Right to be cynical about Sky

According to this – Vaughters
According to this – Vaughters said their tests didn’t show anything ?

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/29/team-sky-jonathan-tiernan-locke-cycling

Is Brian Smith or JV wrong ?

More stuff – but still nothing seriously suspect –

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/09/biological-passport-what-can-teams-learn-from-the-tiernan-locke-case/

You think they’d be better
You think they’d be better off hiring people with no success?

Does it though? A promising
Does it though? A promising British rider – great to have him on a British team. In hindsight the signing was naive at best, but I don’t remember too much mud being slung around at the time.

Colin Peyresourde

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

fukawitribe wrote:

Colin sees the devil in everyone it seems – I agree with some of what he says, but not his apparent unequivocal belief that he knows it applies everywhere.

We all know there is doping going on, and some teams or individuals seem more obvious targets than others, but there appears to be this naive belief that suspicion implies proof

You’re putting words in my mouth.

To some degree, yes – but it is a belief based on comments from you in the past and also at the end of your reply here.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

I don’t think that Sky are any different from any other team. There is little proof that doping has been eradicated.

No-one is saying that doping has been eradicated in cycling – or did you mean eradicated in Sky ?

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

But I think it is naive to think that just because a team talks about being drug free that it is when the results do not indicate them to be second best.

Of course it would be naive to assume that without evidence – although I don’t agree that winning implies they must be doping, if that was what you were implying. If so think that is one of the areas I guess we can agree to disagree.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

Sky say they do blood samples to check their riders are clean. This seems like PR. The tests equally tell them that their riders are not in imminent danger of being caught.

..assuming they are doping…

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

You seem to be somewhat aware, but believe that the Sky policy means that they are 100% clean, but JTL was hardly a guarantee of that.

I agree that policy doesn’t proof compliance – although JTL didn’t dope with Sky, he was suspended by the them when the back-check against the biological passport data came to light and they sacked him when it appeared anomalous.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

The CIRC did little to prove any assertion that any team is drug free.

It did little to prove that every team isn’t either…

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

It maybe done at an individual level or at a team level. We know the means and the reasons why, just not who, when and how much.

It’s nice to believe the PR but only when the ADAs have a full and fool proof means of testing will you see doping eradicated. Until then you’ll just see it by degrees.

Agreed.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

I agree we’re not going to see Riis or Armstrong like performances, but in order to compete, especially in stage races, you need to dope.

No, you don’t – even in athletics there are some clean winners.

fukawitribe wrote:Colin sees

fukawitribe wrote:

Colin sees the devil in everyone it seems – I agree with some of what he says, but not his apparent unequivocal belief that he knows it applies everywhere.

We all know there is doping going on, and some teams or individuals seem more obvious targets than others, but there appears to be this naive belief that suspicion implies proof

You’re putting words in my mouth. I don’t think that Sky are any different from any other team. There is little proof that doping has been eradicated. But I think it is naive to think that just because a team talks about being drug free that it is when the results do not indicate them to be second best.

Sky say they do blood samples to check their riders are clean. This seems like PR. The tests equally tell them that their riders are not in imminent danger of being caught. You seem to be somewhat aware, but believe that the Sky policy means that they are 100% clean, but JTL was hardly a guarantee of that.

The CIRC did little to prove any assertion that any team is drug free. It maybe done at an individual level or at a team level. We know the means and the reasons why, just not who, when and how much.

It’s nice to believe the PR but only when the ADAs have a full and fool proof means of testing will you see doping eradicated. Until then you’ll just see it by degrees. I agree we’re not going to see Riis or Armstrong like performances, but in order to compete, especially in stage races, you need to dope.

ianrobo wrote:Well Nibali

ianrobo wrote:

Well Nibali today was beaten on the smallish climbs in Milan-Sanremo by reknown climbers Cav and Greipel, obviously the pills not working yet.

I know (or hope!) you’re being flippant with that comment but Nibali did actually get caught up in a crash on one of the descents – he was further back in the peloton when Sky were forcing the pace on the front. He came out of it very lightly but it’ll have put him much further down the field. Cav and Griepel were quite far up the bunch when they started the Poggio.

Colin sees the devil in
Colin sees the devil in everyone it seems – I agree with some of what he says, but not his apparent unequivocal belief that he knows it applies everywhere.

We all know there is doping going on, and some teams or individuals seem more obvious targets than others, but there appears to be this naive belief that suspicion implies proof.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

if your competing at the top end of this doping is pretty much on the cards.

In world tour cycling today, that’s just pushing it- and you should know that. It’s an avenue but not everyone is going down it.