Olympics 2012
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 102 comments are related to the topic:
Wiggins - How has he improved so much?
Wiggins - How has he improved so much?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 102
|
By:
So hang on are you saying that it's such an amazing feat that he must be on drugs to do it or that it was a weak tdf, a weak tt and therefore nothing special? It almost sounds as if people are just dissing Wiggins with the first thing they think of rather than coming up with any serious proof (or even background to any possible proof)!
Which is it - was it a weak tdf and tt (and therefore the top cyclist that could maintain form would win) or is it an amazing feat that for any athlete to complete they must be on drugs? |
|
By:
if people want to believe something there is no evidence in the world that will change their opinion
|
|
By:
thats true denis
 |
|
By:
i think the power output numbers are the best gauge, there was a detailed article on the first tough hill climb and there was nothing suspicious in the numbers from Wiggins or Froome both had numbers within the realms of human capability and well below previous tours. Anyone that follows cycling will know this is no overnight success from Wiggins.
I think its natural within cycling to be suspicious because it has such a bad reputation but at least have some sort of basis before calling somebody a cheat. I suggest you look at the power output from Wiggins and Froome during the tour and if you do that you'll see its well below previous tour winners and within whats humanly possible. |
|
By:
Certainly no overnight success. 12 years at the very least. I suspect this has been a plan for an awful lot more time. With the advent of Dave Brailsford, I bet every single step of Wiggins' career has been carefully planned and managed. But some people just can't gauge that. Sad really.
|
|
By:
Dylan, nobody really knows what is humanly possible in a 3 week Tour any more - how could they ? Saying cycling is cleaner than the 90s (when the top riders had ketchup for blood and had to wake themselves up every night to avoid heart attacks) is not really saying very much at all
Sports scientists will tell you what is possible an hour of effort but they have no real idea how this translates to a 3 week race where the key is recovery. The times for stages and climbs this year were not really any different to 2006 - 2011. For example this year's La Toussuire stage was pretty much an exact replica of the stage in 2006 (the day Floyd Landis forgot to eat / drink) - the overall stage speed was slightly faster this year and so was the ascent of the final climb. The Peyresourde climb this year was done slightly faster than Contador and Rasmussen managed in 2007. One thing's for sure - cycling today looks nothing like cycling in the 1980s pre-EPO / transfusions. We know riders are still doping - it's just to a lesser extent |
|
By:
whats wrong with the time being similar to 2006?? Landis took the drugs for the stage after when he went off like a motorbike on his own and got back all the time he'd lost.
why should cycling in 2012 be the same as 1980s cycling ffs?? the sport has come on massively (like all sports) in terms of technology and training techniques/nutrition etc etc. it'd be pretty strange if they hadnt worked out how to cycle a bit faster in 30 years |
|
By:
Landis was doping the whole of 2006. In fact, by his own admission he was doping for most of his career, not just for one stage of the Tour and not just with testosterone but also with all the high-benefit weapons of the time (EPO, auto transfusions, hgh). 2006 was the year of Operation Puerto with 50+ riders transfusing / storing blood at Dr Fuentes' clinic. Not exactly the cleanest era for cycling. I'm not sure you're really interested though
I never said cycling today should be the same as the 1980s - I said it looked completely different. If cycling was supposed to exactly look like the 1980s I wouldn't have said "nobody really knows what is humanly possible in a 3 week Tour any more". But the 1980s is the last era where you can be fairly confident that the (naturally) best riders were winning |
|
By:
johnnyrant 02 Aug 12 18:22
exactly wizard - it certainly was an incredibly weak TdF this year. Someone just off their stabilisers could have been a contender. You sound really clued up on the sport of cycling  |
|
By:
Get a sense of humour, Biscuit. That was obviously a joke. It is ok to write facetiously sometimes - quite a good way to try and get others to try and pull their heads out of the sand.
|
|
By:
I have a sense of humour is someone is being amusing. You however, are far from it. You're going round in circles here and you don't even know what your own point is.
First your questioning (or just pointing out as you say) whether Wiggins is clean or not, saying we only have his word, then in the next breath you're saying he only won the tour because he was the leader of the most dominant side in a weak tour and his main rivals weren't there. So either he's on something or it was an easy win, make your mind up. The fact is he's been winning olympic medals for 12 years, it's not as if he's come from nowhere. |
|
By:
The TdF was a weak contest this year, and he may not be clean. Perfectly entitled to throw both those views into the mix. Your extremely weak defence of him is, you should not question Wiggins word. I'd suggest people are perfectly entitled to question it. You are being needlessly pedantic which seems to be your par for the course for you.
|
|
By:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-2177405/Bradley-Wiggins-battle-cyclings-drug-demons--Paul-Kimmage.html
|
|
By:
Aussie Genes IMHO
|
|
By:
johnnyrant 03 Aug 12 12:52
The TdF was a weak contest this year, and he may not be clean. Perfectly entitled to throw both those views into the mix. Your extremely weak defence of him is, you should not question Wiggins word. I'd suggest people are perfectly entitled to question it. You are being needlessly pedantic which seems to be your par for the course for you. So you claim my defence of Britain's greatest ever Olympian, a guy who's been winning medals for 12 years and has never failed a test is extremely weak yet your case against him appears to be, 'other TDF winners have been caught taking drugs, so he must be too'. |
|
By:
I'd leave it biscuit. I think Wiggins' quote that someone used above sums it up.
|
|
By:
i know a few tesco shelf fillers on drugs
|
|
By:
Ignorant posters like Joe need to study the facts 1st before engaging keyboard
 |
|
By:
where's the fun in that ?!
|
|
By:
On the BBC they said Wiggins weight dropped from 82kg in 2008 to 67kg in 2012. Wikipedia say 69kg (which is 152lbs) and 150lbs. He is 6'3", 1m 90cm.
I have read that good cycling climbers have a weight in pounds / height in inches of 2.0, and that is exactly what Wiggins has 150/75 = 2.0. |
|
By:
I've not said he must be, I've said people are entitled to ask the question. Greatest Olympian? That really is taking the biscuit - living up to your name, at least.
|
|
By:
Ignorant posters like Joe need to study the facts 1st before engaging keyboardWink
A naive boring response. Can you at least argue the point rather than the man? Complete waste of time posting that. If you believe Wiggins clean, fair enough. Everyone can respect that and everyone can have different opinions, but argue your point like most above have rather than boring posts name calling. |
|
By:
What evidence would the Wiggins doubters need to see to convince them he was clean?
|