# Wiggins responds again to doping insinuations



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

From cyclingnews.com, Wiggins: I'm Not Some S--t Rider Who Has Come From Nowhere | Cyclingnews.com, Wiggo more eloquently articulates his feelings the second time around regarding the whispering campaign and innuendo leveled at him this year. 
I say: "Well done 'Sticks'" :thumbsup:


----------



## JChasse (Sep 16, 2005)

Comes across as a complete jackoff if you ask me.


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

JChasse said:


> Comes across as a complete jackoff if you ask me.


Comes off the same way to me.


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

JChasse said:


> Comes across as a complete jackoff if you ask me.


Care to explain? What, in your opinion, should he have said that wouldn't have made appear to you to be a complete jackoff (I assume 'jackoff' is an Americanism for 'wanker')?


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

gizzard said:


> Care to explain? What, in your opinion, should he have said that wouldn't have made appear to you to be a complete jackoff (I assume 'jackoff' is an Americanism for 'wanker')?


well instead of quoting Riis and Armstrong he could start off by addressing the points raised by Paul Kimmage 
Kimmage disappointed in Wiggins and Team Sky over transparency


----------



## MikeBiker (Mar 9, 2003)

There is really no way to answer that type of question. It's similar to the 'Are you still beating your wife?' question. I thought that Wiggins' answer was appropriate to the question.


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

den bakker said:


> well instead of quoting Riis and Armstrong he could start off by addressing the points raised by Paul Kimmage
> Kimmage disappointed in Wiggins and Team Sky over transparency


Correct me if 'm wrong, but I don't think Paul Kimmage was present. But I get the feeling that even if he was, Wiggins' answer wouldn't be quite good enough.


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

MikeBiker said:


> There is really no way to answer that type of question. It's similar to the 'Are you still beating your wife?' question. I thought that Wiggins' answer was appropriate to the question.


+1. Explanations, no matter how detailed, will never be enough.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

gizzard said:


> Correct me if 'm wrong, but I don't think Paul Kimmage was present. But I get the feeling that even if he was, Wiggins' answer wouldn't be quite good enough.


3 minutes to note there's a response, read the article and reply? I guess it indicates how much thought you gave it.


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

den bakker said:


> 3 minutes to note there's a response, read the article and reply? I guess it indicates how much thought you gave it.


Um, you really need to speak to someone about how the internet works. That piece has been live since 06.48 EST.:thumbsup:


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

gizzard said:


> Um, you really need to speak to someone about how the internet works. That piece has been live since 06.48 EST.:thumbsup:


and still not a coherent comment about it?


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

gizzard said:


> Correct me if 'm wrong, but I don't think Paul Kimmage was present. But I get the feeling that even if he was, Wiggins' answer wouldn't be quite good enough.


Interesting article. How it relates to this year is somewhat leading. What I feel was the most interesting is that a rider (It was Wiggins, but it could have been any rider as far as I'm concerned) shut the door on Kimmage following them on the Tour from day one, but day eight to the finish is not a problem. What's with that?


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

den bakker said:


> and still not a coherent comment about it?


Oh dear, is that the best retort you can muster? 
My first observation about the Kimmage piece is that at the time Wiggins was being interviewed by Tan, he probably wasn't even aware of the existence of the Kimmage piece. He's in the middle of the Tour and probably has more pressing issues to consider. It's therefore a little harsh expecting him to address issues relating to him in a piece that he's almost certainly unaware of (check the publication [timing] of the two pieces). 
As for the transparency thing, I'm not too sure what Kimmage is referring to - Sky's hiring of dodgy doctors or the fact that Wiggins wasn't happy for him to tag along for the Tour...in 2010. 
One thing I have learned about Kimmage though, is that the fight against doping is his raison d'etre. If it wasn't Wiggins in his sights, someone else surely would be. Maybe Froome's time is coming?


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

gizzard said:


> Oh dear, is that the best retort you can muster?
> My first observation about the Kimmage piece is that at the time Wiggins was being interviewed by Tan, he probably wasn't even aware of the existence of the Kimmage piece. He's in the middle of the Tour and probably has more pressing issues to consider. It's therefore a little harsh expecting him to address issues relating to him in a piece that he's almost certainly unaware of (check the publication [timing] of the two pieces).
> As for the transparency thing, I'm not too sure what Kimmage is referring to - Sky's hiring of dodgy doctors or the fact that Wiggins wasn't happy for him to tag along for the Tour...in 2010.
> One thing I have learned about Kimmage though, is that the fight against doping is his raison d'etre. If it wasn't Wiggins in his sights, someone else surely would be. Maybe Froome's time is coming?


this is nothing new and not only mentioned by Paul. The hire was in direct contradiction to initial statements by Sky. 
Whatever, this is the same ongoing discussion for over 15 years, only the names change. I hope Sky is the real deal, its truly too bad they throw the exact same cliches out all the previous wonder teams did.


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

I LOL'd when I read that the UK press is calling Sky U.K. Postal.

As to his response, he comes across like he's being persecuted just because people are asking legitimate questions about him possibly doping....especially in light of his team doctor.

It's interesting to me that in that entire diatribe, he never once says unequivicially, "I do not dope, I ride absolutly clean."

If it's me, and I am riding 100% clean, that's all I would keep repeating. If someone askls me the question he was asked which basicially is "can you understand the questions of the leader and the skepticism." The answer is simple...sure, I can understand the questions, especially in light of history, but all I can say is I don't dope, I ride clean......there is nothing else I can do to prove it to you but be tested. 

I think the reaction with an answer like that would be different than what he is getting now.

Len


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

Len J said:


> I LOL'd when I read that the UK press is calling Sky U.K. Postal.
> 
> As to his response, he comes across like he's being persecuted just because people are asking legitimate questions about him possibly doping....especially in light of his team doctor.
> 
> ...


Good point, but I fear that simply saying "I do not dope and I am 100% clean" won't be enough for the naysayers. I don't think anything will satisfy the skeptics.


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

gizzard said:


> Good point, but I fear that simply saying "I do not dope and I am 100% clean" won't be enough for the naysayers. I don't think anything will satisfy the skeptics.


Good point, but is the cost of making such a statement so high that it is not made?


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

Len J said:


> I LOL'd when I read that the UK press is calling Sky U.K. Postal.
> 
> As to his response, he comes across like he's being persecuted just because people are asking legitimate questions about him possibly doping....especially in light of his team doctor.
> 
> ...


BTW, I think it was the French press that referred to Sky as UK Postal, but witty none the less.


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

orange_julius said:


> Good point, but is the cost of making such a statement so high that it is not made?


Agree. Wiggins needs a semester at the Armstrong School of Slick PR. He could learn a thing or two from the master. Come to think of it, saying "I don't dope and I'm 100% clean" is the master's stance to a t. The press would love that.


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

gizzard said:


> Good point, but I fear that simply saying "I do not dope and I am 100% clean" won't be enough for the naysayers. I don't think anything will satisfy the skeptics.


That is exactly my point....why get down in the mud and wrestle with the pigs?

There is no way for him to prove that he is clean short of making daily blood samples available for independant testing both now and in the future for every day of both his training and his racing......and none of the stars have ever done that or will do it....I wonder why not?

So in the absence of an ability to prove he is clean, all he can do is acknowledge that there is good reason to be skeptical, re-state that he rides clean (which he never says in this article btw), and move on. Doing what he did makes him look like an ass IMO. and invites more poking and prodding.

Don;t know who his publicity advisor is, but they need to either be fired or listened to.

Len


----------



## gizzard (Oct 5, 2005)

den bakker said:


> this is nothing new and not only mentioned by Paul. The hire was in direct contradiction to initial statements by Sky.
> Whatever, this is the same ongoing discussion for over 15 years, only the names change. I hope Sky is the real deal, its truly too bad they throw the exact same cliches out all the previous wonder teams did.


Agree, Sky's and Wiggins' choice of words is frankly naive. It's sad that such a beautiful sport has been corroded and devalued by years of cheating, lying etc to the point now that every great performance is greeted by skepticism.


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

gizzard said:


> Agree. Wiggins needs a semester at the Armstrong School of Slick PR. He could learn a thing or two from the master. Come to think of it, saying "I don't dope and I'm 100% clean" is the master's stance to a t. The press would love that.


Armstrong never said "I don't dope." Rather he was always careful to say "I've never used a banned substance." or "I've never tested positive for a banned substance." You can drive a tractor trailer in the gap between "never doped" and "Never used a banned substance".

Just sayin'

Len


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

gizzard said:


> Agree, Sky's and Wiggins' choice of words is frankly naive.


It was not naive by all the previous users of the exact same language.


----------



## Buzzard (Sep 7, 2004)

gizzard said:


> +1. Explanations, no matter how detailed, will never be enough.


I'm not looking for an explanation, just some good old-fashioned humility.

Wiggins' most recent statements regarding the matter run completely contrary to his apparent sentiment back in 2007. Why then should we be expected to apply any less scrutiny to this year's Tour than Wiggins did when he made the following statement?

_"No one's got any faith in who's in yellow now. The whole thing is null and void as far as I'm concerned this year. I don't blame people for doubting the credibility of the Tour de France for the next five, six, seven years.”_

-Bradley Wiggins, July 27, 2007

Wiggns says Tour is null and Void | Latest News | Cycling Weekly


----------



## biobanker (Jun 11, 2009)

Stupid questions deserve stupid responses.

Wiggo should show up at the next press conference in a Superman suit and claim that his dominance on the bike comes from his being born on another world.

Test for that UCI!


----------



## cheddarlove (Oct 17, 2005)

I'm pretty sure he has said he has "never doped" more than once. I could only find this one quote but I believe he's said it at other times.


'I have been notified that USADA, an organization largely funded by taxpayer dollars but governed only by self-written rules, intends to again dredge up discredited allegations dating back more than 16 years to prevent me from competing as a triathlete and try and strip me of the seven Tour de France victories I earned. 'These are the very same charges and the same witnesses that the Justice Department chose not to pursue after a two-year investigation. These charges are baseless, motivated by spite and advanced through testimony bought and paid for by promises of anonymity and immunity. 'Although USADA alleges a wide-ranging conspiracy extended over more than 16 years, I am the only athlete it has chosen to charge. USADAs malice, its methods, its star-chamber practices, and its decision to punish first and adjudicate later all are at odds with our ideals of fairness and fair play. *****'I have never doped*****, and, unlike many of my accusers, I have competed as an endurance athlete for 25 years with no spike in performance, passed more than 500 drug tests and never failed one. 'That USADA ignores this fundamental distinction and charges me instead of the admitted dopers says far more about USADA, its lack of fairness and this vendetta than it does about my guilt or innocence.'


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I don't care if Wiggo comes off as a prick when asked about doping. 

I won a number of races this season. I've had a good year, full of improvement. 

I showed up late for a group ride once. I blew past a number of riders on a hill while I was trying to catch the lead group. Some loudmouthed girl said, "Wow, are you on steroids or something?" 

I told her to "F-off!" 

I couldn't imagine anything more insulting. With her stupid question, she managed to insinuate that my accomplishments were not from my own hard work. 

Others have asked, "What's your secret?" The truth is that I have no secret, save for hard work, consistency, and a refusal to quit. But when they ask I feel like I need to justify myself in other ways. I was a competitive runner in college. I was a triathlete. For the most part, I quit running at the beginning of this year and dedicated myself to cycling. I spend more time on the bike and without the pounding of running, my legs recovery much quicker than last year. I've lost 7-10lbs of weight. I've explained this more than once. I have no idea, but I always feel the need to justify things. 

So I'll say it again, I can completely understand why Wiggo would respond in such a manner. It's natural for him to list his pedigree and become upset.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> I don't care if Wiggo comes off as a prick when asked about doping.
> 
> I won a number of races this season. I've had a good year, full of improvement.
> 
> ...


It may be natural for him to respond this way, and maybe he doesn't care, but isn't he also a salesman?


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

Chris-X said:


> It may be natural for him to respond this way, and maybe he doesn't care, but isn't he also a salesman?


Anyone who is at the top of the heap in cycling should expect questions about doping. To not have a measured response at the ready shows a lack of preparedness or extreme naiveté, the latter of which I would not believe for Wiggins.

Sean Kelly's analysis that Wiggins is not mentally prepared enough to win the tour could be spot on.


----------



## NextTime (Oct 13, 2007)

We all have different reactions from the language and manner in which Wiggins addresses the public. For me it's a turn-off when it comes from an athlete and one who is a champion. So I'm not a fan. 

I'll watch Tosh.O when I need a dose of obnoxiousness.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

A well-scripted, measured response will indicate something to someone.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> A well-scripted, measured response will indicate something to someone.


Obviously it's a numbers game. Dropping the F bomb and using the c word is guaranteed to indicate something to a large % of someone's.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Again, my immediate, visceral reply was telling someone to f off. (and I'm clean.)

So I'm not about to read too much into Wiggo's reply. 


I'm not the biggest fan of Tyler Farrar. The things he says make it hard to like him. But when he crossed the line in 15th(?) in some race a while back and yelled out "F^&k!" I was not at all bothered. It made me like him a little. 

These are grown men, obviously type A personalities and obviously very competitive with a strong drive to win. They are paid to race bicycles; they are not politicians. I am not bothered by occasional outbursts. I agree with Cipollini's comments: 

“At the beginning of a sprint, I felt like a gladiator, ready to do anything to keep my place. And when I lost, I wasn’t capable of going to congratulate whoever had beaten me, like Andy Schleck did at the Tour. Me, I’d hate him because he’d taken the bread from my mouth.”

The friendship between Andy Schleck and Alberto Contador is something that Cipollini finds difficult to fathom and he echoed the thoughts of the late Laurent Fignon on the aftermath of the “Chaingate” incident.

“Seeing Schleck and Contador embrace on the Tourmalet after crossing the line and then seeing Contador affectionately pinch Schleck’s cheek during his interview was unreal for me,” Cipollini exclaimed. “Logically, Schleck should have been raging, he had just lost the Tour after all.

“After the chain slip incident on the Port de Balès, he should have attacked the Spaniard day after day, in front of the microphones and on the air too, without giving him time to piss!”


Cipollini Decries Modern Cycling's Lack Of Machismo | Cyclingnews.com


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I guess we can look at Spartacus's response as an innocent rider's model response: 

*"It’s so stupid I’m speechless,”* said Cancellara, who rides for the Saxo Bank team. *“I’ve never had batteries on my bike.”*

Call the allegation stupid and then deny it and move on with your day. 


EDIT: He also went on to say: *“It’s quite funny, but it’s become a bigger story and is no longer so funny. It’s a sad and really outrageous story.”*


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

*From this perspective*



Local Hero said:


> Again, my immediate, visceral reply was telling someone to f off. (and I'm clean.)
> 
> So I'm not about to read too much into Wiggo's reply.
> 
> ...


it seems kind of odd when non dopers didn't call out Armstrong's cheating to his face and instead, like Wigans said, 'I love him' during the comeback.

Floyd Mayweather had no problem saying Pacquiao should be tested. Then Pac Man started coming up with nonsense like he doesn't like to give blood tests too close to a fight because it weakens him.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

JChasse said:


> Comes across as a complete jackoff if you ask me.


Jackoff is a bit tame. Got these from another site:

_In 2010 just after his 4th place in the TDF I was asked to present the Jersey,s and medals at the British TT champs. Now obviously there was a lot going on for him so soon after the TDF and I didn't expect much of a acknowledgement but his arrogance was a bit of a shock. I felt like somat he,d wipe of the bottom of his shoe.
For the record, the reason I was asked was back in the 80,s I,d been British 25 mile TT champ 4 years running and twice Individual Pursuit Champ._

--------------
_I remember the 2010 team presentations. The announcer said to Bradley, 'new hairstyle.' The announcer was bald. Bradley turns around, totally serious, 'at least i have hair.' Everyone is there looking at him thinking where the f*** did that come from and what warranted it._


----------



## pianopiano (Jun 4, 2005)

*no 'pedigree' off of the bike*

Imho, just about every time Bradley Wiggins opens his mouth these days he sounds like a bloody wanker. Somehow I expected a whole lot more from him.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

jorgy said:


> Sean Kelly's analysis that Wiggins is not mentally prepared enough to win the tour could be spot on.


I would have said the same about Evans, both (although Evans seems to have chilled out some) are wound so tight they have to be stressing themselves and wasting all kinds of energy.

Neither are "tranquillo" like Armstrong and many other great riders typically are.


----------



## David Loving (Jun 13, 2008)

I agree with Cipollini. The riders need to man up - and not just take testosterone. It's the lack of upper body muscles. They look like wusses.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

David Loving said:


> I agree with Cipollini. The riders need to man up - and not just take testosterone. It's the lack of upper body muscles. They look like wusses.


That is the difference between sprinters and climbers. The essential nature of endurance athletes is not confrontational.

Aggression wastes too much energy and the long distance guys are expert in pacing.

One thing that Armstrong did was to take a combat sport mentality into GT's and essentially intimidated the heck out of everyone.

With his morphology, the drugs enabled him to compete with the pure climbers and the climbers were killing themselves to keep up on the flats. 

Then when Armstrong turned on the jerk routine no one was there to tell him to STFU.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

David Loving said:


> I agree with Cipollini. The riders need to man up - and not just take testosterone. It's the lack of upper body muscles. They look like wusses.


Nothing says manly like needing to supplement testosterone!


----------



## MarkS (Feb 3, 2004)

Local Hero said:


> These are grown men, obviously type A personalities and obviously very competitive with a strong drive to win. They are paid to race bicycles; they are not politicians. I am not bothered by occasional outbursts.
> | Cyclingnews.com[/url]


Actually, they are paid to promote their sponsors. I recently have been watching a lot of NASCAR races (for professional reasons, not pleasure). I am very impressed by the way that the drivers always manage to mention all of their sponsors when they are interviewed after a race. I don't know about all of the NASCAR teams, but I do know that at least one of them has professional media relations coaches work with their personnel to improve their on camera performance when they are interviewed. If I were the sponsor of a team in the Tour de France, I would expect the riders and other team personnel to present a good image when they are interviewed. As others have said, anyone who is at the top of the leader board in the Tour is going to be asked questions about doping. There is no excuse for Wiggins' outbursts. He is a professional and should act like one.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> Nothing says manly like needing to supplement testosterone!


Heavy endurance training loads destroy testosterone levels.

Mental stress too.

You said you were a competitive collegiate runner and you're now stepping up your training?

Go get tested. I'll bet you're low normal.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

MarkS said:


> Actually, they are paid to promote their sponsors. I recently have been watching a lot of NASCAR races (for professional reasons, not pleasure). I am very impressed by the way that the drivers always manage to mention all of their sponsors when they are interviewed after a race. I don't know about all of the NASCAR teams, but I do know that at least one of them has professional media relations coaches work with their personnel to improve their on camera performance when they are interviewed. If I were the sponsor of a team in the Tour de France, I would expect the riders and other team personnel to present a good image when they are interviewed. As others have said, anyone who is at the top of the leader board in the Tour is going to be asked questions about doping. There is no excuse for Wiggins' outbursts. He is a professional and should act like one.


Yes, I went to the Daytona 500 a couple of years ago and was blown away by the marketing. I'm not a fan of NASCAR but the drivers look like the Blue Angels I also saw and their uniforms are perfect. More Hollywood than Top Gun which I'm not a fan of either but it's hard to not be impressed by the show.

The proper demeanor for professional athletes seems to be polite and approachable but somewhat aloof at the same time. Mud wrestling with the hoi polloi seems pretty stupid.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Chris-X said:


> Heavy endurance training loads destroy testosterone levels.
> 
> Mental stress too.
> 
> ...


I've heard this. My solution is to do a few hard anaerobic workouts here and there, such as a pushup, pullup, or an abs workout before my night time shower. Outside of racing season I squat. A lot. 

Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if my testosterone levels are low. Let's say I do get tested. What exactly am I supposed to do with that information? I feel fine. If some dr told me that I need to start rubbing T gel on my lower back I'd laugh in his face.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> I've heard this. My solution is to do a few hard anaerobic workouts here and there, such as a pushup, pullup, or an abs workout before my night time shower. Outside of racing season I squat. A lot.
> 
> Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if my testosterone levels are low. Let's say I do get tested. What exactly am I supposed to do with that information? I feel fine. If some dr told me that I need to start rubbing T gel on my lower back I'd laugh in his face.


I was just responding to the "manly" comment. If you feel fine, then you're good. If you were dragging all the time, testosterone might be indicated.

Everyone seems to be low on sleep too. That's not good for hormone levels. No sleep, drinking, a lot of caffeine, bad diet, and then overtraining/ not paying attention to body. People wonder why they feel like crap.

You're right on the resistance training to keep hormone levels good. Short and intense with strict form. Compound movements/exercises like squats.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

And my comment was a joke, as in to say,_ It isn't very manly to need testosterone/viagrra/whatever to feel like a man_. 

Or a student who takes adderall -- I don't want to hear this person talking up their study habits. Obviously these things have their place in medicine. But it's tantamount to doping on a different note.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> And my comment was a joke, as in to say,_ It isn't very manly to need testosterone/viagrra/whatever to feel like a man_.
> 
> *Or a student who takes adderall -- I don't want to hear this person talking up their study habits.* Obviously these things have their place in medicine. But it's tantamount to doping on a different note.


I agree and this is my primary source of annoyance with people like Armstrong, and why other dopers like Indurain haven't gotten the grief LA has. Armstrong referred to the opposition as "chumps" and "pu$sies?" C'mon.

He comes back because he wasn't impressed by the Sastre TdF victory? Not only did Armstrong fool a lot of people out there, he fooled himself.

In the end, everyone is humbled one way or another.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

MarkS said:


> Actually, they are paid to promote their sponsors. I recently have been watching a lot of NASCAR races (for professional reasons, not pleasure). I am very impressed by the way that the drivers always manage to mention all of their sponsors when they are interviewed after a race. I don't know about all of the NASCAR teams, but I do know that at least one of them has professional media relations coaches work with their personnel to improve their on camera performance when they are interviewed. If I were the sponsor of a team in the Tour de France, I would expect the riders and other team personnel to present a good image when they are interviewed. As others have said, anyone who is at the top of the leader board in the Tour is going to be asked questions about doping. There is no excuse for Wiggins' outbursts. He is a professional and should act like one.


You're absolutely right about NASCAR teams and how they treat their sponsors. Drivers get coached about how to conduct interviews so that sponsors are front-and-center, Drivers can even get cap switches, mid-interview, to give as many sponsors as possible maximum exposure. Those NASCAR guys know who's signing the paychecks.

More popular drivers, who get product endorsement contracts, take acting lessons to maximize their marketability and effectiveness on-camera.

Some these guys in the peleton should take a lesson from that. Especially Wiggins. While I understand and can appreciate where he's coming from, it's not very professional. He'd be better off not responding at all. His outbursts only put him in a spotlight he doesn't need to be in and I would suspect his sponsors aren't to keen about it, either.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

MarkS said:


> I recently have been watching a lot of NASCAR races (for professional reasons, not pleasure). I am very impressed by the way that the drivers always manage to mention all of their sponsors when they are interviewed after a race.


I don't watch Nascar but have seen enough interviews flipping through the channels to be annoyed by this. It makes 100% complete sense to do it, but still it comes across to me as just over the top intrusive shilling.


----------



## juno (Jul 18, 2008)

Ha! Wiggins is a dick like LA but they forgive him because he speaks funny.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Dwayne Barry said:


> I don't watch Nascar but have seen enough interviews flipping through the channels to be annoyed by this. It makes 100% complete sense to do it, but still it comes across to me as just over the top intrusive shilling.


When the official team phrase for the car and sponsor is four or five words long and it is repeated three times in a rather small soundbite, the drivers sound like robots.

"The Ford Thunder Cougar Falcon Bird was workin' great today. The last few laps the Ford Thunder Cougar Falcon Bird was slippin' a bit in the corners, but I kept 'er steady. Everything worked out. The whole Ford Thunder Cougar Falcon Bird team's hard work paid off for the win today."


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

trailrunner68 said:


> When the official team phrase for the car and sponsor is four or five words long and it is repeated three times in a rather small soundbite, the drivers sound like robots.
> 
> "The Ford Thunder Cougar Falcon Bird was workin' great today. The last few laps the Ford Thunder Cougar Falcon Bird was slippin' a bit in the corners, but I kept 'er steady. Everything worked out. The whole Ford Thunder Cougar Falcon Bird team's hard work paid off for the win today."


I worked in a boiler room for a very short time and in spite of how ridiculous it sounds, repeating a person's name, Mr. Smith, 3 times in a very short script works.

I'm disgusted with that kind of crap myself and hang up the phone when telemarketers try it with me, but it does work with people who tend to get suckered which I think is the vast majority of the population.

Like I said, I only worked there for a very short time and this realization was the last straw.


----------



## tricycletalent (Apr 2, 2005)

Local Hero said:


> Some loudmouthed girl said, "Wow, are you on steroids or something?"
> 
> I told her to "F-off!"


She gave you a covert compliment. 

You explained in detail your pedigree, showing how proud you are of yourself, and how much you dig yourself, AND need to boast. 

You're a douche.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

tricycletalent said:


> She gave you a covert compliment.
> 
> You explained in detail your pedigree, showing how proud you are of yourself, and how much you dig yourself, AND need to boast.
> 
> You're a douche.


LOL

Jealous?


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> I won a number of races this season. I've had a good year, full of improvement.
> 
> I showed up late for a group ride once. I blew past a number of riders on a hill while I was trying to catch the lead group. Some loudmouthed girl said, "Wow, are you on steroids or something?"
> 
> I told her to "F-off!"


You should have told her how you came in fourth in a swim race when you were twelve.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

It was more like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0f1mSfF1D0w


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

jorgy said:


> Anyone who is at the top of the heap in cycling should expect questions about doping. To not have a measured response at the ready shows a lack of preparedness or extreme naiveté, the latter of which I would not believe for Wiggins.


I was thinking along those same lines. How tough would it be to have the media relations person, someone from legal and the team boss get up at a team meeting and say to the team: "When you're asked about doping, we want you say this......"?

When dealing with the media these riders come off like rank amateurs.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

MikeBiker said:


> There is really no way to answer that type of question. It's similar to the 'Are you still beating your wife?' question. I thought that Wiggins' answer was appropriate to the question.


Not only is there no answer that will resolve it, but it keeps getting asked over and over.

And he's an athlete, not a professional PR spokesman. His talent is riding a bicycle, not debating.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

tricycletalent said:


> She gave you a covert compliment


Insulting someone by assuming they are cheating is not a compliment.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> Not only is there no answer that will resolve it, but it keeps getting asked over and over.
> 
> And he's an athlete, not a professional PR spokesman. His talent is riding a bicycle, not debating.


The way to answer it is to be honest with the public. Acknowledge that there were few wins during the last twenty years that are not tainted. The public's skepticism is understandable, but the sport has clampled down on the excesses of the past. Huge amounts of progress has been made, and assure the public that Wiggins is doing it clean.

The big problem is that no one in the sport wants to talk about the past. They will imply that things were bad by saying the sport is completely different, but they are still defending specific and obvious examples of doping, chief of which is Armstrong. It is hard to taken anyone seriously when they defend Armstrong and describe his ex-teammates as bitter, unreliable drunks, which Wiggins has done.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Sometimes the Armstrong persecutors presume that everyone thinks like them. They presume that all allegations are true and that everyone should agree that all the allegations against Armstrong are true. 


Why should Wiggo _acknowledge_ that Armstrong's wins were tainted when it has not been proven?


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Maybe because Wiggins has already publicly said they were tainted and that the pro peloton, in his words, "has no credibility"? 

Just a WAG.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> Sometimes the Armstrong persecutors presume that everyone thinks like them. They presume that all allegations are true and that everyone should agree that all the allegations against Armstrong are true.
> 
> 
> Why should Wiggo _acknowledge_ that Armstrong's wins were tainted when it has not been proven?


WIggins was on a team filled with Armstrong's ex-teammates who told him. It is no secret. Everyone in cycling knows it.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> Sometimes the Armstrong persecutors presume that everyone thinks like them. They presume that all allegations are true and that everyone should agree that all the allegations against Armstrong are true.
> 
> 
> Why should Wiggo _acknowledge_ that Armstrong's wins were tainted when it has not been proven?


Armstrong is being persecuted?

C'mon, seriously..

I thought that amongst attorneys the presumption of innocence begins with the payment of the retainer?


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

I don't think this has been posted anywhere yet from what I could see but Wiggins used his blog to discuss his reaction to the queries over the doping.

Bradley Wiggins: I can never dope because it would cost me everything | Sport | The Guardian

I know the naysayers will point out that of course he'd say that and they're right. In that regard nobody, doper or otherwise, can say anything that proves they're clean.

One thing I believe he was half-right on was the attitude to doping in the UK. Until CAS intervened GBR was I think the only country that ruled that any of their athletes that tested positive would never be allowed to compete in Olympics again. CAS has now ruled that illegal but in terms of the public perception he's right they can't come back as heroes. Dwain Chambers for instance will now go the Olympics for GBR but there's no chance he'll be a public hero even if he overcomes the improbability of beating Bolt/Powell/Gay etc. Millar I think is regarded slightly differently, partly because of his book but also because in the general publics' eyes he's never been considered heroic given that road cycling in the UK has only really garnered interest since Sky threw their weight behind it and Cav gained a bigger media spotlight.

Anyway, if you haven't read the article give it a look over.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I like that blog entry. By Wiggo's math, when you subtract the dopers, his top 10 finishes turn into top 5; he has been consistently at the top. He has consistently performed for 25 years with no spike in performance, if you will.


----------



## FlandersFields (Jul 16, 2010)

David Loving said:


> I agree with Cipollini. The riders need to man up - and not just take testosterone. It's the lack of upper body muscles. They look like wusses.


What's up mate? Have some problems getting rid of that belly?


----------



## nate (Jun 20, 2004)

roddjbrown said:


> I don't think this has been posted anywhere yet from what I could see but Wiggins used his blog to discuss his reaction to the queries over the doping.
> 
> Bradley Wiggins: I can never dope because it would cost me everything | Sport | The Guardian
> 
> ...


His claim, "There is a different culture in British cycling. Britain is a country where doping is not morally acceptable." is absolutely ludicrous. It's a ridiculous premise to claim they're morally superior to the rest of cycling and athletes in general. The whole article relies on that argument and I don't buy it. I'm not necessarily a believer that he is doping, but his argument is absurd.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

nate said:


> His claim, "There is a different culture in British cycling. Britain is a country where doping is not morally acceptable." is absolutely ludicrous. It's a ridiculous premise to claim they're morally superior to the rest of cycling and athletes in general. The whole article relies on that argument and I don't buy it. I'm not necessarily a believer that he is doping, but his argument is absurd.


I don't think he's claiming they're morally superior, more that the British public are.I think personally more it's the outrage in the British press. In terms of British athlete doping scandals I can think of four possibly? Dwain Chambers, Christine Ohuorugo, Rio Ferdinand and Millar. Of those at least three of them regularly have the name prefaced in an article with "former drugs cheat...". You could argue that we're just not great at sport but as far as a culture goes its a relatively small number compared to the numbers in some countries/sports.

Of course you're unlikely to have many dopers when you have had so few top level cyclists


----------



## Alaska Mike (Sep 28, 2008)

roddjbrown said:


> Of course you're unlikely to have many dopers when you have had so few top level cyclists


Tell that to Paul Kimmage.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

roddjbrown said:


> I don't think he's claiming they're morally superior, more that the British public are.I think personally more it's the outrage in the British press. In terms of British athlete doping scandals I can think of four possibly? Dwain Chambers, Christine Ohuorugo, Rio Ferdinand and Millar. Of those at least three of them regularly have the name prefaced in an article with "former drugs cheat...". You could argue that we're just not great at sport but as far as a culture goes its a relatively small number compared to the numbers in some countries/sports.
> 
> Of course you're unlikely to have many dopers when you have had so few top level cyclists


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

den bakker said:


>


Precisely...one British road cyclist you've named there from The 60s. Robert Millar, Boardman, Liggett. There aren't many.


----------



## Priit (Feb 17, 2012)

den bakker said:


> well instead of quoting Riis and Armstrong he could start off by addressing the points raised by Paul Kimmage


Paul Kimmage is a stupid leftist wussy. Shitheads like this one should be totally ignored by the cycling community.


----------



## Alaska Mike (Sep 28, 2008)

Priit said:


> Paul Kimmage is a stupid leftist wussy. Shitheads like this one should be totally ignored by the cycling community.


To be honest, I found _Rough Ride_ to be kind of a whiny, "I could have been a contender" book from what was at best a mid-level talent, but it did raise the curtain on doping to a large degree, and he took a considerable amount of grief for it. A lot of guys who were looking to come forward may have looked at Kimmage's experiences after writing the book and decided it wasn't worth it.

I don't particularly like his journalistic style, but then again it seems the guys who irritate me the most also happen to be asking the right sort of questions these days, instead of playing along and selling the mythology.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

roddjbrown said:


> I don't think he's claiming they're morally superior, more that the British public are.


They do the same thing with diving in football. It's always the foreigners doing the diving, except when it's a Brit and then they kind of pretend it was a momentary lapse of reason, and quickly forget about it so they can go back to slagging on the foreigners ruining their great sport.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Dwayne Barry said:


> They do the same thing with diving in football. It's always the foreigners doing the diving, except when it's a Brit and then they kind of pretend it was a momentary lapse of reason, and quickly forget about it so they can go back to slagging on the foreigners ruining their great sport.


That's an excellent point.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Wiggo gets kudos outside of the doping forum: 

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/pro-cycling-race-discussion/wiggins-wining-me-over-285297.html


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> Wiggo gets kudos outside of the doping forum:
> 
> http://forums.roadbikereview.com/pro-cycling-race-discussion/wiggins-wining-me-over-285297.html


Kudos for what? Doing a time trial better than he has ever done before then riding behind his team in the most boring manner possible, sucking the life out of the race?


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

trailrunner68 said:


> Kudos for what? Doing a time trial better than he has ever done before then riding behind his team in the most boring manner possible, sucking the life out of the race?


Wow that's a lot of hatred. Yep winning through TTs is poor form. That Indurain chap - useless - absolute joker. 

And Wiggins is winning but why doesn't he do something more exciting? No chance at all that it should be down to his competition to make these exciting moves you want? 

Same with Sagan, can he not go for some sprints for a bit? Make the green jersey competition more exciting please!


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> Wow that's a lot of hatred. Yep winning through TTs is poor form. That Indurain chap - useless - absolute joker.
> 
> And Wiggins is winning but why doesn't he do something more exciting? No chance at all that it should be down to his competition to make these exciting moves you want?


Can't you come up with something other than, "Ooh, someone said something I don't like. I'll call them a hater. That'll show them. Waaa. Waa. Waa!"

Did you actually watch the Indurain years? Boring as watching paint dry.

This is the worst GC battle in memory. Just absolute crap. This year's TdF route blows.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> Wow that's a lot of hatred. Yep winning through TTs is poor form. That Indurain chap - useless - absolute joker.
> 
> And Wiggins is winning but why doesn't he do something more exciting? No chance at all that it should be down to his competition to make these exciting moves you want?


Seems to me, that Wigs is just playing it smart: Let your team protect you. Protect the jersey. Stay away from trouble. Maintain your points lead and don't screw up doing bazai crap - that's for the guys who are content with stage wins.

The winner is the rider with the most points not the rider who was the most exciting to watch.

Besides, if you're out front crushing the peleton every day, everyone will say you're doping. Ok, everyone will say you're doping, anyway. It won't matter what the truth is. Nobody gives a s**t about that any more.

Pro wrestling is a LOT more entertaining.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

trailrunner68 said:


> Can't you come up with something other than, "Ooh, someone said something I don't like. I'll call them a hater. That'll show them. Waaa. Waa. Waa!"
> 
> Did you actually watch the Indurain years? Boring as watching paint dry.
> 
> This is the worse GC battle in memory. Just absolute crap. This year's TdF route blows.


Quotation marks are used for direct quotes. I never called you a hater, I just find it astounding that anyone who claims to know anything about cycling would blame the guy winning the Tour de France for a GC battle being boring. 

Blame the competition sure, but you win the TdF (which he hasn't yet) you deserve it.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

trailrunner68 said:


> Can't you come up with something other than, "Ooh, someone said something I don't like. I'll call them a hater. That'll show them. Waaa. Waa. Waa!"
> 
> Did you actually watch the Indurain years? Boring as watching paint dry.
> 
> This is the worse GC battle in memory. Just absolute crap. This year's TdF route blows.


I assume your TV has more than one channel, right? Go watch something else and quit whining.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> Quotation marks are used for direct quotes. I never called you a hater,


Yeah, you just attribute anyone's opinion that does not match your own as being the result of hatred. Huge difference. 



roddjbrown said:


> I just find it astounding that anyone who claims to know anything about cycling would blame the guy winning the Tour de France for a GC battle being boring.
> 
> Blame the competition sure, but you win the TdF (which he hasn't yet) you deserve it.


I don't care who "deserves" it. I don't care who is to "blame." I just want a GC battle that is interesting to watch. This one is not.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

trailrunner68 said:


> Yeah, you just attribute anyone's opinion that does not match your own as being the result of hatred. Huge difference.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care who "deserves" it. I don't care who is to "blame." I just want a GC battle that is interesting to watch. This one is not.


Well you blamed Wiggins for it being boring so that doesn't entirely ring true.

Maybe the WWE is the best match for you. Actual sport generally relies pretty heavily on who deserves it, entertainment however just works on pleasing the viewer.

Should I add some speech marks and a smiley?


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> Well you blamed Wiggins for it being boring so that doesn't entirely ring true.


He is boring. He is leipheimering his way to a win. It's a snoozefest.



roddjbrown said:


> Maybe the WWE is the best match for you. Actual sport generally relies pretty heavily on who deserves it, entertainment however just works on pleasing the viewer.


Maybe you should mind your own business and stop telling people what they should or should not watch.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Many of us who are watching and enjoying the tour would like to post about it here without all the sniveling. Maybe BMX would be more your speed?

Tours have been won by guys who didn't win a single stage. I can assure you the important thing to them and there sponsors is that they finished in yellow, which is more than anyone else could say.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

trailrunner68 said:


> He is boring. He is leipheimering his way to a win. It's a snoozefest.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should mind your own business and stop telling people what they should or should not watch.


Right so we're back to you caring who's making it boring. Difficult to follow at first but I get it now, it's just every other post.

And why is only your opinion valid? You tell someone else their opinion on Wiggins isn't valid, you do/don't (I'm losing track) blame Wiggins for making it boring, don't blame his lack of competition, then tell someone they have no right to offer their opinion. 

At least a debate with you certainly isn't a snoozefest


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Fireform said:


> Tours have been won by guys who didn't win a single stage. I can assure you the important thing to them and there sponsors is that they finished in yellow, which is more than anyone else could say.


Oh, happy day. The sponsors are glad with any win, whether it was a good show or not. Fans everywhere should rejoice. Hooray for the sponsors.

Let's not mention all those who tuned out, reduced their viewing, or fell asleep while trying to watch.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> Right so we're back to you caring who's making it boring. Difficult to follow at first but I get it now, it's just every other post.
> 
> And why is only your opinion valid? You tell someone else their opinion on Wiggins isn't valid, you do/don't (I'm losing track) blame Wiggins for making it boring, don't blame his lack of competition, then tell someone they have no right to offer their opinion.
> 
> At least a debate with you certainly isn't a snoozefest


You are the one who seems to be upset with other's opinions. All your posts are filled with one "you" statement after another. Try dealing with the post rather than the poster.

Tell us why Wiggins and Sky has made this Tour worth watching. Explain why someone who does not think this race is exciting must be a hater.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

trailrunner68 said:


> You are the one who seems to be upset with other's opinions. All your posts are filled with one "you" statement after another. Try dealing with the post rather than the poster.
> 
> Tell us why Wiggins and Sky has made this Tour worth watching. Explain why someone who does not think this race is exciting must be a hater.


Again with that word "hater." Used twice by you and not once by me.

Wiggins is winning by doing what he does best, TTing and tempo riding . The competition haven't come up with any way to beat that yet but he's still beatable and has been known to crack. 

If you don't understand how Grand Tour racing works Wikipedia it, but if you've genuinely not seen anything exciting so far with Sagan, Millar, Voekler , TVG et al then this really isn't the sport for you.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

trailrunner68 said:


> Kudos for what?


Kudos for his response to the doping insinuations. Once the sugar rush from your haterade wears off you should read the thread.


> Doing a time trial better than he has ever done before then riding behind his team in the most boring manner possible, sucking the life out of the race?


I agree that the GC contest is a little boring. The most exciting thing yesterday was carpet tacks! 

Is that a good reason for you to hate Wiggans?


trailrunner68 said:


> Tell us why Wiggins and Sky has made this Tour worth watching.


Is that their responsibility?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I wonder if trailrunner68 is bored to tears while watching stage 20. 

Wiggans should slow down and stop just before the finish line in Chartres. Just hang out for a few minutes as the seconds tick past. Tic tic tic tic.... keep waiting until his GC time is within a second of Cadel Evans's GC time. 

Then cross the line. 

That would make the Champs Elysees exciting.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> Again with that word "hater." Used twice by you and not once by me.





roddjbrown said:


> Wow that's a lot of hatred.


Your words, not mine. Evidently the opinion of anyone who is not excited by the GC contest must come from "hatred." I rest my case. 

Worst Tour ever. Yes, even worse than 2009.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Your opinion is duly noted.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

On a related note, I look forward to Contadoper's return. His punchy, attacking style may be the antidote to Wiggo's tapping it out at a medium pace.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

trailrunner68 said:


> Your words, not mine. Evidently the opinion of anyone who is not excited by the GC contest must come from "hatred." I rest my case.
> 
> Worst Tour ever. Yes, even worse than 2009.


Hatred - an intense dislike of something or someone found in the Oxford English dictionary

Hater - a street slang term not in any dictionary

Same words? No. I was referring to your comments on Wiggins as bleeding the life out of the race.

Now I've explained why this tour is still exciting. I and others asked you to explain but it's Sky's job to make it exciting. Since you ignore those comments I think this debates done


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Yes, why blame Sky? 

Why not blame other teams with a GC guy, like BMC or Liquigas? Or blame Lotto or Greenedge? Why not blame the Olympics? 

When I used to run, I would always meet people who claimed that running is boring. Well, I find people who complain about boring things to be boring people. Why not blame yourself?!


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> Yes, why blame Sky?
> 
> Why not blame other teams with a GC guy, like BMC or Liquigas? Or blame Lotto or Greenedge? Why not blame the Olympics?
> 
> When I used to run, I would always meet people who claimed that running is boring. Well, I find people who complain about boring things to be boring people. Why not blame yourself?!


Why blame USPS and Armstrong for the boring reign of 1999-2005.

When you figure that out, we can talk.

Odd that you used to be a runner but you apply none of your personal experiences to any other endurance sport.

The reason it's boring is that Sky is riding so far under their collective limits no one can apply pressure and everyone in the race and watching it, knows this. Apparently you're fascinated by these tactics, if you can call doping the whole team with a novel approach a tactic.

Kind of odd that Wigans' body has evolved from it's previous incarnation and he's now able to maintain a peak for months on end at an extraordinarily low body fat %. 

As great as Lance was even he couldn't do that! Moninger has seemingly conceded the race to Wigans saying some nonsense that even if he gives up time in the Pyrenees, it's a foregone conclusion he'll smoke everybody in the time trial. Wow, that's drama!

How about the possibility Wigans could crack, possibly get a bug which could cost him a lot of time?

They've figured that out! The only guy who can crack him is Froome....


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

The most amusing thing about this thread is the blatant divide between the brit members and the rest of the world who's not blinded by silly nationalism.

Even more amusing is that the brit press calling Sky "UK Postal." Sure that doesn't have any insinuation in it, right?


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

robdamanii said:


> The most amusing thing about this thread is the blatant divide between the brit members and the rest of the world who's not blinded by silly nationalism.
> 
> Even more amusing is that the brit press calling Sky "UK Postal." Sure that doesn't have any insinuation in it, right?


I'm British but 1) don't like Wiggins and 2) completely agree with doubting Sky as its unlikely they're clean (although I do think their performances are technically feasible)

One thing I wondered is where this British press calling Sky UKPS has come from? Can anyone provide a link to it? I'm thinking it was actually in l'Equipe and one person said it was the British press and everyone else just accepted it as gospel. Not trying to be difficult but I'm genuinely intrigued as I'd be very surprised if the British press knew enough to make that comparison.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> I'm British but 1) don't like Wiggins and 2) completely agree with doubting Sky as its unlikely they're clean (although I do think their performances are technically feasible)
> 
> One thing I wondered is where this British press calling Sky UKPS has come from? Can anyone provide a link to it? I'm thinking it was actually in l'Equipe and one person said it was the British press and everyone else just accepted it as gospel. Not trying to be difficult but I'm genuinely intrigued as I'd be very surprised if the British press knew enough to make that comparison.


What I don't understand is why the team manager at Sky can't stand up in front of the press when doping allegations are made, wave a bunch of testing results in their faces saying, "Here's yesterdays testing data for every member of the team INCUDING Wiggins and it says they're clean."

I bet he doesn't do that because he can't. I'll bet he doesn't have any testing data at all for any member of his team. It might be safe to assume there's no testing data because there's no testing being done.

Aren't these guys being tested regularly? Like I mentioned in another thread, in other forms of pro racing, podium finishers are ALWAYS inspected to ensure rules compliance before results are official. If a team protests another team, that team gets inspected too. If they are being tested, why doesn't the team have copies and most importantly, why don't they use that data when doping allegations arise?


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

Samadhi said:


> What I don't understand is why the team manager at Sky can't stand up in front of the press when doping allegations are made, wave a bunch of testing results in their faces saying, "Here's yesterdays testing data for every member of the team INCUDING Wiggins and it says they're clean."
> 
> I bet he doesn't do that because he can't. I'll bet he doesn't have any testing data at all for any member of his team. It might be safe to assume there's no testing data because there's no testing being done.
> 
> Aren't these guys being tested regularly? Like I mentioned in another thread, in other forms of pro racing, podium finishers are ALWAYS inspected to ensure rules compliance before results are official. If a team protests another team, that team gets inspected too. If they are being tested, why doesn't the team have copies and most importantly, why don't they use that data when doping allegations arise?


Look back at the tour history for the last 20 years........all of the stage winners, the overall leaders and a random sample of other riders are tested daily........The problem is that the only way both confessed dopers and caught dopers ever get caught historicially is not from testing but rather because a.) either their Doctor gets caught (see puerto); b.) their mule gets caught carrying drugs across a border, or c.) they make a mistake in their doping (Hamilton/Landis) like using the wrong blood. In other words, only the stupid or inept get caught.

Dopers are way ahead of the testing....to the point where it's a joke.

Len


----------



## AdamM (Jul 9, 2008)

> What I don't understand is why the team manager at Sky can't stand up in front of the press when doping allegations are made, wave a bunch of testing results in their faces saying, "Here's yesterdays testing data for every member of the team INCUDING Wiggins and it says they're clean."


When Sky started out they branded themselves as a team radically committed to clean racing program. But as anti-doping journo Paul Kimmage pointed out a week or so ago, Sky is now a team that he doesn't recognize. Secretive, defensive, hired a new team doctor who ran the Rabo doping program back in the day. There were no other good sports doctors to be found supposedly. Anyway, race performance has improved significantly.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

AdamM said:


> When Sky started out they branded themselves as a team radically committed to clean racing program. But as anti-doping journo Paul Kimmage pointed out a week or so ago, Sky is now a team that he doesn't recognize. Secretive, defensive, hired a new team doctor who ran the Rabo doping program back in the day. There were no other good sports doctors to be found supposedly. Anyway, race performance has improved significantly.


Ok, but none of that is really proof of anything. The real proof MUST lie in testing.

When is testing done and where are the frikkin' results?


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

Len J said:


> Dopers are way ahead of the testing....to the point where it's a joke.


Well, it's not very funny.

Without regular, effective and reliable testing noone can actually prove anything one way or the other. It's like busting Al Capone for tax evasion and his more serious crimes went unpunished.

And then we have temerity to dis all these riders for doping. It's in the nature of racing to push the rules _as far as can be done without getting caught_. It's been this way since racing rules were first established. If you can get away with it, you try it, because winning is far more important than anything else. That, my friends is a true racer's mentality.

If you wanna rip on something, don't go after the Wiggins' of this world. Go after the system that can't apply and enforce it's own rules.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Samadhi said:


> Ok, but none of that is really proof of anything. The real proof MUST lie in testing.
> 
> When is testing done and where are the frikkin' results?


I think Brailsford absolutely could stand up and wave those results but it doesn't mean anything. You don't get caught by the type of testing you're thinking of all that often. See Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong etc.

I also agree with the comments about Sky's perspective having changed. They had this super clean mentality, zero tolerance etc. Then it all gets a lot more secretive, Tenerife training camps which ring alarm bells, a dodgy doctor.

I truly hope they're clean (and I do think it's feasible, just unlikely) not because they're British, but in the same way I want every team to be clean. Unfortunately, Schleks just ruined that and he won't be the last.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> I think Brailsford absolutely could stand up and wave those results but it doesn't mean anything. You don't get caught by the type of testing you're thinking of all that often. See Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong etc.


Well if they can't catch the bad guys when it really matters - like rduring or right after a race, then what's the frikkin point of all this talk about doping and it's unmittigated evil?

Waiting till someone screws up or gets caught at the border is ****ed up.

Serious racers must look at pro cycling and then throw up in their mouth a little. That, or envy the hell out of these guys because they can get away with almost anything as long as they don't screw up off-track.

Nobody can prove anything. That's obvious now. We might as well STFU and let them race.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Samadhi said:


> Well if they can't catch the bad guys when it really matters - like rduring or right after a race, then what's the frikkin point of all this talk about doping and it's unmittigated evil?
> 
> Waiting till someone screws up or gets caught at the border is ****ed up.
> 
> ...


The Bio Passport is what was designed to catch them,

Also, I wouldn't be so sure those "serious racers" aren't using the same stuff. Dopers are in a lot of sports


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

Samadhi said:


> Well, it's not very funny.
> 
> Without regular, effective and reliable testing noone can actually prove anything one way or the other. It's like busting Al Capone for tax evasion and his more serious crimes went unpunished.
> 
> ...


Do you think this is what is meant by "morality?" Needing to be watched over to ensure compliance with laws and rules of society?

Al Capone was guilty of tax evasion btw. What's wrong with prosecuting him for it?

BTW, how do you explain the "racers mentality" or the etiquette of the sport which frowns on taking advantage of mechanical failures of other racers? Seems to be at odds with what you label the "true racer's mentality."

Michele Ferrari believes anything that's not forbidden is allowed. Sounds like you share that "philosophy.":idea:


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

gizzard said:


> From cyclingnews.com, Wiggins: I'm Not Some S--t Rider Who Has Come From Nowhere | Cyclingnews.com, Wiggo more eloquently articulates his feelings the second time around regarding the whispering campaign and innuendo leveled at him this year.
> I say: "Well done 'Sticks'" :thumbsup:


So how does he explain Froome's ascention since joining Sky in 2010?


----------



## SFTifoso (Aug 17, 2011)

Either Chris Froome is some sort of genetic anomaly or his dirty. Which is more likely?


----------



## terzo rene (Mar 23, 2002)

SFTifoso said:


> Either Chris Froome is some sort of genetic anomaly or his dirty. Which is more likely?


 Both. They're all genetic anomalies or they wouldn't be pro athletes.


----------

