Are sky clean or not?

1…5253555758…60

Comments

  • Jez mon
    Jez mon Posts: 3,809
    Actually organising training through the team rather than allowing the riders to do their own thing seems to be what Sky have done, to an extent.

    Sky have also put it all together in a single package...some riders have warmed down, some have had their own chefs, some teams have (insert endless list of marginal gains here)

    Sky have put it all together constantly, then by and large targeted a single race.
    You live and learn. At any rate, you live
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Any other specific examples of how Sky have modernised training? Reverse periodisation and altitude training weren't pioneered by Sky. That leaves ... ?
    It leaves us waiting for you to provide some proof of wrongdoing instead of yet more irrelevant rambling. Any time you're ready.
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    adr82 wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Any other specific examples of how Sky have modernised training? Reverse periodisation and altitude training weren't pioneered by Sky. That leaves ... ?
    It leaves us waiting for you to provide some proof of wrongdoing instead of yet more irrelevant rambling. Any time you're ready.

    I fear we may be waiting for quite some time.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    edited August 2016
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Any other specific examples of how Sky have modernised training? Reverse periodisation and altitude training weren't pioneered by Sky. That leaves ... ?
    There aren't specific examples. Everything they do has been by someone in some form before. Sky just bring it all together in house and innovate where possible (or borrow from others). And back it with money.

    What they did differently was take full responsibility for all aspects of the rider's training - including things like nutrition. Previously riders had generally got their off the peg training plans from a third party - an old pro, a dodgy doctor, the coach at their local club, their dad etc. That was a big change for cycling. You no doubt mock their 'swimming coach' - but he's a got twenty years experience in sports physiology and took a year to gather data. Better than the DS's mate armed with a Cyrille Guimard book from the 80s I would have thought.

    But don't take my word for it, here's Romain Bardet: "This year’s team is nothing like the one I turned professional with in 2012. There is more structure now, more trainers, more training camps, and all my data is analysed. Before I didn’t have a power meter or a coach, and you just tried to do what you could"

    In two sentences that is what Sky brought to the sport - backed up by lots of cash.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    Double post
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Richmond Racer 2
    Richmond Racer 2 Posts: 4,698
    Feltkuota, the Muppets convey everything for me. Sesame St in the event of the Muppets being unavailable for comment
  • feltkuota
    feltkuota Posts: 333
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    Feltkuota, the Muppets convey everything for me. Sesame St in the event of the Muppets being unavailable for comment

    That's the type of conclusive evidence this thread needs.
  • craigus89
    craigus89 Posts: 887
    CuthbertC wrote:
    .... That leaves ... ?

    Cuthbert, lets say you are right. You're not, but lets say you are. I direct your attention to this post made earlier that was conveniently ignored:
    adr82 wrote:
    Cuthbert, you can try to change the subject by asking stupid questions like "How have they modernised training?" all you want, I'm still waiting for even a single piece of factual evidence that proves Sky are doping. Maybe you can find it in another old Telegraph article? :roll:
  • above_the_cows
    above_the_cows Posts: 11,406
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    Feltkuota, the Muppets convey everything for me. Sesame St in the event of the Muppets being unavailable for comment

    Sesame Street for those who find even the Muppets a little hard to understand.
    Correlation is not causation.
  • above_the_cows
    above_the_cows Posts: 11,406
    ^WTF? That post just added a URL link all on its own. :shock: Is this some new advertising thing?
    Correlation is not causation.
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    Above The Cows wrote:
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    Feltkuota, the Muppets convey everything for me. Sesame St in the event of the Muppets being unavailable for comment

    Sesame Street for those who find even the Muppets a little hard to understand.
    Count_von_Count_kneeling.png
    There are 1!... 2!... 3!... 4! dopers on the Sky Tour team! Ah ah ah!
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Wow, is it possible that this thread will eclipse Lances in number of pages? What is the longest doping thread on BR?
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,398
    adr82 wrote:
    Above The Cows wrote:
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    Feltkuota, the Muppets convey everything for me. Sesame St in the event of the Muppets being unavailable for comment

    Sesame Street for those who find even the Muppets a little hard to understand.
    Count_von_Count_kneeling.png
    There are 1!... 2!... 3!... 4! dopers on the Sky Tour team! Ah ah ah!

    Ha! Top marks that man.

    I guess that confirms it's only Froome and his "inner circle" doping then...
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,398
    dennisn wrote:
    Wow, is it possible that this thread will eclipse Lances in number of pages? What is the longest doping thread on BR?

    To be fair I'm not sure 10 pages of pictures of Sesame Street and the Muppets really constitutes a thread about doping...
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    Above The Cows wrote:
    maxresdefault.jpg
    David Brailsford explains to Ed Clancy his plan to break and reset his collarbone to improve aerodynamics.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    Nevermind.
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    dennisn wrote:
    Wow, is it possible that this thread will eclipse Lances in number of pages?
    Probably depends if you're planning to set up shop in this one as well given your apparent love for keeping the Lance one alive.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    adr82 wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Wow, is it possible that this thread will eclipse Lances in number of pages?
    Probably depends if you're planning to set up shop in this one as well given your apparent love for keeping the Lance one alive.
    In my defense I don't think I was the only one keeping it alive.
  • CuthbertC
    CuthbertC Posts: 172
    adr82 wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Any other specific examples of how Sky have modernised training? Reverse periodisation and altitude training weren't pioneered by Sky. That leaves ... ?
    It leaves us waiting for you to provide some proof of wrongdoing instead of yet more irrelevant rambling. Any time you're ready.

    Didn't you want me to STFU? Make up your mind.
  • CuthbertC
    CuthbertC Posts: 172
    Craigus89 wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    .... That leaves ... ?

    Cuthbert, lets say you are right. You're not, but lets say you are. I direct your attention to this post made earlier that was conveniently ignored:
    adr82 wrote:
    Cuthbert, you can try to change the subject by asking stupid questions like "How have they modernised training?" all you want, I'm still waiting for even a single piece of factual evidence that proves Sky are doping. Maybe you can find it in another old Telegraph article? :roll:

    I've answered it previously ((viewtopic.php?p=19931267#p19931267). adr82 doesn't understand the meaning of the word 'evidence'.
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,398
    RichN95 wrote:
    Above The Cows wrote:
    maxresdefault.jpg
    David Brailsford explains to Ed Clancy his plan to break and reset his collarbone to improve aerodynamics.

    We should have a Muppets/Sesame Street meets Pro Race caption competition.
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,310
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Craigus89 wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    .... That leaves ... ?

    Cuthbert, lets say you are right. You're not, but lets say you are. I direct your attention to this post made earlier that was conveniently ignored:
    adr82 wrote:
    Cuthbert, you can try to change the subject by asking stupid questions like "How have they modernised training?" all you want, I'm still waiting for even a single piece of factual evidence that proves Sky are doping. Maybe you can find it in another old Telegraph article? :roll:

    I've answered it previously ((viewtopic.php?p=19931267#p19931267). adr82 doesn't understand the meaning of the word 'evidence'.

    I'm sure he does.
    His standard of what is acceptable evidence on which to base an accusation is possibly higher than yours.
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    CuthbertC wrote:
    adr82 wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Any other specific examples of how Sky have modernised training? Reverse periodisation and altitude training weren't pioneered by Sky. That leaves ... ?
    It leaves us waiting for you to provide some proof of wrongdoing instead of yet more irrelevant rambling. Any time you're ready.

    Didn't you want me to STFU? Make up your mind.
    If you check my previous post, what I actually said was "Show me some evidence or STFU". Either one would be fantastic. Still waiting.
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,398
    TailWindHome wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Craigus89 wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    .... That leaves ... ?

    Cuthbert, lets say you are right. You're not, but lets say you are. I direct your attention to this post made earlier that was conveniently ignored:
    adr82 wrote:
    Cuthbert, you can try to change the subject by asking stupid questions like "How have they modernised training?" all you want, I'm still waiting for even a single piece of factual evidence that proves Sky are doping. Maybe you can find it in another old Telegraph article? :roll:

    I've answered it previously ((viewtopic.php?p=19931267#p19931267). adr82 doesn't understand the meaning of the word 'evidence'.

    I'm sure he does.
    His standard of what is acceptable evidence on which to base an accusation is possibly higher than yours.

    The mountain train one is particularly absurd - all that shows is that it's an effective tactic if you can afford lots of very good climbers. It has no bearing on whether or not they might be doping - all it is evidence for is Sky buying lots of good climbers (doped or otherwise) and making them work as domestiques with the express purpose of winning the Tour.
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Craigus89 wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    .... That leaves ... ?

    Cuthbert, lets say you are right. You're not, but lets say you are. I direct your attention to this post made earlier that was conveniently ignored:
    adr82 wrote:
    Cuthbert, you can try to change the subject by asking stupid questions like "How have they modernised training?" all you want, I'm still waiting for even a single piece of factual evidence that proves Sky are doping. Maybe you can find it in another old Telegraph article? :roll:

    I've answered it previously ((viewtopic.php?p=19931267#p19931267). adr82 doesn't understand the meaning of the word 'evidence'.

    I'm sure he does.
    His standard of what is acceptable evidence on which to base an accusation is possibly higher than yours.

    The mountain train one is particularly absurd - all that shows is that it's an effective tactic if you can afford lots of very good climbers. It has no bearing on whether or not they might be doping - all it is evidence for is Sky buying lots of good climbers (doped or otherwise) and making them work as domestiques with the express purpose of winning the Tour.


    Exactly, all it shows is that Sky pay riders enough to be happy to ride in the service of Chris Froome rather than themselves.
    "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'"

    @gietvangent
  • CuthbertC
    CuthbertC Posts: 172
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    Craigus89 wrote:
    CuthbertC wrote:
    .... That leaves ... ?

    Cuthbert, lets say you are right. You're not, but lets say you are. I direct your attention to this post made earlier that was conveniently ignored:
    adr82 wrote:
    Cuthbert, you can try to change the subject by asking stupid questions like "How have they modernised training?" all you want, I'm still waiting for even a single piece of factual evidence that proves Sky are doping. Maybe you can find it in another old Telegraph article? :roll:

    I've answered it previously ((viewtopic.php?p=19931267#p19931267). adr82 doesn't understand the meaning of the word 'evidence'.

    I'm sure he does.
    His standard of what is acceptable evidence on which to base an accusation is possibly higher than yours.

    The mountain train one is particularly absurd - all that shows is that it's an effective tactic if you can afford lots of very good climbers. It has no bearing on whether or not they might be doping - all it is evidence for is Sky buying lots of good climbers (doped or otherwise) and making them work as domestiques with the express purpose of winning the Tour.

    The only teams that have been control races with mountain trains are all known to have had team programs or been extremely suspicious. Unless you can cite at least one example of a clean mountain train that has helped a rider win a Grand Tour?

    'Doped or otherwise'? Aren't you claiming that they're clean?
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    Name another that wasn't US Postal/Disco.
    "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'"

    @gietvangent
  • salsiccia1
    salsiccia1 Posts: 3,725
    Mountain train =/= doped

    US Postal could afford to employ riders in a mountain train, the same way Sky can. It wasn't the doping that made it a mountain train. It is the same as Sky, lots of good riders paid enough to ride for Lance.

    Correlation does not imply causation.
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • Richmond Racer 2
    Richmond Racer 2 Posts: 4,698
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    Name another that wasn't US Postal/Disco.


    Oooh difficult challenge for Cuthers
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    Richmond Racer 2 wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    Name another that wasn't US Postal/Disco.


    Oooh difficult challenge for Cuthers

    There's a trap I'm waiting for him to Google his way into
    "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'"

    @gietvangent

Categories