Right to be cynical about Sky

stumps wrote:

So then an early exponent of the EPO test states that the low level of EPO in the sample is EITHER a problem with the kidneys or misuse of EPO. He CANNOT say it was entirely down to misuse can he ? No, he cant so where would that leave any prosecution, absolutely nowhere because they cannot prove beyond all doubt that Knaven misused drugs.

Its just a theory, just like because Nibali rides for Astana he must also be tainted by drug use blah blah blah.

Until irrefutable evidence comes to light that Knaven or any other rider, past or present, has misused drugs then its all just pie in the sky and in the thoughts of very gullible posters.

You are the gullible one! The words used in the article are 'significant renal damage'. Have you studied the whole case surrounding the Knaven situation? If you do, then still believe in Sky's 'zero tolerance', then your faith is blind!

daddyELVIS wrote:

stumps wrote:

So then an early exponent of the EPO test states that the low level of EPO in the sample is EITHER a problem with the kidneys or misuse of EPO. He CANNOT say it was entirely down to misuse can he ? No, he cant so where would that leave any prosecution, absolutely nowhere because they cannot prove beyond all doubt that Knaven misused drugs.

Its just a theory, just like because Nibali rides for Astana he must also be tainted by drug use blah blah blah.

Until irrefutable evidence comes to light that Knaven or any other rider, past or present, has misused drugs then its all just pie in the sky and in the thoughts of very gullible posters.

You are the gullible one! The words used in the article are 'significant renal damage'. Have you studied the whole case surrounding the Knaven situation? If you do, then still believe in Sky's 'zero tolerance', then your faith is blind!

Your having a laugh aren't you ? I have studied the article and it DOES say that the expert CANNOT say for definite that it was EPO abuse and he goes on to say it could be caused by renal damage. So that leaves us absolutely nowhere other than the blood sample showed a low level of EPO and not how it came to be there.
As for being gullible i'm not the one who automatically believes every article written about Sky putting them down is correct beyond all doubt. Sky have had their faults, just look at Rogers, Yates etc but they have also been a victim of jealousy by writers, journo's and other parties, which to you are all telling the truth.

stumps wrote:

daddyELVIS wrote:

stumps wrote:

So then an early exponent of the EPO test states that the low level of EPO in the sample is EITHER a problem with the kidneys or misuse of EPO. He CANNOT say it was entirely down to misuse can he ? No, he cant so where would that leave any prosecution, absolutely nowhere because they cannot prove beyond all doubt that Knaven misused drugs.

Its just a theory, just like because Nibali rides for Astana he must also be tainted by drug use blah blah blah.

Until irrefutable evidence comes to light that Knaven or any other rider, past or present, has misused drugs then its all just pie in the sky and in the thoughts of very gullible posters.

You are the gullible one! The words used in the article are 'significant renal damage'. Have you studied the whole case surrounding the Knaven situation? If you do, then still believe in Sky's 'zero tolerance', then your faith is blind!

Your having a laugh aren't you ? I have studied the article and it DOES say that the expert CANNOT say for definite that it was EPO abuse and he goes on to say it could be caused by renal damage. So that leaves us absolutely nowhere other than the blood sample showed a low level of EPO and not how it came to be there.
As for being gullible i'm not the one who automatically believes every article written about Sky putting them down is correct beyond all doubt. Sky have had their faults, just look at Rogers, Yates etc but they have also been a victim of jealousy by writers, journo's and other parties, which to you are all telling the truth.

I said 'the case' (as in the TVM case), not the article! Although, since you're clinging to the possibility that it was renal damage, all Knaven needs to do is confirm that ( he could easily back that up with medical records).

BL7 wrote:

Armstrong was the best doper, when they were all dopers.

Let me fix that for you:

Armstrong was the best doper when the dopers drove all the clean riders out of the peloton.

BL7 wrote:

He would most likely have been the best clean racer too, if they were all clean racers.

Not true - Greg Lemond constantly claimed that Lance's VO2 numbers were too low to be able to perform as he did. Also riders with a lower natural hct had more to gain by inflating it up to the magical 49.9% mark.

BL7 wrote:

STB - managed by a known cheat. Contador known cheat. Astana - known cheats. etc, etc, etc.

So cannondale, managed by a known cheat, Etix-QS do you really think Lefevere didn't know what was going on. Museew has admitted he was doping.

If you want to go to extremes, i don't think you will find ANY top level teams that are not implicated in some way with doping. Be it riders, be it DSs, sponsors, owners, managers, doctors, etc etc etc.

Now the real question is how many riders have been busted where the evidence is irrefutable, and not based on opinion or trace levels of some "masking" agent.

BL7 wrote:

The last 2 posts fully show the problem with cycling.

A known drug cheat, i.e. Contador announces he is going to quit. He shouldn't even be in the peloton, never mind folk in the UK 'celebrating' his ability, his style, the exciting racing with him in it.'

You can't moan about druggies, moan about Lance duping everyone on one hand, then claim Contador is a 'legend'! Contador couldn't hold Lance's wheel, and they are both cheats. Does this mean that Armstrong too is a 'legend'?

On one hand everyone wants a clean sport with no cheating. On the other, we want people like Contador to be 'worshipped', 'celebrated' and 'encouraged'.

Double standards.

Until the viewers, the supporters, the sponsors, and eventually the governing body really get serious about dealing with these cheats in this sport, the tainted shadow will always follow it around. The people above who 'support' what Contador brings to this sport should think hard about what this really means.

I'd rather see Froome and Quintana chase each other up every hill, with Contador and his druggie pals all sitting with Lance in the naughty corner! Once a cheat, always a cheat!

You are deluded. He's a cheat because he got caught (more precisely because the attempts to cover it up failed!). This is the pinnacle of cycling - to believe your heroes are winning the world's toughest and fastest races on bread and water is laughable! As I have mentioned elsewhere, with the recent crop of positives, we now have a 2-speed peloton: The fast, clean riders and the slow, doped riders! Get real!!

BL7 wrote:

The last 2 posts fully show the problem with cycling.

A known drug cheat, i.e. Contador announces he is going to quit. He shouldn't even be in the peloton, never mind folk in the UK 'celebrating' his ability, his style, the exciting racing with him in it.'

You can't moan about druggies, moan about Lance duping everyone on one hand, then claim Contador is a 'legend'! Contador couldn't hold Lance's wheel, and they are both cheats. Does this mean that Armstrong too is a 'legend'?

On one hand everyone wants a clean sport with no cheating. On the other, we want people like Contador to be 'worshipped', 'celebrated' and 'encouraged'.

Double standards.

Until the viewers, the supporters, the sponsors, and eventually the governing body really get serious about dealing with these cheats in this sport, the tainted shadow will always follow it around. The people above who 'support' what Contador brings to this sport should think hard about what this really means.

I'd rather see Froome and Quintana chase each other up every hill, with Contador and his druggie pals all sitting with Lance in the naughty corner! Once a cheat, always a cheat!

I don't moan about 'druggies' other than the ones that commit crime to fuel their habits. Elite sport is past saving, sad but true. Until they start giving life bans to everyone on a first offence it will never change. However you get life for murder and people still do it, so let's be realistic, sport-money-humans = 'whatever it takes attitudes' including cheating. No matter what is happening in sport with drugs, and I mean all sports, you still have to have the ability, talent & commitment. Give me the finest coaches and 'Dr' in the world and I still ain't winning nothing...
And yes, as a bike rider I do think Armstrong is a legend.

BL7 wrote:

You can't moan about druggies, moan about Lance duping everyone on one hand, then claim Contador is a 'legend'! Contador couldn't hold Lance's wheel, and they are both cheats.

Contador couldn't hold Lance's wheel?

What like when Contador put over 5 mins into him whilst winning the 2009 Tour? Right you are...

I don't hear anybody claiming Contador is clean.

There's only one rider I'm confident is clean - and he'll never reach the pinnacle his talent should allow!

BL7 wrote:

so...

the good news today - Bertie is going to retire. That'll be one less known cheat in the peloton.

the bad news...This won't happen until the end of 2016. We still have to embrace him in the pack, despite his past, despite his team Managed by a known cheat, despite his 'favourable treatment' by the UCI, when he should have been hung.

Little wonder those boys who do actually race clean must feel sick, as Brailsford has quoted!

Ignorant post.

Simply one of the best bike riders of his generation. Froome & Contador are going to make the season.

Cyclist wrote:

BL7 wrote:

so...

the good news today - Bertie is going to retire. That'll be one less known cheat in the peloton.

the bad news...This won't happen until the end of 2016. We still have to embrace him in the pack, despite his past, despite his team Managed by a known cheat, despite his 'favourable treatment' by the UCI, when he should have been hung.

Little wonder those boys who do actually race clean must feel sick, as Brailsford has quoted!

Ignorant post.

Simply one of the best bike riders of his generation. Froome & Contador are going to make the season.

Agreed! Stage races would be a bore without Contador! An absolute legend!!

BL7 wrote:

For sure Sky have stuck their heads up by stating they will ride clean, and only employee clean employees. Maybe this should be commended rather than treated cynically? If every team did this, we maybe could look to finally rid the sport of bad influences, 'cheats' and finally show new young riders that 'if' they get caught then they are finished, for good! Rewarding known cheats with big salaries and a way in the future of this sport has no place!

And back in the real world, try it and you will be sued for breach of employment rights, as has happened!

People will still cheat, if there is a chance of not getting caught and making money then people will cheat. Ask yourself why in countries where there is the death penalty people are still being executed.

Paul J wrote:

What have Sky done to clean up cycling?

They won't join the MPCC, with its tougher rules on certain steroids and TUEs, and consequences for doping.

Chris Froome openly abuses asthma steroids in races, and is defended for it.

Skys' two Tour winners both showed incredible weight loss. Somehow, despite drastic weight loss resulting in being built like stick insects, they still both remained world-class time trialists and lost none of their power on the flats (indeed, maybe even gained).

Sky initially had a "no dodgy cycling doctors" policy, but then, despite having well qualified medical and performance staff, they went and hired Geert fucking Leinders for his cycling "expertise". Leinders is known for having long been an insider, deep in the Belgian/Dutch cycling "performance" culture with Panasonic and then later head doctor at Rabobank. There are a number of accounts by former riders of an endemic doping culture at those teams, with doping programmes formulated and administered by Leinders.

Why did Sky, who did not lack for qualified medical staff free of cycling-doping baggage, have such a great need for a "traditional" cycling doctor? Brailsford says it was just naïvety.

Then there was Brailsfords initial claims they would be transparent and publish data, which he backtracked on. Why?

Now, I'd still be willing to believe Sky found a way to win back to back tours with 2 different riders clean. It's /possible/, but you can't deny there's a hint of smoke. Whether that smoke comes from Sky, or has just drifted over from the general cloud hanging over pro-cycling is hard to tell. However, anyone who gets annoyed at suspicions of doping at Sky and vehemently denies it could be possible is just way off in Cloud Fanboy land.

It's amazing what nationalism will blind people to.

Join MPCC - the 'club' that Astana are part of ? Why the hell would you join that club - they'd get slated for alignin with teams with massive doping problems.

The rest of your issues are just theories.

If Sky were doping - then where are all the positive tests ? Remember Disco and the slew of positives from ex riders still doping and getting busted ?
Presumably Brailsford had similar programs for the GB Track team ? Where are their positive tests ? Where are the exposes ? Where are the confessions ?

Doping on that kind of scale would leak out. There would be slip ups. There would be people wanting to talk. What about JTL ? He must feel hard done to - he could sell a drugs story for thousands - if there was one.

Nationalism in as much as Sky have evolved from British Cycling who have been winning everything in sight for over a decade without ever falling foul of drugs tests? Brad and Froome showed "incredible" weight loss so they're taking drugs that no-one's discovered? Or perhaps they're just not eating. What are you saying? If you want "smoke" there are plenty of teams out there with riders getting popped, criticise them. Brailsford's riders have been riding at the very top level, tested frequently for over 12 years, and only J T-L has failed a drugs test, and that was discovered by, err Sky as a result of him coming in new and having to ride clean. Please find a point to argue or show some respect to 12 years of clean riding in the most tested cycling era ever and shut the f up until they cheat, your approach offends everyone who believes in clean riding

Cresser wrote:

Nationalism in as much as Sky have evolved from British Cycling who have been winning everything in sight for over a decade without ever falling foul of drugs tests? Brad and Froome showed "incredible" weight loss so they're taking drugs that no-one's discovered? Or perhaps they're just not eating. What are you saying? If you want "smoke" there are plenty of teams out there with riders getting popped, criticise them. Brailsford's riders have been riding at the very top level, tested frequently for over 12 years, and only J T-L has failed a drugs test, and that was discovered by, err Sky as a result of him coming in new and having to ride clean. Please find a point to argue or show some respect to 12 years of clean riding in the most tested cycling era ever and shut the f up until they cheat, your approach offends everyone who believes in clean riding

'or perhaps they're just not eating' - Amazing!!!