I have little faith in Padun repeating his performance at EF, but JV is doing his job as a hypeman well, if that's true we'll see some more Santi Padun performances.
Why do you assume he would sign him only if his performances were possibly clean?say what you want about JV but he obviously ran tests on Padun to see if his performances last year were possible clean and he decided that they were, or else he wouldn't have signed him.
I don't think he did. He did say it was somewhat irrelevant.Didn't an earlier incarnation of JV say that VO2 Max was meaningless, or am I misremembering?
Sort of. On the Cycling in Alignment pod, he says he's always a bit dismissive of high Vo2 guys, like Gaimon, cause it reminds him of himself, and he struggled so much with the non-numbers part of cycling, like pack positioning and tactics. Says a similar thing about Dekker in a slightly different way, that he was so good he never had to learn how to ride in the cross winds even though he's Dutch, he'd just brute force everything.Didn't an earlier incarnation of JV say that VO2 Max was meaningless, or am I misremembering?
As noted when Villalobos was first sent to the naughty step: "At the time of the sample collection the Rider was contracted to the UCI Continental Team Aevolo."The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) announces that the UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal (the Tribunal) has rendered its decision in the case involving the Mexican rider Mr. Luis Ricardo Villalobos Hernandez.
The Tribunal found the rider guilty of an anti-doping rule violation (presence of GHRP-6*) and imposed a four-year period of ineligibility on the rider.
In accordance with the Procedural Rules of the Tribunal, the decision will shortly be published on the UCI website.
*GHRP-6 is a Prohibited Substance listed under class S2.2 (Peptide hormones and their releasing factors) of the Prohibited List which is maintained by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and adopted by the UCI.
Also over 1:30 slower than Quintana in 2017. That said, back then the Blockhaus stage was almost an unipublic stage, so most of the difference is probably because of this stage being much harder before the final climb.I dunno about de Gendt (never thought he was clean anyway) but this Giro actually feels a lot cleaner. the front group only did 5.92 w/kg today on Blockhaus. Hindley did 6.41 on Piancavallo in 2020 (similar length climb). that's a huge difference.
yeah that's tough to compare, todays stage was a much harder profile and almost 2 hours longer in duration. still I think Quintana's time only comes out to 6.1 w/kg, about right for the best climber in the world as he was back then, but still not even close to whatever the hell was going on for that Piancavallo stage (which might've been an even harder stage than today).Also over 1:30 slower than Quintana in 2017. That said, back then the Blockhaus stage was almost an unipublic stage, so most of the difference is probably because of this stage being much harder before the final climb.
We've seen two rolling rest days, three bog-standard sprint stages, one uphill sprint stage, one interesting technical TT, one damp squib of a mountain top finish and one not so damp. I'd be wary of anyone drawing any conclusions from that lot.More than happy with what I've seen in the Giro so far to be honest.
From my perspective yesterdays stage and the TJV stage win were about as utterly believable an athletic performance as you'll see. So were the sprint victories. Of course, that doesn't mean there aren't a few sleeper agents out there waiting to pounce after a race day.We've seen two rolling rest days, three bog-standard sprint stages, one uphill sprint stage, one interesting technical TT, one damp squib of a mountain top finish and one not so damp. I'd be wary of anyone drawing any conclusions from that lot.