I have said this before but something happened around 2020, which offset the previous equilibrium regarding performance, enhancement and tactics.
The most overt consequence is that long-range attacking by key GC and classics contenders once again became not only viable (as it was in some cases in the 2010s) but almost the norm. In other words, level-differences in aerobic metabolic capacity were reintroduced into the peloton. And so it is once again possible to just ride away from the top tier contenders if the "big six" or whatever have that one bit of extra capacity.
During the 2010s this was not the case; the strongest riders still had to mostly concentrate their attacks on key climbs at the end of the stages or one day races. There were of course exceptions (think Cancellara and Boonen's raids; Schleck's attack, Froome in the Giro, etc). But I think the key is this: what was mythical and exceptional then is the expectation today.
The very high racing speeds and fast climb times partly confirm this paradigm shift IMHO.
At the same time, the rail-thin anorexic GC bois (think Wiggo & Froome in 2012-13) have almost disappeared. The current crop is not that borderline. Even Vingegaard is not that extreme if you ask me. You ask me, all this tinkering with weight was to gain advantages within the paradigm; watts were more or less non-enhancable, so the focus was on kilos and/or stamina/fatigue resistance (corticosteroids, for instance).
What is driving the change I have no clue. But the riders clearly metabolise more stuff aerobically, be it fats, carbs, ketone esters or whatever.
What was exposed during the Aderlass fallout is the last window into the practices. And that was good old fashioned blood doping, fairly low tech. But OTOH no heads of state were busted, so we really have only guesses.
www.procyclingstats.com
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram