The great thing about watching cycling over a number of decades, as many of the grumpy old men on this forum clearly have, is that one gets to see things repeat over time. It seems like just other day I was reading all those articles about how Indurain's exploits could be completely explained by advances in training, nutrition and bikes, in combination with his freakish natural attributes. A turbocharged rider bringing kids into the sport? Yes, we all miss Marco. Journalists banging on about how someone dominating the sport is "inspirational"? Got far too much in the Lance era, but maybe that's considered old news now. Teams pretending that "this time is different"? Well, all dominant teams try that one. Sometimes they even get it to stick for a while.
There's more money involved now, and we have carefully managed social media feeds to show us how lovable our heroes are. Maybe it'll take someone getting up to "7" before the appeal of watching a couple of riders in a different universe to the rest wears off, one of them managing to do it in the classics too. Are all the attacks still as interesting when nothing is really being risked as the difference in levels is so extreme? It felt like something changed in the Combloux time trial last year, even some Vingo supporters becoming a bit uneasy with the display. Then this year the nice Mr Gianetti and the smiling "kid on a bike" came back with even bigger nukes and the number of people finding it hard to suspend disbelief seems to be growing. Hard to maintain the halo while skirting the difficult questions, CO is probably just the beginning.
But the show must go on. The clinic in the 2050s will probably be fired up by arguments about a couple of riders who have had more advanced genetic engineering than the rest. Some old codger will then remind the rest that this is nothing, he was around for the days of Pog and Vingo in the 2020s. At which point a forum contrarian will disagree and point to the real villain of this age: Superman Lopez.