an even more extreme example, just look at the reaction to Vinokourov's win at the Olympics, with the 'defalt position of the forum' seeming to be that was is juiced up every time he rode, even if he hadn't tested positive.
The reality is that, for almost any rider who is not with Sky, whether or not they are doping seems to be considered to be a fair point for discussion. Such double standards are very reminiscent of they hey-day of Armstrong!"an original thinker… the intellectual heir of Galileo and Einstein… suspicious of orthodoxy - any orthodoxy… He relishes all forms of ontological argument": jane90.0 -
I think you're exaggerating somewhat. There's actually little doping talk on this forum unless there's an actual story. Generally, this forum is on the side of riders if there is no actual evidence.BenderRodriguez wrote:But there are plenty willing to 'question' the performances of riders on no more basis than they are riding well without them being shouted down as 'trolls' and so forth - as long as that rider is not with Sky! For example, Nibali's performances have frequently being 'questioned' this way and it is much the story with riders such as Contador and even Voeckler. For an even more extreme example, just look at the reaction to Vinokourov's win at the Olympics, with the 'defalt position of the forum' seeming to be that was is juiced up every time he rode, even if he hadn't tested positive.
I can't remember much said about Nibali or Voeckler - with Contador it's more pushback on Frenchie's nonsense.
And as for Vino, well he has tested positive, and been on the team at the centre of Puerto and worked with Ferrari - events he barely acknowledges, so he's not really deserving of faith and support. And given that he now runs a team, he needs to viewed with greater scrutiny.
There was a fifty page thread about Sky and what they might be doing. It's hardly stopping discussion. Personally I'd welcome sensible discussion on the matter, but the case for the prosecution too often uses phrases like 'nationalist fanboy' and trite comparisons to Armstrong rather than any intelligence (and is often met with 'hater').
Too much of the debate is people who missed out on Armstrong first time round for whatever reason (being a fan, not having social media, too young) trying to recreate it so they can be on board this time. Whether they are right or not is largely immaterial to them.Twitter: @RichN950 -
BenderRodriguez wrote:mfin wrote:There's very few people on here whatsoever who would defend any rider when evidence is clear.
But there are plenty willing to 'question' the performances of riders on no more basis than they are riding well without them being shouted down as 'trolls' and so forth - as long as that rider is not with Sky! For example, Nibali's performances have frequently being 'questioned' this way and it is much the story with riders such as Contador and even Voeckler. For an even more extreme example, just look at the reaction to Vinokourov's win at the Olympics, with the 'defalt position of the forum' seeming to be that was is juiced up every time he rode, even if he hadn't tested positive.
The reality is that, for almost any rider who is not with Sky, whether or not they are doping seems to be considered to be a fair point for discussion. Such double standards are very reminiscent of they hey-day of Armstrong!
Vino's win was 2 years ago, if that's your best example then try harder.
A few posters questioned Nibali's dominance but a reasonable number defended him, on the grounds that you know, there's no evidence, just like a reasonable number of posters defend sky, because you know, there's no actual evidence...You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Why are you lot arguing when it refers to something as mindnumbingly boring as velodrome / track cycling and its round and round and round zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz nature.
If you going to hammer your points home in an aggressive fashion then it would be so much better if it was road based aggression and not rubbish like track cycling.
Im so glad laura trott has switched to road cycling and packed in that velodrome bull$hit.This serious internet site..............I serious cat0 -
Serious Cat wrote:Why are you lot arguing when it refers to something as mindnumbingly boring as velodrome / track cycling and its round and round and round zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz nature.
If you going to hammer your points home in an aggressive fashion then it would be so much better if it was road based aggression and not rubbish like track cycling.
Im so glad laura trott has switched to road cycling and packed in that velodrome bull$hit.
Quality post...0 -
Serious Cat wrote:Im so glad laura trott has switched to road cycling and packed in that velodrome bull$hit.
She hasn't, you plum. She was racing on the track at the Commonwealth Games just a couple of weeks ago.
Serious Cat? Trolling Misinformed Cat would be more accurate.0 -
andyp wrote:Serious Cat wrote:Im so glad laura trott has switched to road cycling and packed in that velodrome bull$hit.
She hasn't, you plum. She was racing on the track at the Commonwealth Games just a couple of weeks ago.
Serious Cat? Trolling Misinformed Cat would be more accurate.
Quite, cycling is cycling. Get over it. :roll:0
