Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Dr Dutch on July 23, 2016, 11:20:38 AM
-
Any getbiggers stlll interested in the biggest and worldwide (except USA) most followed 3 weeks cycling race ?
Chris Froome (UK) is going to win it , tomorrow.....
Best cyclist ever as far as I am concerned, in order 1 to 3:
1. Eddy Mercks (Belgium)
2. Bernard Hinault (France)
3. Lance Armstrong (USA)
Using gear/amfetamines/epo/cortisone or whatever doesn't mean a shit, they all did en do.
Froome is the justified winner of the 2016 tour, I think.
Says Dr Dutch.
-
Any getbiggers stlll interested in the biggest and worldwide (except USA) most followed 3 weeks cycling race ?
Chris Froome (UK) is going to win it , tomorrow.....
Best cyclist ever as far as I am concerned, in order 1 to 3:
1. Eddy Mercks (Belgium)
2. Bernard Hinault (France)
3. Lance Armstrong (USA)
Using gear/amfetamines/epo/cortisone or whatever doesn't mean a shit, they all did en do.
Froome is the justified winner of the 2016 tour, I think.
Says Dr Dutch.
Errrrr. No. Lance had advanced warning of tests, gave money to WADA and had a plane loaded with the most exotic performance-enhancing undetectable cocktails imaginable. To say that everyone was competing against him on equal grounds is a crock o shit. Lance was simply on a better program. And Froome, as well as most of the Skybots, are on a better program.
In my opinion:
1. Eddie Merckx - Because he wanted to win everything every time
2. Miguel Indurain - Resting heartbeat of 28bpm and lungs the size of two 45lbs plates/guy was a natural wonder and demolished everyone
3. Bernard Hinault - Never gave up, always on the attack, never surrendered
-
(http://i.imgur.com/Vje5b7Y.gif)
-
Iv been watching every stage this year. I like cycling! Got two racebikes myself. Love bikes! Bodybuilding and billing is the only teo things I follow on YouTube accept some life guidance sites motivation happiness and shit like that...
-
Errrrr. No. Lance had advanced warning of tests, gave money to WADA and had a plane loaded with the most exotic performance-enhancing undetectable cocktails imaginable. To say that everyone was competing against him on equal grounds is a crock o shit. Lance was simply on a better program. And Froome, as well as most of the Skybots, are on a better program.
In my opinion:
1. Eddie Merckx - Because he wanted to win everything every time
2. Miguel Indurain - Resting heartbeat of 28bpm and lungs the size of two 45lbs plates/guy was a natural wonder and demolished everyone
3. Bernard Hinault - Never gave up, always on the attack, never surrendered
You know your stuff.....maybe Jan Ullrich is top 3, he loved life to much for his potential to come out. Had he done everything right with the Mercks cannibal mindset, he might have rivalled Mercks.
But that's just my opinion. We'll never know...
Indurain was the Ivan Drago (Rocky 4) of cycling. On paper the forever king, but no personality and no imagination.... :D
-
It was a great tour this year. Things seemed to be more even keeled which led to most stages being unpredictable. The Olympic years always make the Tour exciting too. Potential Olympic Team Candidates have to show more aggressiveness trying to catch the eye and earn a spot on the team.
I think #3 should be switched out with Lemond. He won/raced more races than Lance did. Lance primarily sat out most races and focused on the Tour year after year.
-
It was a great tour this year. Things seemed to be more even keeled which led to most stages being unpredictable. The Olympic years always make the Tour exciting too. Potential Olympic Team Candidates have to show more aggressiveness trying to catch the eye and earn a spot on the team.
I think #3 should be switched out with Lemond. He won/raced more races than Lance did. Lance primarily sat out most races and focused on the Tour year after year.
x2 but that has been the way it went over the years.
Mercks wanted to enter plus win all races and he did until he had to retire at 30 cause of back injuries. He's miles ahead in any classification, would he start today and be clever he'd win the TDF for 15 to 20 yrs in a row....not kidding.
-
"I control the field from the front" Best quote I ever heard from Eddy.
-
About Mercks being the best ever: must be 80% mindset. No way he could have been that much better than the competition physically......boggles how these things work.
-
Errrrr. No. Lance had advanced warning of tests, gave money to WADA and had a plane loaded with the most exotic performance-enhancing undetectable cocktails imaginable. To say that everyone was competing against him on equal grounds is a crock o shit. Lance was simply on a better program. And Froome, as well as most of the Skybots, are on a better program.
In my opinion:
1. Eddie Merckx - Because he wanted to win everything every time
2. Miguel Indurain - Resting heartbeat of 28bpm and lungs the size of two 45lbs plates/guy was a natural wonder and demolished everyone
3. Bernard Hinault - Never gave up, always on the attack, never surrendered
Indurain was chemically assisted as well. You don't go from a domestique to taking 4 minutes out of your nearest competitor without "help". He and the Banesto team worked with Dr. Conconi extensively- the same Dr. Conconi who blood doped Francesco Moser for his hour record:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-indurain-and-banesto-were-conconi-clients/ (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-indurain-and-banesto-were-conconi-clients/)
-
Indurain was a monster. Amazing how much raw power that guy possessed. He was awful at descending but could power right back into his position on the flats. In time trials, he was very unorthodox in such a non-aero fit but could out ride the best. He killed the 96' Olympic time trial too.
-
All top 5 or 10 TDF cyclist were and are assisted.......It really amazes me that people think that such a 3 week performance with daily recovery is possible naturally.
I don't care though, I say just let them all use whatever they want. It's their lifes.
1000s of people kill themselves each day by going McDonalds for years. I am sure that even the most juiced up TDF cyclist are much, MUCH, healthier.
Plus even more healthy than our IFBB idols. ::) ::)
-
(http://cache4.asset-cache.net/gc/147640184-lebanese-sunni-muslim-salafist-cleric-sheikh-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7QbkwC1G8Lpve6AM%2Bmyq1Y9PUfymiWYc6gXYZQI6HXzOYZrZTNCb42Ohc9y7bgVOLTA%3D%3D)
-
I wanna speak out for Lance, though. Juiced or not, he was the proverbial getbig-TDF cyclist. I respect him totally. He's being put down the last few years, but in time he will still be considered one of the greatest. Maybe THE greatest after Mercks. I will not say there will never be another Mercks, but it will be once in a century....
-
Gotta take Lance out of the top three. His non-Tour accomplishments were minor in comparison to others.
1 Merckx
2 Hinault
3 Fausto Coppi
Fausto Coppi won 2 TdF, five Giros, and 3 of the 5 monuments nine times. He didn't race during WWII, depriving him of many wins.
Gino Bartali won two TdF and three Giros and missed out during WWII. He also won 2 of the 5 monuments seven times.
Winning seven in a row, drugs or not, is amazing. You have to be in the right position, master the descents, and avoid bad luck and illness - there are no drugs for this.
-
Coppi's been a while, but a good point. Maybe Aquetil too ?
Difficult to compare cyclists from the 60s and 50s to recent guys....
Seems like everyone seems to agree on Mercks, and most with Hinault......they were both killers, really.
Lots of terrific competitors behind them: Poulidor, Zoetemelk (finished the most tours ever, 1st in 1980), Bjarne Riis (king of EPO, won the tour with the highest hemoglobin count ever, amazing thing he survived), Wiggins (amazing win, well......), Lucien van Impe, 1976 I think (only winner without being ever caught with doping) from his era....
-
I've read that Riis weighed150 for his Tour win in 1996. At 6'1" that's a ridiculously low bodyfat, but going up a mountain is all power/weight.
-
I've read that Riis weighed150 for his Tour win in 1996. At 6'1" that's a ridiculously low bodyfat, but going up a mountain is all power/weight.
Riis is one of the few that admitted using EPD years after his win....though he was never caught. Admitted after the crime wore off, or how does one say this in English......of course.. ;D. expired ?
-
Errrrr. No. Lance had advanced warning of tests, gave money to WADA and had a plane loaded with the most exotic performance-enhancing undetectable cocktails imaginable. To say that everyone was competing against him on equal grounds is a crock o shit. Lance was simply on a better program. And Froome, as well as most of the Skybots, are on a better program.
In my opinion:
1. Eddie Merckx - Because he wanted to win everything every time
2. Miguel Indurain - Resting heartbeat of 28bpm and lungs the size of two 45lbs plates/guy was a natural wonder and demolished everyone
3. Bernard Hinault - Never gave up, always on the attack, never surrendered
Just like in the Olympics, they all can be bought off...
-
Indurain was chemically assisted as well. You don't go from a domestique to taking 4 minutes out of your nearest competitor without "help". He and the Banesto team worked with Dr. Conconi extensively- the same Dr. Conconi who blood doped Francesco Moser for his hour record:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-indurain-and-banesto-were-conconi-clients/ (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-indurain-and-banesto-were-conconi-clients/)
At that time everyone in the TdF was doing something, although Indurain was a beast. The only guy able to beat him was Riis, and we all know what he had to do to beat him: Get his hematocrit level up to 60%. Bjarne played with death that year. Rumor has it, the night before the Hautacam stage, he was seen riding the stationary bike in the middle of the night because he was scared of going to sleep and not waking up (he was afraid he was going to go on cardiac arrest due to the thickness of his blood). That year, 1996, doping at the TdF took a huge leap. Same with the Armstrong era. Same with Froome.
Sky have riders who are well above 180lbs dropping well-known climbers in some of the climbs. Froome himself has posted climbing times that resemble those posted by known dopers. Yet, he keeps yapping away that he is clean.
-
Lance was essentially handed a death sentence with metastatic testicular cancer. It spread to his stomach, lungs and brain and he had slim chance of survival. In 1997 he was given the all clear and in 99 he won the Tour.
I don't care what he took the guy was a stud. Should have just stayed retired and never come back.
-
At that time everyone in the TdF was doing something, although Indurain was a beast. The only guy able to beat him was Riis, and we all know what he had to do to beat him: Get his hematocrit level up to 60%. Bjarne played with death that year. Rumor has it, the night before the Hautacam stage, he was seen riding the stationary bike in the middle of the night because he was scared of going to sleep and not waking up (he was afraid he was going to go on cardiac arrest due to the thickness of his blood). That year, 1996, doping at the TdF took a huge leap. Same with the Armstrong era. Same with Froome.
Sky have riders who are well above 180lbs dropping well-known climbers in some of the climbs. Froome himself has posted climbing times that resemble those posted by known dopers. Yet, he keeps yapping away that he is clean.
I'm still of the mind that Sky is clean till proven otherwise.
I'm friends with one of Lance's former teammates. He outlined everything they took and told me the recovery was miraculous each day. He also said Lance took far less than anyone else- he was that much of a natural talent. They started running gear when they saw guys they were dropping the previous year suddenly leave them in the dust. It was either use or quit the sport. I can see their point. I once raced against a guy who was taking amphetamines- one race he was average and the next no one could hold his wheel.
As for US Postal being the most advanced drug program- not by a long shot. Telekom had a program designed and administered by a team of doctors. Same with Manolo Saiz and Once. My friend Steve Bauer was offered a contract by them but changed his mind after seeing the "medical" program you were expected to go on.
-
All top 5 or 10 TDF cyclist were and are assisted.......It really amazes me that people think that such a 3 week performance with daily recovery is possible naturally.
I don't care though, I say just let them all use whatever they want. It's their lifes.
1000s of people kill themselves each day by going McDonalds for years. I am sure that even the most juiced up TDF cyclist are much, MUCH, healthier.
Plus even more healthy than our IFBB idols. ::) ::)
I was sad to see Bauke Mollema (coolest name since Fabian Cancellara) drop from 2nd to 10th. He'll be riding with Contador next year.
-
Big Tex Lance Armstrong is definitely in the conversation for best TDF rider ever regardless of PED.
lol @ the argument that his teams had better and undetectable drugs and that's why he won :D
I don't follow cycling closely but I believe among those who do, Lance is not considered the greatest ever because he pretty much only did the TDF and never won the other tours or any of the major day races. During his winning years I don't think he even raced in either of the other grand tours (may have earlier in his career).
-
Errrrr. No. Lance had advanced warning of tests, gave money to WADA and had a plane loaded with the most exotic performance-enhancing undetectable cocktails imaginable. To say that everyone was competing against him on equal grounds is a crock o shit. Lance was simply on a better program. And Froome, as well as most of the Skybots, are on a better program.
Lance had a political advantage and a timing advantage re testing sure, however they used the same Doctors and same programs, same drugs. In doping rings it's been talked to death. Make no mistake everything was available to everybody, Lance wasn't on some mystical drug, Lance just did everything better and had an unbeatable formula at that time. Plenty of transfusion stories even from low down riders during that era, so even your pack fodder riders were transfusing blood just like the top dogs.
Ullrich was asked could there have been anything more he could have done and he flatly answered no. I didn't everything and anything that i could have done (in reference to drug programs). One of Ullrich's biggest problems was weight gain. He would drop up to 7kg a few weeks out from the TDF which is not a positive thing. Whether or not it's true it was always said that Ullrich had more talent than Lance but offseason he fucked around a lot and that's why he never won.
-
I'm still of the mind that Sky is clean till proven otherwise.
I'm friends with one of Lance's former teammates. He outlined everything they took and told me the recovery was miraculous each day. He also said Lance took far less than anyone else- he was that much of a natural talent. They started running gear when they saw guys they were dropping the previous year suddenly leave them in the dust. It was either use or quit the sport. I can see their point. I once raced against a guy who was taking amphetamines- one race he was average and the next no one could hold his wheel.
As for US Postal being the most advanced drug program- not by a long shot. Telekom had a program designed and administered by a team of doctors. Same with Manolo Saiz and Once. My friend Steve Bauer was offered a contract by them but changed his mind after seeing the "medical" program you were expected to go on.
Nah that's the wrong mindset to have. SKY use a track background..... i raced track... it's the fucking dirtiest sport on the planet LOL. Pretty much bodybuilders on bikes. But does it really matter? All top riders are doing the same thing and in the end you must accept it's simply an even field when looking at the top guys.
Your mate on USPS wouldn't know WTF Lance was taking. Just like the bodybuilding industry, they all know who is on what but then there is always some smart ass who says they use 1/10th of what someone else does because they are a Legit alien being. It simply isn't true. Lance wasn't an outlier.
Team SKY have a budget of EUR35m/yr and simply buy all the strongest riders plain and simple. There is no magic doping program that they use vs anybody else. I 100% believe in the marginal gain shit because Brailsford has a track background and they run their strategy with mathematics. That's why they refer to them as Skybots because it's just a formula and is fucking boring - but it's the best strategy to win.
A real shame what has happened as the days of a small group attacking over and over and over is long gone.
-
I'm still of the mind that Sky is clean till proven otherwise.
Look, if we apply the "Sky is clean till proven otherwise" to all the cyclists from all the teams we would've busted not even ¼ of the dopers that eventually came out and told the truth. Fact of the matter is that Sky is the most obvious example of a sophisticated doped up team: In most races they are usually at the front imposing an insane rhythm that not even experience climbers can follow, they have culos gordos (which is how sprinters are known in the international peloton and means "big asses" in Spanish) dropping past Giro D'Italia, Vuelta a España and Tour de France multiple mountain stage winners like a bad cold, and lastly, they have Froome, who LITERALLY came our of nowhere to drop a known doper, Contador.
Like I said, the stench of doping is all over Sky, and there's nothing they can do about it.
I'm friends with one of Lance's former teammates. He outlined everything they took and told me the recovery was miraculous each day. He also said Lance took far less than anyone else- he was that much of a natural talent. They started running gear when they saw guys they were dropping the previous year suddenly leave them in the dust. It was either use or quit the sport. I can see their point. I once raced against a guy who was taking amphetamines- one race he was average and the next no one could hold his wheel.
Look, I'm not for or against Lance. What I am against is this idea that Lance was "taking less" than anyone else because he was a natural wonder. How do you or him know what everyone else took? Like I said, Lance went as far as donating money to WADA, tried to buy the sample testing machines he was then going to get tested with, had a plane that was (supposedly) loaded up with medical equipment, had advanced notice of tests, et cetera. But please, stop that bullshit story that he was more talented than anyone else... and that he was taking less than anyone else... How do you know?
As for US Postal being the most advanced drug program- not by a long shot. Telekom had a program designed and administered by a team of doctors. Same with Manolo Saiz and Once. My friend Steve Bauer was offered a contract by them but changed his mind after seeing the "medical" program you were expected to go on.
Dude, Lance had a plane loaded with transfusion equipment. Which other team was able to enjoy such luxuries? By advanced program I didn't just mean the drugs, I meant all the paraphernalia US Postal had access to, all the behind-the-scenes lobbying Bruyneel and his cronies were doing to find out from the UCI crooks who and when was going to get tested next, etc. US Postal had the competition rigged to such a point the other teams simply had no chance. Leveled playing field my fucking anus.
-
Team SKY have a budget of EUR35m/yr and simply buy all the strongest riders plain and simple. There is no magic doping program that they use vs anybody else. I 100% believe in the marginal gain shit because Brailsford has a track background and they run their strategy with mathematics. That's why they refer to them as Skybots because it's just a formula and is fucking boring - but it's the best strategy to win.
Marginal bullshit more like it.
Sky are doping. Face it.
-
You see, the main issue with doping and cycling is that the whole medical history of a cyclist as well as the sample collection and testing protocols are entirely a private matter. More often than not we find out who tested positive from a newspaper (because someone at the laboratory snitched,) which in my book speaks volumes about the powers-that-be reticence to publicly decry these fuckers. Just as with the UFC, there are TUEs, and some cyclists have some rather strange TUEs.
Froome himself once was on the verge of testing positive because he was busted for corticosteroid prednisolone, immediately ran to the UCI and got a TUE in record time (usually takes days) so that he didn't test positive. Get this, prior to taking the drug he had been suffering from a chest infection and was really struggling. He then is granted the TUE and goes on to win the competition.
Here's Froome in 2014 taking a puff while in competition (moments later he attacks like a madman):
(https://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/06/9g4mr.gif)
When found out, he came out and said that he's had asthma all his life. The press then went on a hunt and it was found that he has never EVER mentioned he has asthma. He just has it during the TdF.
WINK WINK
-
Just like most sports, Cycling is another big business. 5%ers everywhere.
-
Remove all drug testing from cycling.
Let the dead bodies re-shape the rules.
-
Nah that's the wrong mindset to have. SKY use a track background..... i raced track... it's the fucking dirtiest sport on the planet LOL. Pretty much bodybuilders on bikes. But does it really matter? All top riders are doing the same thing and in the end you must accept it's simply an even field when looking at the top guys.
Your mate on USPS wouldn't know WTF Lance was taking. Just like the bodybuilding industry, they all know who is on what but then there is always some smart ass who says they use 1/10th of what someone else does because they are a Legit alien being. It simply isn't true. Lance wasn't an outlier.
Team SKY have a budget of EUR35m/yr and simply buy all the strongest riders plain and simple. There is no magic doping program that they use vs anybody else. I 100% believe in the marginal gain shit because Brailsford has a track background and they run their strategy with mathematics. That's why they refer to them as Skybots because it's just a formula and is fucking boring - but it's the best strategy to win.
A real shame what has happened as the days of a small group attacking over and over and over is long gone.
Lol- Oh my friend knew exactly what Lance was taking...
-
Lol- Oh my friend knew exactly what Lance was taking...
I heard it from my neighbor's mother-in-law's dentist's veterinarian too.
-
Remove all drug testing from cycling.
Let the dead bodies re-shape the rules.
This is exactly my opinion too!
Main issue is, just as with bodybuilding, just when you think these guys aren't dumb enough to take certain PEDs... they end up taking certain PEDs.
-
Cycling has always been a doping sport, even before steroids or EPO guys were using speed etc...
They are also tested a whole lot more than in any other sports (compared to soccer for exemple). Hence the numerous doping scandals.
Nowadays they are even putting electric engines in the bike. They dont even need drugs anymore i guess.
Anytime theres money on the line people will try to get any edge possible, just the way it is.
-
I heard it from my neighbor's mother-in-law's dentist's veterinarian too.
Well, you are getting close with the neighbor thing, haha. I can't give much more than that. I'd lose my invite to the annual New Year's party he gives.
By the way, I saw Lance in October. Like all of us he has his good and bad, but his good is incredibly good. My late friend from upstate NY rode the now defunct Tour of Hope bike ride across America. ( It was sponsored by Bristol Myers). This was for cancer survivors. Lance and a teammate rode 100 miles in the rain just to pace my friend in to the finish of this epic ride.
A few years later when my buddy had cancer come back, and passed away shortly thereafter, Lance visited his widow and gave a yellow jersey from the Tour to her young son. He did a lot more than that and never once wanted to publicize it.
-
Can't leave out: Mechanical Doping, Cutting Courses, etc.
It's human nature to cheat.
-
Lance was essentially handed a death sentence with metastatic testicular cancer. It spread to his stomach, lungs and brain and he had slim chance of survival. In 1997 he was given the all clear and in 99 he won the Tour.
I don't care what he took the guy was a stud. Should have just stayed retired and never come back.
I agree with you...except he wanted a come-back.
He never juiced more than any of his top 10 rivals...C'mon....Lancevis tpo 3 ever...
-
Cycling...oh, brother ::)
-
the bullet from germany! GRIEPEL the Gorilla!
-
Not bad legs for doing cardio 30houers/week
-
Marginal bullshit more like it.
Sky are doping. Face it.
Did you even read what I wrote?
I already said it's an even playing field re drugs.
The fact is it isn't who can take the most wins. Hence the marginal gains is true on top of the drugs.
Lances' prep, team, tactics was what won. No different to Sky in the Tdf. Drugs are equal so the playing field is even. You need to face facts, there is more to cycling than doping.
-
Tired of all doping bullshit people dont know jack shit, they asume, thats all, no proofe!
THe climbing times now are much slower than 10 years ago!
-
No.
The bloodpassport was created to give goalposts for.doping so riders could not repeat what they did in the Lance era and earlier.
That's why times are slower but don't kid yourself they still hit 6.2w/kg on climbs which is doping Territory.
Riders are getting done coming off..... My personal feeling is the top riders are constantly on. The blood regulates.itself over time so that solves the bloodpassport issue. You only need to worry about timing of injects then. My own blood parameters look like a normal person yet for cycling I am doped up (lightly compared to lance lol).
So there is truth in what I say as I cycle and also record parameters so I have seen it.myself. Yi never would have believed it prior to me seeing what happened to my own blood values over time.
-
but is it worth it?
being so skinny
nobody will give props on the streets you just look like a skinny vegan ???
-
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Mw8xYR4fPRc/TNmJhpVwsnI/AAAAAAAABIw/GpldhVD0dNw/s1600/arnold-bike.jpg)
-
Did you even read what I wrote?
I already said it's an even playing field re drugs.
The fact is it isn't who can take the most wins. Hence the marginal gains is true on top of the drugs.
Lances' prep, team, tactics was what won. No different to Sky in the Tdf. Drugs are equal so the playing field is even. You need to face facts, there is more to cycling than doping.
Dude, the marginal gains YOU are talking about are not the marginal gains Brailsford keeps harping about. In any case, it is an insult to the community, and one many experienced people take to heart, to think that some traffic light from Lower Upperton all of a sudden revolutionized the world of cycling. Never mind the rolling accumulated knowledge that has been acquired for the past 100+ years. Neegah please. Sky's tactics are the equivalent to Piana's 5%.
Like I said, Lance had foreknowledge of tests, had a plane which he used to dope in, and had a very good team around him. Hardly a leveled playing field.
Check out Jeff Novitzky's Joe Rogan Experience interview (from 10:50 onwards):
Jeff is talking about the team he investigated, namely US Postal, and Lance's habits.
-
US Postal/Lance Armstrong had it all rigged to the point that they were getting Trek to send them hundreds of bikes, even though they only used 10-15% of them, and then selling the rest off the back of a truck. They would then use the money to buy steroids, EPO, cortisone, GH, et cetera. The bikes were about 7-15k each, so they really made a lot of money out of it.
And the story about him doping when he got to the TdF is absolute bullshit. Those in-the-know say that he had been doing "things" from the time he was blowing everyone out of the water during his triathlon years.
-
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Mw8xYR4fPRc/TNmJhpVwsnI/AAAAAAAABIw/GpldhVD0dNw/s1600/arnold-bike.jpg)
Thighs like a female crossfitter....
-
Dude, the marginal gains YOU are talking about are not the marginal gains Brailsford keeps harping about. In any case, it is an insult to the community, and one many experienced people take to heart, to think that some traffic light from Lower Upperton all of a sudden revolutionized the world of cycling. Never mind the rolling accumulated knowledge that has been acquired for the past 100+ years. Neegah please. Sky's tactics are the equivalent to Piana's 5%.
Like I said, Lance had foreknowledge of tests, had a plane which he used to dope in, and had a very good team around him. Hardly a leveled playing field.
He did 'revolutionise' cycling in a sense by bringing his track experience directly into the road peloton and as a result winning the TDF with a track rider - Wiggins.
People just hate him because they hate SKY because they make cycling boring. The marginal gains was a term he coined and now distances himself from it quoting it was something the media made up LOL. Mainly because of what you say above - it's insulting to constantly hear that pear juice is the secret formula this year lol.
However, i continue to say it is a level playing ground re drugs whether people want to accept that or not. Look at Brittish track cycling - fucking powerhouse nation now and it isn't because of a change in drugs because those have always been there. They looked into every single detail on how to get those few hundredths of a second more and he is applying those same things to the road because nobody else was doing it.
Track cycling changed considerably in tactics over recent years and it was all to do with watt management vs fatigue. SKY adopted that before anybody else. Marginal gains is a really shit sounding term, it's more appropriate to say they are a step ahead.
Re Lance - Ullrich who finished 2nd to him disagrees with you that it wasn't level. Sure, Lance was corrupt to the core but as for the drug availability for performance they were all still using the same doctors, same programs, same things etc. Operation Puerto was all the evidence anybody needed to realise half the peloton was using the same Doctor who was storing their blood bags for them for transfusions.
People need to just accept at the top end it's all even regarding drugs and move on. If your favourite rider doesn't win it's because their prep sucked. Look at Quintana, dude looked pretty good early in the season and then BAM the wheels fell off and he rides poorly. Althouigh his performance makes me wonder whether the TDF was just a red-herring and he is planning to win the Vuelta.
-
Thighs like a female crossfitter....
wanna question Arnold, "Sobchak" ? (what kinda name is that, Polak ?)
Remenber your place in the line, dude.... >:(
-
Bicycling sprint champs make many BB wannabees very humble...their quads are HUGE....and I mean HUGE.
-
Remove all drug testing from cycling.
Let the dead bodies re-shape the rules.
X 100....... 8)
-
He did 'revolutionise' cycling in a sense by bringing his track experience directly into the road peloton and as a result winning the TDF with a track rider - Wiggins.
No he didn't! Stop repeating slogans. What is SKY doing nowadays that they didn't steal from US Postal? What. Is. It? Brailsford's track experience didn't, doesn't and will not mean jack shit. Where did SKY learn to control the mountain stages by imposing an insane rhythm? US Postal. Where did SKY learn to launch the leader 5k out? US Postal. Where did SKY learn to get rid of potential competition by signing them to SKY? US Postal. Where did SKY learn to scout out climbs prior to a competition? US Postal. Where did SKY get their desire to implement the latest technological advances? US Postal. You see, the more you look into it, the more research you put in it, the faster the Brailsford house of cards crumbles.
People just hate him because they hate SKY because they make cycling boring. The marginal gains was a term he coined and now distances himself from it quoting it was something the media made up LOL. Mainly because of what you say above - it's insulting to constantly hear that pear juice is the secret formula this year lol.
No, it's insulting because we all know what he is doing to win (doping). It's not a leveled playing field if you're playing with almost a 40 million dollar budget and the majority is dealing with less than 20.
However, i continue to say it is a level playing ground re drugs whether people want to accept that or not.
Where do you get that??? Who told you that??? How do you know what cyclists take???
Look at Brittish track cycling - fucking powerhouse nation now and it isn't because of a change in drugs because those have always been there. They looked into every single detail on how to get those few hundredths of a second more and he is applying those same things to the road because nobody else was doing it.
Slogan, as usual. Everyone else is just stupid. Amazing what some people will take as facts because it comes from a (wo)man I like's mouth.
Track cycling changed considerably in tactics over recent years and it was all to do with watt management vs fatigue. SKY adopted that before anybody else. Marginal gains is a really shit sounding term, it's more appropriate to say they are a step ahead.
Because it's bullshit. Like I said before, ALL teams have over 100 years of rolling inherited experience. There isn't anything new in the world of cycling that is so groundbreaking as to create the gap that we now see with people like Froome and SKY. It's like in bodybuilding... the basics have already been laid out. We all know what you have to do to get from Mike O'Hearn to Markus Ruhl. You can beat around the bush all you want, I, for one, am of the opinion that the only thing that changes is the quantities of PEDs one takes vs. the other.
Re Lance - Ullrich who finished 2nd to him disagrees with you that it wasn't level. Sure, Lance was corrupt to the core but as for the drug availability for performance they were all still using the same doctors, same programs, same things etc. Operation Puerto was all the evidence anybody needed to realise half the peloton was using the same Doctor who was storing their blood bags for them for transfusions.
By Ullrich's own admission, his only doping protocol involved transfusing his own blood. Lance Armstrong used testosterone patches, GH, cortisone, EPO, et cetera. Does it sound like a leveled playing field to you?
People need to just accept at the top end it's all even regarding drugs and move on. If your favourite rider doesn't win it's because their prep sucked. Look at Quintana, dude looked pretty good early in the season and then BAM the wheels fell off and he rides poorly. Althouigh his performance makes me wonder whether the TDF was just a red-herring and he is planning to win the Vuelta.
That's not true at all. You see, the #1 fallacy when it comes to taking PEDs, regardless of sport, is that the others are doing them too. How do you know? Again, take bodybuilding as an example... there's plenty of people out there that are on something and will lie to your face and tell you that they are natural. You see, with bodybuilding there's no way to hide the fact that someone is taking steroids. In cycling, the size differential can be seen in people's career. Take Froome for example... he isn't even a Brit, he's from Kenya. He went from placing 9th Overall at the Tour du Haut Var (the equivalent of a Tour of Northern Vermont) to placing second at the Vuelta a España about a year later. His records are the most suspicious I've seen since Rumsas came along.
-
Lance got a raw deal.
The guy beat cancer and went on to be a TDF legend. He inspired many who had cancer.
They went on a witch hunt to take him down, while many others in the sport clearly did dope, dope now, and will dope in the future.
Yeah he lied and pissed a lot of people off, but what else could he do?
He accomplished some great things in his life.
-
He was the leader of the cycling mafia. Ruined many names and future work/careers. 5%er.
-
No he didn't! Stop repeating slogans. What is SKY doing nowadays that they didn't steal from US Postal? What. Is. It? Brailsford's track experience didn't, doesn't and will not mean jack shit. Where did SKY learn to control the mountain stages by imposing an insane rhythm? US Postal. Where did SKY learn to launch the leader 5k out? US Postal. Where did SKY learn to get rid of potential competition by signing them to SKY? US Postal. Where did SKY learn to scout out climbs prior to a competition? US Postal. Where did SKY get their desire to implement the latest technological advances? US Postal. You see, the more you look into it, the more research you put in it, the faster the Brailsford house of cards crumbles.
No, it's insulting because we all know what he is doing to win (doping). It's not a leveled playing field if you're playing with almost a 40 million dollar budget and the majority is dealing with less than 20.
Where do you get that??? Who told you that??? How do you know what cyclists take???
Slogan, as usual. Everyone else is just stupid. Amazing what some people will take as facts because it comes from a (wo)man I like's mouth.
Because it's bullshit. Like I said before, ALL teams have over 100 years of rolling inherited experience. There isn't anything new in the world of cycling that is so groundbreaking as to create the gap that we now see with people like Froome and SKY. It's like in bodybuilding... the basics have already been laid out. We all know what you have to do to get from Mike O'Hearn to Markus Ruhl. You can beat around the bush all you want, I, for one, am of the opinion that the only thing that changes is the quantities of PEDs one takes vs. the other.
By Ullrich's own admission, his only doping protocol involved transfusing his own blood. Lance Armstrong used testosterone patches, GH, cortisone, EPO, et cetera. Does it sound like a leveled playing field to you?
That's not true at all. You see, the #1 fallacy when it comes to taking PEDs, regardless of sport, is that the others are doing them too. How do you know? Again, take bodybuilding as an example... there's plenty of people out there that are on something and will lie to your face and tell you that they are natural. You see, with bodybuilding there's no way to hide the fact that someone is taking steroids. In cycling, the size differential can be seen in people's career. Take Froome for example... he isn't even a Brit, he's from Kenya. He went from placing 9th Overall at the Tour du Haut Var (the equivalent of a Tour of Northern Vermont) to placing second at the Vuelta a España about a year later. His records are the most suspicious I've seen since Rumsas came along.
1) Nah Brailsford is one up on USPS with tactics. SKY are using methods not used before in managing their power. Sure, it's reminiscent of USPS sure but it is not the same and they do deserve kudos. Whether you like it or not power management has improved massively in the last 10yrs. All post Lance era. You don't want to believe that, no problem.
2) WTF is it with you and thinking only SKY are doping?
3) Because i have experience in that in the realm both doing and also knowing people who did it in my particular circle. You clearly don't and you ignore what the pros even say. They were even using the same doctors. I've done it so i know it.
4) I raced track and i cycle. You have no idea what tactics, wheels, frames, positions, gearing, aerodynamics, weight, power delivery etc are for. They send these guys into wind tunnels, do you realise how expensive that is? The Brit's found a better formula and it isn't drugs. You seem to be helt bent on hating the Brittish.
5) Wrong. You know nothing about watts and power management.
6) Wrong. Ullrich stated he did everything and anthing to win and nothing was left unturned. None of the doped to the gills pros ever complained that Lance had an edge in that realm. When the whole peloton flipped even lower classed riders were doing transfusions and EPO and everything the top guys were doing. The difference was top riders could afford the EUR500k program to not get caught. Lower riders opted for a cheaper plan which came with higher risk.
7) My circle in cycling tells me otherwise. Even in rec club racing there is a large doping problem and that's average fat joe racing at the local races. A local race here they started rocking up to test people at local club racing and one night half the field suddenly grabbed their bikes, loaded the car and drove off before they could be tested LOL.
The thing is sports become much more enjoyable when you assume they are doping and it's a level field because you are just watching the best person win. When you act like you and others who think only 'some' dope then you piss and bitch and moan about a certain individual or team or whatever and it completely ruins the sport for you.
You have it in so bad for Froome and SKY you can't even accept that they are fucking smart and have made inroads to how to win that no one has done. I already said i don't like their tactics but damn, they work! Even Tinkoff says Brailsford is the best team director there is but apparently you know more than the riders and team owners lol. Just chill out man. Relax. Enjoy the sport and accept the best man/team will win at the end of the day because it's all even.
-
Mayday, what is there not to like about Team Sky's tactics? they are running guys a little below their FTP, it's hard to attack ahead of that. They have the biggest budget and so they can hire the strongest riders. Wout Poel looked to be stronger the Nairo Kitana on the hills, Froome didn't even have to attack on the hills to win. Is this boring to watch, probably, but you can't deny the effectiveness of it.
I have to disagree with your statement "Power management has changed in the past 10 years". Yes, power meters are great, I have one and hate riding or training without it, I also use Zwift and Strava to track my numbers. Lactic acid threshold is a key measurement as well, and Dr. Ferrari knew that all to well back then ;)
Ulrich is one of my all time favorites but he wasn't always one for training or coming into the TDF in peak form, simply put he was too big to climb with the mountain goats.
Slacker, everyone scouts out the climbs, every team has the same equipment or access to it. Sky does have the budget to hire team leaders as domestiques. Richie Porte (now on BMC's GC leader) was Froome's helper and now is leading
-
1) Nah Brailsford is one up on USPS with tactics. SKY are using methods not used before in managing their power.
Not used before? ;D ;D ;D You DO know the house of cards will come crumbling down eventually right? You sound like me back in 2002, when I was cussing people out for calling Lance out on doping. I also devoured all the crazy new cycling routines, new training methods, new nutrition knowledge... and then, when you try it, you see that it's all BS. But I continued on with the lie because I got too emotionally invested in it, even though there was a HUGE mountain of evidence suggesting all of US Postal were on some kind of program.
Sure, it's reminiscent of USPS sure but it is not the same and they do deserve kudos. Whether you like it or not power management has improved massively in the last 10yrs. All post Lance era. You don't want to believe that, no problem.
"Power management" has improved massively? Who said that? You mean to tell me that what happened in the past 100 years means nothing? And that a guy from a country that had ZERO Tour de Frances, until Wiggins won, all of a sudden becomes the idol of all-things-cycling. PLEASE! I'm not so much interested in "power management," but in how and where they get the extra power from.
2) WTF is it with you and thinking only SKY are doping?
I didn't say that. I said that the current state of affairs is ANYTHING but a leveled playing field. When you have a team with twice the budget of 80% of the teams, most of the best cyclists and a leader who is being literally shellacked with doping allegations... connect the dots buddy!
3) Because i have experience in that in the realm both doing and also knowing people who did it in my particular circle. You clearly don't and you ignore what the pros even say. They were even using the same doctors. I've done it so i know it.
Well, that's a major assumption on your part because... I hate to break it to you but... I've been cycling myself for about 30 years, and am an avid fan of the sport for about the same time. I read cycling magazines, watch cycling events on TV and LISTEN and READ people who are both knowledgeable and cyclists themselves: Greg LeMond, Paul Kimmage, et cetera. In other words, I've been around and can tell you, without a shadow of a doubt, that the pungent stench of doping surrounding SKY is obvious.
4) I raced track and i cycle. You have no idea what tactics, wheels, frames, positions, gearing, aerodynamics, weight, power delivery etc are for. They send these guys into wind tunnels, do you realise how expensive that is? The Brit's found a better formula and it isn't drugs. You seem to be helt bent on hating the Brittish.
That's not true, I ride my bike every day of the week. I even ride the Citibike here in NYC every single day. I don't hate the Brits, I hate your stupidity and the childish reticence to give credit to whom credit is due: US Postal. You coming up with all these idiotic new training methods, power management theories is nothing but bullshit. Without US Postal you wouldn't even know what a bicycle is.
5) Wrong. You know nothing about watts and power management.
Again, don't assume things. I do know what a watt is. I also know how to get the extra power that you need to manage the cycling style of a Froome. On a side note, by all accounts, Chris' style of riding a bicycle is so bio-mechanically OFF that it looks as though he trained on a stationary bicycle all his life, put on a major cycle of PEDs and then put on a racing bike.
6) Wrong. Ullrich stated he did everything and anthing to win and nothing was left unturned. None of the doped to the gills pros ever complained that Lance had an edge in that realm. When the whole peloton flipped even lower classed riders were doing transfusions and EPO and everything the top guys were doing. The difference was top riders could afford the EUR500k program to not get caught. Lower riders opted for a cheaper plan which came with higher risk.
That's because the other contenders had NO IDEA that Bruyneel was doing a lot of dirty work behind the scenes, having lance donate money to WADA, bribing UCI officials to try to find out who was going to get tested when, et cetera. That I know of, no other teams had access to this valuable information. At the end of the day, if you have privileged information, you can plan transfusions and microdoses ahead of time. Kinda like what happened to Contador when he tested positive: He knew that he was going to lose the TdF on the Tourmalet that year because Andy Schleck was that much stronger than him in the previous stages, so he (allegedly) had a blood transfusion (the level of plasticizers in his blood were through the roof the day after) that contained minor traces of clenbuterol. Had he been Lance, he probably would've known ahead of time that that sample was going to be sent to the Cologne lab with the ultra sensitive equipment, and would've avoided the transfusion.
7) My circle in cycling tells me otherwise. Even in rec club racing there is a large doping problem and that's average fat joe racing at the local races. A local race here they started rocking up to test people at local club racing and one night half the field suddenly grabbed their bikes, loaded the car and drove off before they could be tested LOL.
I'm not disagreeing with you on this.
The thing is sports become much more enjoyable when you assume they are doping and it's a level field because you are just watching the best person win.
Again, this is bullshit. A fallacy. Put the other teams on a 40-million a year budget. Get them the best 4-5 domestiques and a leader who is able to go off radar in some of the most remote Kenyan villages and then we'd be onto something.
When you act like you and others who think only 'some' dope then you piss and bitch and moan about a certain individual or team or whatever and it completely ruins the sport for you.
I'm not saying that the others do not dope, quite the contrary: I am say most of the cyclists taking part in the TdF are actually on something other than their bikes. NOW, this is where it ends. What I am contending is that the TdF is a competition in which cyclists are on different programs, different PEDs, different tactics, different everything, so... as to why people would call this a "leveled playing field" is beyond me. SKY had most of the TdF team training solely to peak at the TdF. The (arguably) next best team's best domestique, Valverde, did the Giro before going to the Tour. How is this equal? How are they leveled?
You have it in so bad for Froome and SKY you can't even accept that they are fucking smart and have made inroads to how to win that no one has done. I already said i don't like their tactics but damn, they work! Even Tinkoff says Brailsford is the best team director there is but apparently you know more than the riders and team owners lol. Just chill out man. Relax. Enjoy the sport and accept the best man/team will win at the end of the day because it's all even.
Buddy, with a 40-million budget and using US Postal's blueprint to the teeth... It's no wonder. I could be winning the TdF with that team.
God! You make me love the Fourth of July. So. Frigging. Much.
-
Just so that we put a perspective on things... the guy in yellow is Christopher Froome, of SKY. He adamantly insists he does not dope. The following video shows him dropping a well-known and busted doper: Alberto Contador of TInkoff Saxo: