• 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 227 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Extinction

Extinction

Jan 8, 2020
4,754
5,367
16,180
Read the article about Pogacar not really beating Pantani on PdB by such an insanely large margin. Because when you consider all the aero/fiction improvements he saved and estimated 40 watts. So Tadej would go as fast with 40 less watts, right? For isn't it that less resistence and better aerodynamics just means at a certain wattage you go as fast as the higher wattage that would be required with more drag and chain friction? But these improvements themselves don't give you extra watts.You still have to physiologically produce them. Yet Pog sustained 7.27 (adjusted) watts per kilo on PdB, which is an absolute power value and can't be explained by the tech considerations, right?
 
D

Divergence

Feb 27, 2023
429
585
3,880
Extinction said:
Read the article about Pogacar not really beating Pantani on PdB by such an insanely large margin. Because when you consider all the aero/fiction improvements he saved and estimated 40 watts. So Tadej would go as fast with 40 less watts, right? For isn't it that less resistence and better aerodynamics just means at a certain wattage you go as fast as the higher wattage that would be required with more drag and chain friction? But these improvements themselves don't give you extra watts.You still have to physiologically produce them. Yet Pog sustained 7.27 (adjusted) watts per kilo on PdB, which is an absolute power value and can't be explained by the tech considerations, right?
Click to expand...
They are saying Pantani did almost the same W/kg but was 4min down because of the road conditions, aerodynamics and tires.
 
  • Wow
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: E_F_, Monoxidator and noob
S

shadowrider

May 18, 2023
706
590
3,580
Rechtschreibfehler said:
Don't they use scanners for the stage winners bikes now? Don't motors produce heat as well? Could that not be easily defected as well? Like by fans, journalists, the officials if they want?
Click to expand...
Yes, only when/while thinking about the "classic" electric motors. As they are used in the electric bikes and speedelecs used by the public. But since a few years there are a lot of technological systems that can support pedaling, systems that can hardly or not be detected with traditional scans. The question is also whether the UCI wants the cheating to be exposed.

Even in traditional doping research, doping products are constantly found to be present in the samples. But always in minimal quantities, below the permissible limit. This is extremely frustrating for the scientists and professors who determine this and realize that microdosing systems do indeed cause doping abuse. But here too, the UCI refuses to adjust the limits or to allow more extensive research methods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noob
MartinGT

MartinGT

Jul 4, 2010
5,552
1,151
20,680
Extinction said:
Read the article about Pogacar not really beating Pantani on PdB by such an insanely large margin. Because when you consider all the aero/fiction improvements he saved and estimated 40 watts. So Tadej would go as fast with 40 less watts, right? For isn't it that less resistence and better aerodynamics just means at a certain wattage you go as fast as the higher wattage that would be required with more drag and chain friction? But these improvements themselves don't give you extra watts.You still have to physiologically produce them. Yet Pog sustained 7.27 (adjusted) watts per kilo on PdB, which is an absolute power value and can't be explained by the tech considerations, right?
Click to expand...

Pog didn't even bother with aero shoe covers for he final TT because he's that hard
 
  • Love
Reactions: E_F_
E_F_

E_F_

Jul 16, 2024
686
800
3,680
Listen to https://lnk.to/GhostInTheMachine to get a clear understanding of why there's basically no good reason to believe that motors haven't been used to win the biggest races.

www.cyclingweekly.com

'Getting away with it is shockingly easy': Five reasons why motor doping suspicions won't go away

Having spent over a year investigating motor doping, Chris Marshall-Bell examines the rumours and unanswered questions that remain
www.cyclingweekly.com www.cyclingweekly.com

Often teams went to races without their bikes being scanned, when they did it was perhaps just one of the teammembers, even in the best case only one bike per rider, and further more the scanners only detect magnetic radiation which is shielded by carbon... So there's basically no testing.
 
Last edited:
Extinction

Extinction

Jan 8, 2020
4,754
5,367
16,180
Divergence said:
They are saying Pantani did almost the same W/kg but was 4min down because of the road conditions, aerodynamics and tires.
Click to expand...
The article gives no watts/kg estimates for Pantani and Pogacar. I've heard Pogacar did the equivalent of 7.27 (unseemly). So even assuming a full EPO jacked Pantani hit 7, the tech improvements still don't explain how Pogacar reached such a high output, which can only be generated not given. This was my point. Whereas Pantani with the same tech advancements of today with the same watts/kg would have been faster, but still slower than Pogacar by a fair bit, because a supposed clean Tadej was simply stronger. Although it doesn't seem likely Pog wasn't enhanced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noob
D

Divergence

Feb 27, 2023
429
585
3,880
Extinction said:
The article gives no watts/kg estimates for Pantani and Pogacar. I've heard Pogacar did the equivalent of 7.27 (unseemly). So even assuming a full EPO jacked Pantani hit 7, the tech improvements still don't explain how Pogacar reached such a high output, which can only be generated not given. This was my point. Whereas Pantani with the same tech advancements of today with the same watts/kg would have been faster, but still slower than Pogacar by a fair bit, because a supposed clean Tadej was simply stronger. Although it doesn't seem likely Pog wasn't enhanced.
Click to expand...
Yes, the idea is that the better nutrition and training compensates for EPO and thus the 4min are explained.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Raest and noob
J

JWTS

Jul 18, 2024
7
11
60
shadowrider said:
Yes, only when/while thinking about the "classic" electric motors. As they are used in the electric bikes and speedelecs used by the public. But since a few years there are a lot of technological systems that can support pedaling, systems that can hardly or not be detected with traditional scans. The question is also whether the UCI wants the cheating to be exposed.

.
Click to expand...
What are these things? I've been involved in the bike industry most of my adult life and in the ebike space for the last 10, and I'm unaware of any technology that doesn't involve a battery or that doesn't generate a heat and have magnetic resistance of some sort.

If someone has discovered the perpetual motion machine, please let me know asap! TIA
 
  • Like
Reactions: noob
H

houtdffan

Jul 20, 2019
2,642
2,337
9,680
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Extinction, Stablo, snipeheem and 1 other person
R

Raest

Jul 19, 2024
60
143
380
Netserk said:
By my back of the envelope calculation, Pogi would have needed aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance to be reduced by ~33 % of what it was for Pantani for that to be true.
Click to expand...
Not just that. He beat Armstrong’s time by close to 6 min. Armstrong’s ftp pre tour was in the 500 watts region from memory his tour weight was around 73 kg so that would give around 6.85 w/kg. And he was doped to the gills. Pogacar had a 40 min effort that was about .1-.15 w/kg higher than Armstrong’s ftp/kg, done at the end of the queen stage of the tour in its second week. It’s bonkers.

On a couple of different topics. I will believe the “40 w savings” claim when i see an independent study. Till then it’s marketing spiel to persuade rich, overweight 50-yr olds to part with the better part of ten grand.

I don’t think it’s motor doping not because it’s not happening (it is) but because, as far as I know, they X-Ray the leaders’ bikes at the end of each stage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Extinction
D

Divergence

Feb 27, 2023
429
585
3,880
Raest said:
Not just that. He beat Armstrong’s time by close to 6 min. Armstrong’s ftp pre tour was in the 500 watts region from memory his tour weight was around 73 kg so that would give around 6.85 w/kg. And he was doped to the gills. Pogacar had a 40 min effort that was about .1-.15 w/kg higher than Armstrong’s ftp/kg, done at the end of the queen stage of the tour in its second week. It’s bonkers.

On a couple of different topics. I will believe the “40 w savings” claim when i see an independent study. Till then it’s marketing spiel to persuade rich, overweight 50-yr olds to part with the better part of ten grand.

I don’t think it’s motor doping not because it’s not happening (it is) but because, as far as I know, they X-Ray the leaders’ bikes at the end of each stage.
Click to expand...
Idk what Armstrong's weight was but I remember him saying that he was doing 500W for 30min on Col de la Madonne pre Tour (I guess any Tour he won).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raest
carolina

carolina

Sep 29, 2013
1,856
1,313
13,680
houtdffan said:
Oh Pog...

cyclinguptodate.com

Tadej Pogacar tackles doping questions at Tour de France: "I think this is one of the cleanest sports in the whole world"

Tadej Pogacar has reached the top of the cycling world once again, beating Jonas Vingegaard to win the Tour de France three years after his last triumph. The Slovenian is without a doubt the rider of...
cyclinguptodate.com cyclinguptodate.com

Cycling is the cleanest sport in the world?
Click to expand...
Honestly, it likely is.

Cycling has anti-doping controls in and out of competition, surprise tests, bio passport, no-needle policy... What other sport has all of this?

It's also a sport the deals with much less money then other top sports, that don't have the same level of scrutiny and control. So if there is more money and less control, why not use PEDs if no one is looking?

I wouldn't say it's the cleanest, I'd just say it's less dirty.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Wow
Reactions: Peyroteo94, Melo, Andon and 4 others
H

houtdffan

Jul 20, 2019
2,642
2,337
9,680
carolina said:
Honestly, it likely is.

Cycling has anti-doping controls in and out of competition, surprise tests, bio passport, no-needle policy... What other sport has all of this?

It's also a sport the deals with much less money then other top sports, that don't have the same level of scrutiny and control. So if there is more money and less control, why not use PEDs if no one is looking?

I wouldn't say it's the cleanest, I'd just say it's less dirty.
Click to expand...

So very naive


They had controls during the Armstrong years. The UCI simply did not act on positives and allowed things like backdated TUEs
 
  • Like
Reactions: anti -e-bike, Extinction, Raest and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom