Marco Pantani on the form of 1998 vs. present GC contenders on ITT

[crapna]

Marco Pantani, probably the best climber ever, would definitely destroy Alberto Contador, Andy Schleck and other big favourites on the moutains on the form he had back in 1998. He would also beat them in GC standings of any GT with a massive margin. We all know Pantani would never had won two GT's in the same year without his more than decent ITT efforts. He placed 3rd on the latter ITT's in both Giro and Tour of 1998. In addition, he lost respectively about 6 minutes against Jan Ullrich on two ITT's alltogether in Tdf.

Against pure climbers like John Gadret and Joaquim Rodriquez, il Pirata would gain more time than he lost against Jan Ullrich. No question decent time trialists like Bauke Mollema and Vincenzo Nibali would also be trailing behind Pantani.

So the question is whether Pantani would outperform Cadel Evans, Alberto Contador, Bradley Wiggins and other best time trialists among GC contenders on individual time trial. Would he beat them with the equipment he had in 1998 or would he need a modern time trial bike? Clinical assistances of the late 90's would not be allowed for present riders. Any speculation is welcome.

 

[meat puppet]

As speculations of transhistorical nature go, this one is actually interesting.

My take is that the contest between Conti and Pantani would be a tight one. Pantani clocked in approximately 47,8kmh for 53k in TDF 98 and Contador was at his best in TDF 09 when he did 50,1kmh for 42k. Both TTs were at the end of grand tour. Factoring in the difference in length, I guess Contador would beat him for a couple of seconds. Without modern TT equipment Pantani wins.

Have no science whatsoever to back this up and I did not compare the profiles or anything. Just pure shameless speculation. Guess we'll find out next year, cause there is the 52k TT beast at the end.

 

[BotanyBay]

Marco Pantani, probably the best climber ever, would definitely destroy Alberto Contador, Andy Schleck and other big favourites on the moutains on the form he had back in 1998. He would also beat them in GC standings of any GT with a massive margin. We all know Pantani would never had won two GT's in the same year without his more than decent ITT efforts. He placed 3rd on the latter ITT's in both Giro and Tour of 1998. In addition, he lost respectively about 6 minutes against Jan Ullrich on two ITT's alltogether in Tdf.

Against pure climbers like John Gadret and Joaquim Rodriquez, il Pirata would gain more time than he lost against Jan Ullrich. No question decent time trialists like Bauke Mollema and Vincenzo Nibali would also be trailing behind Pantani.

So the question is whether Pantani would outperform Cadel Evans, Alberto Contador, Bradley Wiggins and other best time trialists among GC contenders on individual time trial. Would he beat them with the equipment he had in 1998 or would he need a modern time trial bike? Clinical assistances of the late 90's would not be allowed for present riders. Any speculation is welcome.

We never really saw a "clean" Pantani, so we can never make that guess. Just look how well Floyd did (once clean).

 

[crapna]

We never really saw a "clean" Pantani

Doesn't matter at all. There is no need to make guess how "clean" Pantani was in 1998.

 

[happychappy]

If Contador could use as much EPO as Pantani in 1998? Contador would smash him on a ****ing shopping bike.

 

[Nick777]

Pantani's TT's in the 1998 Tdf.

Prologue, 5.6kms: 7.00 at 48kph, 181st @ 0.48 - winner was Boardman (54.2kph)

First TT, 58kms: 1:19:46 at 43.63kph - 33rd @ 4.21 - winner was Ullrich (46.1kph)

Second TT, 53kms: 1:06:27 at 47.8kph - 3rd @ 2.35 - winner was Ullrich (48.8kph)

Who would have thought he would lose less time to Ullrich in the faster, flatter TT? Those were wacky days...!

 

[Cloxxki]

I dont think contador is on anything near the doping programme that pantani was on in the 90"s. Taking that into account i think contador would beat pantani.

I agree.

It's more about what a doper could get away with, than their actual talent.
If I boost my blood to 55-60% HC, add in some testosteron loading, clenbuterol toning and HGH revitalisation, I don't need even need to train (years off the bike now) to spank my younger fitter version in my best performances. Sure, Contador dopes to a significant degree, but he'd bound to the 50% rule, at least in theory. And more markers are being followed. Reliable tests for all EPO version (bar HemAssist) for instance.

Contador is a very special talent in my view. Not enough to beat any in teh top-5 when clean, but on a level playing field (whether 1998 program or absolutely clean), it's hard to find a better GC contender in all of cycling's history. Yes, you'd have to bring in Lemond to take on a clean Contador I suppose.
Imagine that, a prime Lemond on today's bikes.
Schleck would cry for his mommy. Contador would pull a funny lip, Pantani exclaim something hopeless in Italian.

 

[biopass]

Sure, Contador dopes to a significant degree, but he'd bound to the 50% rule, at least in theory. And more markers are being followed. Reliable tests for all EPO version (bar HemAssist) for instance.

The 50% rule was applied back in 1997. Which is why Mr. 64% from 1996 couldnt keep the pace once the road went uphill.

 

[BrentonOfTheNorth]

The 50% rule was applied back in 1997. Which is why Mr. 64% from 1996 couldnt keep the pace once the road went uphill.

But some doctors quickly figured out they could dilute a cyclists blood after a stage, before taking the dope test. Pantani's performances didn't exactly decline after 1996.

 

[BotanyBay]

But some doctors quickly figured out they could dilute a cyclists blood after a stage, before taking the dope test. Pantani's performances didn't exactly decline after 1996.

Hence, the era of the mega-bus began.

 

[Altitude]

Nobody could touch Pantani on his 1999 Giro form. Not Contador or anyone else.

It's not fair to say "well if Contador was that doped, ect ect" because you have to take into account that while Pantani was massively doped, so were all his competitors.

Contador, while being much less doped than Pantani, is racing against a peloton that is also much less doped than it was in 1999.

 

[El Pistolero]

Nobody could touch Pantani on his 1999 Giro form. Not Contador or anyone else.

It's not fair to say "well if Contador was that doped, ect ect" because you have to take into account that while Pantani was massively doped, so were all his competitors.

Contador, while being much less doped than Pantani, is racing against a peloton that is also much less doped than it was in 1999.

Yes, and he's winning much more.

 

[Mambo95]

It's not fair to say "well if Contador was that doped, ect ect" because you have to take into account that while Pantani was massively doped, so were all his competitors.

But if you're trying to compare Pantani with Contador then it's very fair to take it into account, just as it is very fair to consider the big advances in TT aerodynamics.

My opinion is that the talent pool is similar between both periods and Contador has reputation as a good TTer and Pantani didn't. I'd fancy Contador to win this hypothetical TT.

 

[Altitude]

But if you're trying to compare Pantani with Contador then it's very fair to take it into account, just as it is very fair to consider the big advances in TT aerodynamics.

My opinion is that the talent pool is similar between both periods and Contador has reputation as a good TTer and Pantani didn't. I'd fancy Contador to win this hypothetical TT.

In a TT Contador wins everytime, that's kind of a stupid question. I was refering to a GT in general, which I should have specified.

 

[Ripper]

I dont think contador is on anything near the doping programme that pantani was on in the 90"s. Taking that into account i think contador would beat pantani.

ha ha ha ha ha

Nice wish. Perhaps dopador is on twice the sophisticated program that Pantani was.

 

[McLovin]

1998
Pentium 3
Fifa 98
Samsung CRT
Pantani program


2011
Intel Core i7-980X Extreme 3.33GHz
Fifa 2012
Samsung LED 3D
Contador Program

Let's not be naive and think Pantani had more acces to stuff like Contador.

 

[The Hitch]

1998
Pentium 3
Fifa 98
Samsung CRT
Pantani program


2011
Intel Core i7-980X Extreme 3.33GHz
Fifa 2012
Samsung LED 3D
Contador Program

Let's not be naive and think Pantani had more acces to stuff like Contador.

1 There is a far greater demand for Computers tv's and video games than there is for a doping programme.
Michelle Ferrari doesn't own a skyskraper in every city and employ millions of people.

2 Anti doping has improved significantly. What you need need to make your example more accurate would be government agencies, world agencies, dedicated to the destruction of video games/ computers/ televisions.

Would Fifa 12 be as good if video games were illegal and were being made underground?

3 Medicine hasn't improved as much as entertainment technology over the last 10 years.

 

[AcademyCC]

1 There is a far greater demand for Computers tv's and video games than there is for a doping programme.
Michelle Ferrari doesn't own a skyskraper in every city and employ millions of people.

2 Anti doping has improved significantly. What you need need to make your example more accurate would be government agencies, world agencies, dedicated to the destruction of video games/ computers/ televisions.

Would Fifa 12 be as good if video games were illegal and were being made underground?

3 Medicine hasn't improved as much as entertainment technology over the last 10 years.

Computers/TV's dont earn you millions of Euros. You are the consumer hence you are spending money, not earning it.

Anti-doping may have improved, naive to think the doping suppliers haven't evolved at the same rate.

Medicine not improving?

1) Diagnostic processes are now far more accurate and able to diagnose previously 'hidden' issues. CAT scans are one example as well as doctor's surgery rather than hospital based diagnosis, saving time and money. Surgical procedures are less invasive for many treatments (e.g. 'keyhole' surgery).

2) Ferociously scary diseases such as AIDS and cancer are now manageable in many cases, with extensions to life-expectancy unheard of 15 years ago.

 

[The Hitch]

Computers/TV's dont earn you millions of Euros. You are the consumer hence you are spending money, not earning it.

Anti-doping may have improved, naive to think the doping suppliers haven't evolved at the same rate.

Medicine not improving?

1) Diagnostic processes are now far more accurate and able to diagnose previously 'hidden' issues. CAT scans are one example as well as doctor's surgery rather than hospital based diagnosis, saving time and money. Surgical procedures are less invasive for many treatments (e.g. 'keyhole' surgery).

2) Ferociously scary diseases such as AIDS and cancer are now manageable in many cases, with extensions to life-expectancy unheard of 15 years ago.

This is some serious misreading here, or misunderstanding.

Medicine hasn't improved as much as entertainment technology over the last 10 years.

That means Medicine is improving, just not as much as the electronic good industry, has improved.

Observe for example the difference between these 2.

Ullrich did not climb Alpe d'huez.
Ullrich did not climb Alpe d'huez as fast as Pantani.

 

[AcademyCC]

This is some serious misreading here, or misunderstanding.


That means Medicine is improving, just not as much as the electronic good industry, has improved.

Observe for example the difference between these 2.

Ullrich did not climb Alpe d'huez.
Ullrich did not climb Alpe d'huez as fast as Pantani.

Sound, no worries.

 

[Polish]

1 There is a far greater demand for Computers tv's and video games than there is for a doping programme.
Michelle Ferrari doesn't own a skyskraper in every city and employ millions of people.

2 Anti doping has improved significantly. What you need need to make your example more accurate would be government agencies, world agencies, dedicated to the destruction of video games/ computers/ televisions.

Would Fifa 12 be as good if video games were illegal and were being made underground?

3 Medicine hasn't improved as much as entertainment technology over the last 10 years.

I have to disagree The Hitch...

1) Demand for Health Care/Medicine is bigger than the demand for Entertainment.

2) Anti-Doping does not slow down the development of latest generation EPO or Gene Research or any other Medical Miracle Drug than can be abused as a PED. Are the people developing video games as sharp as the people developing Wonder Drugs? Gosh, I hope not.

3) Medicine Technology has improved more than Enertainment Technology

 

[metaCYCLE]

Pantani is the Kurt Cobain of cycling.