You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Could his time up there be something simple like a better road surface , tailwind , great lead out etc . If he wins the overall would it be possible that he could have a crack at the Vuelta ?
Maybe he's got internal motors in his legs?
The ultimate mechanical doping.
They don't x-ray the riders , so whose going to know?
I don't care, all i know is Pog is ace and Armstrong was a dick.
Electro-stimulation of leg muscles via the “radio”
Maybe he’s got internal motors in his legs?
hmmm - long shorts definitely en vogue currently ... 😉
I Think we had this same discussion last 2 years....except then it was Vingo in the frame.....I guess there's always doubters, but I'm in the frame of mind that these guys are freaks of nature, and with all the data on multiple variables the teams have, they can tweak the athletes' performance and they can control effort as they ride to decide how hard to push. So is tech info a kind of doping - if you have better data analyses- or is that competitive advantage. And where altitude training is concerned are they still using hyper/hypobaric tents or whatever to simulate altitude. And is me using AI algorithms to decide my winter Zwift program also doping (not gonna win anything me)
Never knew this about testosterone:
The average T / E ratio for a normal functioning male is a 1:1 ratio, but WADA allows up to a 4:1 ratio without testing positive for elevated testosterone.
So you're allowed to boost your testosterone up to 4 x your normal levels and still be below the threshold that WADA will see as a positive test. Bonkers.
So you’re allowed to boost your testosterone up to 4 x your normal levels
No – the rules state 'a normal functioning male' – some males will have a naturally higher ratio but WADA wouldn't allow four times higher (ie, if Pog's 'normal' ratio is 2:1, he wouldn't be allowed to have 8:1 without testing positive).
I pretty much work on the principle that they are extraordinary athletes. I've known a few people who have freakish endurance and fitness. Whereas I need to keep on top of it just to be below average (a mate pedalled up la belles filles and super belles in the middle of the block whereas I was blowing out my arse and slammed on the big ring).
But also they are nudging the rules of what is testable and probably trying stuff that isn't yet illegal. Add to that the modern sports science and you get absolute peak athletes. Could they all do it? No. You have to have the base. Pog, Ving and Armstrong, pantini had the physical starting point that many in the peleton don't what is done after that makes the difference.
Not all cheating is about making them muscularly strong/ able to endure. Getting oxygen to muscles by upping red blood cells, getting fuel to cells by upping carbohydrate intake are two sides of the same coin. 8 years ago I was told by someone in BC that there was about to be a big step in road cycling.
Again they are extraordinary athletes to begin with how you tune that athlete is the question. Enjoy the racing in the knowledge that currently they are all within the rules.
Then we would be discussing Jonas not Tadej.
I know that's the OPs title, but much of the discussion is much more wide reaching.
There are two aspects to the current crop that makes you squint a bit - the gap between the very best (and I'm looking at Cross, XC and tour mountain stages here) and the rest; especially as the rest are also on fancy pants 2024 bikes and have access to 2024 nutritional and training science too. But it's not just that, it's also the advancements in terms of time on the previous generation.
I've said it before earlier in the thread - one of the warning bells 25 years ago that got a lot of people twitchy was when average stage speeds started creeping up and up with the superstars still able to ride off the front with apparent ease. People pointed to the improvements in tech, nutrition and training back then too. With a bit of justification it has to be said. But it wasn't just that was it and the whole house of cards came tumbling down. It's pretty understandable that there's the odd Roger Moore style eyebrow raise now given the duping we all got back then. Sins of the fathers and all that.
My total guess is that it's more likely to be the lower ranking riders who might be doping, just to try to keep pace with the World Tour in the first place.
Sins of the fathers and all that.
Which I think has possibly made road cycling the cleanest endurance sport in the world. Certainly the most self-critical.
As convert said the tech and nutrition advancements make sense for average speed of the whole peleton to increase its the fact that these guys are still riding off the front with ease. Might not be your EPO of days gone but its some sort of secret sauce thats probaby on the grey side of legal.
Chakaping has a good point i think it would be a lower pro on a smaller team that would get caught old school because they wouldn’t have the money and the infamous around them to get smart
This climb may not have been used for 27 years
Apart from in 2015 when it was won by Rodriguez. I wonder how fast he was.
Slow probably. Quick skim of the transcript from CN he went on the attack very early with a decent size group. On the final climb had to chase down the leaders with 2 others then went solo. Far cry from sat in the pack all day then getting a lead out from fresh "domestiques" :0)
Rodriguez was not in the same league as Pog. Yes I'm deliberately not discussing possibility of doping.
https://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2015/stage-12/live-report/
But also they are nudging the rules of what is testable and probably trying stuff that isn’t yet illegal.
Through various conversations with international UCI Commissaires, I'm aware that there's a general "understanding" or "knowledge" within the top echelons of the sport that a couple of teams have been given notification by the UCI that they (the UCI) have an idea of what they (the teams) are up to and while it's not currently illegal, it's deemed a bit "not the done thing" and if they could please stop toeing the line quite that closely, it would be appreciated.
I think you're right, there's a whole grey area - not dissimilar to F1 where entire teams of engineers will pick over every aspect of the rules then design a floor that doesn't break the rules but really wasn't part of the intended rulebook!
I can understand why people might think it, but I don't think they're doping, and I REALLY hope that I'm right. Cycling has been through some terrible times because of all of the doping scandals and in recent years has made huge steps in recovering credibility. Perhaps I am too optimistic and have too much faith in human nature but I like to think that todays elites have the strength of character to not resort to doping, and the respect for those that have gone before them not to undo the work they've done in helping cycling move past the doping scandals.
Also consider the teams, Ineos for example. If they get caught up in a doping scandal it would negatively impact them in so many more areas - immediately Man Utd would be tarred with the same brush, along with all of the other teams and sports they are involved in.
Personally, I think there are many many reasons for the likes of Pog and Jonas to be doing so well and prefer to take a default view of innocent until proven guilty. Every year the tour fascinates me in different ways, but it never occurs to me to assume anyone is doping.
I think you’re right, there’s a whole grey area – not dissimilar to F1 where entire teams of engineers will pick over every aspect of the rules then design a floor that doesn’t break the rules but really wasn’t part of the intended rulebook!
Where it differs to F1 are the rules they are picking over and the marginal gains are to do with the "engineering" of a human body. And that might come with long term health issues. Part of the anti doping concept is about preventing unfair advantage. The other part is about not exploiting athletes (or allowing self harm) to their long term detriment just to be a bit better at riding a bike.
Agreed, Slovenia has produced quite a few outstanding riders recently, for a population of 2 million. That’s a population 2/3rds the size of Wales, who also have access to an outstanding development programme but haven’t yet produced any superhumans
You're going to be blown away by the Isle of Man....
I personally think you're taking individuals who have freakishly great genetics, then every aspect of their physical performance and that of the bike is being pushed to the limits.
I am more impressed by Jonas's recovery from the injuries he sustained than Pog. I think like many i love watching Pog race as he has been fallible in the past, he is a racer and enjoys pushing himself, even if a few times he has then blown up catastrophically..
I come from a rugby background, a sport that weirdly has a high number of banned athletes on WADA list often, but does not seem to get the tarnished reputation of cycling or athletics, I got tired of playing against another prop-forward who was smaller than me, only to see him next season, and he'd gained 2 stone, was spotty and had a bad attitude...
it’s not currently illegal, it’s deemed a bit “not the done thing”
Does not compute in professional sport. The emphasis being on professional. And if some well-funded teams can buy the new technology and others cannot, impose spending caps. UAE have the team they have because they can pay GC wages for domestiques. So they get GC riders to ride for their GC leader. And they can buy every legal technology possible. What about wages caps? It is not a level playing field, but it's hardly bike technology that is the differentiator.
Rugby players fail anabolic steroid tests, the average player has gained about 14kg. That's a lot of chicken. Curiously the badboys of WADA ADRV's are ... curling and equestrian sports. And of course bodybuilding. But Rugby has has about 1/200 ADRVs, curling is double that. Bodybuilding treble.
I imagine that, as stated above, those most tempted in the peloton are the lower ranking domestiques who need the boost in performance to maintain their jobs when the genetic freaks are off the pointy end.
I find it mildly amusing that a MTB website/ forum has a thread dedicated to the best 'all round' road rider of his generation - yet nothing for any of the current greats of MTB; Schurter, Neff, Bruni, Minnaar, PFP, Atherton, etc
I find it mildly amusing that a MTB website/ forum has a thread dedicated to the best ‘all round’ road rider of his generation – yet nothing for any of the current greats of MTB; Schurter, Neff, Bruni, Minnaar, PFP, Atherton, etc
So which of them are you saying is on the juice?
All? Maybe not enough advantage in DH mtb tho. Pidcock seems to be greater than Schurter anyway and we've mentioned him.
The carbon monoxide piece has been picked up (a bit) by the Guardian's coverage of yesterday's stage, with teams admitting they're using it to "measure" oxygenation. Given the dangers it's presumably ripe for the UCI to stop pretending it didn't know about it and ban anything involving carbon monoxide?
Interesting that Pog's performance and comparisons to Armstrong and Pantani were made on ITV's TDF highlights show last night. I didn't think they'd be biting the hand that feeds them. Or maybe it's just mitigating any future doping discoveries, by saying "we told you so".
No – the rules state ‘a normal functioning male’ – some males will have a naturally higher ratio but WADA wouldn’t allow four times higher (ie, if Pog’s ‘normal’ ratio is 2:1, he wouldn’t be allowed to have 8:1 without testing positive).
Er, did you read the quoted text and the article I lifted it from? It said the average male has a 1:1 ratio and the test threshold is 4:1, so you could in theory get a TUE to boost up to 4:1 if you were deemed to have a low testosterone level.
But I do understand how you could be confused by my comment if you only read part of it ?
Modern "aero" bikes and clothing alongside improved/increased nutrition during the races is a reasonable explanation for improved average speed in the pro peloton. The case for improved speeds up an 8% plus mountain climb seem less plausible. Sure there is an element of aero gains, but Pantani/Lance era bikes were marginally lighter than modern bikes and the drivetrain efficiency is basically unchanged.
It would also be naive to believe that there isn't a single downhill racer not taking some sort of steroid, especially to build muscle after an injury.
but Pantani/Lance era bikes were marginally lighter than modern bikes and the drivetrain efficiency is basically unchanged
My modern disc-braked carbon road bike is heavier than the high-end rim-brake one it replaced, but climbs quicker somehow (definitely not me being fitter).
Frame stiffness perhaps? Wider tyres some influence?
It would also be naive to believe that there isn’t a single downhill racer not taking some sort of steroid
Well that's a bold claim.
No – the rules state ‘a normal functioning male’ – some males will have a naturally higher ratio but WADA wouldn’t allow four times higher (ie, if Pog’s ‘normal’ ratio is 2:1, he wouldn’t be allowed to have 8:1 without testing positive).
Er, did you read the quoted text and the article I lifted it from? It said the average male has a 1:1 ratio and the test threshold is 4:1, so you could in theory get a TUE to boost up to 4:1 if you were deemed to have a low testosterone level.But I do understand how you could be confused by my comment if you only read part of it ?
You aren't allowed ANY synthetic testosterone though. Landis got caught for that.
It's possible you could with a TUE for a specific medical issue. IDK.
I love the tour, and I enjoy the Vingegaard Pogacar rivalry. And yes there are good technical reasons why the peloton is quicker than it used to be. However there is something inherently suspicious when two competitors are head and shoulders better than the rest.
Teams do not have their own secret labs and mad scientists working on unheard of drugs
Wasn't that just about exactly what BALCO was?
(apologies if someone already posted that)
Maybe they are just better than the rest just as MVDP is better at Cyclocross, Pidcock is better at XC and so on.
I heard/read elsewhere that Cavendish's time up the Plateau de Beille was also pretty close to Pantani's record.
"Well that’s a bold claim."
Refer back to the evidence that shows that 43% of athletes at the athletic world championship admitted to doping when asked in an anonymous way. The rewards and professionalism of cycling is such that it's naive to think it's no longer a factor.
Given a hefty enough budget, what other aspects of the performance could you enhance, if starting from a clean sheet of paper and avoiding the existing drug based restrictions?
Improve haemoglobin's quality, affecting the ability to collect and distribute oxygen into tissues.
Improve the overnight repair rate of muscle fibres.
Make those fibres more resilient, or reduce the hormones that control their breakdown during intense exercise.
Increase the quality of glycogen, (or its storage), so that there's more energy available in the ready use store.
Adapt stomach rates of absorbing carb fuel.
Once you open the door to genetic modification of riders physiology, the world's your lobster... If I can think of a handful of these dodgy options, I'm sure that the teams have already been considering these and many others.
I heard/read elsewhere that Cavendish’s time up the Plateau de Beille was also pretty close to Pantani’s record.
Heard that but frankly it's rubbish. I think they were journos on the ground after 2 weeks on Tour with no time to think.
Pog 3 minutes ish up on Pantani and also on the day on Remco. No way Cav rode it in the same time as Remco.
Hardly bold.
Erm, re-read this please:
there isn’t a single downhill racer not taking some sort of steroid
You'd agree with that? Everyone on the circuit is on steroids?
Utter bullshit.
Pog looks fresher at the end of rides than I do at the start. I’d like some of that juice.
I find it mildly amusing that a MTB website/ forum has a thread dedicated to the best ‘all round’ road rider
Is this a MTB forum? It's more diverse than that, surely.
I take as read that they are all doing something either side of the rules
It seems in my time watching the tour - 50 years - that it always been that way
I welcome a great mountain stage and both days were excellent - havent watched todays yet but looking forward to a battle in the alps
"Erm, re-read this please:
there isn’t a single downhill racer not taking some sort of steroid
You’d agree with that? Everyone on the circuit is on steroids?
Utter bullshit.
"
Ok fair point - I missed the double negative. I imagine what the poster meant was that it was unlikely that there isn't a single dher who was has taken steroids for non medical reasons.
"I heard/read elsewhere that Cavendish’s time up the Plateau de Beille was also pretty close to Pantani’s record."
He rode with several team mates including Cees Bol. Cees Bol did the climb in 56min 11s. (No idea how to quote the message from above)
I've been reading a french website that analyses cycling performances in great depth and then points out the ones that look suspicious.
They say that in the EPO bad days there were loads of records for outstanding performances set by doped riders. In the 2010 to 2019 era none of these records were broken. If Froome, Wiggins, Bernal etc. were on anything it obviously wasn't very good.
Suddenly from 2020 loads of the old records from the EPO era started being not just broken, but completely destroyed.
https://www.cyclisme-dopage.com/actualite/2024-07-15-cyclisme-dopage-com2c.htm
Mitch Docker talked on some podcast episodes about the change in training that happened around 2020 and how racing got dramatically harder. I think it probably coincided with modern sports nutrition and changes in training methodology (more low intensity training and smaller amounts of very high intensity work).
I don’t race, but I feel like my local road chain gangs have got dramatically faster too: I think bikes have improved more than people give credit for. I don’t think there’s much new doping going on amongst the chain gang lot either, fwiw - it’s just that bit easier to ride faster than it was 10 or 15 years ago.
Suddenly from 2020 loads of the old records from the EPO era started being not just broken, but completely destroyed.
COVID vaccines gave everyone superhuman abilities, innit.
Agree tech advances over recent years have been pretty major, especially aero stuff and wider tyres! Has much more of an effect at the speed the pros ride.
They say that in the EPO bad days there were loads of records for outstanding performances set by doped riders. In the 2010 to 2019 era none of these records were broken. If Froome, Wiggins, Bernal etc. were on anything it obviously wasn’t very good.
SKY not renowned for being remotely interested in beating records or even riding up a mountain faster than they need to to strangle the life out of the race. Typically they were the only team left with any quantity of domestiques so could just tap away at a pace.
Rewatch Sundays climb. Jumbos first man comes onto the climb flat out and hands over to Jorgenson who burys himself for as long as possible then Pogs last domestique does the same until 5km to go.
There are a good few people here who my Nigerian friend, the prince, would be really interested in establishing a business relationship with. Damn - where are the emojis when you need them to demonstrate you are not entirely serious <winky face>!
Let’s not forget that although the name of these teams changes as the sponsors come and go, the management can and does stay the same . The management of UAE , for example , have previous for doping offences.
As I said in the other thread , the Giro was made a mockery of and was boring. The same is happening in France and I have stopped watching this year’s race.
I hope I am wrong but will not be surprised to proven otherwise.
I’m sorry, but after today’s stage I’m finding it increasingly difficult to not be suspicious. The way he just rode past world class climbers as if they were stationary is getting too good to be true. Assuming that all the teams are using the best sport science to train and fuel properly both in the race and away fro the race then how can someone be that much better day after day and not blow up.
I’m sorry, but after today’s stage I’m finding it increasingly difficult to not be suspicious.
+1. I've given up on watching it.
If he were doping why would he thrash everyone by such a huge margin?
If he weren’t doping how would he be so much better than everyone else? It’s not even close.
And to be so good at so many different types of racing makes me really suspicious. Classics, monuments and GT.
"Pogačar on Isola 2000 averaged 6.83 ᵉW/Kg for 37:44 min and 7.21 ᵉW/Kg normalized for sea level. Despite it being at a high altitude, Pogačar’s raw ᵉW/Kg numbers still are incredible, and he did the second-greatest climbing performance of all time, losing only to his Stage 15 performance on Plateau de Beille. Evenepoel with Vingegaard on his wheel did 6.42 ᵉW/Kg for 39:26 min.
Adam Yates in the first 17:06 min averaged 6.96 ᵉW/Kg, while Pogačar, Vingegaard, Almeida and Evenepoel in the draft pushed 6.75 ᵉW/Kg. After Pogačar attacked, he did 7.00 ᵉW/Kg for 20:38 min. Evenepoel and Vingegaard slowed down with 6.22 ᵉW/Kg and 6.03 ᵉW/Kg in the second part of the climb, showing how much better the Slovenian superstar was, pushing almost 1 ᵉW/Kg more than Vingegaard in the final part."
Pogacar was reprimanded by none other than Lance Armstrong.
“It was really unnecessary to attack like that,” Armstrong said on his podcast. “This will only draw more attention to Pogacar. If there’s already speculation about his performance, this certainly doesn’t help
Or he's pushing huge numbers and taking time because he can and knows that he'll test clean because he is clean.
As I said before I believe they are all doing things that aren't illegal (yet) on top of being freakishly adapted to be elite cyclists.
It really is ridiculous now, they must have something near undetectable to cause the results they have.
Or because he knows his team knows how to hide it…
I’m sorry, but after today’s stage I’m finding it increasingly difficult to not be suspicious.
He's done it every race he's ridden this year, and plenty in the years prior. It's hard to buy into the idea that it's down to nutrition and technology when 4th place in the GC is over 15 minutes back. 2nd and 3rd are also 'once in a generation' wonders, smashing records themselves.
It was considered for a long time that because of the specialisation and alignment in training and technology, there never could be another Merckx. Yet Pogacar has already gone well beyond what Armstrong and Pantani were doing, and well into Merckx territory.
I've said it loads of times, I'm quite enjoying the spectacle. Good or bad, we're witnessing an historic moment, and it makes for some utterly bonkers racing. But you have to ask the question, how? How is it even possible? What's changed?
Been reading about the use of cobalt salts and carbon monoxide inducing near epo effects on erythropoesis.
But unsure how this would remain hidden in the whole blood tests.
The cobalt salts are apparently undetectable and the teams have said they are using carbon monoxide
Not sure on the cobalt salts, but there's been lots of media confusion about the carbon monoxide use.
What the teams have admitted to using is a carbon monoxide rebreather, which is a way of measuring haemoglobin mass (i.e. quantifying the effect of altitude training etc.). Using carbon monoxide as an ergogenic aid is different and would require quite frequent inhalation of a CO dose over a fairly extended period. I imagine CO therapy will be banned soon, but the CO rebreathers probably not.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30110719/
Just one article I found. I just wonder if it would change the blood values in a detectable way
when 4th place in the GC is over 15 minutes back. 2nd and 3rd are also ‘once in a generation’ wonders, smashing records themselves.
2nd place was in intensive care a few months back, 3rd place has little track record in GTs and is only in his 1st TdF, 4th place is a support rider. The other major challenger has withdrawn injured and there's a bunch of people I'll or recovering from injuries.
Last year we were using Pogacars performance to justify the Vingagard was juiced now it's vice versa. He was a clear favourite coming in and the result is beating that out. We're in an era where there are some really good one day racers about and riders who are competitive in one week races but there is a dearth of good GT riders.
Last year we were using Pogacars performance to justify the Vingagard was juiced now it’s vice versa.
Both of them are producing performances well beyond what we've seen in the modern era.
2nd place was in intensive care a few months back
Which is more reason to raise an eyebrow.
3rd place has little track record in GTs and is only in his 1st TdF
Yet is producing performances on climbs better than anybody in the history of the TdF before him, albeit slightly behind 1st and 2nd. This is the guy that was consistently getting dropped by domestiques a couple of weeks prior in the Dauphine.
The numbers don't lie. There are several former grand tour winners in the peloton. These 3 are way ahead because they're riding faster than anyone in the history of the sport. These margins of winning simply haven't happened in the modern era. You can argue that we suddenly have an influx of super talented individuals, or that they've uncovered new training techniques, but you cannot argue that it's normal or due to a lack of competition, because that's simply not true.
It’s just surprising to see the one day racer is also breaking records on mountain climbs. I’ve never seen any GT racer be that good in February, March classics. To win sprints or to do 60 mile solo breaks.
Irrespective of the injuries or the other competitors, it’s the numbers that are out of this world.
Personally I don’t mind. I think it’s fair to say if he is juicing he won’t be the only one.
Nils Politt the wonder climber is probably more suspicious.
knows that he’ll test clean because he is clean.
passing the tests and being clean are two very different things. Also the testing only tests for what it knows about and has developed a reliable test to for. That always the problem with doping control
Over the last 10 years the average time gap between 1st and 10th has been 16 minutes with a range between 7 and 26 minutes. 10th place is currently sitting at 22 minutes, it's hardly suggesting they are way ahead of everyone else compared to history.
The time separation isn't anywhere near as eye opening as the alleged W/kg values being put around.
As has been said, super human, on another planet, unreal.....
Cavs record won't last very long at this rate!
But up there the shock was the comparison to the other riders, the data suggests that they're not that different to usual in terms of difference to other riders.
If the time difference is comparable then an increase in power is being replicated proportionally across the peloton (we aren't seeing lots of riders missing the cut) so the implication now is that everyone is juicing to hold position?
I don't doubt significantly funded squads are identifying and using techniques that sail close to the edge and might in time be banned but that's not the same as doping.
These margins of winning simply haven’t happened in the modern era.
I mean, he won by what, 1:40 today? Froome won that stage in 2015 by similar (with similar doping accusations afterwards). There just doesn't seem to be a huge depth of GC contenders this year. Outside the top three, most of the top ten are domestiques. Mas, Betnal, Thomas have all been up there regularly in recent years, but are literally nowhere this year. Similar for Bardet....Simon Yates, Handley, Carapaz....most of those haven't even featured as also rans on GC.
It does look like 10th place on GC could be almost 30 mins down by the finish, which is a larger gap than the usual 20ish I suppose.
It’s just surprising to see the one day racer is also breaking records on mountain climbs. I’ve never seen any GT racer be that good in February, March classics. To win sprints or to do 60 mile solo breaks.
This argues against Pog doping with anything special, as there is surely no PED that can give you this performance if you're not already the greatest cyclist ever seen.
No one would argue that UAE are clean given the Leadership, and Pog is likely engaged in garden variety doping like everyone else, but it's also likely that Pog is just the GoaT. Micro-dosing EPO + blood doping + whatever doesn't give you a Pog.
The GOAT, better than Merckx, Big Mig, Armstrong? Call me sceptical…..
Turning Polit into an 80kg climbing god is a little bit too much. He was always an average breakaway rider who couldn’t really climb. Lots of raw power on flatter stages, but his transformation to me is quite startling. But he’s 6 feet 3 and at least 80kgs.
We’re all entitled to our opinion. I’m not going to be swayed…..too old and long in the tooth to believe in miracles.
I’ve never seen any GT racer be that good in February, March classics. To win sprints or to do 60 mile solo breaks.
Merckx and a few others around that time did but that was quite a long time ago and who knows what they may have been using or not. Maybe it was the steaks they ate for breakfast.
The GOAT, better than Merckx, Big Mig, Armstrong? Call me sceptical…..
Well there always has to be someone who is better than those before them. If everyone was worse than the riders from 20+ years ago that would be odd wouldnt it?
This argues against Pog doping with anything special, as there is surely no PED that can give you this performance if you’re not already the greatest cyclist ever seen.
No it doesn't. Pog probably is the greatest cyclist but that doesn't exclude doping. If you think merx and co weren't on something as well then that's just naive.
Pog dominates this year, vinagard last year, I would be very very surprised if they're not both (and the rest of the top ten) on some cocktail of stuff. I mean as far as I know micro dosing if done properly still can't be detected so meh. I don't really care, I like pog and I have no problem with him dominating - I was cheering him on.
If you think merx and co weren’t on something as well then that’s just naive.
I think it is pretty well documented that they were and Merckx was caught 3 times.
Personally the only thing that explains Pogis performance is genetics. In Michael Hutchinsons book he says that there are 20 (approx) genes that are linked to superior athletic ability and the highest (so far) detected in one human is 11. Pogi must have more.
The GOAT, better than Merckx, Big Mig, Armstrong? Call me sceptical…..
Not better than Merckx, Merckx was winning races week in week out and on the track as well. Pog and most top rides have a much lighter schedule, one of the reasons racing is faster - the amount or racing is less for the top riders and training more focused.
How many other teams spent time targetting yesterday's stage like UAE? Repeated ascents between the Giro & Tour, with the whole team aware of the plan. Add the quality of those riders supporting Pog, and you’ve got a huge disparity with smaller teams.
It's the first Tour for the rider in 3rd, who's not really a climbing specialist; it's the first Tour for the rider in 2nd who was on life support 3 months ago. That explains a lot, when in context.
But, it's cycle racing, so nothing would suprise as history supports.
If you think merx and co weren’t on something as well then that’s just naive.
Personally I do not believe there has ever been a clean TDF winner. sometimes they get caught, sometimes they are ahead of the testers and rules,
Personally the only thing that explains Pogis performance is genetics.
It's more likely the combination of genetics and modern, optimised training, nutrition, equipment etc. People seem to have this idea that all elite cyclists are roughly equal, so any big differences must come down to some sort of doping programme, but that's a naive over simplification which completely ignores genetic differences.
I always think back to a fascinating documentary about Colin Jackson, the astonishingly fast 110m hurdler. It looked at whether he was physiologically gifted and analysed all sorts of stuff. There was nothing extraordinary about him untll they analysed a core sample from his quad and found he had an incredibly rate fast twitch muscle fibre that simply meant his muscles could contract faster than other people's.
Obviously he also had great technique, motivation and the ability to execute under pressure, but right at the core of it all, he was also naturally gifted.
It doesn't of course mean that Pogacar isn't doping, of course he could be, but the idea that he must be, is maybe a little blinkered. Bear in mind too, that there may be lots of other Pogs out there, who've never been 'discovered' and are sat right now watching TV and doing the odd annoyingly fast park run that bears no relation to their general activity levels.
As an adjunct to all this, you have to wonder if the future of doping is DNA manipulation.
People seem to have this idea that all elite cyclists are roughly equal, so any big differences must come down to some sort of doping programme, but that’s a naive over simplification which completely ignores genetic differences.
The problem is that all professional cyclists are all already going to be the people at the tip of the genetic potential bell curve.
The current (and relatively sudden increase in) W/kg performances suggests that the bell curve has recently shifted somehow.
I think comparisons with 30 year old performances doesn't really tell us much. And in terms of performance improvements, I can see training and recovery protocols allowing more consistent performances across a Grand Tour or even at the end of a particularly grueling stage.
The one stand out for me is the raw W/kg number. There is a physiological limit that has suddenly been smashed, and not just by Pog. These are the numbers that are screaming out 'dodgy' to me.