Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    31

    UCI & Sky: The similarities between post-Festina scandal & post-Lance scandal.

    Post Festina affair, the UCI desperately needed to clean up cycling's image as a tainted sport, retaining its integrity AND profits; enter a new era - Lance and Team Postal, "proving" cycling had been cleaned up and was driven by honest, hardwork, not drugs.

    Post Lance, the sport has once again lost corporate and public support, but enter Team Sky to once again usher in a new, clean age. As Sir Bradley Wiggins put it, 'British cycling saved me from doping.' Just as Armstrong and Postal proved clean cycling can win, Team Sky proves that hardwork and smart training is once again number one.

    Is the UCI continuing with the methods it used during its previous "new, clean era?" Selective and convienent testing (Lance would have his blood/urine tested on flat stages, but not on the more important mountain stages). Teams would be tipped off about when tests/raids were going to occur; positive tests would disappear; minimal samples were taken to prevent retroactive analysis; etc ETC ETC.

    Who wants to bet that once again, the UCI is selectively brushing the uglies under the table to herald in a new age of clean heroes, positive PR, corporate sponsors, and most importantly, profits? It reads like the post-Festina era all over.

  2. #2
    UNBANNABLE
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    374
    It wouldn't surprize me one bit!

  3. #3
    Travels by Map
    Reputation: nate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,030
    I'm not sure where these numbers are from, but this was supposedly the fifth fastest Tour ever. That doesn't make for a very good picture, especially when you see the years of the four that were faster. All four of those Tours had the original winners disqualified for doping. I'd be interested to find out the elevation gains for each, because this year seemed to have more mountains than usual as well.



  4. #4
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: pedalruns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    765
    Very similiar indeed..

    Worse though.. in that Team Sky has lots of $$$ to cover their tracks. And they are a media giant with LOTS of POWER.

    Armstrong had the great comeback story and his team was poor in 1999.. It was the 'story' that made the magic happen and the $ and power followed.. But it was Armstrong's own ego and the fact that he was a jerk that the truth actually came out.

    Being an armchair fan I can only make my own opinion and that is that Team Sky has the magic potion and the $ and power to cover their tracks..

    Next year we might can expect a team sky all podium with Froome, Wiggins and Porte!! Of course I doubt they will be that obvious, someone will have a bad day.

  5. #5
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: love4himies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,080
    Quote Originally Posted by pedalruns View Post
    Next year we might can expect a team sky all podium with Froome, Wiggins and Porte!! Of course I doubt they will be that obvious, someone will have a bad day.
    Yes, but each will take a turn at having a bad day, so all three still end up on that podium.
    While we are free to choose our actions, we are not free to choose the consequences of our actions. - Stephen R. Covey.

  6. #6
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: MattSoutherden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by pedalruns View Post
    Being an armchair fan
    Yep. Pretty much nailed it.
    Laterally stiff yet vertically compliant.

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: pedalruns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    765
    Quote Originally Posted by MattSoutherden View Post
    Yep. Pretty much nailed it.
    Good insult... Is that all you got?
    “You don't suffer, kill yourself and take the risks I take just for money. I love bike racing.” .....Greg Lemond

  8. #8
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: rbart4506's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,052
    Yup and the arm chair fans had been calling Lance out for years and look at what happened...

    You know the saying 'If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then....'

    In due time...

  9. #9
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: MattSoutherden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    549
    So, what is the walking and quacking?

    If you can provide some evidence that stands up to rudimentary scrutiny, then please do go ahead.
    Laterally stiff yet vertically compliant.

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    106
    Quote Originally Posted by MattSoutherden View Post
    So, what is the walking and quacking?

    If you can provide some evidence that stands up to rudimentary scrutiny, then please do go ahead.
    3rd fastest time ever up Ax3 (surrounded by doped times)
    Barely losing to TM on the TT which was the 3rd fastest time ever!
    Porte riding back and forth to the team car and other poor saps like it's a club ride (okay, not froome related but you get the point)

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    106
    Quote Originally Posted by usernametaken View Post
    Post Festina affair, the UCI desperately needed to clean up cycling's image as a tainted sport, retaining its integrity AND profits; enter a new era - Lance and Team Postal, "proving" cycling had been cleaned up and was driven by honest, hardwork, not drugs.

    Post Lance, the sport has once again lost corporate and public support, but enter Team Sky to once again usher in a new, clean age. As Sir Bradley Wiggins put it, 'British cycling saved me from doping.' Just as Armstrong and Postal proved clean cycling can win, Team Sky proves that hardwork and smart training is once again number one.

    Is the UCI continuing with the methods it used during its previous "new, clean era?" Selective and convienent testing (Lance would have his blood/urine tested on flat stages, but not on the more important mountain stages). Teams would be tipped off about when tests/raids were going to occur; positive tests would disappear; minimal samples were taken to prevent retroactive analysis; etc ETC ETC.

    Who wants to bet that once again, the UCI is selectively brushing the uglies under the table to herald in a new age of clean heroes, positive PR, corporate sponsors, and most importantly, profits? It reads like the post-Festina era all over.
    Osymetric chainrings, pinarellos, turbo trainers are all selling great right now I imagine!

  12. #12
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: MattSoutherden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by kokothemonkey View Post
    3rd fastest time ever up Ax3 (surrounded by doped times)
    Do the times alone take into account all factors contributing to climbing effort? Hint. The answer isn't yes.

    Also, there are only 4 previous ascents of Ax3 in the Tour so not much reference data to go on. Froome was a minute quicker than the 2010 times. Here's a quote from the coverage of that stage, which was similar to the 2013 route, including the Col de Pailhères, but which came on stage 14 of the Tour, a whole week of racing later:

    "Schleck sat on Contador at the rear of the group, at times coming close to a standstill watching each other."

    And a quote from Andy:

    "He played poker, I played poker, we both played poker today,” said Schleck. “I can afford to lose time to the others but I had to play the game today.
    Tomorrow will be different."

    Does that sound the same as the way it was ridden this year?

    Here's a little light reading about why estimating power and performance is fraught with danger:

    Alex's Cycle Blog: Windbags
    On Bicycles, and.... what else is there?: pVAM and the Critical Power Model

    Quote Originally Posted by kokothemonkey View Post
    Barely losing to TM on the TT which was the 3rd fastest time ever!
    This Tony Martin?

    Tony Martin Tour De France Crash picture

    And one would expect times to be fast in a short ITT. But in comparative length TTs, they were both still slower than Greg Lemond.
    Laterally stiff yet vertically compliant.

  13. #13
    Slightly Opinionated
    Reputation: robdamanii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    10,219
    Quote Originally Posted by MattSoutherden View Post
    Do the times alone take into account all factors contributing to climbing effort? Hint. The answer isn't yes.

    Also, there are only 4 previous ascents of Ax3 in the Tour so not much reference data to go on. Froome was a minute quicker than the 2010 times. Here's a quote from the coverage of that stage, which was similar to the 2013 route, including the Col de Pailhères, but which came on stage 14 of the Tour, a whole week of racing later:

    "Schleck sat on Contador at the rear of the group, at times coming close to a standstill watching each other."

    And a quote from Andy:

    "He played poker, I played poker, we both played poker today,” said Schleck. “I can afford to lose time to the others but I had to play the game today.
    Tomorrow will be different."

    Does that sound the same as the way it was ridden this year?

    Here's a little light reading about why estimating power and performance is fraught with danger:

    Alex's Cycle Blog: Windbags
    On Bicycles, and.... what else is there?: pVAM and the Critical Power Model



    This Tony Martin?

    Tony Martin Tour De France Crash picture

    And one would expect times to be fast in a short ITT. But in comparative length TTs, they were both still slower than Greg Lemond.
    Who was the last clean tour winner who A) utterly dominated the field and B) continued to get faster as the race unfolded? How does a clean tour winner go 5th fastest overall speed of all time? How does a domestique shatter pure climbers on the mountaintop finish after pulling for 40k?

    How does Sky do this over. And over. And over.

    You dismiss the pVAM numbers out of hand. How can you? In the absence of transparency and in the presence of all the factors seen in the past three weeks, pVAM data is MORE than enough to raise red flags, especially when it backs up the extraterrestrial feats we saw on TV. To your point on Ax-3, he took third fastest time of all time. Second only to Laiseca and Armstrong.

    It's not just ONE thing, it's a combination of many small things that cause us to say "ok, that might be believable" but when taken all together, we know this win is built on bullsh*t. Just like Postal was able to create Hamilton, Heras, Landis and Lance, so too has Sky created Wiggins, Froome, Porte and (I'm guessing the next anointed star will be) Kennaugh.
    Last edited by robdamanii; 07-23-2013 at 03:46 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigrider View Post
    Teh Lounge- "Its not just for weirdos anymore. It is for those trying to escape the noobsauce questions."
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    Trolling the lounge is like noodling for piranha.


    The Daily Grind Cycling Journal & Tailwind Coaching

  14. #14
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: MattSoutherden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by robdamanii View Post
    B) continued to get faster as the race unfolded?
    What makes you suggest Froome got better as the race progressed?

    He was clearly the best [GC] rider in the race during the middle week. But by the end he was starting to lose form compared to Purito and Quintana.

    Quote Originally Posted by robdamanii View Post
    How does a clean tour winner go 5th fastest overall speed of all time?
    Oh please. I know you have more understanding of bike racing than this. Average speed for the race is not determined by the few times that the GC winner is at the front. It is primarily determined by how aggressive the other teams are at the start of the stages, and how much the teams that do not make the break want to chase for the stage wins.

    Many times in this tour there were stages where the first hour of racing (even 2 hours on some stages) was increadibaly aggressive, and even after large (and therefore fast) breakaways had established there whole teams driving in the front to chase.

    Quote Originally Posted by robdamanii View Post
    How does a domestique shatter pure climbers on the mountaintop finish after pulling for 40k?
    Which stage was that?

    Quote Originally Posted by robdamanii View Post
    so too has Sky created Wiggins, Froome, Porte and (I'm guessing the next anointed star will be) Kennaugh.
    It's not just 'Sky Pro Cycling' that is behind this in the last 4 years. There is a 20 year history of British Cycling and latterly the UK Sport World Class Performance Programme that has been identifying talent and learning how to train and manage athletes' performance.

    It's not a stretch to say that the vast majority of performance coaching in the pro peloton up until 5 years ago was based on "Go ride your bike 6 hours a day and show up at some races". Only at the top of the GC battle was there any real attention to performance management going on, and this was entirely based on how best to augment performance through doping.
    Laterally stiff yet vertically compliant.

  15. #15
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    8,313
    Quote Originally Posted by MattSoutherden View Post
    It's not a stretch to say that the vast majority of performance coaching in the pro peloton up until 5 years ago was based on "Go ride your bike 6 hours a day and show up at some races". Only at the top of the GC battle was there any real attention to performance management going on, and this was entirely based on how best to augment performance through doping.
    statements back in the days from CSC would disagree with that. their success was due to their focus to training material and diet. And circle-jerk camps in the off season.
    Blows your hair back.

  16. #16
    Slightly Opinionated
    Reputation: robdamanii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    10,219
    Quote Originally Posted by MattSoutherden View Post
    What makes you suggest Froome got better as the race progressed?

    He was clearly the best [GC] rider in the race during the middle week. But by the end he was starting to lose form compared to Purito and Quintana.



    Oh please. I know you have more understanding of bike racing than this. Average speed for the race is not determined by the few times that the GC winner is at the front. It is primarily determined by how aggressive the other teams are at the start of the stages, and how much the teams that do not make the break want to chase for the stage wins.

    Many times in this tour there were stages where the first hour of racing (even 2 hours on some stages) was increadibaly aggressive, and even after large (and therefore fast) breakaways had established there whole teams driving in the front to chase.



    Which stage was that?



    It's not just 'Sky Pro Cycling' that is behind this in the last 4 years. There is a 20 year history of British Cycling and latterly the UK Sport World Class Performance Programme that has been identifying talent and learning how to train and manage athletes' performance.

    It's not a stretch to say that the vast majority of performance coaching in the pro peloton up until 5 years ago was based on "Go ride your bike 6 hours a day and show up at some races". Only at the top of the GC battle was there any real attention to performance management going on, and this was entirely based on how best to augment performance through doping.
    Go read Veloclinic and review where the numbers came from.

    You've completely bought into the Sky lie. Noted.

    People defended Armstrong with similar talking points. "Performance management" "Marginal gains" "Asymmetric chainrings" "20 minute FTP efforts after stages" Yep, it all sounds legit. Until people stop believing the garbage that's put forth by these teams and start questioning every extraordinary performance they see, we'll be destined to go through a major scandal every few years. Simple acceptance is what has been the problem with this sport and continues to be.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigrider View Post
    Teh Lounge- "Its not just for weirdos anymore. It is for those trying to escape the noobsauce questions."
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    Trolling the lounge is like noodling for piranha.


    The Daily Grind Cycling Journal & Tailwind Coaching

  17. #17
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: roddjbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    472
    Quote Originally Posted by robdamanii View Post
    Who was the last clean tour winner?
    Fixed
    "It never gets easier, you just go faster" - Greg LeMond

  18. #18
    Slightly Opinionated
    Reputation: robdamanii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    10,219
    Quote Originally Posted by roddjbrown View Post
    Fixed
    Good point...
    Quote Originally Posted by bigrider View Post
    Teh Lounge- "Its not just for weirdos anymore. It is for those trying to escape the noobsauce questions."
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    Trolling the lounge is like noodling for piranha.


    The Daily Grind Cycling Journal & Tailwind Coaching

  19. #19
    Roadbike Rider
    Reputation: Chainstay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,262

    What about Quintana???

    Quintana and Rodriguez also put in performances that would compete well in the doping era.

    I have cross posted to a previous post of mine.
    Quintana - power outputs on Alpe D'Huez

    Sky got a lot of deserved attention for the remarkable performance on stage 8 where Froome was the only one with a Lance type ride. On stage 18 and 21 Quintana was amazing, and only 23 years old. Because he had the company of other suspicious riders, and everybody was watching Froome, no flags were raised.

    Check out the chart at the bottom of this veloclinic posting. All three riders are beating Lemond with performances that hold up against Armstrong

    2013 Tour de France Overall Analysis ? veloclinic
    "It's supposed to be automatic, but actually you have to push this button. "
    — John Brunner (Stand on Zanzibar)

  20. #20
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: MattSoutherden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by robdamanii View Post
    Go read Veloclinic and review where the numbers came from.
    Do you mean this VC post about Froome getting better as the race went on?

    longitudinal DpVAM through stage 18: de pixilated ? veloclinic
    Laterally stiff yet vertically compliant.

  21. #21
    Daft Punk built my hotrod
    Reputation: PaxRomana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,771
    Quote Originally Posted by MattSoutherden View Post
    Do you mean this VC post about Froome getting better as the race went on?

    longitudinal DpVAM through stage 18: de pixilated ? veloclinic
    After Ax3D, the race was effectively over. Yet, Froome managed to drop both Quintana and Rodriguez on Ventoux.

    Veloclinic indicts Purito and Quintana, they don't exonerate Sky.

  22. #22
    Slightly Opinionated
    Reputation: robdamanii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    10,219
    Quote Originally Posted by MattSoutherden View Post
    Do you mean this VC post about Froome getting better as the race went on?

    longitudinal DpVAM through stage 18: de pixilated ? veloclinic
    Nice disingenuous post. Don't cherry pick data from before the tour was completed.

    2013 Tour de France Overall Analysis ? veloclinic

    Froome threw up a pair of bars on Semnoz. On the last day of the race. And BARELY lost the stage to Quintana, who put up a performance that was "deep in doping territory."

    Yet you still can't bring yourself to believe that your (newfound) hero is dirty as skidmarked underwear?

    Sad, really.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigrider View Post
    Teh Lounge- "Its not just for weirdos anymore. It is for those trying to escape the noobsauce questions."
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    Trolling the lounge is like noodling for piranha.


    The Daily Grind Cycling Journal & Tailwind Coaching

  23. #23
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: MattSoutherden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    549
    What does 'threw up a pair of bars' *actually* mean? One thing it does not mean is a certainty of doping.

    People are trying to read more into partial data analysis than they can reasonably do. This is exactly what DB is referring to as pseudoscience.

    And Chris Froome is far from being my hero.
    Laterally stiff yet vertically compliant.

  24. #24
    Slightly Opinionated
    Reputation: robdamanii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    10,219
    Quote Originally Posted by MattSoutherden View Post
    What does 'threw up a pair of bars' *actually* mean? One thing it does not mean is a certainty of doping.

    People are trying to read more into partial data analysis than they can reasonably do. This is exactly what DB is referring to as pseudoscience.

    And Chris Froome is far from being my hero.
    "Psuedoscience" is the new "never tested positive."

    Glad you believe in miracles. Those of us with common sense, don't.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigrider View Post
    Teh Lounge- "Its not just for weirdos anymore. It is for those trying to escape the noobsauce questions."
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    Trolling the lounge is like noodling for piranha.


    The Daily Grind Cycling Journal & Tailwind Coaching

  25. #25
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    31
    A few examples of pseudoscience:

    -Blood/urine testing schedules and sample collection not administered/analyzed by independent third parties. Decision to mark as a positive result and administer penalty decided by entity with "conflicts of interest" (UCI) vs a neutral panel of scientists.

    -Withholding data and methods from public and other scientific institutions. Statistical analysis and results used must be verified for accuracy by independent parties.

    -Excluding prior observations and data from interpretation of validity of results; in this case - past podium/peloton positives, data from past positive performances of dopers, etc.

    -No proof, or ability to test that self-reported power data is reliable and valid. All Tour bikes should be required to have an independent unit that records power output, GPS location, etc. Unit calibration must be verified each stage by independent third party.


    Saying Sky is clean is about as scientifically accurate as saying the earth is hollow. The data collected and methods must be both reliable and valid before you can say the "Science of Team Clean Sky," until then it is "The Pseudoscience of Team Clean Sky."

    Based on past scientific data and observations, top riders are guilty until proven innocent.

Similar Threads

  1. Wal-Mart scandal
    By Fredke in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-23-2012, 07:37 AM
  2. Another Repub Sex Scandal...
    By spyderman in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 06-20-2009, 09:36 AM
  3. The Next AIG Scandal?
    By rocco in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-18-2009, 04:23 PM
  4. Now this is news scandal that should be ...
    By Live Steam in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-17-2004, 10:36 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

INTERBIKE

EUROBIKE

Hot Deals

Interbike Featured Booths

Check out the hottest road bike products from these brands!




















See All Interbike Coverage - Click Here »


Latest RoadBike Articles


Latest Videos

RoadbikeReview on Facebook