• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

Page 224 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
There's no flipping way cycling was a sport during the Sky years. That whole operation was as insulting as anything we've seen in the last three decades.
The power levels were a lot lower during the Sky era even though they were a bigger farce overall with their anatomic jock strap races, swimming coaches, garbage retrospective explanations like Badzilla or whatever inane nonsense that they came up with. I definitely prefer Pogacar over these guys as he knows how to ride his bike unlike Froome who learned how to ride his bike at a pro level when he was around 32
 
Cycling is stuck with a Lance 2.0 who is "likable", instagrammable, and also does the classics.

In principle someone who loves racing and watching racing should be excited to observe a very complete rider do their thing but to me this is just ridiculous. Regardless of who is the kingpin.

As for how long will this era last - well, as long as the cash keeps flowing, everyone gets their cut and the boat is not rocked too much. Probably only to get crazier from here.
 
Sky years, despite issues known now from then, were at lot more believable. Having a train do the pacing, knowing your own limits perfectly to slowly strangle others might not be exciting but it's a lot more realistic. Sure, attacks all over do well on TV but for getting the best out of yourself it's not. Up hill cycling is more like a TT. Let domestiques put others just above threshold while you are just below and cord will break and you gain time. Boring? Probably. Realistic? More so than Pog and Vingegaard in recent years. So do you want entertainment or best human performance?
 
Sky years, despite issues known now from then, were at lot more believable. Having a train do the pacing, knowing your own limits perfectly to slowly strangle others might not be exciting but it's a lot more realistic. Sure, attacks all over do well on TV but for getting the best out of yourself it's not. Up hill cycling is more like a TT. Let domestiques put others just above threshold while you are just below and cord will break and you gain time. Boring? Probably. Realistic? More so than Pog and Vingegaard in recent years. So do you want entertainment or best human performance?

This is absolutely true.

When people call long distance attacks & huge margins 'real ciclismo', what they're really saying is they're nostalgic of the 1990's EPO & coke addicts shooting up the cols like they were on the flat.

It's bread & circuses.
 
Sky years, despite issues known now from then, were at lot more believable. Having a train do the pacing, knowing your own limits perfectly to slowly strangle others might not be exciting but it's a lot more realistic. Sure, attacks all over do well on TV but for getting the best out of yourself it's not. Up hill cycling is more like a TT. Let domestiques put others just above threshold while you are just below and cord will break and you gain time. Boring? Probably. Realistic? More so than Pog and Vingegaard in recent years. So do you want entertainment or best human performance?
In a vacuum, sure. Sky folks were pushing way less power compared to today. However, considering who were in the Sky train, I think these guys are more realistic than former track riders or nobodies who could not ride in a straight line before joining the Sky train.