[Closed] So, do we think Wiggins is clean?

[img] [/img]

Yes....

Who?

Oh, you mean WiggIns? As in Bradley?

If you are going to use someone to troll, at least spell his name properly.

Edit. Go on then I'll bite. What makes you think this?

Edit 2. Nice edit.

🙄

Thoughts? I think you should take your obnoxious trolling elsewhere.

He did taste a bit dirty last time I obliged.

I'd still do it again though.

I'm not sure, I haven't seen his schedule, but if he is a good boy, Sunday night should be bath night so I think I'll say yes.....

I'd still do it again though.

Literally, the Breakfast Of Champions.

2/10

you did get an extra point for backing up your opinion with a guess though.

lived & trained at altitude for many weeks before the racing started - artificially (& legally) boosted EPO production

(I wonder what that does to your biological passport and how easily it could be differentiated from exogenous EPO or similar, dunno)

whether he did anything else that may have been against the rules, dunno

FWIW, I think he's clean - mostly just because of the stance they've taken and what a **** he'll look if he's ever caught (and Brailsford et al, too)

[img] [/img]

Honestly Im not sure that you could say for certain any top athelete, roadie, mtber, fottball, rugby etc is clean

governing bodies notoriously corrupt

the pressures immense at the top, age isnt kind and Im always amazed how quickly pro atheletes can come back from injury, eg cedric gracia and dan atherton both had massive injuries but were back of it within a couple of months, physio rehab top doctors etc but its still must be tempting

the minute you start on energy gels/ protein/recovery drinks/powders youre already on a grey area , I dont know whats in SIS does anyone else?
and what about supplements that arent banned but might be later etc

oh and fwiw i get the impression wiggos clean, except maybe the odd recreational toke 😉

Not trying to troll at all, just wanted to start a discussion.

Are a lot of people afraid of what they might think is the truth?

Are a lot of people afraid of what they might think is the truth?

Hmm. When you put it like that, I reckon you might be onto something.*

*Allegedly.

Is there a single scrap of evidence to suggest doping? I mean other than that he won some races that previously dopers had won.

[img] [/img]

I very much doubt it.

Yes he may well have been 'clean' during the tour, but clean for life? Very unlikely.

In most sports at the top level, PED's are commonplace.

Not trying to troll at all, just wanted to start a discussion.

Not sure what there is to discuss when there isn't any evidence.

And what is the 'truth'? I've no reason to think he's dirty, other than the sworn testimony of samuri, so, what has told you so conclusively that he's dirty.

Is winning proof of doping?

[img] [/img]

Not sure what there is to discuss when there isn't any evidence.

In most sports at the top level, PED's are commonplace.

Are they? Care to share how you know this?

Is winning proof of doping?

Contador is labelled as a doper without any evidence

Apart from the failed dope test and 2 year ban for doping and Wiggins having never failed a dope test they they are identical

not sure why the op is getting all the clog.

it's the first thing i asked myself when he won the tdf.

but then i expect all elite level cyclists, athletes and swimmers to be dopers.

I reckon he may of used some recreationals at one time or another

I dunno, Contador is labelled as a doper without any evidence. One failed test doesn't make him a lifetime doper, unless the evidence can be presented here.

Eh? Caught doping = doper.

I won a pub quiz once, my team and I collectively had about 16 pints of drugs in our systems. I think we got away with it.

Eh? Caught doping = doper.

[url= http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=17412 ]sky doping theories[/url]

essentially nothing beyond "they won, they musthave cheated" but it goes on for 100's of pages.

If someone murders someone, only once mind, at what point aren't they a murderer?

training at altutude is a nonsense. your body takes a few hours to adjust to lower pressures. that's how its possible to climb high mountains. the camp at 1st base while there body adjusts to the altitiude. same happens when you desend.

Just speculating, I haven't heard or seen more than anyone else. If I was pushed to make a decision, I'd guess he was taking some performance enhancers in some form or another

I say you’re just a ****ing ****er. I cannot be doing with people like that. It justifies your own bone idleness because you can’t imagine applying yourself to do anything in your life.

It’s easy for you to sit under a pseudonym on STW and write that sort of shit, rather than get off your own arse in your own life and apply yourself and work hard at something and achieve something. And that’s ultimately what counts. ****s.

Bradley was in my club as a teenager. So I rode with him before all of you had heard of him. He was world junior champion at the time. He did that through being committed. I don't doubt that he still does it through being committed now.
Also he hasn't written a book telling the world that he was great and how the only way he was able to motivate himself was by hating and picking fights with every single other rider.
Get over yourselves.
I cutthroat up with his second coach at New Years, he's a medaled rider too, and his first coach and mentor lived an incredible ascetic lifestyle - disappointingly not mentioned in Bradley's various books.

living at altitude is prob what matters, yeah, training by riding up mountains (halfy-halfy, let's say) - if he didn't have to ride up big hills he'd be better off training at sea level

@aracer. Like what you did there 🙂

I do wish aracer would get off the fence...

aracer, good work! 🙂

If someone murders someone, only once mind, at what point aren't they a murderer?

Can you prove that Wiggo isn't?

How do you prove a negative?
If he's not failed a test, then he's not a doper.

training at altutude is a nonsense. your body takes a few hours to adjust to lower pressures. that's how its possible to climb high mountains.

I think you need to go and have a wee read up on how altitude training works (or is meant to work)!

If he's not failed a test, then he's not a doper.

living at altitude is prob what matters,

I'm not saying Bertie is doping now, I'm saying he was proved to have, so is and always will be a doper. A reformed one maybe, but still a doper.

Bradley has not been proved to be a doper (and there isn't any evidence to even hint that he is) therefore he isn't a doper.

There was plenty of evidence against LA before it all kicked off, it's just he sued anyone who published it. Seems only the usada was the only group willing to stand up to him.

Can you prove that Contador is doping now?
Can you prove that Wiggo isn't?

Lets look at it another way, morally speaking who is in the superior position?

A convicted doper.
or
Someone who has never returned a positive sample?

All other things being equal whoyagonnabelieve?

Treat them all the same. All dope unless proven otherwise, you won't be disappointed then

Seems only the usada was the only group willing to stand up to him.

All other things being equal whoyagonnabelieve?

You believe the person who said sorry over the guy who never did wrong in the first place?? 😯

They must all see you coming....

What a pointless thread this is!

I've got quite a lot of faith in him.

When Cofidis were chucked off the TdF because one chap was caugght doping Wiggins flounced off immediately.

He then joined Slipstream, where Vaughters and Millar were working hard to run a completely drug-free team by actively engaging their riders in a clean ethos based on Vaughters' and Millar's considerable experience of how and why doped teams happen and what can be done to stop it. During that period, Wiggins' blood values from internal team testing were available online for everyone to see.

After Slipstream, Wiggins goes to Sky, another team with a very engaged zero-tolerance policy for doping run by Brailsford - a man to whom Millar had to explain the very concepts of doping to after he eventually got out of Biarritz police station to find Brailsford waiting for him.

For much of his time, Wiggins has also ridden for British Cycling, which again runs explicitly drug-free. Crucially, there is no suggestion at all that he has any association with any problematic doctors.

He has been consistently, bitterly intolerant of other people doping and has repeatedly stated that he doesn't dope (cf. "never failed a test" and other weasel forms of words.) He has simply never demonstrated any ambivalence on the subject.

He has had a reasonably plausible run of form, including winning a seriously slow TdF in which he repeatedly appeared very tired and vulnerable.

Compared to the astonishing speeds and 1990s-style heroics of the Vuelta last year, the TdF looked very much like a panyagua effort.

We can either simply say "they are all at it", or we can grasp that this stuff comes and goes, and at the moment there seems to be a critical mass of teams which appear to run clean and riders who take pride in having a clean competition. Sky appears to be such a team, and Wiggins appears to be such a rider.

That said, I'm always slightly prepped for being bitterly disappointed, and if anything does go wrong I think it's very, very importnant to let go of the denial immediately and move on. The saddest thing about the Lance shambles is the poor saps still wittering about a massive conspiracy to frame an innocent man...

No respect for Millar who was caught, bang to rights. He'd have been at it for as long as possible. His little boy lost routine is riseable.

As for Wiggins, Kimmage seems to think so...

My point being that Contador is a reformed doper, as murderers can be rehabilitated.

In order for murderers to be rehabilitated they have to express remorse. I'd suggest the same should apply to dopers.

You believe the person who said sorry over the guy who never did wrong in the first place??

I say you’re just a * *. I cannot be doing with people like that. It justifies your own bone idleness because you can’t imagine applying yourself to do anything in your life.

It’s easy for you to sit under a pseudonym on STW and write that sort of shit, rather than get off your own arse in your own life and apply yourself and work hard at something and achieve something. And that’s ultimately what counts. ****.

WOAH WOAH STEADY ON THERE!!!!! 🙄

I'm pretty sure you don't know me, you have no idea what I have or haven't achieved, so you have no right to blurt out those absurdities.

Sounds like you're the naive type to me tbh.

I say you’re just a * *. I cannot be doing with people like that. It justifies your own bone idleness because you can’t imagine applying yourself to do anything in your life.

It’s easy for you to sit under a pseudonym on STW and write that sort of shit, rather than get off your own arse in your own life and apply yourself and work hard at something and achieve something. And that’s ultimately what counts. ****.

And pages 198 - 200 of his book. Read that and tell the world you think he's doping. Well done aracer.

There's just a blatant pattern of tour winners cheating, which doesn't really need to be stated as its pretty obvious one would think. I was a big Armstrong fan and was probably one of the last to actually come around to the idea of doping, It just doesn't really seem to make sense that someone could win the tour without some performance enhancement when half of them seem to be on something, if not all.

^^^ Poor little lamb, it went straight over his head.

Happy Birthday Marco.

As for Wiggins, Kimmage seems to think so...

[url= http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage-unconvinced-by-sky-and-wiggins ]This is the strongest Kimmage statement I can find. [/url]

I'd forgotten about Leinders... 😕

WOAH WOAH STEADY ON THERE!!!!!

You know he's paraphrasing Wiggo in a tour interview, right?

Cynicism - knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing. A terrible way IMO to spend the few years we have to live life...

People don't seem to appreciate that what LA did was not a simple thing to do and required a certain type of extreme personality to deliver. And even then he's not been successful - he's been found out. Very very unlikely to be repeated...

The likelihood of Brad being able to dope and not get caught given all the attention given to both him and doping these days is pretty unlikely. And as said above, he has no record at all which suggests any reason to be suspicious.

If you love cycling, have some hope the battle's beginning to be won FFS!

😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

<note to mods - it wasn't an intentional troll!>

Threads like this and the 'everyone's at it' attitude are part of the fallout of cyclings dirty past.

I'd like to think that's changing.

Bit niave. Dopers just step ahead of the game.

Threads like this and the 'everyone's at it' attitude are part of the fallout of cyclings dirty past.

I'd like to think that's changing.

Although threads like this don't help.

I'd love to see some of you anonymous forum lurkers stand eyeball to eyeball with Wiggins and then accuse him of doping. Doubt you'd be so brave or smart then!

Bit niave. Dopers just step ahead of the game.

Looks like that wasn't quite the case...

To some degree they doped in way which could get them round the tests (refusing to answer the door when the testers came round - not hard!)

But the other side of their strategy appears to have been working on governing bodies so that for those times when the testing regime did catch them, they could simply avoid it being properly dealt with.

This strategy has also now been kicked in the knackers...

I was a big Armstrong fan and was probably one of the last to actually come around to the idea of doping,

No offence but that what loads of folk say who only really got into because of LA.

At the time it was obvious what was going on , for many, within the peleton and with LA as well.

As for calling Brad or any other winner [ Cadel is clean IMHO]its like doubting Bolt because of Ben Johnson

I think he's clean I also believe Evans, Lemond and Sastre were clean winners too, but I'm not daft enough to think I could change anyones opinion on the matter so believe what you like.

I'd like to distance myself from the sceptics. I do believe Wiggins is the real deal.

I also believe that doping continues, and evolves with new products, with riders evading testers not at the door because they are confident that any test will not show them glowing

There was no tests to detect EPO for years.

Are a lot of people afraid of what they might think is the truth?

I was a big Armstrong fan and was probably one of the last to actually come around to the idea of doping, It just doesn't really seem to make sense that someone could win the tour without some performance enhancement when half of them seem to be on something, if not all.

Having displayed poor judgement once, does it not occur to you to refrain from displaying it again in public?

I hope that hes clean. Thats all we can say really.

I have faith that Wiggins is clean.

I have no faith that Contador is clean. What's the chance that during his ban he was using performance enhancing drugs during training as he won't have been tested. The beneficial effects can last for years - his ban was pathetic. Back dated, what's that all about!?.

One of the main reasons that Wiggins won the tour last year was the format of the tour suited him, he did well in the time trials and hung on in the mountains of which there werent a lot. The team was disciplined and worked for him to get the win. I would be amazed if he is doping, the scrutiny he is under would make it impossible. IMO he didnt do anything superhuman * the climb when LA looks over his shoulder at Ulrich and just blasted away that was superhuman and now we know fuelled by doping.

* apart from win the Tour and a gold medal 🙂

Wot Pigface said....And will be shown in the fact he will not win it this year,unlike Froome 8)

Eh? Caught doping = doper.

What was he (Contador) caught with?

A drug dose 180 times below the level that would cause any effective performance effect...

I have to laugh at people who think guys like Wiggins and Evans are clean yet guys like Contador aren't. Look at the 2007 Tour for example, 23 seconds between Contador and Evans. If a guy like Contador was doping and Evans was't the gap would be closer to 23 minutes.

A drug dose 180 times below the level that would cause any effective performance effect...

IIRC, it was the combination of clenbuterol [u]and[/u] plasticisers that did for Bertie - clear indicators of transfusions?

FWIW, I think Wiggins is clean - without the TT & flatter stages there were several contendersin 2012.

This is why it's a pointless discussion. As an ex-smoker, I've been there, seen it and done it. I've seen the negatives and understand the down side. The never-smoked are always prey to the peddlers of filth.

I've seen many more ex-smokers restart than I've seen non-smokers over the age of 30 take it up. Out of all the stupid incorrect arguments on STW this possibly tops even TJ's zenith of idiocy...

I think Wiggins is 100% clean and In general the sport is getting cleaner. The fact that Sky has used personell that may have had a history with doping in the past is fairly inevitable seeing as how widespread it was afew years back. As others have said the times over the large climbs on any Grand tour event have slowed up considerably over the last ten years. I think a lot of people think doping only dates back to the mid 80's when If you read any article on great riders like Coppi etc they were all on amphetamines back in the 50's .
Here's an interesting article on the legal stuff that goes on in the Peloton . [url= http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/13076/Taylor-Phinney-Interview-Getting-the-pill-culture-out-of-the-sport.aspx ]Taylor Phinney interview[/url]