The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
DFA123 said:Jungels is exactly the kind of rider who should be winning big one day races. He's got an amazing engine, he climbs well, he's got a strong anaerobic kick and a half-decent sprint.Serpentin said:Jungels, donkey turned race horse. Not every guy on a team should be able to win like this. All solo wins. They din`t have the numbers today besides Ala.
Whether or not there is a team-wide doping programme at Quickstep, Jungels certainly isn't, and never has been a donkey.
thehog said:DFA123 said:Jungels is exactly the kind of rider who should be winning big one day races. He's got an amazing engine, he climbs well, he's got a strong anaerobic kick and a half-decent sprint.Serpentin said:Jungels, donkey turned race horse. Not every guy on a team should be able to win like this. All solo wins. They din`t have the numbers today besides Ala.
Whether or not there is a team-wide doping programme at Quickstep, Jungels certainly isn't, and never has been a donkey.
Agreed but you can still take drugs even with a big engine. You can iron out any weak spots or down days.
rick james said:If it was sky this thread would be 100 pages already, Hippocrates sadly
rick james said:If it was sky this thread would be 100 pages already, Hippocrates sadly
whatever you need to tell yourselfDFA123 said:Of course. You just have to look at Indurain or Ullrich to see how they can take you to the next level. One thing Jungels has though, which is very difficult (maybe impossible) to fully creae using drugs, is that rounded power profile. I always think riders who have excellent aerobic, anaerobic and sprint power are the biggest natural talents. While my suspicion of 'donkey to racehorse' falls mostly on those who just have huge aerobic engines and not much else.thehog said:DFA123 said:Jungels is exactly the kind of rider who should be winning big one day races. He's got an amazing engine, he climbs well, he's got a strong anaerobic kick and a half-decent sprint.Serpentin said:Jungels, donkey turned race horse. Not every guy on a team should be able to win like this. All solo wins. They din`t have the numbers today besides Ala.
Whether or not there is a team-wide doping programme at Quickstep, Jungels certainly isn't, and never has been a donkey.
Agreed but you can still take drugs even with a big engine. You can iron out any weak spots or down days.
I'm not telling myself anything. It's a hypothesis based on several observed factors. Well done for the great contribution to the discussion though as usual.Netserk said:whatever you need to tell yourselfDFA123 said:Of course. You just have to look at Indurain or Ullrich to see how they can take you to the next level. One thing Jungels has though, which is very difficult (maybe impossible) to fully creae using drugs, is that rounded power profile. I always think riders who have excellent aerobic, anaerobic and sprint power are the biggest natural talents. While my suspicion of 'donkey to racehorse' falls mostly on those who just have huge aerobic engines and not much else.
Not sure that's really true. They've been extremely strong in the hilly classics for a while now. In fact, with the exception of Valverde, they've been the dominant force in the Ardennes for the last few years or so.Koronin said:rick james said:If it was sky this thread would be 100 pages already, Hippocrates sadly
Um this thread was started at the beginning of this month and many of us were willing to wait and see. Now things are starting look a lot more suspicious than during the cobbled races which they have always been good in and always had teams for just many times very bad tactics. The Ardennes are a different story.
It's a hypothesis based on not verifying if talent is actually natural before claiming someone who's a bit allround is a natural talentDFA123 said:I'm not telling myself anything. It's a hypothesis based on several observed factors. Well done for the great contribution to the discussion though as usual.Netserk said:whatever you need to tell yourselfDFA123 said:Of course. You just have to look at Indurain or Ullrich to see how they can take you to the next level. One thing Jungels has though, which is very difficult (maybe impossible) to fully creae using drugs, is that rounded power profile. I always think riders who have excellent aerobic, anaerobic and sprint power are the biggest natural talents. While my suspicion of 'donkey to racehorse' falls mostly on those who just have huge aerobic engines and not much else.
DFA123 said:Not sure that's really true. They've been extremely strong in the hilly classics for a while now. In fact, with the exception of Valverde, they've been the dominant force in the Ardennes for the last few years or so.Koronin said:rick james said:If it was sky this thread would be 100 pages already, Hippocrates sadly
Um this thread was started at the beginning of this month and many of us were willing to wait and see. Now things are starting look a lot more suspicious than during the cobbled races which they have always been good in and always had teams for just many times very bad tactics. The Ardennes are a different story.
LBL they were 2nd last year, 2nd in 2015, 3rd in 2014.
Fleche they were 2nd last year, 2nd and 3rd in 2016, 2nd in 2015, 3rd in 2014.
Amstel they were 1st last year, 6th in 2016, 1st in 2015, 5th in 2014.
Wrong. At least I think what you said is wrong, it's a pretty clunky sentence you've written there. It's based on observing that doping vastly enhances aerobic power more than it does anaerobic or sprinting. Riders who only have strong aerobic power could be absolute donkeys who are massively doped up. Riders who have good all round power are much less likely to be donkeys.Red Rick said:It's a hypothesis based on not verifying if talent is actually natural before claiming someone who's a bit allround is a natural talentDFA123 said:I'm not telling myself anything. It's a hypothesis based on several observed factors. Well done for the great contribution to the discussion though as usual.Netserk said:whatever you need to tell yourselfDFA123 said:Of course. You just have to look at Indurain or Ullrich to see how they can take you to the next level. One thing Jungels has though, which is very difficult (maybe impossible) to fully creae using drugs, is that rounded power profile. I always think riders who have excellent aerobic, anaerobic and sprint power are the biggest natural talents. While my suspicion of 'donkey to racehorse' falls mostly on those who just have huge aerobic engines and not much else.
Sure; I'm certainly not vouching for them being clean. But you said the Ardennes are a different story. Which isn't the case. They have been the best all round team there for the last few years, and would have been even more dominant there than on the cobbles if it wasn't for Valverde constantly pipping them to the line. And they only let Martin go because they believe (seemingly correctly) that Alaphilippe is better than him.Koronin said:DFA123 said:Not sure that's really true. They've been extremely strong in the hilly classics for a while now. In fact, with the exception of Valverde, they've been the dominant force in the Ardennes for the last few years or so.Koronin said:rick james said:If it was sky this thread would be 100 pages already, Hippocrates sadly
Um this thread was started at the beginning of this month and many of us were willing to wait and see. Now things are starting look a lot more suspicious than during the cobbled races which they have always been good in and always had teams for just many times very bad tactics. The Ardennes are a different story.
LBL they were 2nd last year, 2nd in 2015, 3rd in 2014.
Fleche they were 2nd last year, 2nd and 3rd in 2016, 2nd in 2015, 3rd in 2014.
Amstel they were 1st last year, 6th in 2016, 1st in 2015, 5th in 2014.
A bunch of those podiums you mentioned are Dan Martin who's not there. He's at UAE and not exactly preforming very well which actually may lead to more questions.
The Hegelian said:There's no way Jungels was ever a donkey.
And it's not surprising that he can ride a good LBL. Mind you, he was dropped in AG and has hardly shown the kind of form that made this look possible.
On top of everything else this spring, and given the history of the sport, at least half an eyebrow ought to be raised. It's so hard to win even one classic - there are so many genuine contenders who target specific races, and the level is so high. Even more so for a monument.
The 'good tactics' argument is a bit short sighted - you need the legs as well; amazing, amazing legs to pull off a long range attack in a field of champions, many of whom have peaked for that day.
When so many QS'ers have such amazing, amazing legs, well, it's definitely eyebrow raising.
rick james said:If it was sky this thread would be 100 pages already, Hippocrates sadly
Koronin said:The Hegelian said:There's no way Jungels was ever a donkey.
And it's not surprising that he can ride a good LBL. Mind you, he was dropped in AG and has hardly shown the kind of form that made this look possible.
On top of everything else this spring, and given the history of the sport, at least half an eyebrow ought to be raised. It's so hard to win even one classic - there are so many genuine contenders who target specific races, and the level is so high. Even more so for a monument.
The 'good tactics' argument is a bit short sighted - you need the legs as well; amazing, amazing legs to pull off a long range attack in a field of champions, many of whom have peaked for that day.
When so many QS'ers have such amazing, amazing legs, well, it's definitely eyebrow raising.
For me, it's the entire body of work this year where the eyebrow has to be raised. Then add in the factor that Dan Martin has been nowhere to be found this year leads to another eyebrow being raised.
Huapango said:Koronin said:The Hegelian said:There's no way Jungels was ever a donkey.
And it's not surprising that he can ride a good LBL. Mind you, he was dropped in AG and has hardly shown the kind of form that made this look possible.
On top of everything else this spring, and given the history of the sport, at least half an eyebrow ought to be raised. It's so hard to win even one classic - there are so many genuine contenders who target specific races, and the level is so high. Even more so for a monument.
The 'good tactics' argument is a bit short sighted - you need the legs as well; amazing, amazing legs to pull off a long range attack in a field of champions, many of whom have peaked for that day.
When so many QS'ers have such amazing, amazing legs, well, it's definitely eyebrow raising.
For me, it's the entire body of work this year where the eyebrow has to be raised. Then add in the factor that Dan Martin has been nowhere to be found this year leads to another eyebrow being raised.
I saw nothing strange about today, nor in any of the other classics I've watched this year. What I don't see is ridiculous performances by riders who used to suck. Dan Martin may not be getting the same horsepower in his bike now that he doesn't ride for JV anymore (and with a new UCI head).
proffate said:doesn't it make sense for a weaker rider on a stronger team to be able to nab results they couldn't have accomplished riding totally solo? IOW the QS boys should all be punching above their weight, benefiting from team tactics and circumstance, and when they move to another team their results would suffer.