Tour de France 2015 - may contain nuts and SPOILERS

[Wafer]

Renshaw showing his top speed of 107kph...
https://twitter.com/Mark_Renshaw/status/621365456377675776

 

[Crackle]

On the other hand, a significant former defender of Froome's performances, is now pretty much convinced that something is up: http://sportsscientists.com/2015/07/day-1-in-the-mountains-one-more-pixel-context-mistrust/

I'm pretty sure he's also lowered the bar about what he thinks is a believable watts per kg but most disappointing is that he sounds like The Clinic now.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I generally like reading Tucker. I find him interesting and quite sane.

 

[Bollo]

I have to strongly disagree, theres nothing wrong in a bit of cynicism or even a lot of cynicism, and I'm of the opinion that unless proof is given then they are clean, I don't care about kg/watts, power metres etc, I enjoy the racing..in fact history teaches us that in sport, doping has been and still is a major problem..this year we've had 7 or 8 pro cyclist banned for doping...
but none of this means we can't enjoy the sport of cycling, the same way I can still enjoy old races or documentaries knowing most were doping gobshites..
and if it turns out Sky riders ( I think not) or whomever are doping, then I'll be disappointed but I move on hoping the next bunch are clean and so on and so forth but I'll still watch cycling and still enjoy the racing...

I'm much the same Irish. I enjoy cycle racing enough to make the effort to watch it in the flesh whenever I can, but I don't invest emotionally in particular riders or teams. Close up, I've seem some riders who are pleasant to fans, others who are happy to provide a little entertainment and quite a few who are just normal human beings bar for one exceptional talent. All of that makes not a blind bit of difference to whether they're sauced or not I'm afraid. Until concrete evidence or confessions come out, none of us will really know whether Sky or any other team are clean. We're all just speculating.

Right, back to the knob gags.

 

[HF2300]

On the other hand, a significant former defender of Froome's performances, is now pretty much convinced that something is up: http://sportsscientists.com/2015/07/day-1-in-the-mountains-one-more-pixel-context-mistrust/

I read that earlier today and found it really disappointing. What it appeared to be saying was that he started out trying to show Sky / Froome and others aren't doping, the numbers don't really show they're doping, but what the heck, there's loads of irrational circumstantial evidence such as Froome beating people who may or may not be doping, so he's concluded they must be doping even though there's no concrete evidence and he didn't think the numbers proved it.

As Crax says, how is that better or more scientific than the Clinic?

 

[rich p]

On the other hand, a significant former defender of Froome's performances, is now pretty much convinced that something is up: http://sportsscientists.com/2015/07/day-1-in-the-mountains-one-more-pixel-context-mistrust/

He's turned from a scientist into a speculative journo in that piece.

 

[roadrash]

does speculative journo .. mean the same as NOB

 

[rich p]

does speculative journo .. mean the same as NOB

The style and lack of precision in his writing has changed dramatically. I wonder if someone hacked his data.

 

[Mugshot]

Right, back to the knob gags.

Today's knob gag on Eurosport was,

"Cock revelations"

This followed the failed attempt to unveil a giant chicken for the benefit of the helicopter.
Much mirth and merriment for the commentators ensued.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

Before/After pics of Team BMC

http://www.plan78.com/portfolio/bmc-racing-team-no-pain-no-gain/

 

[Bollo]

The style and lack of precision in his writing has changed dramatically. I wonder if someone hacked his data.

In fact, something I hope you will appreciate is that a performance from the past can change meaning as new information emerges to contextualize it. In other words, it doesn’t need there to be a performance of X to suddenly make the previous ones suspect. As the environment changes, interpretation in hindsight can (and should, if we assimilate new knowledge properly), so what was ‘marginal’ or grey in the past can look different (either secure or worse), thanks to ’emergence’.
http://sportsscientists.com/2015/07/day-1-in-the-mountains-one-more-pixel-context-mistrust/

Eeeeerrrrrrr?!

 

[400bhp]

There is some potion they (Sky) have apparently before a stage - £1500 a pop.

 

[smutchin]

There is some potion they (Sky) have apparently before a stage - £1500 a pop.

Presume you mean this one:
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...ew-energy-drink-next-big-thing-cycling-151877

See also the link posted by @The Couch yesterday.

 

[Berk on a Bike]

Spawny bugger of the day: Zakkari Dempster of Bora-Argon 18 finished outside the time limit BUT was given dispensation, so he rides on! Perhaps his team's co-title sponsor vented at the officials...

Bora. Vented. Geddit...?

 

[400bhp]

Presume you mean this one:
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...ew-energy-drink-next-big-thing-cycling-151877

See also the link posted by @The Couch yesterday.

TBH I can't remember (it was in a talk presented by some clever cycling scientist last September using lots of big words - I only woke up out of a coma when my mate started talking about this £1500 quid drink and agreeing with the speaker that I took notice).