Jonas Vingegaard Rasmussen, the new alpha mutant

[Rackham]

Froome never doped like the other guys, and his anomalous salbutamol finding was shown to be very flawed by an actual scientific study (I guess this forum has its fair share of anti-science conspiracy theorists though)

His performances weren't that abnormal either, not compared to 1990s and Armstrong, and now Pogacar and Vingegaard.

So yes you're correct that it's obvious with the huge time trial wins of Pogacar and Vingegaard and other performances which haven't been seen since 20 years ago that something is amiss. But this constant comparison with Sky and Froome, Thomas etc with their modest performances is just crazy, irrational and simply makes this whole forum the joke that many outsiders consider it is.

Irrational unscientific lunatics with nationalist agendas mostly, rather that sensible considered rational/scientfic arguments about the evidence before us.

With regards to Froome & Sky, it's all relative, i.e. relative to their rivals of that era.

The salbutamol was the tip of the iceberg (& absolutely doping, aka something others were suspended for). If whatever cocktail Sky had was good enough in the 2010's to smash the peloton, then it's all they needed.

If current stratospheric performances from Pog & Vinge make Froome & Sky look like amateurs by comparison, it's simply evidence of an out-of-control arms race constantly pushing the boundaries forward. We know this because Jumbo & Vingegaard have just supplanted Pog & UAE in a similar manner within their own little duel, i.e. when applying your logic re Sky, Vingegaard made Pog's LPDBF 2020 look "human" compared to what he achieved on Tuesday.

It's escalation.

 

[iceblink]

With regards to Froome & Sky, it's all relative, i.e. relative to their rivals of that era.

The salbutamol was the tip of the iceberg (& absolutely doping, aka something others were suspended for). If whatever cocktail Sky had was good enough in the 2010's to smash the peloton, then it's all they needed.

If current stratospheric performances from Pog & Vinge make Froome & Sky look like amateurs by comparison, it's simply evidence of an out-of-control arms race constantly pushing the boundaries forward. We know this because Jumbo & Vingegaard have just supplanted Pog & UAE in a similar manner within their own little duel, i.e. when applying your logic re Sky, Vingegaard made Pog's LPDBF 2020 look "human" compared to what he achieved on Tuesday.

It's escalation.

That's not a very scientific analysis. Like I said earlier...

 

[Red Rick]

I guess Dumoulin refused the special treatment or did DSM allready used it on him and they could't improve any further?

I don't think the 2017 era Sunweb stuff is what makes pigs fly now. I don't think Dumo didn't try it but maybe he wasn't a mega responder, or the overtraining and non Clinical factors were just more important anyway

 

[Salvarani]

Hilarious.

 

[meat puppet]

Great post. Exactly my problem. I expected up to 30 seconds, maybe on a unreal day for either of them and then he smashes everybody to pieces. I wouldn't be typing this last year but this TT was just... If it were 50km he would put even more minutes into everybody. And then I hear something about precision cornering. Ok. He would have destroyed Ganna on a flat TT and he weighs less than 60kg.

Bet you a tenner that peak Ganna still beats him in a flat 50k TT, though.

As for re: Sky, it's funny to see the same old talking points repeated. Froome's performances may have been milder than what we witness today. But in 2013 he put 2000s avgs to shame. Which leads us to the point: the level of analysis back then was a lot higher than now. Missing doc veloclinic in particular. Unique substance and style.

Tour de France 2013 stage 8 DpVAM: AX3 The Warning Shot | Cyclismas

 

[danielovichdk2]

You are all having tunnel vision with regard to Jonas.

Typical clinch stuff. No facts. No data. Pure subjective statements.

Quote me when you have solid proof. Please.

 

[Aimar16]

I guess Dumoulin refused the special treatment or did DSM allready used it on him and they could't improve any further?

He was Kittel's fourth man in the train and went on to become a Grand Tour winner. That's quite a transformation, isn't it?

 

[noob]

https://ekstrabladet.dk/sport/cykling/vi-bliver-noedt-til-at-stole-paa-jonas/9870042

He's hilariously two-faced

 

[magliaroz]

I guess Dumoulin refused the special treatment or did DSM allready used it on him and they could't improve any further?

Whatever goes on in Sunweb/DSM, it seems to take a big toll on cyclists, both physically and mentally. Hirschi, who is way younger than Dumo, is the pale shadow of himself since he left. The breakfast of champions UAE gives to Pogacar clearly isn't working on him.

 

[Rechtschreibfehler]

You are all having tunnel vision with regard to Jonas.

Typical clinch stuff. No facts. No data. Pure subjective statements.

Quote me when you have solid proof. Please.

You may be skeptical about the intepretation of the data and facts, but it's not that the argument isn't based on them. The brute fact in this case being that the speeds and performances are just at the same level or beyond the 90ies when it comes to Vinegegaard especially. That begs explanation, and the explanations given so far are either the same stories that used to be smoke bombs in the past, or ricidulous stuff like better cornering or having 500g less *** in your stomach.
The times clocked in cycling are measured, and power output is calculated, this is only as subjective as the instruments used to measure them. In this case the question is how good the power estimations are, but there are zero estimates put out by anyone that don't scream the 90ies are back. There is no subjective reasoning to these observations. The only subjective aspect I can make out here is the level of doubt you approach them with.

 

[Pantani_lives]

So it is possible to turn a donkey into a racehorse after all. Jonas Vingegaard, a guy who didn't show any talent before the age of twenty, has been turned into an unbeatable Tour winner, producing wattages that have never been seen before. The media, UCI and ASO want us to believe it's all because of the better nutrition and the better bikes at Jumbo-Visma. Cycling fans say it doesn't matter, because the others are doing the same. But let's not kid each other. Le cyclisme à deux (ou trois) vitesses is a fact. So what is he on?

A. EPO, testosterone and other detectable stuff?

No, that 's old school. He would have been caught years ago.

B. Blood doping?

A blood bag with your own blood on the resting day is still a possibility, but the introduction of the biological passport has made that harder as well. The same can be said about HGH.

C. Mechanical doping?

The stories of the hidden motors are conspiracy theories on the Internet. You could wonder about the battery in the electronic derailleur, but all the teams have that. The bike scanning is meant to prevent this kind of cheating.

D. Synthetic drugs?

CERA was the notorious example of a synthetic drug in cycling. THG was a designer drug in track and field. These can be variants of older forms of doping, but they're not specified on the list of banned substances and they can be designed in labs to avoid detection. Maybe there are new types that haven't been discovered by the authorities.

E. Gene doping?

Those who use the word mutant might be closer to the truth than they realize. It isn't science fiction. Mice and monkeys have been used in labs to test the insertion of EPO genes and IGF-1. Stem cell doping is another possibility, but that's still in its experimental phase. Athletes who undergo a miraculous transformation might be the result of gene doping, but there is no proof of this.

So what's the truth? You can take your pick. Maybe we'll have to wait another twenty years to find out.

 

[Vudy]

So it is possible to turn a donkey into a racehorse after all. Jonas Vingegaard, a guy who didn't show any talent before the age of twenty, has been turned into an unbeatable Tour winner, producing wattages that have never been seen before. The media, UCI and ASO want us to believe it's all because of the better nutrition and the better bikes at Jumbo-Visma. Cycling fans say it doesn't matter, because the others are doing the same. But let's not kid each other. Le cyclisme à deux (ou trois) vitesses is a fact. So what is he on?

A. EPO, testosterone and other detectable stuff?

No, that 's old school. He would have been caught years ago.

B. Blood doping?

A blood bag with your own blood on the resting day is still a possibility, but the introduction of the biological passport has made that harder as well. The same can be said about HGH.

C. Mechanical doping?

The stories of the hidden motors are conspiracy theories on the Internet. You could wonder about the battery in the electronic derailleur, but all the teams have that. The bike scanning is meant to prevent this kind of cheating.

D. Synthetic drugs?

CERA was the notorious example of a synthetic drug in cycling. THG was a designer drug in track and field. These can be variants of older forms of doping, but they're not specified on the list of banned substances and they can be designed in labs to avoid detection. Maybe there are new types that haven't been discovered by the authorities.

E. Gene doping?

Those who use the word mutant might be closer to the truth than they realize. It isn't science fiction. Mice and monkeys have been used in labs to test the insertion of EPO genes and IGF-1. Stem cell doping is another possibility, but that's still in its experimental phase. Athletes who undergo a miraculous transformation might be the result of gene doping, but there is no proof of this.

So what's the truth? You can take your pick. Maybe we'll have to wait another twenty years to find out.

Whatever it was, it started one year after Roglič has failed to win the TdF.

 

[Blobs]

So it is possible to turn a donkey into a racehorse after all. Jonas Vingegaard, a guy who didn't show any talent before the age of twenty, has been turned into an unbeatable Tour winner, producing wattages that have never been seen before. The media, UCI and ASO want us to believe it's all because of the better nutrition and the better bikes at Jumbo-Visma. Cycling fans say it doesn't matter, because the others are doing the same. But let's not kid each other. Le cyclisme à deux (ou trois) vitesses is a fact. So what is he on?

Marco Pantani?

 

[Riek s]

Marco Pantani?

Depends on what you assume the accuracy of those 7.5-7.6W/kg are from the TT.

But more importantly, those numbers (whether accurate or overestimated) were done on a TT bike, which in itself gives on avg a 10% power loss. For some it might be more, for some less. Even if we only assume a 5% drop (which ofcourse i don't believe for Vingegaard, gives about 20-22W (based on 400-440W).

Best numbers of Pantani are still from a roadbike and i believe are around 7W/kg for 30+minutes? (as absolute best?)

ChronosWatts.com

chronoswatts.com Chronos and Watts simulations for the best cycling performances, during the mythic climbs of The Tour de France, Giro and Vuelta.

www.chronoswatts.com

 

[Blobs]

Depends on what you assume the accuracy of those 7.5-7.6W/kg are from the TT.

But more importantly, those numbers (whether accurate or overestimated) were done on a TT bike, which in itself gives on avg a 10% power loss. For some it might be more, for some less. Even if we only assume a 5% drop (which ofcourse i don't believe for Vingegaard, gives about 20-22W (based on 400-440W).

Best numbers of Pantani are still from a roadbike and i believe are around 7.4W/kg? (as absolute best?)

But for a longer time, so a stronger overall performance by Pantani

 

[ontheroad]

Whatever it was, it started one year after Roglič has failed to win the TdF.

The real transformation occurred after the Tour 2020. His performance level had spiked dramatically in the spring of 2021 and that years Tour was when he announced his arrival in the big time when he finished second on GC. Just looking at his TT results would back that up.

Sep 2018: Olympias 81st
Feb 2019: Andalucia 123rd
Apr 2019: Itzulia 43rd
May 2019: Romandie 53rd
Aug 2019: Denmark 7th
Nov 2020: Vuelta 105th
Feb 2021: UAE 13th
Apr 2021: Itzulia 3rd
Jun 2021: Dauphine 7th
Jul 2021: TDF 3rd

None of those results indicated that he was close to being a top TTer let alone capable of smashing the top riders by 3 minutes plus over 22km.

 

[Riek s]

But for a longer time, so a stronger overall performance by Pantani

yeah, sorry i updated my post while you were responding .
Indeed, best i could find was 7W/kg for alpe duez which was a 30+min effort, i assume his 20min effort would be 7.4W/k

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Depends on what you assume the accuracy of those 7.5-7.6W/kg are from the TT.

But more importantly, those numbers (whether accurate or overestimated) were done on a TT bike, which in itself gives on avg a 10% power loss. For some it might be more, for some less. Even if we only assume a 5% drop (which ofcourse i don't believe for Vingegaard, gives about 20-22W (based on 400-440W).

Best numbers of Pantani are still from a roadbike and i believe are around 7W/kg for 30+minutes? (as absolute best?)

ChronosWatts.com

chronoswatts.com Chronos and Watts simulations for the best cycling performances, during the mythic climbs of The Tour de France, Giro and Vuelta.

www.chronoswatts.com

Some of those w/kg estimations are wrong. 6.88 w/kg on Hautacam would mean VAM of 1950 m/h or sth. Even Riis didn't come close to these numbers on Hautacam.
6.75 w/kg for 28'20'' on Chalet Reynard was closer to believable (VAM of 1874 m/h is more likely in 6.6-6.7 w/kg range though). It was a part of the whole Ventoux so very impressive anyway.

Would be interesting to know Pantani's best climbing for a 20-25 minute climb (I suppose his best performance could be close to 7 w/kg so about 1950-2000 m/h for 20 minutes). Vinge reached about 6.8 w/kg for this period during the TT.

 

[hrotha]

None of those results indicated that he was close to being a top TTer

You have to understand, there are no mountains in Denmark

 

[Kwibus]

We do actually have evidence they're juiced (although we lack the specifics regarding how), i.e. it's right there in front of our eyes with their inhumane level.

The problem with the current times is that people think their gut feeling is the truth and judge people on this. I prefer the 'not guilty until proven' more.

 

[Kwibus]

It was a pleasure checking the clinic again. I refuse to become like everyone here and since Salvarani was on to me from the beginning I failed my mission to derail this thread!. He knew that I tried was derailing this thread, allthough I have no idea what he is actually means with this? I feel like I'm part of a conspiracy theory now! Cool!

Anyways everyone have a nice day and life!

 

[The Clogger]

None of those results indicated that he was close to being a top TTer let alone capable of smashing the top riders by 3 minutes plus over 22km.

Isn't that how it always is when a cyclist rises to the top?
Pogacar went from losing consistently to Anton Charming in TT's to winning the Tour de France 2020

 

[zastomito]

It's always eye opening to see people who were so convinced that godlike numbers are the proof of doping (same as producing contender after contender seemingly at will, Jumbo, Ineos) defend even more preposterous performance just because they like the guy more or is their countryman. Eye opening and sad. Remember when Race Radio was lost to Sky. Now other distinguished forum members are falling in line with the "sport is clean" mantra.
Again with the shtick that started with Lance and lived on through Sky/Ineos and is alive and kicking with Jumbo. Better nutrition, better pillows, more time on the bike, French are just lazy drunks. If only Lance remembered to empty his bowels and talk about it no one would question Sestriere.
When I see the drivel spouted here it almost makes me wish he held out for longer, bribed who he needed to bribe, payed off Walsh or whatever, he might have kept his 7 titles. He's only fault is that he basically gave teams blueprint how to not get scrutinized. Play dumb, don't let your rider speak, spread some *** science but above all, don't rub anyone the wrong way, in the media that is.
Remember also when 6 W/kg was borderline suspicious. Then they started putting it into context (tailwind, short effort, rest day, it is 3rd week but it was an easy Tour). All of that is nonsense, of course (check this forum for Froome on Ventoux 2013). Now we're contemplating if it's acceptable for a rider that is, by his own admission, holding back, to output 7.3 W/kg? Defenders say 6.8, like it makes it so much more believable.
If only French weren't so lazy.

 

[hrotha]

6 W/kg was never an absolute limit for all kinds of climbs, it was always specifically for long efforts. They're putting out crazy watts out there but that's not it

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Defenders say 6.8, like it makes it so much more believable.
If only French weren't so lazy.

I'm not a Vinge defender. He indeed went considerably beyond 7 w/kg on the steepest part and his average after the descent so from the last 20-21 minutes (which can be considered a medium-length effort) was likely around 6.8 w/kg (based on his words and VAM/power-to-mass formula). Obviously 6.8 w/kg is still crazy, probably the biggest number I've seen for this duration in modern era (i.e. post EPO-peak). The TT being a standalone effort could help but OTOH isn't riding on a TT bike a bit detrimental to one's power? (which would make this even more unbelievable).