So, Valverde pushing bigger numbers at the age of 40 in order to keep up, than what he was pushing "full dope" is making the peloton suspicious, and not the fact that a 40 year old now is seemingly capable of pushing bigger numbers than when he was in his 20s in a doped era? Errr what? I don't believe statements like this for a second, because i refuse to believe a 40 year old being physically more competitive than when he was winning 10 or more years ago. Neither do i believe statements of Bernal in the 2020 TDF that he was pushing his best numbers, while being dropped by a group of some 50 riders. Statements like that are nice to implicate other riders and teams, but i don't buy them for a second, or at least not at face value void of context. Bardet saying he's pushing bigger numbers in the TDF, but for the first time in years, he's able to follow the best climbers.
I also have an issue with the theory that covid testing is acting as a cover for dope testing. Unless teams, riders, trainers had a magic 8 ball telling them when covid would break out, when lockdowns would start/stop and when cycling would resume, it doesn't make sense. Nobody could predict how serious the pandemic would turn out, nobody could predict how long it would last. It would be very brash to assume it could be used as a cover. It is my understanding that winners are still being tested, and samples are still being kept on ice. Do we assume that in case samples of 2020-2021 get retested as soon as the pandemic has subsided, that we'll be seeing one positive test after another? I doubt it. That doesn't mean people can't be doping, but i don't believe they are taking chances because covid made for less tests.
Wind, rain, race conditions, motorpacing and tactics can have a huge impact on a single race, on climb speeds, average speeds etc. But you can't assume this to be the case when every race is faster, when every climb is faster, when all power outputs are higher.
Could a prolonged training and rest period during lockdown have improved the base level? Riders who were able/allowed to train outside during lockdown clearly benefited from lockdown, as opposed to riders who couldn't. I feel this hasn't been debated in full as opposed to the easy explanation. One doesn't have to exclude the other, but it could certainly explain part of the phenomena we've seen since covid. Better overall fitness would also improve energy savings during a race, having riders start a climb more fresh, much like a shorter stage would, or a succession of easier stages.
Do we know the exact effects of ketones? With a team like Sunweb kicking Hirschi, i have to assume they really want to stay on the clean side. As such, are guys like Bardet or Benoot going to be performing worse than they were before? Was Benoot underperforming during covid compared to other riders? For me, his PN performance was very much in line with what could be expected, neither was he outclassed by the competition. He was also part of "record breaking climbs". So why is Sunweb kicking Hirschi, but not Benoot? Can we assume Benoot is clean (i do for one).
It's clear that the younger generation is showing more relative "progress". Pogacar, Hindley, Evenepoel, Almeida, Hirschi... What do we know about scouting and training? I've often made this argument before, and i've only seen info basically backing this up. Riders that have been coming out of the U23 the past +/- 3 years, have had more/better training, equipment, intel, nutrition, coaching, power meters, lab tests... And better scouting. I don't know about other countries, but in Belgium, the national federation started scouting specifically for young talents over 5 years ago. Specifically on climbing abilities (which had been grossly neglected in Belgium for decades). Guys like Lambrecht & Evenepoel were basically posterboys of this management. When i hear stories of the way current +/-20 year olds have been training for years, how professionally they've been coached it is a night and day difference with the older generation, where riders were told by their fathers to train long and hard. No power meters, no lab tests, no adapted nutrition. Stories of wasted talents, overtrained too early and endangering their careers have become much more scarce. If you combine better scouting with better management at an early age, you get more talents breaking through at a younger age at a higher level (coming out of U23 ranks, closer to their potential ceiling). It would also mean they have less relative growth ahead of them. In Evenepoel's case, he's been training and managed since a far earlier age to be a top athlete, since he played football for Anderlecht and PSV, where physical guidance was far more professional than what kids riding bikes get at an early age.
It's also remarkable that none of the jawdropping performances are coming from the old generation. In previous doped era's there were always old geezers with nothing to lose, trying to go for glory. If they got caught, well, their careers were over anyway regardless. If they didn't get caught, even better. But not even the second rate old-timers (the most suspicious performers) are even close to keeping up. When there is a new wonder drug, first i look for are 35 year old break-through performers. They have the connections, they have the experience, and most importantly they have nothing to lose. To be clear i'm not saying all dopers are old timers, but when none of the big performances come from them, then i'm leaning towards something else than a new miracle drug. Where are the Piepolis, the Perauds, the Horners, etc...
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram