Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

Garmin vs Sky (non-doping related)

The TruthThe Truth Posts: 161
edited February 2014 in Pro race
I have been told both these teams are clean.

But when you compare their results, there is a huge gap between them. How can this be? If they are competing on equal terms, shouldn't their results be quite similar too?

When you look at their respective results from 2013, it's like comparing us postal to Ag2r.
«13456711

Posts

  • ddraverddraver Posts: 23,053
    trans·par·ent
    [trans-pair-uhnt, -par-]

    adjective
    1.
    having the property of transmitting rays of light through its substance so that bodies situated beyond or behind can be distinctly seen.

    2.
    admitting the passage of light through interstices.

    3.
    so sheer as to permit light to pass through; diaphanous.

    4.
    easily seen through, recognized, or detected: transparent excuses.

    5.
    manifest; obvious: a story with a transparent plot.

    4 & 5 I think are pertinant...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,467
    The Truth wrote:
    I have been told both these teams are clean.

    But when you compare their results, there is a huge gap between them. How can this be? If they are competing on equal terms, shouldn't their results be quite similar too?

    When you look at their respective results from 2013, it's like comparing us postal to Ag2r.
    Money.

    End of thread.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • MartinGTMartinGT Posts: 475
    Non doping lol, yeh ok.

    The teams with big budgets

    BMC, Garmin, Sky, Astana, SBT.

    All should have similar results. Why dont they?

    Its called sport.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,467
    MartinGT wrote:
    The teams with big budgets

    BMC, Garmin, Sky, Astana, SBT.
    Garmin don't have a big budget. They're one of the poorest WT teams. (And Saxo having money is only since Tinkoff came along)
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • MartinGTMartinGT Posts: 475
    Interesting I assumed they had a decent budget:

    BMC Racing 15 million euros (2013 estimate)
    Team Sky 13.2 million euros (2011)
    Team Saxo Bank 9.01 million euros (2012)
    Garmin-Sharp 7.28 million euros (2013 estimate)
    Omega Pharma 6.55 million euros (2011)
    Cannondale 6.24 million euros (2012)
    Francaise des Jeux 6.07 million euros (2012)
    Movistar 5.91 million euros (2011)
    Cofidis 4.46 million euros (2011)
    Europcar 4.08 million euros (2012)
    Sojasun 2.13 million euros (2011)

    Source
  • mike6mike6 Posts: 1,199
    Its been posted before but I will repeat anyway. Its what you spend the money on. A 900k rider with a 100k coach beats a 1 million pound rider.

    "None doping related"? Yea, right. :roll:
  • Depends how you measure success dunnit?

    Sky have a budget of 13.2m and have won 2 grand tours, Garmin have a budget of 55% of this and have won 1. Looks about right.

    In fact, if you factor in Garmin's PR win, you could say they've been punching above their weight.
    "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
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,467
    edited February 2014
    MartinGT wrote:
    Interesting I assumed they had a decent budget:

    BMC Racing 15 million euros (2013 estimate)
    Team Sky 13.2 million euros (2011)
    Team Saxo Bank 9.01 million euros (2012)
    Garmin-Sharp 7.28 million euros (2013 estimate)
    Omega Pharma 6.55 million euros (2011)
    Cannondale 6.24 million euros (2012)
    Francaise des Jeux 6.07 million euros (2012)
    Movistar 5.91 million euros (2011)
    Cofidis 4.46 million euros (2011)
    Europcar 4.08 million euros (2012)
    Sojasun 2.13 million euros (2011)

    Source

    Notice the different dates though. Garmin is 2013 (and half what Sky spent in 2011). In fact Sky's expenditure rose from £16.6m in 2011 (actually about 20m euros*) to £21.3m to 2012 (about 25m Euros*). (We know this as they publish their accounts).

    Sky's spend in 2012 excluding wages was more than Garmin's entire budget. Excluding wages!

    *Using today's exchange rate.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • thomthomthomthom Posts: 3,574
    edited February 2014
    "If they are competing on equal terms, shouldn't their results be quite similar too?"

    This makes no sense? Why are the competing on equal terms just beacuse they are both clean?

    It's not level playing field when everyone is doping - nor is it the other way round either.
  • How does the extra money make you better? I don't think sky have been buying up all the best talent, so there has to be another reason.
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 23,053
    The Truth wrote:
    How does the extra money make you better? I don't think sky have been buying up all the best talent, so there has to be another reason.

    Have a read of this - viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=12954651

    Warning - it goes around in circles quite a lot...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • thomthomthomthom Posts: 3,574
    The Truth wrote:
    How does the extra money make you better? I don't think sky have been buying up all the best talent, so there has to be another reason.

    They have the two latest TdF winners on board - how is that not buying up the best talent?
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 23,053
    Plus a third person to go for the Giro in 2014 who was riding domestique for the eventual winner and for 2013 they had OPQS's 2014 GC "superstar"

    They also had 2 olympic gold medal winners on the Tour team last year plus a guy consistently labelled as the next big Norweigen Classics Star (yes I know...)
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • RichN95 wrote:
    MartinGT wrote:
    Interesting I assumed they had a decent budget:

    BMC Racing 15 million euros (2013 estimate)
    Team Sky 13.2 million euros (2011)
    Team Saxo Bank 9.01 million euros (2012)
    Garmin-Sharp 7.28 million euros (2013 estimate)
    Omega Pharma 6.55 million euros (2011)
    Cannondale 6.24 million euros (2012)
    Francaise des Jeux 6.07 million euros (2012)
    Movistar 5.91 million euros (2011)
    Cofidis 4.46 million euros (2011)
    Europcar 4.08 million euros (2012)
    Sojasun 2.13 million euros (2011)

    Source

    Notice the different dates though. Garmin is 2013 (and half what Sky spent in 2011). In fact Sky's expenditure rose from £16.6m in 2011 to £21.3m to 2012 (we know this as they publish their accounts)

    So lets build on this.... I'm going to take the figure above as a representative average of the 2 teams total budget from 2010 to 2013 (The time both have been racing against each other).

    Sky have won (on the road and in GC)

    2010: 3 GCs at a cost of 4.4m each and 25 Time Trials/road stages/one day races at a cost of 520k each.
    2011: 5 GCs at a cost of 2.64m each and 34 races at a cost of 388k each
    2012: 8 GCs at a cost of 1.65m each and 52 Races at a cost of 253k each
    2013: 8 GCs at a cost of 1.65m each and 35 Races at a cost of 377k each

    Tune in in a moment when I'll break down Garmin!
    "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
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,467
    The Truth wrote:
    How does the extra money make you better? I don't think sky have been buying up all the best talent, so there has to be another reason.
    They have twelve riders who have been top 20 in a Grand Tour - seven in the top 10. (And that doesn't include the likes of Thomas, Kennaugh, Dombrowski & Boasson Hagen).

    And money doesn't just recruit riders, it retains them too.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • ThomThom wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    How does the extra money make you better? I don't think sky have been buying up all the best talent, so there has to be another reason.

    They have the two latest TdF winners on board - how is that not buying up the best talent?

    I'm sure most people would agree that Froome wasn't regarded as a future tour winner when sky signed him. In fact, most people had no idea who he was.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,467
    The Truth wrote:
    I'm sure most people would agree that Froome wasn't regarded as a future tour winner when sky signed him. In fact, most people had no idea who he was.
    But he is now. And Sky are paying him more money than teams like Garmin can afford.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Garmin's breakdown (NB I include all GC victories as equal, but I'm not factoring in days spent in the jersey or any other classifications. Also not counted are olympic/track results)

    2010: 4 GCs costing 1.8m each and 18 races at 400k each
    2011: 1 GC at 7.2, and 13 races at 553k each
    2012: 3 GCs at 2.4m each and 19 races at 379k each
    2013: 3 GCs at 2.4m each and 12 races at 600k each

    So what we see from this is that Garmin pays more than Sky for each race win and has done since 2011. Which rather blows the "sky buy all the talent" line out of the water. Sky spend more money, but in terms of wins, they spend it more efficiently.
    "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
  • r0bhr0bh Posts: 1,587
    The Truth wrote:
    How does the extra money make you better? I don't think sky have been buying up all the best talent, so there has to be another reason.

    Do you think all of those team training camps in Mallorca and Tenerife come for free?
  • Would those be better with a chart?
    "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
  • Garmin's breakdown (NB I include all GC victories as equal, but I'm not factoring in days spent in the jersey or any other classifications. Also not counted are olympic/track results)

    2010: 4 GCs costing 1.8m each and 22 races at 327k each
    2011: 1 GC at 7.2, and 18 races at 400k each
    2012: 3 GCs at 2.4m each and 23 races at 313k each
    2013: 3 GCs at 2.4m each and 12 races at 600k each

    So what we see from this is that Garmin pays more than Sky for each race win and has done since 2011. Which rather blows the "sky buy all the talent" line out of the water. Sky spend more money, but in terms of wins, they spend it more efficiently.


    Bum. Missed off Garmins national championships... revised above!
    "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
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 23,053
    Would those be better with a chart?

    I know you know the answer to that! :wink:
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • salsiccia1salsiccia1 Posts: 3,696
    The Truth wrote:
    How does the extra money make you better? I don't think sky have been buying up all the best talent, so there has to be another reason.

    Come on then, just get it over with...
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,467
    So what we see from this is that Garmin pays more than Sky for each race win and has done since 2011. Which rather blows the "sky buy all the talent" line out of the water. Sky spend more money, but in terms of wins, they spend it more efficiently.
    That's the Law of Diminishing Returns for you
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • salsiccia1salsiccia1 Posts: 3,696
    I reckon they spend their money on:

    better doping doctors
    better doping products
    better doping couriers
    buying off UCI/WADA
    bigger syringes
    epo-impregnated bar tape
    Testosterone-soaked chamois pads
    surgically-implanted doping pumps, operated by Brailsford from the car

    *none of these are true. Probably.
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • RichN95 wrote:
    So what we see from this is that Garmin pays more than Sky for each race win and has done since 2011. Which rather blows the "sky buy all the talent" line out of the water. Sky spend more money, but in terms of wins, they spend it more efficiently.
    That's the Law of Diminishing Returns for you

    Or the lawof marginal gains.

    What I did note whilst compiling that is that Sky do win a load of utter nonsense for most of the year!
    "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
  • Any fool knows it's the mattresses and pillows.
    Correlation is not causation.
  • Salsiccia1 wrote:
    epo-impregnated bar tape

    I read that as eco-impregnated bar tape and wondered how that got onto your doping related list and what eco bar tape would be, made of soya perhaps, or recyclable bio-degradable hemp? But then I'm ill and words are a bit blurry.
    Correlation is not causation.
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 23,053
    Lets Not forget they hired a dirty doctor to learn them all his nasty tricks once too!

    Can't trust the Belgians with anything you know (unless they work for OPQS, then they re fine)
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • joelsimjoelsim Posts: 7,552
    1. Money - it doesn't always buy success but it sure helps (c) Chelsea & Man City
    2. Brailsford
    3. New thinking & power meters (but I think they have been found out on this point)
This discussion has been closed.