Home

http://youtu.be/CVROhTHxWP8

Watch the whole video of an interview with Sky's performance guru, or forward to just before the 5.00 minutes where his body language and speech patterns suddenly change (in response to a certain question!).

For all the Sky fanboys out there, forget he's Sky, and forget they are the 'best of British' - what is your over-riding feeling from 5.00 onwards?

Truth or Lie?

35 comments

Avatar
stumps [3184 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

No one likes to be asked questions like that and i would bet even the likes of Garmins performance bloke would get the same responce.

But keep digging you will probably find Lord Lucan and Elvis first.

Avatar
Some Fella [890 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

My feeling is that he is a massive nerd who is clearly not comfortable in front of a camera, probably has very strong views on doping and would love to name and shame those he probably knows are doping but has to answer diplomatically.
 37

Avatar
stumps [3184 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Did some digging myself and found this article. Very thought provoking but wont sit well with the sceptical members of the forum. Its a bit long winded but very interesting.

Anyways after the 2010 season, Kerrison sat down with Brailsford to show him what Kerrison had observed and his overall conclusions. Brailsford said afterwards he was "blown away" by what Kerrison presented to him...

Here are his main conclusions...

What is startling from there primarily is how they make so much sense but due to the fact that they come from a mind which has not been whatsoever influenced by the sport and therefore does not concur with the stigmas and stereotypes which many of the tradiotional European teams have been influenced and therefore restricted by. Particularly as he says the reliance on doping, has stunted the coaching aspect of the sport whilst the best coaches and doctors in the past, have not been the ones who are the best trainers, but rather the ones who have the best doping techniques.

1) Kerrison could not understand why it was common practice for riders to use races for training.

This technique was instituted years ago due to prize money... now the top riders dont need the prize money all that much, then why do they still use the races as training and build up when they can do it in more controlled environments at their own leisure, when they were not subjected to the racing peloton who has a mind and rhythm of its own.

Yet people still believe that quality efforts would be done at the races, whilst the inter periods would be done at home for resting and lesser intensity training.

Edit: I found this quote which backs up this explanation

"Wiggins said last month, while on camp in Tenerife, that he doubted if any single day on the Dauphine would be as hard as his training in, on and around Mount Teide and he was manifestly right. To these eyes the one full day's hit out I witnessed in Tenerife was immeasurably tougher than either of the two high mountain stages at the Dauphine".

2) Another concept of his was "reverse periodisation". This is what people have witnessed with Porte, Wiggins and Rogers over the past year, where they have seemed to be at peak form, a step ahead of the other riders throughout the season.

Effectively it gets rid of the athlete originally focusing on his endurance and building an aerobic base, and then only afterwards to move only on to high intensity exercises only towards the end of the training period or cycle.

And instead it makes the rider focus on introducing all the power and speed work early on and then they would gradually increase the duration of the training of those attributes as the rider's fitness improved, AKA. in this case closer to the Tour.

In the Wiggins case this was very evident wherease many so called "experts" questioned as to whether Wiggins was not peaking a tad too early. If these "experts" had understood that the "reverse periodisation" allows Wiggins to produce maximal perfomances even prior to his peak they would have realised Wiggins was in perfect shape for the Tour.

They assumed that if riders are outputting maximal efforts then that would fastrack a rider into and out of the other side of their best form.

Once again this is another one of the misgiving which has stunted cycling and without it, it seems cyclists can perform much better.

Furthermore another example is that of Wiggins's time trialling which as markedly improved over the past two years. This is due to the fact that Kerrison has made Wiggins race his TTs at a lowed cadence.

Indeed Sky have rightfully applauded their genius coach and Wiggins has specifically attributed his Tour win down to Kerrison's coaching.

Avatar
Simon E [2539 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I'm no expert but I'd say he was choosing his words carefully, and with good reason!

It's been argued before that traditional winter training isn't perfect and using races as training has some notable flaws. The weather in early spring is mostly crap, the riders pick up viruses from the bad weather and the cowshit they ride through (which inevitably gets in their digestive system), there's the stress of travel and competition and so on.

Brad's last book mentions his change in TT cadence but I wouldn't read too much into that being the only reason. It wasn't a huge change in cadence and will not have been the only thing they worked on. Also, he won't be willing to tell his rivals what else he changed (and which may have even made a bigger difference).

Fretting about whether Sky are doping would spoil my enjoyment of the race. They have reiterated their 'clean' stance enough times and their much-criticised hardline policy saw the departure of some key staff so they weren't afraid to (belatedly) make some tough decisions. If they are doping then it would be suicidal for all concerned and have repercussions of immense proportions for both BC's well funded Olympic programme and pro cycling as a whole.

Avatar
notfastenough [3661 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

@Stumpy - Right, and that's just the stuff they're willing to discuss!

@daddyelvis, no-one's suggesting that the peloton is completely clean, but like Paul Kimmage, you seem to have a thing about Team Sky, in the face of a complete lack, not just of evidence, but even of 'I roomed with x and saw him doping' rumours. I think there are several more obvious candidates for your cynicism.

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
notfastenough wrote:

@Stumpy - Right, and that's just the stuff they're willing to discuss!

@daddyelvis, no-one's suggesting that the peloton is completely clean, but like Paul Kimmage, you seem to have a thing about Team Sky, in the face of a complete lack, not just of evidence, but even of 'I roomed with x and saw him doping' rumours. I think there are several more obvious candidates for your cynicism.

I'm well aware there are other obvious cadidates, but the thing that grates with Sky is all the anti-doping PR that doesn't add up. Kimmage probably has a 'thing' about Sky because he's seen Brailsford's ethical team dossier that was put together when Sky was formed, and he knows it's total BS. Where's the transparency? Every release about Sky is controlled - look at Walsh's current live-in with Sky, it's more like a love-in, he tweets like a Sky PR manager,not an independent journalist! And the part about not employing anyone previously linked to doping, and only employing doctors from outside the sport is laughable - Brailsford suddenly remembered that part of his promise AFTER they had won the TdF! Kerrison - Australian swimming - must be clean as a whistle then

Avatar
Simon E [2539 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Sometimes people just see what they want to see.

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
stumps wrote:

Did some digging myself and found this article. Very thought provoking but wont sit well with the sceptical members of the forum. Its a bit long winded but very interesting.

Anyways after the 2010 season, Kerrison sat down with Brailsford to show him what Kerrison had observed and his overall conclusions. Brailsford said afterwards he was "blown away" by what Kerrison presented to him...

Here are his main conclusions...

What is startling from there primarily is how they make so much sense but due to the fact that they come from a mind which has not been whatsoever influenced by the sport and therefore does not concur with the stigmas and stereotypes which many of the tradiotional European teams have been influenced and therefore restricted by. Particularly as he says the reliance on doping, has stunted the coaching aspect of the sport whilst the best coaches and doctors in the past, have not been the ones who are the best trainers, but rather the ones who have the best doping techniques.

1) Kerrison could not understand why it was common practice for riders to use races for training.

This technique was instituted years ago due to prize money... now the top riders dont need the prize money all that much, then why do they still use the races as training and build up when they can do it in more controlled environments at their own leisure, when they were not subjected to the racing peloton who has a mind and rhythm of its own.

Yet people still believe that quality efforts would be done at the races, whilst the inter periods would be done at home for resting and lesser intensity training.

Edit: I found this quote which backs up this explanation

"Wiggins said last month, while on camp in Tenerife, that he doubted if any single day on the Dauphine would be as hard as his training in, on and around Mount Teide and he was manifestly right. To these eyes the one full day's hit out I witnessed in Tenerife was immeasurably tougher than either of the two high mountain stages at the Dauphine".

2) Another concept of his was "reverse periodisation". This is what people have witnessed with Porte, Wiggins and Rogers over the past year, where they have seemed to be at peak form, a step ahead of the other riders throughout the season.

Effectively it gets rid of the athlete originally focusing on his endurance and building an aerobic base, and then only afterwards to move only on to high intensity exercises only towards the end of the training period or cycle.

And instead it makes the rider focus on introducing all the power and speed work early on and then they would gradually increase the duration of the training of those attributes as the rider's fitness improved, AKA. in this case closer to the Tour.

In the Wiggins case this was very evident wherease many so called "experts" questioned as to whether Wiggins was not peaking a tad too early. If these "experts" had understood that the "reverse periodisation" allows Wiggins to produce maximal perfomances even prior to his peak they would have realised Wiggins was in perfect shape for the Tour.

They assumed that if riders are outputting maximal efforts then that would fastrack a rider into and out of the other side of their best form.

Once again this is another one of the misgiving which has stunted cycling and without it, it seems cyclists can perform much better.

Furthermore another example is that of Wiggins's time trialling which as markedly improved over the past two years. This is due to the fact that Kerrison has made Wiggins race his TTs at a lowed cadence.

Indeed Sky have rightfully applauded their genius coach and Wiggins has specifically attributed his Tour win down to Kerrison's coaching.

I did some digging myself, and found the same forum you cut-and-pasted all that from. I see you didn't cut and paste the Greg Lemond quotes from that forum thread. Why not provide some balance?

Avatar
stumps [3184 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

daddyelvis, i didn't cut and paste from any forum. It was a lift from another rider's interview, there was nothing in it about Lemond so please dont try and twist to suit.

As for balance, you seem to be level headed, is that due to a chip on both shoulders about Sky  3

Avatar
Leviathan [1775 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
stumps wrote:

As for balance, you seem to be level headed, is that due to a chip on both shoulders about Sky  3

daddyelvis bought a Rapha Sky large jersey but couldn't do up the zip.
Yes I called you fat, I am that mature.
Please call me a fanboy and we can get to the end of this thread a bit quicker.

Avatar
CraigS [129 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Wiggins I could believe - massively strong endurance rider on the track who won the TdF because it translated to TT efforts and he had protection in the hills from a brilliant team.

Froome(/Porte) I want to believe but have my doubts - had he just transformed himself into one of the world's best climbers, that would be one thing, but to blitz the TT too?

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
stumps wrote:

daddyelvis, i didn't cut and paste from any forum. It was a lift from another rider's interview, there was nothing in it about Lemond so please dont try and twist to suit.

As for balance, you seem to be level headed, is that due to a chip on both shoulders about Sky  3

he-he, nice one. No chips here, just use my experience and common sense to tell me when somebody isn't telling the truth. Keep believing, I'm sure you won't be disappointed.

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
bikeboy76 wrote:
stumps wrote:

As for balance, you seem to be level headed, is that due to a chip on both shoulders about Sky  3

daddyelvis bought a Rapha Sky large jersey but couldn't do up the zip.
Yes I called you fat, I am that mature.
Please call me a fanboy and we can get to the end of this thread a bit quicker.

Hopefully you're not a fat fanboy, that would be terrible

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
CraigS wrote:

Froome(/Porte) I want to believe but have my doubts - had he just transformed himself into one of the world's best climbers, that would be one thing, but to blitz the TT too?

imagine if he had a Movistar jersey on, and then suddenly improved the way he has. I dare say ASO wouldn't stand for that!

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Simon E wrote:

I'm no expert but I'd say he was choosing his words carefully
.

His choice of the word 'perceived' was unfortunate, but probably the most truthful part of his answer!

Avatar
stumps [3184 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

In the end mate its your choice what you want to believe or not and i respect your views - sorry about the chip bit  4

Unless one of the Sky boys is caught with epo or whatever i will continue to believe they are clean.

Avatar
Super Domestique [1596 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

1) shouldn't this be in the bike section?

2) Team Sky's great one day, fall apart the next looks pretty clean to me. Either that or they need a refund!

3) Climb well and TT well? Possible. Big Mig anyone?

I'm not a fanboy. Was fairly bored by Skys tactic, been more a supporter recently for various reasons ncluding some more exciting racing and their (often) positive (for want of better phrase!) effect on cycling in the UK.*

* not including overly large MAMILs  3

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
stumps wrote:

sorry about the chip bit  4

No problem, I'm not easily offended.

Besides, my view on doping is not as simple as clean is good, dope is bad. However hypocrisy does the debate no favours.

stumps wrote:

Unless one of the Sky boys is caught with epo or whatever i will continue to believe they are clean.

If Sky are doping, it could take more than a positive test to catch them  3

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Super Domestique wrote:

1) shouldn't this be in the bike section?

Not sure, the original post was about Tim Kerrison's change in body-language and speech in response to a question on doping.

Super Domestique wrote:

2) Team Sky's great one day, fall apart the next looks pretty clean to me. Either that or they need a refund!

Was that the disastrous day that Froome lost absolutely no time against his GC rivals?

Super Domestique wrote:

3) Climb well and TT well? Possible. Big Mig anyone?

Hilarious!

Avatar
Super Domestique [1596 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

1) so biking content then.

2) so either all are doping at the top of GC or none are. That is what you are saying, right?

3) yawn.

I will agree he didn't look comfortable BTW, although most in cycling don't do except David Millar when talking on it tbh.

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Super Domestique wrote:

1) so biking content then.

2) so either all are doping at the top of GC or none are. That is what you are saying, right?

3) yawn.

I will agree he didn't look comfortable BTW, although most in cycling don't do except David Millar when talking on it tbh.

1) mainly doping related. Not sure where that goes. No 'Clinic' here.

2)Maybe, there's a good chance. But that is not my point. You don't know my stance on the doping / anti-doping debate - it may surprise you.

3)looks like you saw the error of your argument there  3

Avatar
Super Domestique [1596 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

1) Tea stop says 'non-bike' related stuff. This is clearly bike related.

2) that comment makes no sense.

3) I was bored by the point being missed.

My final comment was just showing that I knew 'why' you'd posted. However, the classic 'tongue poke' (I counted 2) is a sign of dislike. According to body language experts this stems from childhood and being fed food we didn't like the taste of.

Avatar
The Rumpo Kid [589 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Super Domestique wrote:

1) Tea stop says 'non-bike' related stuff. This is clearly bike related.

2) that comment makes no sense.

3) I was bored by the point being missed.

My final comment was just showing that I knew 'why' you'd posted. However, the classic 'tongue poke' (I counted 2) is a sign of dislike. According to body language experts this stems from childhood and being fed food we didn't like the taste of.

Just FYI... According to Social Anthropologists, poking out the tongue is the closest thing to the genital diplay of our Ape cousins that we clothed Humans have.

Avatar
Super Domestique [1596 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I don't think I should have bothered posting above but I'll leave it out of politeness. Clearly we differ in view.

However I posted this in the comments on today's stage in the news section and it seems relevant.

One thing I don't get with all those so quick to shout 'drugs' at every win, etc
Why bother watching if it's all doom and gloom?
posted by Super Domestique [1228 posts] 14th July 2013 - 18:43

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Super Domestique wrote:

However I posted this in the comments on today's stage in the news section and it seems relevant.

One thing I don't get with all those so quick to shout 'drugs' at every win, etc
Why bother watching if it's all doom and gloom?
posted by Super Domestique [1228 posts] 14th July 2013 - 18:43

I watch the sport because I love it. Not all doom n gloom for me, and my view on doping is quite broad-minded. I just can't stand DB's BS on the subject, and his BS has little contribution to the anti-doping debate. And my opinion is that Froome's performances cannot be fully explained by marginal gains.

Avatar
Some Fella [890 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
daddyELVIS wrote:

And my opinion is that Froome's performances cannot be fully explained by marginal gains.

Yes - you are correct - Froome's performances cannot be fully explained by marginal gains.
But they can be explained by natural raw talent, hard graft, excellent training methods, a formidable and proven team behind him, the shortcomings of his rivals now they have been forced to race clean, the shortcomings of teams who are perhaps a year or more behind Sky in regards their methods and tactics *and* marginal gains.

No disrespect but if you are looking for dopers you are pissing up the wrong tree.

Avatar
MattT53 [146 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Avatar
700c [817 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Not fair!

Very few people in the UK are crying foul after Andy Murray's great Wimbledon victory this year, so why should everyone be on Frome's back after his great stage wins so far in the TDF.

I completely understand some scepticism for historical reasons, but when the testing regime is so much more rigorous in cycling than in, for example tennis, and team sky so upfront about their training and performance, why it's frustrating that cycling gets singled out in this way.

I know this is always going to happen after the legacy of LA, and others, plus UCI's previously dubious policing of the sport, but it does get my goat!

I'd say ours much more likely for British sportsmen in, say, athletics, to be found guilty of doping today, than it is for British cyclists..  3

Avatar
daddyELVIS [654 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Gotta say, Sky are standing up well to the doping questions this year, a couple of wobbles from Froome, but all the 'right noises' from DB. His suggestions of TUE transparency is a good one, but releasing data files on power, etc to WADA is next to useless. If they are truly clean, then they need to be truly transparent - release blood profiles and other test results for each rider (all year round). They should lead the way, and other teams who don't follow will then be accused of being dopers instead of Sky.

Avatar
Cycle_Jim [264 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Kerrison is the reason that I believe sky are drug free. If it comes out that they are doping I will be sorely disappointed purely because the next gen of cyclists will be crushed as there heroes aren't who they claim to be

Pages