That is the article where you can read :
Sans compter l'évolution du matériel. "Au temps d'Armstrong, les vélos n'étaient même pas en carbone", rappelle-t-il.
(Not to mention the evolution of the material. "In Armstrong's time, bikes weren't even carbon," he recalls.)
You can measure how much of a joke is that Frédéric Grappe ! He claims any lies that fits his goal.
Everybody on this forum knows that carbon frames date back to the 80's and were well perfected within a few years.
Remember this is the same Frédéric Grappe who claimed in L'Equipe in 2003 that the dominance of Armstrong in the Tour de France
was the result of the better efficiency of his pedalling style with higher rpm than his opponents, dismissing any doping but omitting to say that he was on L.A.'s payroll at the time.
NOW MY OPINION (Grappe's goal) :
Frédéric Grappe is very much annoyed by the fact that Vayer's claims of extra normal performances have been gaining acceptance during this 2023 Tour de France.
Vayer himself does not do the cycling power calculations, he has Portoleau to do them for him and there are other serious people who obtain the same results like Mihai Simion (climbing-records.com) or Ammattipyoraily.
Everybody agrees that Vayer has an abrasive personality and may tend to oversell his viewpoint, but he says lots of truths and I recommend his latest article in "cyclisme-dopage.com".
Préambule - Les positions de Mohoric...
www.cyclisme-dopage.com
It's in French but any translation website should do a good job on it.
I can speak French so I'm fine. But thanks.
If we ignore Vayer's trollish inclinations & other controversies for a second, one of the main issues he has faced in terms of legitimacy is he's very insistent in portraying Gaudu, Pinot & the French riders as clean, yet
their estimated power numbers over the past couple of years (Gaudu in particular) have occasionally veered into the suspect category of Vayer's own doping gauge where he calculates the spectrum between tolerable versus "suspect, miraculous & mutant".
That's an issue FDJ face as well as watts per kilo estimates in the peloton go higher & higher. Hence why I can understand a certain vested interest exists for men like Frédéric Grappe to downplay the power element (because his own riders fall into the higher categories) & refocus the debate on the seconds per km gains in the ITT & overall time gaps. But that doesn't mean he's wrong about Vingegaard. Beyond the usual stuff about 'technology', no one has actually really explained the how & why Lance Armstrong said a rider couldn't compete for the Tour clean 20 years ago whilst current 'clean' riders are (at best) equalling Armstrong's times & (at worst) often smashing them.
It's incongruous & the onus falls on the actors of the sport to convince us of their honesty, i.e. because benefit of the doubt should no longer exist in this sport. In my mind when a performance looks ridiculous & is too good to be true (with insane time gaps as well), it most likely is.