Are sky clean or not?
Comments
-
His Vuelta 2011 performance was a huge surprise, I can't imagine anyone saying otherwise, but we're halfway through 2015 now and it's still the best (only?) stick to beat him with.
Vuelta 2011 gets so many references because it was such a step-change relative to what had gone before. The roll call of riders who've undergone a similar transformation means it is a pretty big stick.
Unless a rider is a top tier kn*b-head like Lance then life is pretty binary - they either fail a test and get busted or they don't, and one only has performance levels on which to base suspicion in an objective manner.0 -
As I have pointed out before, Froome didn't have that huge a jump in performance at a GT, actually pretty similar to others:
Contador went from 31st to 1st, Froome went from 34th to 2nd, Nibali went from 20th to 6th, Quintana went from 36th to 2nd.
All pretty similar jumps in performance, I know its not scientific but it's interesting.
That's an interesting comparison.
One, slight oddity that I have noticed Digger keep banging on about, is that Froome suffered from bilharzia and also has asthma...according to him, that's impossible...although the guardian appears to suggest that what is hypothesized is that diseases like bilharzia reduce how common stuff like asthma is...You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
As I have pointed out before, Froome didn't have that huge a jump in performance at a GT, actually pretty similar to others:
Contador went from 31st to 1st, Froome went from 34th to 2nd, Nibali went from 20th to 6th, Quintana went from 36th to 2nd.
All pretty similar jumps in performance, I know its not scientific but it's interesting.
However, his results in ProTour/World Tour races, 2HCs and 2.1s vs those of the other 3 before all of their respective break-though GTs, aren't in the same town never mind the same ball-park. For whatever reasons.
His is a very unusual career progression. And in a post-Lance/USADA world, its easy enough to see why many are twitchy.0 -
As I have pointed out before, Froome didn't have that huge a jump in performance at a GT, actually pretty similar to others:
Contador went from 31st to 1st, Froome went from 34th to 2nd, Nibali went from 20th to 6th, Quintana went from 36th to 2nd.
All pretty similar jumps in performance, I know its not scientific but it's interesting.
Interesting, indeed. Worth noting the following:
- Berto has been busted for doping, so his improvement is maybe easiest to explain!
- Froome was 26 when he transformed
- Nibs was 23 at the time and had finished 11th in the Giro before finishing 20th in the Tour in 2008.
- Quintana was 23 in the 2013 Tour and in his first full season in Europe the year before had already notched some high level wins.
- Although improving from finishing in the 30s to the GT podium doesn't sound much, it typically a time gap of 60-90 minutes (vs maybe 10-15 minutes for being at the bottom end of the top 10) which over (say) 20 major climbs represents 3-4 minutes per climb. As each climb typically takes 40 minutes, such an improvement is actually very big indeed. Granted a youthful pro will have to do their share of time in the wind which will compromise performance, but even so, improving from a mid 30s GT finish is a big move. (Lance finished 36 in 1995, and we all know how that worked out!)0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19666843#p19666843]Wallace and Gromit[/url] wrote:[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19666768#p19666768]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:One of the biggest problems with Froome in arguing his credibility, is his back story. There's no doubt its a gift to the Doperati, but there's also no doubt its a bit of a hurdle.
I have some sympathy for the more rationale Clinic Cynics re Froome. The story from Sky is that they always knew Froome was a supreme talent but it took him a while to deal with his relative lack of experience and sort out the Bilharzia.
I have a few problems with this:
1 - If you do a Google search on Froome, then there is nothing about him being particularly talented in "real time". He is simply AN Other Barloworld/Sky rider. His most notable contribution to GT history prior to 2011 was to be DQ'd for taking a tow! (Albeit when in search of the team car to abandon). All the stuff about him being a supreme talent that just needed nurturing is retrospectively
2 - He arrived in Europe in 2007 training/racing at the UCI Academy. Now, in any endurance sport, after a year or two of solid training and racing as an adult, you start achieving performances that are quite close to your maximum levels in % terms. (The returns for more/better training diminish rapidly, and are mainly aimed at eeking out the final percent or two, not transforming yourself in your mid 20s.) So, where were the GT-contending level results in 2009/2010 and early 2011? Even riders who flatter to ultimately deceive do at least flatter in their early days.
3 - If he was the supreme talent pre Vuelta 2011, what are the odds on him performing to close to GT winning levels in the lab repeatedly but never on the road?
As Father In Law says about investments: If it sounds too good to be true then it probably is.
I think you also have to look at when cycling turned a corner in terms of doping.
Using the TdF final classification top 10 to keep things simple:
2007 - Lots of doping
2008 - Still lots of doping
2009 - Still lots of doping. Better than 2008
2010 - Some doping. Better than 2009
2011 - Still some questionable in the top 10
2012 - A clean tour?
2013 - Another clean tour?
2014 - Another clean tour?
2015 - Another clean tour?0 -
As I have pointed out before, Froome didn't have that huge a jump in performance at a GT, actually pretty similar to others:
Contador went from 31st to 1st, Froome went from 34th to 2nd, Nibali went from 20th to 6th, Quintana went from 36th to 2nd.
All pretty similar jumps in performance, I know its not scientific but it's interesting.
That's an interesting comparison.
One, slight oddity that I have noticed Digger keep banging on about, is that Froome suffered from bilharzia and also has asthma...according to him, that's impossible...although the guardian appears to suggest that what is hypothesized is that diseases like bilharzia reduce how common stuff like asthma is...
Ah. Doctor Digger. The well known medical expert. The same one who tried to claim that its a very rare illness. The same illness that affects over 200m worldwide and is very common in Africa.0 -
IF there's anything about Froome - and I'm not saying there is - a fearless 'doping is a scourge' journo who has made his doubts about Sky and Froome very plain, such as, oh I dont know, Kimmage perhaps, could get off his fat arse and get onto a plane to Nairobi and Cape Town. If there's anything about Froome's past to be unearthed, it may be there.
But he wont be arsed. He's just a noisy drum.0 -
Good stuff on the background. What's the deal on his 2011 contract? Was he out the door before the storming Vuelta?
Also, let's not forget, that the team took a while to find their feet and didn't hit their stride before arguably hiring a certain unknown celebrity doping doc. (I imagine Froome charges Brailsford a reputation surcharge for that hire)...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
Dug out some old Procycling's recently. One from end of 2009 when they were just starting to name the riders signed to Sky had a small bit about Froome where the hope was that with a bit of coaching he could be a GC contender.0
-
OK, so just to sum up the last two pages since Joel asked for "extraordinary evidence", nobody has anything more than "but 2011!"? And that only for Froome in particular rather than Sky in general?0
-
Dug out some old Procycling's recently. One from end of 2009 when they were just starting to name the riders signed to Sky had a small bit about Froome where the hope was that with a bit of coaching he could be a GC contender.
Sky would probably make more money out of selling that coaching plan to Weekend Warriors than from cycling or even flogging TV subscriptions!0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19667085#p19667085]Wallace and Gromit[/url] wrote:Dug out some old Procycling's recently. One from end of 2009 when they were just starting to name the riders signed to Sky had a small bit about Froome where the hope was that with a bit of coaching he could be a GC contender.
Sky would probably make more money out of selling that coaching plan to Weekend Warriors than from cycling or even flogging TV subscriptions!
But only they have un-diagnosed bilharzia of course0 -
OK, so just to sum up the last two pages since Joel asked for "extraordinary evidence", nobody has anything more than "but 2011!"? And that only for Froome in particular rather than Sky in general?
Someone made reference to a particular doctor a few posts ago.
To be fair, questions have been asked about Froome's transformation since the day he transformed and Sky have resolutely resisted the temptation to release any testing data from the Old Days which might help resolve the matter one way or another. I can see why they won't release such data, but it's not really fair to highlight how old the issue of Froome's transformation is. It's such a massive factor in any assessment of Sky/Froome that it can't be ignored but without Sky's cooperation, it can't be investigated further, so it remains a live but static issue.0 -
But only they have un-diagnosed bilharzia of course
Well my race results are always worse than my turbo sessions suggest they should be so maybe I have undiagnosed Bilharzia...0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19667092#p19667092]Wallace and Gromit[/url] wrote:But only they have un-diagnosed bilharzia of course
Well my race results are always worse than my turbo sessions suggest they should be so maybe I have undiagnosed Bilharzia...
It's possible - how many years have you lived in Africa?0 -
Also old news. Seriously, it's been years now and many people have joined and left the team during that time and presumably have no reason to keep quiet. Either Sky are incredibly, astonishingly, amazingly good at covering up their doping programs, or they are somehow forcing everyone to stay quiet, or they're simply not doping. I think someone quoted David Walsh earlier as having said that a few years into his Armstrong investigation he already had a bunch of people willing to talk to him about the doping that was going on in that team, yet nobody has come forward with anything remotely similar despite the massive public appetite for any hint of a Sky-related scandal.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19667091#p19667091]Wallace and Gromit[/url] wrote:OK, so just to sum up the last two pages since Joel asked for "extraordinary evidence", nobody has anything more than "but 2011!"? And that only for Froome in particular rather than Sky in general?
Someone made reference to a particular doctor a few posts ago.
I'm more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt until someone turns up some actual evidence, and rehashing the same points over and over again isn't really worth doing.0 -
Also old news. Seriously, it's been years now and many people have joined and left the team during that time and presumably have no reason to keep quiet.
The passage of time is indeed on the positive (pun intended!) side for Sky. On the negative side of things, a few riders have confessed (e.g. Riis) and a few have fessed up in the presence of Federal agents as part of the Lance farrago, but most folk simply keep quiet. The difficulties of proving anything (*) plus of course the damage to one's own reputation/finances are powerful incentives to keep quiet.
(*) Although eye-witness accounts are sufficient, they would need to be corroborated, so a lone voice implicating Sky could be dismissed as the "bitter and twisted ex employee".0 -
But isn't that the point being made? Sky aren't even having to use the "BATEE" defence because there isn't even a lone voice. Unlike Armstrong.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19667129#p19667129]Wallace and Gromit[/url] wrote:Also old news. Seriously, it's been years now and many people have joined and left the team during that time and presumably have no reason to keep quiet.
The passage of time is indeed on the positive (pun intended!) side for Sky. On the negative side of things, a few riders have confessed (e.g. Riis) and a few have fessed up in the presence of Federal agents as part of the Lance farrago, but most folk simply keep quiet. The difficulties of proving anything (*) plus of course the damage to one's own reputation/finances are powerful incentives to keep quiet.
(*) Although eye-witness accounts are sufficient, they would need to be corroborated, so a lone voice implicating Sky could be dismissed as the "bitter and twisted ex employee".0 -
Reading this thread I feel like I'm in Groundhog Day!0
-
I know what you mean.Reading this thread I feel like I'm in Groundhog Day!
But I can't stop staring.
Because so many people in the clinic know for sure that sky are doping, that one of them is bound to post up the proof. And I can't face going there again, so I'm reliant on the reporting of that proof here.
Any time soon....
Eh? Oh....
[tumbleweed]0 -
Different times now compared to the nineties and noughties. There's very little reason for someone who knows something to keep quiet in the current climate, not to mention the "zero tolerance" policy that Sky themselves claim to follow. Even if someone was reluctant to come forward alone, can you imagine how quickly an "expert" like Vayer or Tucker would fall over themselves to provide a platform for an "anonymous source inside Team Sky" ready to confirm all they've been saying for years?! It'd be on Twitter before they'd heard the end of the first sentence! Failing that, they could send information anonymously to a bunch of respected journalists and sit back to watch it play out. Or send it to Wikileaks! There is no end of ways to get the information out there while remaining anonymous these days.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19667129#p19667129]Wallace and Gromit[/url] wrote:
The passage of time is indeed on the positive (pun intended!) side for Sky. On the negative side of things, a few riders have confessed (e.g. Riis) and a few have fessed up in the presence of Federal agents as part of the Lance farrago, but most folk simply keep quiet. The difficulties of proving anything (*) plus of course the damage to one's own reputation/finances are powerful incentives to keep quiet.Also old news. Seriously, it's been years now and many people have joined and left the team during that time and presumably have no reason to keep quiet.
Sky have really been under the microscope since they started winning big races, and if they've managed to maintain a sophisticated and highly successful doping program under everyone's noses for all that time then it genuinely has to count as one of the most successful long term deceptions in recent human history.0 -
Financially, we're talking BONANZA time for the people bringing it out into the open
£££££££££££0 -
Because so many people in the clinic know for sure that sky are doping, that one of them is bound to post up the proof. And I can't face going there again, so I'm reliant on the reporting of that proof here.
Any time soon....
Eh? Oh....
[tumbleweed]Antoine VAYER @festinaboy 19h19 hours ago
Antoine VAYER retweeted Soyunalavadora
Yes Antoine VAYER added,
Soyunalavadora @Soyunalavadora
According to this (from 40:50) Quintana did 6,76W/Kg in Alpe D'Huez http://www.ivoox.com/21-etapa-el-tour-onda-cero-26-07-2015-audios-mp3_rf_5322835_1.html?autoplay=1 … @veloclinic @Scienceofsport @festinaboy
But don't worry. Clinicians say Antoine has his numbers wrong on this one....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
Because so many people in the clinic know for sure that sky are doping, that one of them is bound to post up the proof. And I can't face going there again, so I'm reliant on the reporting of that proof here.
Any time soon....
Eh? Oh....
[tumbleweed]Antoine VAYER @festinaboy 19h19 hours ago
Antoine VAYER retweeted Soyunalavadora
Yes Antoine VAYER added,
Soyunalavadora @Soyunalavadora
According to this (from 40:50) Quintana did 6,76W/Kg in Alpe D'Huez http://www.ivoox.com/21-etapa-el-tour-onda-cero-26-07-2015-audios-mp3_rf_5322835_1.html?autoplay=1 … @veloclinic @Scienceofsport @festinaboy
But don't worry. Clinicians say Antoine has his numbers wrong on this one.
He he
There was a strong headwind on the Alpe on Sat. Just to further underline how good his ride was.0 -
But isn't that the point being made? Sky aren't even having to use the "BATEE" defence because there isn't even a lone voice. Unlike Armstrong.
My gut feeling is that the array of folk lining up against Lance was due to him being a kn*b-head etc. rather than because he was doping. Even the sainted Emma O'Reilly was quite happy dishing out PEDs at USPS whilst Lance was still contracted to Cofidis and was complicit in the cover-up of his 1999 Tour test failure. She only spoke out because she didn't like the way younger riders were being pressurised to dope. Likewise, the Andreus only publicised the "hospital room" conversation some years after the event after Lance had got too big for his boots.
The difficulty for anyone wanting to dish any dirt on Sky is the obvious link between Sky, Wiggins, Team GB and all the lovely gold medals in the last few Olympics. I'm not sure the Great British Public are ready for that yet! Who wants to upset the applecart? Maybe in a few years the time will be right.
As I said above though, the longer nothing comes out, the better it will be for Sky/Froome etc.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19667180#p19667180]Wallace and Gromit[/url] wrote:But isn't that the point being made? Sky aren't even having to use the "BATEE" defence because there isn't even a lone voice. Unlike Armstrong.
My gut feeling is that the array of folk lining up against Lance was due to him being a kn*b-head etc. rather than because he was doping. Even the sainted Emma O'Reilly was quite happy dishing out PEDs at USPS whilst Lance was still contracted to Cofidis and was complicit in the cover-up of his 1999 Tour test failure. She only spoke out because she didn't like the way younger riders were being pressurised to dope. Likewise, the Andreus only publicised the "hospital room" conversation some years after the event after Lance had got too big for his boots.
The difficulty for anyone wanting to dish any dirt on Sky is the obvious link between Sky, Wiggins, Team GB and all the lovely gold medals in the last few Olympics. I'm not sure the Great British Public are ready for that yet! Who wants to upset the applecart? Maybe in a few years the time will be right.
As I said above though, the longer nothing comes out, the better it will be for Sky/Froome etc.
'Who wants to upset the applecart?' I assume you're trolling. Ho ho ho
You seriously think the likes of Kimmage would go 'oh no, I'll sit on this, wouldn't want to upset the nice British people'
Doesnt need to publish in the UK with the fierce libel laws here - they're not so restrictive in Ireland, and they are DEFINITELY not restrictive in any way, shape or form in France - which is where LA Confidential was published.
Furthermore, the days of needing a publisher per se are looooong gone
The 'no one would dare to blow the whistle' conspiracy theory holds no water0 -
Why would you assume Team GB are not doping too if Sky are? As you say, there is an obvious overlap in terms of facilities and personnel, and I'd imagine anyone looking at Sky and thinking "they're clearly doping" would for example probably think the same about the 2008 and 2012 Olympic track performances by Team GB. The only reason we don't hear more about that is probably because outside the Olympics track cycling doesn't attract as much media attention. I bet if they go to Rio next year and win a bunch of golds then accusations will be made.Wallace and Gromit wrote:The difficulty for anyone wanting to dish any dirt on Sky is the obvious link between Sky, Wiggins, Team GB and all the lovely gold medals in the last few Olympics. I'm not sure the Great British Public are ready for that yet! Who wants to upset the applecart? Maybe in a few years the time will be right.0 -
Isn't the (claimed) source a Movistar team doctor?Because so many people in the clinic know for sure that sky are doping, that one of them is bound to post up the proof. And I can't face going there again, so I'm reliant on the reporting of that proof here.
Any time soon....
Eh? Oh....
[tumbleweed]Antoine VAYER @festinaboy 19h19 hours ago
Antoine VAYER retweeted Soyunalavadora
Yes Antoine VAYER added,
Soyunalavadora @Soyunalavadora
According to this (from 40:50) Quintana did 6,76W/Kg in Alpe D'Huez http://www.ivoox.com/21-etapa-el-tour-onda-cero-26-07-2015-audios-mp3_rf_5322835_1.html?autoplay=1 … @veloclinic @Scienceofsport @festinaboy
But don't worry. Clinicians say Antoine has his numbers wrong on this one.0 -
^ I like the idea of a Sky whistleblower forgoing immediate wealth to avoid hurting the public's feelings. True Brit....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0
-
Isn't the (claimed) source a Movistar team doctor?
No idea. I suppose there is a chance that Vayer means 'Yes. That's what it says.' Rather than 'Yes. I agree.'
It's been 4 days since Nairo climbed l'Alpe with mutant power. The deafening silence tells you all you need to know about doping crusaders....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0
