Bradley Wiggins Retirement

Brian?

JK.BMC wrote: »

I mean his technique, his cadence, his TT prowess, his tactical awareness and general bad ass coolness on the bike.
Ok, he ain't a Nibali or a Sagan or a Boonen but you can't take that from him

He was a great TT rider. His tactical awareness was controlled completely by the team, if anything went contrary to plan A he was done for.

Bad ass coolness? Like throwing a strop when Froome rode away from him and nearly abandoning? He was very far from a cool bad ass.

Brian?

RobFowl wrote: »

Pretty much all the Indurain tours were as dull as ditchwater
Would say they were all substantially worse than 2012

No they weren't.

RobFowl

Brian? wrote: »

No they weren't.

Sprint, sprint, sprint then long TT where Big Mig takes yellow then roll on Paris...

Repeat in 92/93/94/95...

Brian?

RobFowl wrote: »

Sprint, sprint, sprint then long TT where Big Mig takes yellow then roll on Paris...

Repeat in 92/93/94/95...

Chiapucci goes on a long one in the Alps, takes 10 minutes. Indurain attacks on a descent on an intermediate stage with Bruyneel. Just 2 exciting stages I can think of without much effort.

Indurain strangled strangled the life from Tours, but he was occasionally exciting. What did Wiggins ever do that was exciting? A pointless attack with 100km to go on the final mountain stage?

I can't believe I'm standing up for Indurain, but jaysus Wiggins is boring. He had tattoos though, does that make him edgy?

Inquitus

Came across this amusing outtake allegedly of dear Brad.

https://twitter.com/LamiraudF/status/814173519944830977

JK.BMC

Inquitus wrote: »

Came across this amusing outtake allegedly of dear Brad.

https://twitter.com/LamiraudF/status/814173519944830977

I remember seeing that; it's brilliant. We all end up on our arse at some stage.
Sure, Wiggins may not be everybody's cup of tea but something tells that if he were Irish, from somewhere like Ballymun or Ballyfermot, we would be lauding him as one of the greats. One who achieved great things, in a corrupt and tainted environment, despite all sorts of allegations and detractors. And maybe he ain't one of the real bad guys after all. He ain't Lance Armstrong either- not by a long shot.
Is there not a touch of the anti-British about this here? Perhaps that is shortsighted but I will say again that whatever one thinks of Wiggins as a person, one cannot deny his brilliance and class on two wheels. He will be remembered as a legend regardless.

Brian?

JK.BMC wrote: »

I remember seeing that; it's brilliant. We all end up on our arse at some stage.
Sure, Wiggins may not be everybody's cup of tea but something tells that if he were Irish, from somewhere like Ballymun or Ballyfermot, we would be lauding him as one of the greats. One who achieved great things, in a corrupt and tainted environment, despite all sorts of allegations and detractors. And maybe he ain't one of the real bad guys after all. He ain't Lance Armstrong either- not by a long shot.
Is there not a touch of the anti-British about this here? Perhaps that is shortsighted but I will say again that whatever one thinks of Wiggins as a person, one cannot deny his brilliance and class on two wheels. He will be remembered as a legend regardless.

It's nothing to do with being anti British. I'm not a fan of of track cycling, so it seems like a lot of this greatness is lost on me. He won the Tour, which was fantastic, but the way he won it was boring. I don't have a view on his personality, I don't really care.

JK.BMC

Brian? wrote: »

It's nothing to do with being anti British. I'm not a fan of of track cycling, so it seems like a lot of this greatness is lost on me. He won the Tour, which was fantastic, but the way he won it was boring. I don't have a view on his personality, I don't really care.

Fair enough point. I don't like BMX so I couldn't care less who won the Olympics. The same point, in principle.

pelevin

JK.BMC wrote: »

I remember seeing that; it's brilliant. We all end up on our arse at some stage.
Sure, Wiggins may not be everybody's cup of tea but something tells that if he were Irish, from somewhere like Ballymun or Ballyfermot, we would be lauding him as one of the greats. One who achieved great things, in a corrupt and tainted environment, despite all sorts of allegations and detractors. And maybe he ain't one of the real bad guys after all. He ain't Lance Armstrong either- not by a long shot.
Is there not a touch of the anti-British about this here? Perhaps that is shortsighted but I will say again that whatever one thinks of Wiggins as a person, one cannot deny his brilliance and class on two wheels. He will be remembered as a legend regardless.

Tobh I can hardly believe what you're coming out with. That he doesn't compare to Lance - that's the bench-mark, is it? And you'd better start accusing a hell of alot of the British media of being anti-British as I've seen a hell of alot more stinging criticism there than on this site - including even from former huge Wiggins fan like Will Fotheringham, co-author of 'Bradley Wiggins - My Time' & David Walsh , author of 'Inside Team Sky' & who practically staked his reputation on Sky's virtues. Matt Lawton from The Daily Mail, & various writers from The Telegraph, The Times & The Guardian have all been damning about this stuff. Then David Millar from Britain saying the drugs Wiggins took were the most powerful ped's he himself ever took.

JK.BMC

pelevin wrote: »

Tobh I can hardly believe what you're coming out with. That he doesn't compare to Lance - that's the bench-mark, is it? And you'd better start accusing a hell of alot of the British media of being anti-British as I've seen a hell of alot more stinging criticism there than on this site - including from former huge Wiggins fan like Will Fotheringham & David Walsh who practically staked his reputation on Sky's virtues. Matt Lawton from The Daily Mail, & various writers from The Telegraph, The Times & The Guardian have all been damning about this stuff.

No- my view that Wiggins is a very classy, stylish cyclist isn't garbage. And as far as cheating/doping is concerned, yes Armstrong is very much the benchmark. Agreed?
I think it's inevitable that Wiggo's victories are seen in comparison to other tour winners. But I believe the world in which he operated is not the same as the LA era; I'm not saying it's perfect but to put it another way: if I was a betting man and I put 2 cyclists on a track like Mondello and wanted to put my tenner on who would win a race I'd fancy Wiggins to have the brains and class to outwit nearly anybody every time. That's my view, simple and all as it is. That he won the greatest of all races- the TDF- is an amazing achievement in itself.

pelevin

JK.BMC wrote: »

No- my view that Wiggins is a very classy, stylish cyclist isn't garbage. And as far as cheating/doping is concerned, yes Armstrong is very much the benchmark. Agreed?
I think it's inevitable that Wiggo's victories are seen in comparison to other tour winners. But I believe the world in which he operated is not the same as the LA era; I'm not saying it's perfect but to put it another way: if I was a betting man and I put 2 cyclists on a track like Mondello and wanted to put my tenner on who would win a race I'd fancy Wiggins to have the brains and class to outwit nearly anybody every time. That's my view, simple and all as it is. That he won the greatest of all races- the TDF- is an amazing achievement in itself.

If being not as bad as Armstrong is some kind of Get Out of Jail card, fair enough, Wiggins goes free. Armstrong was of a different level but Armstrong was dirty in a dirty era. Wiggins & Sky/Brailsford were letting on to be very pure & transparent in an already much cleaner era. I think they've been shown up to be essentially liars & hypocrites considering the gap between the public claims & the private actions. As David Walsh recently said, if Brailsford had been open about Wiggins' coriticosteroid use, there's no way Walsh would have gotten involved with the team, & that he considers this intentional doping. I don't consider these as small little matters that get brushed away.

Weepsie

Again, didn't break the rules (even if it is the greyest of areas)

Plus, they are likely not alone. The Fancy Bears leak was targeted mostly at British and American athletes, though there was a spattering of other nationalities, including one Russian. The highest profile of these is Wiggins. Wiggins has been thrown under the bus by the likes of Froome who laughably called for TUEs to be changed or something to that effect, glossing over his own grey past.

WADA don't publish TUEs as far as I can see, as it's probably considered confidential medical information.

I agree with JK.BMC. There is an an inherent anti-English/British sentiment.

Ireland has it's own Sacred Cows who have shady pasts, but they're given a free pass. Pantani and Contadaor are lauded as greats due to being exciting, attacking cyclists, but their doping is simply looked over.

If people don't like him, or think he's dull or a c*ck, fair enough, but he won the TDF in a way that circumstances and conditions legally allowed. It's just being used as another stick to beat him, while the head clearly goes in the sand regarding the rest of the business, and cyclists that people happen to like. Cycling, and many other professional sports are filthy from top to bottom. He should've just said years ago, I've asthma, I need a TUE, but he didn't.

He dominated the track events, he was an expert TT'r and his hour record is pretty phenomenal. Maybe I'm wrong, and it'll emerge that he went against all that is right, and was corrupt to the core, but he was a brilliant cyclist, maybe not a stylish one, but a brilliant one.

pelevin

Weepsie, I think you should suggest to Team Sky they accuse the current British parliamentary enquiry into their goings on of inherently anti-English sentiments. That'll frighten them off surely.

P2C

JK.BMC wrote: »

Yes, this is a relevant point of view. I know exactly what you mean. Mark Scanlon cud very much have been the Wiggins character. I know lads who rode with/against him. Every one of them says the same. Scanlon beat Cancellara/Pozzato et al when he was champion; that is beyond dispute. Does this negate Wiggins achievements, I don't think so

Bradley was an outstanding TT and track specialist and if you tracked both his and Mark's junior and senior carrers on the road they were both unremarkable. In fact I would say mark was probably the better road rider based on outright wins and podiums until he retired at 25. They were both at French teams. The transformation after that point was simply in my opinion to good to be true. It's hard to understand that you go from winning very little as a pro rider and then all of a sudden your 4th in the tour. Your a world class climber one year and when your with the wagon the year before.

Weepsie

JK.BMC wrote: »

Maybe Brailsford is the real villain?

This.

Weepsie, I think you should suggest to Team Sky they accuse the current British parliamentary enquiry into their goings on of inherently anti-English sentiments. That'll frighten them off surely.

Nice try. They absolutely have to question it, that I don't disagree with. They are getting massive public funding, yet have a lot of corporate sponsorship and all is not as it seems.

However the guy leading the inquiry has a history of shadiness himself.

pelevin

For what it's worth I'd consider Brailsford much more in the wrong. I'd also not be interested in despising anyone! I don't think any of us are so wonderful that that's a good road to be going down, and if we were that good they're not the kind of emotions we'd be feeling anyway!

Weepsie

I'll clarify that, I don't think the anti-British think is something people are aware of when doing it, and it's something a lot of us are guilty of. Irish are particularly guilty of it when it comes to the English Football team (forgetting the teams the Irish fans support) and Rugby teams.

It's a tribal thing. It emerges in the GAA too on a county level when people level abuse at players from counties they just don't like for reasons beyond sporting rivalry.

I'm guilty of it too.

I think Wiggins was a great cyclist. Scanlon was rather unfortunate with injuries and had a lot going on, new family etc in the years leading up to his retirement. He probably meant his comments at the time, but he was probably mostly just disappointed that he'd been dealt a lot of bad luck and robbed of a promising career because of it.

irishrover99

JK.BMC wrote: »

I remember seeing that; it's brilliant. We all end up on our arse at some stage.
Sure, Wiggins may not be everybody's cup of tea but something tells that if he were Irish, from somewhere like Ballymun or Ballyfermot, we would be lauding him as one of the greats.

You mean like the ledge that is Conor McGregor. Who goes up and down weight divisions without batting a eyelid and grows a chin without ever looking fat. Talks nothing but nonsense every time a mic is put in front of him but if you slag him off to the Irish you get baratted.

DirkVoodoo

JK.BMC wrote: »

Seriously though, given that Wiggins only focused on GC once he matured, is it not perfectly reasonable to assume that a rider gets better and more adaptable with age and experience? And I'm not talking about having treatment for cancer here just to be clear!

Ah come on! You can't actually believe that!

I remember guys in college who were nearly failing every class in the early years, then turning around and saying "time to cop on and work!" before walking out with a first class honors degree. Difficult, but not impossible.

What you're suggesting is more like a good will hunting scenario, and it's one pedaled by SKY over and over. Yes, Froome used to be a janitor, but Brailsford caught him solving impossible differential equations and knew he was just a "rough diamond".

And even that analogy is flawed because Matt Damon's character was always prodigious just troubled, these guys couldn't even do basic arithmetic until they were in their 20s and then suddenly were humiliating maths professors for fun.

I'm all for "incredible transformations", but they tend to be tightly bounded. Either they were always brilliant and just lazy, or they took their talents as far as they possibly could. In Wiggins/Froome's case, their domination of cycling can't be explained by application or maturity alone.

Brian?

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Ah come on! You can't actually believe that!

I remember guys in college who were nearly failing every class in the early years, then turning around and saying "time to cop on and work!" before walking out with a first class honors degree. Difficult, but not impossible.

What you're suggesting is more like a good will hunting scenario, and it's one pedaled by SKY over and over. Yes, Froome used to be a janitor, but Brailsford caught him solving impossible differential equations and knew he was just a "rough diamond".

And even that analogy is flawed because Matt Damon's character was always prodigious just troubled, these guys couldn't even do basic arithmetic until they were in their 20s and then suddenly were humiliating maths professors for fun.

I'm all for "incredible transformations", but they tend to be tightly bounded. Either they were always brilliant and just lazy, or they took their talents as far as they possibly could. In Wiggins/Froome's case, their domination of cycling can't be explained by application or maturity alone.

There was nothing incredible about Wiggins change in form on the road. It wasn't even a "transformation". It was a change of focus that yielded results.

He went from being an elite track rider to being an elite road rider in about 3 years. Hardly an incredible transformation given he started on the road.

Shaungoater

The problem is that now we question and will continue to question the legitimacy of every successful cyclist who retires. Lance et al has ruined it for us. Paul Kimage et al has ruined it for us by making us question everything that happens in the sport. I am not sure there is a fix.

I love the sport but that love dwindled significantly over the past few years. I now feel everyone was cheating to some extent, but mostly the ones being persecuted in the media are only the successful ones but who cares about the rest who still couldn't win when they cheated, right?

Lumen

Weepsie wrote: »

I agree with JK.BMC. There is an an inherent anti-English/British sentiment.

Yeah, well 700 years blah blah. A bit of sporting bias is hardly an unreasonable response. :pac:

Weepsie wrote: »

Ireland has it's own Sacred Cows who have shady pasts, but they're given a free pass. Pantani and Contadaor are lauded as greats due to being exciting, attacking cyclists, but their doping is simply looked over.

Dunno about that. Contador has got a lot of stick on this forum, as has Roche senior (although I think that's partly cos it was perceived that he rejected Ireland in favour of France after he made it). Kelly is still loved but time heals a lot. Pantani is dead and that tends to take the heat out of criticism.

Froome is an interesting case. He's sort of British, not a boring rider (although looks terrible on the bike), has gone from donkey to racehorse and yet nothing has stuck.

Lumen

Shaungoater wrote: »

Paul Kimmage et al has ruined it for us by making us question everything that happens in the sport

Yeah, well that might be a valid criticism if he stopped being proven right on a regular basis.

Lumen

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

What you're suggesting is more like a good will hunting scenario, and it's one pedaled by SKY over and over. Yes, Froome used to be a janitor, but Brailsford caught him solving impossible differential equations and knew he was just a "rough diamond".

And even that analogy is flawed because Matt Damon's character was always prodigious just troubled, these guys couldn't even do basic arithmetic until they were in their 20s and then suddenly were humiliating maths professors for fun

I have absolutely no idea what you're on about. :pac:

Brian?

Lumen wrote: »

Yeah, well 700 years blah blah. A bit of sporting bias is hardly an unreasonable response.

800. Come on.

Lusk_Doyle

Brian? wrote: »

800. Come on.

Get over it!

ford2600

Brian? wrote: »

800. Come on.

And counting...

https://youtu.be/K5h-NrrCQzY

Beasty

I've deleted a post and various follow-ups to that post. You can talk about TUE's and their use by Wiggins (and indeed others), and whether you are a fan or otherwise of Wiggins/Sky/BC and the like. However the forum rules on doping speculation are very clear. If anyone is not sure please familiarise yourself with the forum charter.

Any questions PM me - do not respond to this warning in-thread

Thanks

terrydel

He may as well have won nothing as far as I'm concerned.
Never liked him at any stage, but would have always doffed my cap to him as a cyclist. After the tue stuff, none of his achievements mean a dime in my mind. I'm sure he's devastated, but there you go.

Shaungoater

Lumen wrote: »

Yeah, well that might be a valid criticism if he stopped being proven right on a regular basis.

100% agree. It was never a criticism.