2 seconds is now "way faster"?So, Pogacar was, including chang of bike, way faster than anyone who has ever competed on this slope.
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
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
2 seconds is now "way faster"?So, Pogacar was, including chang of bike, way faster than anyone who has ever competed on this slope.
WTF?!!!
Are you his mum? The guy is giving Pogacar a free pass with the shittiest science analysis possible - it's shameful.
WTF?!!!
Are you his mum? The guy is giving Pogacar a free pass with the shittiest science analysis possible - it's shameful.
But then again, data means nothing in the end. Sure, may raise some eyebrows but its far from proof anyway.No data...he didnt have a computer with him.
Just a coincidence, I'm sure.
With a change of bike with no train entering and doing the lower slopes, 2 seconds is too fast!!2 seconds is now "way faster"?
His coach has been asked this question, this was his response. He doesn't say he doesn't know it, but he doesn't provide it either, which is just plain weird to me. Maybe it'll come with that study he's talking about, but I wouldn't get my hopes up.One thing Tucker did do was call out Pogacar's team to release the data from his tests which showed him to have an elevated capacity for lactate clearance/buffering. It would also be helpful to know his tested VO2 Max, seeing as Tucker was making calculations based upon Pogacar's VAM on the climb segment of PdBF (would need to be very high 80s).
you joined 2 days ago, and only posted on the Gianetti-Pogacar thread. I dont want to look like a stalker but post after post I seem to understand you prefer Roglic, and you dislike Pogacar very much.
the fact you say the Slovenian public is very suspicious of Pogacar sound strange.
Do you have some polls for that or something?Regarding the Slovenian public, it is all true, even if it sounds weird.
At what point did Roglic put 1'20 into everyone in the disciplin he wasn't even known for after struggling to hang on 3 days before?I don't really see how Roglic's performances are any more believable than Pogacar's. I guess it can be hard to look at these things objectively if you are a big fan of one rider, but Roglic did absolutely destroy everyone else in this Tour, by an even greater margin than Pogacar destroyed him.
He didn't. Not really sure what that has to do with my point though.At what point did Roglic put 1'20 into everyone in the disciplin he wasn't even known for after struggling to hang on 3 days before?
He didn't. Not really sure what that has to do with my point though.
Not really. Roglic dominated the race for 19 stages; he looked in complete control. Then put in his usual poor 3rd week TT, getting outclimbed by about 12 other guys. Pogacar was more up and down, sometimes great sometimes just hanging on - kind of what you expect from a young super talent.Seems pretty clear to me. Roglic was incrementally better than everyone throughout the race, though he was better rose than Pogacar here, worse than MAL there, etc. Pogacar was just as good or better throughout the race (only behind before ITT due to flat tire) and then was head and shoulders above everyone on the ITT. Roglic was never head and shoulders above everyone at any point in the race.
Roglic was shepherded by a bulletproof team and looks very solid and stoic on a bike, but if you look at his performances, he didn't dominate the way previous Tour winners dominated at least 1 or 2 stages, nor did he dominate the way Pogacar dominated the ITT. Agree, he looked like a cyborg aesthetically, though.Not really. Roglic dominated the race for 19 stages; he looked in complete control. Then put in his usual poor 3rd week TT, getting outclimbed by about 12 other guys. Pogacar was more up and down, sometimes great sometimes just hanging on - kind of what you expect from a young super talent.
And it's not just this race. Roglic showed a lot less potential in his 1st year in a World Tour team than Pogacar did. His transformation has been more extreme.
Imo, both are very suspicious. But it's just fanboy logic to be throwing insinuations against Pogacar while claiming Roglic is believable.
He doesn't have any polls except a general feeling. And what he wrote is mostly true.
There are 2 sayings going around that aren't accusing Pogi/uae as dopers:
1 - instead of 2 winners we got a winner and a loser. and the loser is the one "everyone" was cheering on.
2 - Pogi won the tour, Roglič won the hearts of Slovenians.
Lets not forget Roglič is the one that let us even dream about an achievement this big. This is THE biggest sporting success for Slovenia. And it really does not feel like it. Roglič has the Hollywood story "everyone" was hoping would come true. 3 years ago Slovenia won the Eurobasket and EVERYONE and I mean EVERYONE was talking about that match and win. I mostly kept my mouth shut this week and let me tell you... very few people even mention the race and the ones that do its mostly to say something like the 2 things I wrote above.
Like 2 that were asking me stuff the last 3 weeks or commenting on the race(stage) the day before havent said a WORD. Nothing... like the race didnt even happen. Like cycling does not exist for them.
Also would like to add there were minimal comments about doping for Roglič ever since I started watching/following pro cycling again. Roglič performances were/are believable.
Now comments are filled with doping accusations or doubting the numbers. And its aimed straight at Pogi/UAE but before it was mostly "you guys dont really think they are on bread and water only do you??".
On the other hand... a lot of Slovenians are really salty (including me) right now so thats for sure the source where most of the comments come from.
Not really. Roglic dominated the race for 19 stages; he looked in complete control. Then put in his usual poor 3rd week TT, getting outclimbed by about 12 other guys. Pogacar was more up and down, sometimes great sometimes just hanging on - kind of what you expect from a young super talent.
And it's not just this race. Roglic showed a lot less potential in his 1st year in a World Tour team than Pogacar did. His transformation has been more extreme.
Imo, both are very suspicious. But it's just fanboy logic to be throwing insinuations against Pogacar while claiming Roglic is believable.
Roglic dominated nothing. His team dominated, he did not. He basically did the bare minimum, and it never looked like he himself was strong enough to extend his lead on his own.Not really. Roglic dominated the race for 19 stages; he looked in complete control.
Yes, so back to the title of the thread, TP ...I don't really think Roglic is clean. I'm inclined to say he's doping, too. But his performances have not gone out of the roof. So he might be clean, or he might be doping and not having the same success with it or not being as talented as Pogacar in the first place. Who knows. But Pogacar's performance, especially in the time trial, was so over the limit, that I simply don't find any other solution than doping anymore. He's in areas where, as far as I know, no clean rider has ever been. And I don't believe in super-super-super-talents. In 95% of all cases, when they appear in any but a complete niche sport (where this might be due to a small pool of athletes) at one point they get exposed. There are some, like Usain Bolt, who have never been exposed, but the circumstances make me personally sure they were doped, too.
Me, I would not like to make this "Pogacar vs. Roglic".
In any case it would be really good to have as much data as possible for Pogacar. Maybe there can be an explanation found in that. I don't expect it, but well, could be.
Indeed, more like about 20+ seconds fasterWith a change of bike with no train entering and doing the lower slopes, 2 seconds is too fast!!
IMHO