"PRO" Cycling Discussion

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderators: robbosmans, Moderator Team

User avatar
Tinea Pedis
Posts: 8615
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:08 am
Contact:

by Tinea Pedis

basilic wrote:Tinea, I'm not sure what your point is. Sure, lots of people are only mildly interested in cycling, and their interest has waxed and waned with LA's rise and fall.
But airwise commented about the forum regulars who persist in doubting Sky. He thinks that there is plenty of evidence that the pros are clean, and that people who doubt that are "overly protective of their emotions", ie irrational. That's where (reasonably rational) people can disagree. Pro cycling has thoroughly earned the distrust of many spectators over many years. Being somewhat skeptical seems very rational (to me), especially as long as the circus is run by the same people, with the same governance, as before.


Not sure what your point is.

I simply agreed with airwise.

You're not compelled to agree. But if I read the same thread as you, I see some pretty shrill and baseless claims being thrown around in here. On quite a constant basis.

The optimal word though is "overly". I'm not without scepticism, just not overly so.

Ahillock
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:30 am

by Ahillock

Tinea Pedis wrote:It's simply the reality for people whose only interest in the sport are 3 weeks, max, a year.


No different to me only knowing Barry Bonds and Babe Ruth from baseball.


Once again, fair weather fans, casual "follower" who gets their info from the 30 second clip on the nightly news, who only thinks cycling has one race (TdF) and doesn't realize the sport revolves around other events as well throughout the rest of the racing season. That is the definition of an uninformed viewer who really doesn't understand the sport and shouldn't even be considered a fan of cycling.

Now based on your knowledge of baseball only being Bonds and Ruth, I would say that you do not follow baseball at all so you aren't even a baseball fan. Otherwise you would know more about the sport than that. You have just come across their names because of being mentioned multiple times, that does not make you a baseball fan.

Same with cycling. Just because you hear Lance Armstrong's named mentioned several times per day/week/month does not make you a fan or follower of cycling. If one was, they would realize how much of the sport there was outside of one person. So to equate knowing the name of Armstrong = being a cycling fan is rubbish imo.



Tinea Pedis wrote:Ahillock, steady on. You can make your point without looking like a prat.


I think you are reading in too much into what you think I am writing in my posts. Please don't do that and please be courteous and don't label people "prat" unless you want people to start calling you names as well and want to take the thread that way. It is unfitting and unbecoming of a moderator. Something that is looked down upon on WW is name calling and personal attacks and something that causes threads to be locked.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



KB
Posts: 3967
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: HULL UK

by KB

Tinea Pedis wrote: But if I read the same thread as you, I see some pretty shrill and baseless claims being thrown around in here. On quite a constant basis.

The optimal word though is "overly". I'm not without scepticism, just not overly so.

Agree. There's been some pretty offensive stuff on here over the last year regarding Sky, and for me Froome has taken even more stick than Wiggins. Yes, we have a right to be skeptical, but it's all speculation.

One of the central figures in bringing down Armstrong has been David Walsh. He's had full access to Sky this season. I read his take on Sky in the Sunday Times. His view was that some of the stick Froome was taking was disgusting. He said the worse was on Irish Corner on Alpe D'Huez: been sprayed with syringes full of liquid and verbally abused. Walsh is Irish himself. He believes that Sky are clean.

I've said it before, there's a world of difference between saying 'i've never failed a dope test' as opposed to what Froome has said. So, for me I'll accept his result until WADA or some other agency with clout come up with evidence to suggest his results are not physically possible for an undoped rider.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3708
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

Has been great watching Kittel come of age in this TdF. Has been a great year for him and I can't wait to see what he does in 2014. He has a very bright future and I would have to say he is clearly the fastest sprinter right now. His improvement over the offseason and early next year will be important. Not sure if Renshaw can fix Cav or any issues Cav is having. Kittel is just the faster man. Plus TAS has a very solid leadout train themselves and I don't see that going away. Maybe Cav's dominance at #1 is now over and he will have to deal with being #2/#3.
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

User avatar
MattSoutherden
Posts: 1376
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:22 pm
Location: London

by MattSoutherden

So let me get this straight. Froome wins and you call foul play. Kittel starts putting on the burners and simply out-drags everyone else, and he just has 'a very bright future'?

:thumbup:
Snacking on carrot sticks - Where did it all go so wrong?
-
Finsbury Park CC

KB
Posts: 3967
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: HULL UK

by KB

I've been very impressed with Kittel as well. Last year's Tour was a disaster for him, but he's come back with a vengeance this year. He's definitely the new sprinter on the block.

I'm not writing off Cav yet. I think more important than Renshaw is getting OPQS better organised, but then I also think he needs to look at his programme, but that also depends on priorities. 7 Grand Tour stages this year is not too shabby. However, for him to get the better of Kittel (no guarantee), I think he needs to bale out of the Giro early. His most succesful year was 2009 when he won 6 stages in the Tour. He rode the Giro, but abandoned early to prepare for the Tour.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3708
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

MattSoutherden wrote:So let me get this straight. Froome wins and you call foul play. Kittel starts putting on the burners and simply out-drags everyone else, and he just has 'a very bright future'?


You realize there is a different with a sprinter winning by the length of a wheel +/- after a 250m sprint, vs. an unknown cyclist who couldn't even complete a major stage race without holding onto a motorcycle 3 years ago and is magically transformed into superman and can blow everyone away on climbs and TT's? Now if Kittel was starting his sprint at 1000m and winning a sprint by 10 sec you might have a point.

But I'm not sure why you are trying to compare a GC rider vs. a sprinter? A sprinter who is still young, progressing over the course of his career and didn't explode onto the scene after being a pro for 3-4 years and having done nothing at that point. But you already knew that.
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

Pharmstrong
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:17 pm

by Pharmstrong

53x12 wrote:an unknown cyclist who couldn't even complete a major stage race without holding onto a motorcycle 3 years ago...


He finished the Tour in 08, and Giro in 09. But you already knew that. Or not.

User avatar
HammerTime2
Posts: 5813
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed

by HammerTime2

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/other-sports/the-faster-man-won-says-mark-cavendish-8725746.html wrote:The Manxman offered no excuses, saying Kittel is simply the faster man.

"Kittel was faster," he said. "I did 1500 watts and usually when I do 1500 watts I win by a few bike lengths."
http://www.markcavendish.co.uk/ wrote:Mark Cavendish
Fastest man on two wheels.
FACT.
Time to update his website.
FACT.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3708
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

Pharmstrong wrote:He finished the Tour in 08, and Giro in 09. But you already knew that. Or not.



Was talking about Giro 2010 where he couldn't even complete the race.

You mean Tour in '08 where he didn't even crack top 80 or the Giro in '09 where he didn't even crack top 30? Thanks for making my point for me, but I guess you already knew that.

Time for Froom to start "Froomstrong" in support of the millions who have to battle with bilharzia along with supporting their families and friends.


HammerTime2 wrote:
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/other-sports/the-faster-man-won-says-mark-cavendish-8725746.html wrote:The Manxman offered no excuses, saying Kittel is simply the faster man.

"Kittel was faster," he said. "I did 1500 watts and usually when I do 1500 watts I win by a few bike lengths."
http://www.markcavendish.co.uk/ wrote:Mark Cavendish
Fastest man on two wheels.
FACT.
Time to update his website.
FACT.



Nice. Even Cav can admit he is no longer the fastest man. Not sure why WW can't admit Kittel is faster now.
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

User avatar
MattSoutherden
Posts: 1376
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:22 pm
Location: London

by MattSoutherden

So, basically, he improved year on year from when he turned pro?

2010 he was injured. Oh no, wait. That was all a front wasn't it.
Snacking on carrot sticks - Where did it all go so wrong?
-
Finsbury Park CC

User avatar
stella-azzurra
Posts: 5066
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Location: New York

by stella-azzurra

I called Kittel as the up and coming sprinter 2 years ago.
It was known to be the case among the cycling ranks.
I never took drugs to improve my performance at any time. I will be willing to stick my finger into a polygraph test if anyone with big media pull wants to take issue. If you buy a signed poster now it will not be tarnished later. --Graeme Obree

Ahillock
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:30 am

by Ahillock

MattSoutherden wrote:So, basically, he improved year on year from when he turned pro?

2010 he was injured. Oh no, wait. That was all a front wasn't it.



Even if it was a planned abandon during the 2010 Giro, just look at how he was doing in the 2010 Giro up to that point in stage 19 and you leave underwhelmed. Prior to his 2nd in GC during Vuelta in 2011, what does his palmares look like? To me, a bunch of nothing honestly. Reads just like a life long domestique palmares.

User avatar
tymon_tm
Posts: 3666
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:35 pm

by tymon_tm

Ahillock wrote:
Tinea Pedis wrote:For a lot of people (and I don't think this is a massive generalisation), the Tour really 'started' with Armstrong.

Doped or not, I cannot deny his impact on truly globalising the sport.



? WTF. Maybe for the massively uninformed, fairweather fan and those who just jumped on the bandwagon. Sure. But those of us on here discussing this don't fall into that group. The Tour for many of us (me) started as a kid back in the 80's remembering guys like Hinault, Fignon, LeMond, Roche, Indurain....etc.




does it occur to you, Ahillock, that some people aren't old enough to remember the 'great times' of Hinault, LeMond or Indurain?

every cycling fan, no matter how well thought of himself, has to start following cycling at some point, at which "he jumps on the bandwagon"
kkibbler wrote: WW remembers.

wingguy
Posts: 4318
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

KB wrote:I've said it before, there's a world of difference between saying 'i've never failed a dope test' as opposed to what Froome has said.


I'm not saying this in an anti-Froome way at all, but seriously, you people have got to let go of the canard that Armstrong only ever said he 'hadn't failed a test'. It's complete bollocks. Armstrong said many times, straight up, that he had never doped. The idea that committed dopers will draw the line at saying they don't dope, or that you can tell who's doping by how they handle the question 'are you doping?' is utter nonsense.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Locked