Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[Slavique Nuke]

I don't know what a meme rider is, and don't see how that's an argument at all. Thomas hit his best level (we thought) in 2018 and then declined after, but then returned to an even stronger level than before, at 36.

Do you think Sky could have made these riders much better, but chose not to because they considered them meme riders?

I doubt it. There must be some other explanation.

Landa was there as a helper, and when he was able to get his own results, something almost always happened to him. So that's how the memes became Landismo, Freelanda. No?

Skyborg were always obsessed with their wattmeters, almost never doing more watts than required to win. They had answers for everything and controlled everything. The feeling was always that they could go faster if they needed to. It is hard to judge what times their fully juiced leaders would have been capable of if necessary. So comparing those times with the present is pointless imo

Of course then doping methods were fine-tuned. Better equipments, better supplements, better training regime, more professional approach (which Sky was way ahead of the others at the time). It all helps. What could be the biggest improvement is that the background of riders today is much more diverse. Pogacar is Slovenian, del Torro is Mexican, even 15 years ago you didn't see almost any of these countries in cycling at this level. It was also less than 15 years ago that a dinosaur like Lefevere didn't sign one of the strongest riders (Sagan) of recent times just because he wasn't from a traditional cycling country and didn't speak English.

 

[Blobs]

Landa was there as a helper, and when he was able to get his own results, something almost always happened to him. So that's how the memes became Landismo, Freelanda. No?

Skyborg were always obsessed with their wattmeters, almost never doing more watts than required to win. They had answers for everything and controlled everything. The feeling was always that they could go faster if they needed to. It is hard to judge what times their fully juiced leaders would have been capable of if necessary. So comparing those times with the present is pointless imo

Of course then doping methods were fine-tuned. Better equipments, better supplements, better training regime, more professional approach (which Sky was way ahead of the others at the time). It all helps. What could be the biggest improvement is that the background of riders today is much more diverse. Pogacar is Slovenian, del Torro is Mexican, even 15 years ago you didn't see almost any of these countries in cycling at this level. It was also less than 15 years ago that a dinosaur like Lefevere didn't sign one of the strongest riders (Sagan) of recent times just because he wasn't from a traditional cycling country and didn't speak English.

Thomas was dropped on several occasions in 2019. I'm sure he would have done more watts if he could. In 2020 he wasn't even good enough to get picked for the Tour team. If Sky already had all the ingredients everyone is using today, then why did his level fall off a cliff for a while?

Equipments and supplement, and so on, is always gradually improving. Unless I've missed some huge breakthrough in one or more of those things, they simply don't explain a sudden explosion in everybody's level. What we're currently seeing looks more like what happened in the 90's.

 

[Slavique Nuke]

Thomas was dropped on several occasions in 2019. I'm sure he would have done more watts if he could. In 2020 he wasn't even good enough to get picked for the Tour team. If Sky already had all the ingredients everyone is using today, then why did his level fall off a cliff for a while?

Equipments and supplement, and so on, is always gradually improving. Unless I've missed some huge breakthrough in one or more of those things, they simply don't explain a sudden explosion in everybody's level. What we're currently seeing looks more like what happened in the 90's.

If you go back to my first comment, you will see that I was talking about the golden years of Sky, when the UCI president was a British friendly & not the post-Cookson era. I have stated my theory, clearly writing down the period I mean. If you disagree with it, that's fine, but stop moving the goalposts just to contradict me.

It's also confusing that you're simultaneously saying that "Geraint Thomas is also better in his mid 30's than he was in his prime" and that "his level fall off a cliff for a while".

Anyway enough of this subject and let's get back to the original topic Pogacar and UAE.

 

[Sciatic]

I don't know what a meme rider is, and don't see how that's an argument at all. Thomas hit his best level (we thought) in 2018 and then declined after, but then returned to an even stronger level than before, at 36.

Do you think Sky could have made these riders much better, but chose not to because they considered them meme riders?

I doubt it. There must be some other explanation.

To respond to your first sentence, hyping Landa (whether serious or tongue in cheek) is a CN forums meme, as you can see by the frequent (but somewhat obscure to an outsider) comments (such as #freelanda, Landissimo!), whenever he does something good or bad in a race

 

[Cookster15]

There was a step increase in level which occurred after 2020. Geraint Thomas is a good benchmark. Thomas was 32 when he won the Tour in 2018. When Thomas won the stage to Alpe D'Huez that year they climbed that mountain in about 41 minutes. Four years later, at 36 years of age, Thomas climbed the same mountain two minutes faster (finishing with Pog and Vingegaard) - that is huge. No way is this explained by how they raced the climb. It can only be explained by clinic matters.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

@Cookster15 As others already mentioned 2020 was the breakthrough year. The Tour was super fast on climbs and included a proper thermonuclear performance at the end by none other than young, tender Teddy.

 

[Slavique Nuke]

Thomas was 32 when he won the Tour in 2018. When Thomas won the stage to Alpe D'Huez that year they climbed that mountain in about 41 minutes. Four years later, at 36 years of age, Thomas climbed the same mountain two minutes faster (finishing with Pog and Vingegaard) - that is huge. No way is this explained by how they raced the climb. It can only be explained by clinic matters.

Tactics, pace before the climb, fatigue all play a part. For example, in 2018 they went up to Col de la Croix de Fer 1:30min faster than in 2022. The Galibier was also in economic mode in 2022. Everything was geared to Alpe d'Huez.

If fcking Chris Froome could finish third on a stage where there were 3 HCs in 2022 then you'd suspect the pace before the Alpe d'huez was low. While the 2018's stage was hard from the start.

 

[Blobs]

If you go back to my first comment, you will see that I was talking about the golden years of Sky, when the UCI president was a British friendly & not the post-Cookson era. I have stated my theory, clearly writing down the period I mean. If you disagree with it, that's fine, but stop moving the goalposts just to contradict me.

It's also confusing that you're simultaneously saying that "Geraint Thomas is also better in his mid 30's than he was in his prime" and that "his level fall off a cliff for a while".

Anyway enough of this subject and let's get back to the original topic Pogacar and UAE.

I believe I understand your theory. That Sky had access to the same doping methods that the top riders of today use, right? I'm just saying I don't think that adds up, and arguing why I believe that. I'm not moving any goalposts. There aren't any goalposts to move.

I'm not sure what's confusing about my statement about Thomas. He clearly "peaked" in 2018, declined ("fell off a cliff) in 19-21, but then came back stronger than ever at the Tour at 36. Hope that clears it up.

But yes, we've undeniably veered off topic here

To respond to your first sentence, hyping Landa (whether serious or tongue in cheek) is a CN forums meme, as you can see by the frequent (but somewhat obscure to an outsider) comments (such as #freelanda, Landissimo!), whenever he does something good or bad in a race

Okay thanks. I don't see how that's at all relevant to the point I was making though.

 

[Slavique Nuke]

I believe I understand your theory. That Sky had access to the same doping methods that the top riders of today use, right? I'm just saying I don't think that adds up, and arguing why I believe that. I'm not moving any goalposts. There aren't any goalposts to move.

I'm not sure what's confusing about my statement about Thomas. He clearly "peaked" in 2018, declined ("fell off a cliff) in 19-21, but then came back stronger than ever at the Tour at 36. Hope that clears it up.

But yes, we've undeniably veered off topic here

Okay thanks. I don't see how that's at all relevant to the point I was making though.

- You changed the subject to post-Cookson era. So yes, you keep moving the goalposts. My points were about the golden years of Sky when they were untouchable. Froome-era.

- You claim that the guy who finished 2nd in the 2019 TdF behind his teammate after crashing weeks before and his start was in doubt, fell off a cliff.

- In 2020, finished second in the Tirreno. Fourth at the ITT World Championships. He started the Giro as the biggest favourite, after ITT he was the best placed amongst the GC guys. He crashed again, the race was won comfortably by his helper, which immediately suggests that without a crash Thomas wins it.

- In 2021, 3rd Catalunya, 1st Romandie, 3rd Dauphiné. Naturally the donkey crashed again in the Tour and his shoulder popped out. His teammate was there in third place with Pog and Vingegaard, again suggesting the Skineos guys were okay there.

So I recommend you watch the races instead of just checking the Tour de France results especially if you're talking about a guy who falls more than a drunk british teenager. Thomas' performance has not declined in 2019-21, he is just simply a donkey.

Also, some people try to prove their point with cherry-picked statistics like comparing times on the Alpe d'Huez. Thomas rode the Alpe d'Huez stage in 2018 faster than in 2022 when he finished with Pog and Vingegaard. Despite the fact that the 2018 stage was longer and much harder, as the first climb in 2018, Col de la Madeleine, is harder than Galibier in 2022 + there was an extra Cat 2 climb in 2018.

 

[Red Rick]

Tactics, pace before the climb, fatigue all play a part. For example, in 2018 they went up to Col de la Croix de Fer 1:30min faster than in 2022. The Galibier was also in economic mode in 2022. Everything was geared to Alpe d'Huez.

If fcking Chris Froome could finish third on a stage where there were 3 HCs in 2022 then you'd suspect the pace before the Alpe d'huez was low. While the 2018's stage was hard from the start.

Such comparisons aren't the best. In 2022 the 2008-2019 climbing times were mostly crushed by a minute or more. But AdH was in 2022 was only a few seconds faster than in 2015, despite passively ridden stage.

 

[Netserk]

- You changed the subject to post-Cookson era. So yes, you keep moving the goalposts. My points were about the golden years of Sky when they were untouchable. Froome-era.

- You claim that the guy who finished 2nd in the 2019 TdF behind his teammate after crashing weeks before and his start was in doubt, fell off a cliff.

- In 2020, finished second in the Tirreno. Fourth at the ITT World Championships. He started the Giro as the biggest favourite, after ITT he was the best placed amongst the GC guys. He crashed again, the race was won comfortably by his helper, which immediately suggests that without a crash Thomas wins it.

- In 2021, 3rd Catalunya, 1st Romandie, 3rd Dauphiné. Naturally the donkey crashed again in the Tour and his shoulder popped out. His teammate was there in third place with Pog and Vingegaard, again suggesting the Skineos guys were okay there.

So I recommend you watch the races instead of just checking the Tour de France results especially if you're talking about a guy who falls more than a drunk british teenager. Thomas' performance has not declined in 2019-21, he is just simply a donkey.

Also, some people try to prove their point with cherry-picked statistics like comparing times on the Alpe d'Huez. Thomas rode the Alpe d'Huez stage in 2018 faster than in 2022 when he finished with Pog and Vingegaard. Despite the fact that the 2018 stage was longer and much harder, as the first climb in 2018, Col de la Madeleine, is harder than Galibier in 2022 + there was an extra Cat 2 climb in 2018.

I completely agree with your description of Thomas's trajectory. He's been a beast since his Tour win, but with varied luck (and efforts outside his main targets).

The only climb in 2018 where he went full gas was La Rosière, after that it was cruise control and mission Froome on the podium. That makes it hard to judge just how fast he was back then (and Alpe d'Huez is of no use). Still, it's at the very least plausible that in absolute terms he was faster on the climbs in 2022 than 2018. Just like the whole peloton is faster now than back then.

 

[Blobs]

- You changed the subject to post-Cookson era. So yes, you keep moving the goalposts. My points were about the golden years of Sky when they were untouchable. Froome-era.

- You claim that the guy who finished 2nd in the 2019 TdF behind his teammate after crashing weeks before and his start was in doubt, fell off a cliff.

- In 2020, finished second in the Tirreno. Fourth at the ITT World Championships. He started the Giro as the biggest favourite, after ITT he was the best placed amongst the GC guys. He crashed again, the race was won comfortably by his helper, which immediately suggests that without a crash Thomas wins it.

- In 2021, 3rd Catalunya, 1st Romandie, 3rd Dauphiné. Naturally the donkey crashed again in the Tour and his shoulder popped out. His teammate was there in third place with Pog and Vingegaard, again suggesting the Skineos guys were okay there.

So I recommend you watch the races instead of just checking the Tour de France results especially if you're talking about a guy who falls more than a drunk british teenager. Thomas' performance has not declined in 2019-21, he is just simply a donkey.

Also, some people try to prove their point with cherry-picked statistics like comparing times on the Alpe d'Huez. Thomas rode the Alpe d'Huez stage in 2018 faster than in 2022 when he finished with Pog and Vingegaard. Despite the fact that the 2018 stage was longer and much harder, as the first climb in 2018, Col de la Madeleine, is harder than Galibier in 2022 + there was an extra Cat 2 climb in 2018.

- I didn't change the subject. Your initial post didn't mention Cookson-era. Just "Sky era". I assumed that included their Tour wins in 18 & 19. Anyway, it doesn't really matter. My initial response was to this sentence: "Doping methods probably haven't changed much since the days of Sky, the main difference being that more natural talent and better responders are winning."

So unless you're saying that they had access to modern doping methods in the Cookson era, but then lost them after that, it doesn't matter. If they knew about it under Cookson, they still knew about it after.

- To me he didn't look as good in 2019 as in 2018. There might be circumstances that explain that. In 2020 he prepared specifically for the Tour, but failed to even get picked for the team. That's what I meant by falling off a cliff. What would have happened in the Giro is pure speculation, but he might have done well there, with how weak the field was. We'll never know

- I do watch races, so no need for the condescending tone. Let's discuss politely as adults.

- I don't know where you have your stats from. Thomas climbed the Alpe 2 minutes faster in 2022 than he did 2018

Geraint Thomas was Stronger in the Tour de France 2022 compared to his 2018 Victory - Lanterne Rouge

In the Tour de France 2022, Geraint Thomas displayed strong climbing performances throughout the three weeks, finishing third in the general classification behind Pogačar and Vingegaard. Standing on the podium in Paris was nothing new for the Welshman, who won Le Tour in 2018 and came second in...

lanternerouge.com

His numbers seem to indicate that he had a peak in the late 10's. Then a decline in the early 20's. (I'll concede that "fell off a cliff" might have been an exaggeration), and then a new, much higher, peak from 2022 at 36 years of age.

 

[Red Rick]

I completely agree with your description of Thomas's trajectory. He's been a beast since his Tour win, but with varied luck (and efforts outside his main targets).

The only climb in 2018 where he went full gas was La Rosière, after that it was cruise control and mission Froome on the podium. That makes it hard to judge just how fast he was back then (and Alpe d'Huez is of no use). Still, it's at the very least plausible that in absolute terms he was faster on the climbs in 2022 than 2018. Just like the whole peloton is faster now than back then.

Thomas' superiority of the competition wasn't that big, at least not in the Pyrenees. Otherwise you take much more time in a last km attack on Portet. Compare it to Contador on Farrapona and Ancares, who completely torched Froome after having the suckwheel. Also didn't win the ITT, which he should if he's that superior.

 

[Ripper]

Ba ha ha ha ha.

Back on topic. Hat trick demolition time. It's like somebody watched E3 on TV yesterday and decided I'm going solo as well, I'm going to put even more time on everyone ... so there!! I want more footage from the side so he can turn and smile and talk to the camera.

An honest question here - why the gushing love on the RR forum for one of the more obviously cranked riders? Is it just to boyish charisma that provides a suspension of disbelief?

Other than that, interesting race to tune into. Fisticuffs between riders and soigneurs taking people out!

 

[fbjim]

It's always like that. Even doped riders aren't immune to the forces of popularity and fandom. There's a reason some doped riders get forgiven and some don't.

Also speaking personally, the first tours I seriously followed were 2006 and 2007, and I got hooked. I may be projecting, but I think there's an entire generation of fan who consider this kind of thing part of the drama to an extent.

 

[topcat]

 

[zlev11]

Ba ha ha ha ha.

Back on topic. Hat trick demolition time. It's like somebody watched E3 on TV yesterday and decided I'm going solo as well, I'm going to put even more time on everyone ... so there!! I want more footage from the side so he can turn and smile and talk to the camera.

An honest question here - why the gushing love on the RR forum for one of the more obviously cranked riders? Is it just to boyish charisma that provides a suspension of disbelief?

Other than that, interesting race to tune into. Fisticuffs between riders and soigneurs taking people out!

people like the way he races. he attacks from far out and creates carnage. it's a lot more fun to watch than Team Sky suffocating every race until the final 5k.

it will be interesting to see how he's treated when he ends the Giro on Stage 8 though.

 

[fbjim]

he also had the "decency" to completely explode last year at the Tour, meaning the "most unbeatable rider" crown passed to the guy who's also on the team with ridiculous domestique support.

but really it's just the vague dynamics of sports fandom

 

[Oldermanish]

Thomas was dropped on several occasions in 2019. I'm sure he would have done more watts if he could. In 2020 he wasn't even good enough to get picked for the Tour team. If Sky already had all the ingredients everyone is using today, then why did his level fall off a cliff for a while?

Equipments and supplement, and so on, is always gradually improving. Unless I've missed some huge breakthrough in one or more of those things, they simply don't explain a sudden explosion in everybody's level. What we're currently seeing looks more like what happened in the 90's.

This and actual professional training plans can account for the uplift of much performance. The younger riders are much better trained than in the past, too.
The 90's introduced a pharma aid that everyone knew about that was poorly responded to by the UCI....and many other controlling bodies. There may be something in the peloton that is less than legal and retroactive testing may get it but this widespread parity hasn't revealed anything other than better work ethic so far.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

it will be interesting to see how he's treated when he ends the Giro on Stage 2* though.

*Fixed it for you.

 

[Extinction]

This and actual professional training plans can account for the uplift of much performance. The younger riders are much better trained than in the past, too.
The 90's introduced a pharma aid that everyone knew about that was poorly responded to by the UCI....and many other controlling bodies. There may be something in the peloton that is less than legal and retroactive testing may get it but this widespread parity hasn't revealed anything other than better work ethic so far.

Although it's hard to imagine that better equipment and training plans alone mostly account for the higher level of performance compared to a past that was rife with doping in the peloton. If the pack were let's say relatively clean, then I believe you'd expect to see clean riders with better equipment and training regimes coming nearer to the doped blood-vector enhanced performances of 20-25 years ago, not outperform them. In the specific case of Tadej, I can never forget that he has the same Mauro around him as Riccardo Ricco and Leonardo Piepoli. He's clearly very talented, but what he's doing is extraterrestrial and that in this sport is simply too much to put one's faith in.

 

[Peyroteo94]

people like the way he races. he attacks from far out and creates carnage. it's a lot more fun to watch than Team Sky suffocating every race until the final 5k.

it will be interesting to see how he's treated when he ends the Giro on Stage 8 though.

He will have 3 minutes after stage 3.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Turns out, I don't really like smiley, happy dopers, anymore than I like angry, vengeful dopers.

 

[Red Rick]

Turns out, I don't really like smiley, happy dopers, anymore than I like angry, vengeful dopers.

Ironically starting to dislike it more.

With dudes like Froome, it's like at least people knew it was joke, or they'd sooner or later admit it. Or they'd just go to "clentadopucci" ***.

Now there's not even asking questions anyore. Everything is happy, doping happened 20 years ago, all the while the most ridiculous *** is happening in front of our eyes every fuckign day.

I miss the Froome days. Instead of 3km of action for the win in the Froome days, we now get 5 seconds of Pogacar riding away seated with a smile on his face with a 50% chance of the TV directors missing it as well. Race over. Everyone knows it. And people only get excited because they bought into the cult of Pogacar. Or the cult of Vingegaard. Or the cult of MvdP

"He's so nice".

I'd also be nice if I was the biggest doper out there, everyone worshipped me, and I had assurance i wasn't getting busted any time soon.

 

[Extinction]

Now there's not even asking questions anyore. Everything is happy, doping happened 20 years ago, all the while the most ridiculous *** is happening in front of our eyes every fuckign day.

I was just about to post something along these lines, but you beat me to it. It's true, I don't hear the journos asking Tadej the hard and uncomfortable questions about his performances that was the standard praxis going back to the Festina affair. To me this indicates they don't want to rock the boat, because with a Gianetti in the organization they can't possibly have been duped. But how long can Pog keep performing like this before someone starts questioning the legitimacy of it all?