2017 'PRO' cycling discussion.

[AJS914]

If they actually wanted to illegally cheat, they would do so out of competition--no need for a TUE, especially for things like this where the half life is around two weeks. In other words, why would they rush to illegally take it at the end of Dauphine when they already have legal permission to take it at a point where it would be more beneficial to them?

There are out of competition tests so they can't just simply time this stuff to out of competition. I guess one could try that and they not answer the door. I think they slam you if you miss a number of tests.

[Rondje]

Also note that they don't need a TUE to take PEDs out of competition, as long it's out of their system come test time.

They can't legally take banned substances out of competition. They would still need a TUE for a legit medical usage.

In isolation the TUEs look bad for Sky but I'd love to see a list of all TUEs granted for the same year. If TUEs were public information, they wouldn't try to game the system by asking for them for performance reasons under the guise of medical reasons.

Don't have the specific number of Sky for that year, but here is a list of the total amount of TUE's granted that year:

A Dutch Journalist did some research in 2014 and came to this list: https://twitter.com/thijszonneveld/stat ... 4516953089
Little translation: Geen reactie means no reaction, and all teams with text instead of a number didn't share except for Omega Pharma who shared it with the newspaper but not for publication.
Also funny that Garmin-Sharp shared while BMC couldn't share because of American privacy.

[Mr.Gib]

Wow, look how much healthier these cyclists became in a mere 6 years. Like high speed evolution of the human species.

[petepeterson]

I miss steve tilford and his blog too. Unlike PG the guy clearly wasn't trying to make a living out of his writing on the sport.

Because there's something wrong with writing books after a career in sport?
Cycling fans eh, decry pros for not speaking out and for being too vanilla. Lambaste them when they do. Screwed either way.

So I wasn't very articulate. Totally support speaking out and I like buying/reading books about cycling. Bought many books including Hamilton's. I just don't care much for PG's approach to carving out an income post retirement.

[gravity]

Cycling fans eh, decry pros for not speaking out and for being too vanilla. Lambaste them when they do. Screwed either way.

It's not about that mate and you know it. I completely agree with @nathanong87 that the timing is so convenience to him as he tends to profit directly from the sales of his book. There's a financial motives for PG and that stinks.

[AJS914]

The last Velonews podcast discussed PG's book. They both liked it and didn't like it. They felt that Gaimon mixes up facts and opinions in such a way that it would be hard for many readers to separate the two. Like the Cancellara thing, he does says he's basically stating his opinion regarding a youtube video but he also throws in some insider innuendo which make it seem like he has insider knowledge. I'd read it if the library had it to check out but I wouldn't pay $20 for it.

[Tinea Pedis]

Do you think that a no-name pack fodder dude making noise about one of the greatest stars in the sport would have been seriously listened to in 2010?

Exactly. Also, think how much power Cancellara commanded when he was in the peloton. As if Gaimon, who struggled year on year for a contract, was going to call Fabian out and paint a cobble sized target on his back. We've seen what happens when this occurs, contracts miraculously seem to dry up for the whistle blower.

Also, this is one paragraph in a whole book. At no point did he pick it up and run with it as some sort of headline revelation that 'you'll have to buy the book to find out what I really think'. Phil is saying this is a mountain made out of a molehill and he's right. Every, every autobiography has little hooks and tasty morsels in them. Hamilton's did, some of which have have no more evidence to claims he makes than Phil's opinion on Fabian. Yet here we are with people getting insanely self righteous about a book that - if it didn't have these features - would be a meh throwaway doorstop. That Gaimon is daring to have the seeming audacity make money out of this book notwithstanding.

I applaud Phil for having the balls to drop his thoughts. I'm no lawyer and he could be in a little strife, but heaven forbid future cycling books go a milquetoast route out of fear of retribution for an opinion.

[Kjetil]

Hear, hear.

[Renne]

Cycling fans eh, decry pros for not speaking out and for being too vanilla. Lambaste them when they do. Screwed either way.

It's not about that mate and you know it. I completely agree with @nathanong87 that the timing is so convenience to him as he tends to profit directly from the sales of his book. There's a financial motives for PG and that stinks.

And Cancellara is now using this whole thing as publicity for his granfondo race thing. So they are both profiting from the situation. Everybody happy, now can we move on please?
Would like to see Cancellara and Gaimon go head-to-head on a climb...seeing how much Gaimon can push uphill, might be a nice one

[bilwit]

Wow, look how much healthier these cyclists became in a mere 6 years. Like high speed evolution of the human species.

It's largely because Salbutamol became legal in 2010 and no longer required a TUE, common/inconsequential stuff like that are taken off the exception list. I think they review these things on a yearly basis. I'm sure the whole Fancy Bears leak also made teams think twice before applying for them too.

[spud]

So Sutton admits to using TUEs for marginal gains at Sky. What a surprise.

[maquisard]

What Sutton said is pretty damning. Using a TUE when not strictly required for medical reasons is doping, even if you have the legal paperwork to back it up. TUEs are only legal when used for a legitimate medical reason, if you are using them for ANY performance enhancing reason it is doping.

David Millar's comments were equally scathing, quite telling giving the high ranking position his sister enjoys on the team.

It's throws wide up the farce and stage show that is Team Sky and British Cycling in general.

[mattr]

It's throws wide up the farce and stage show that is professional cycling and national teams in general.

Hate to break it to you, but anything that sky/BC are doing. Everyone else is too.

[maquisard]

Really, the evidence would suggest otherwise.

The fact is that Sky and British Cycling perfected TUE doping just like Ferrari perfected EPO doping in the 90's. Doping moved on to something new just like it did in the late 80's early 90s.

Amazing that I have been saying this stuff on this forum for months if not years and was roundly criticised. Team Sky were the cleanest team in the sport according to many, turns out the opposite was true. It now begs the question why people aren't asking Froome some hard questions about Romandie 2014 and his win immediately after an emergency TUE.

[seaneT1]

Really, the evidence would suggest otherwise.

The fact is that Sky and British Cycling perfected TUE doping just like Ferrari perfected EPO doping in the 90's. Doping moved on to something new just like it did in the late 80's early 90s.

Amazing that I have been saying this stuff on this forum for months if not years and was roundly criticised. Team Sky were the cleanest team in the sport according to many, turns out the opposite was true. It now begs the question why people aren't asking Froome some hard questions about Romandie 2014 and his win immediately after an emergency TUE.

Yeah, yeah, remind me how many TUE's did sky riders take during the Tour and the Vuelta this year? I can't stand people getting Wiggins TUE missuse (and maybe Froome's at some point earlier on his GT career?) and generalizing it to cover the whole team,or the whole sport even!!!, when there is no evidence whatsoever about any other riders, especially in the last 2-3 years, where team Sky still dominated and TUE use dropped signifficantly on the peloton...you people are a joke.....Illegal doping might still be a thing for the pro peloton, but ''legal doping" through TUE is deffinitelly not, just look at the numbers, in 2015 for example only 13 TUE where applied...not 1.300!!!