Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[Extinction]

Logic tells me if you have a wider pool of people to choose from and can identify talent more easily now than 25 years ago, you are likely to find better talent.

No, there is no wider pool, unless you consider Slovenia to have increased the volume exponentially. They can't identify talent better anymore than then. Lemond was a double junior world champion, what is more easy to identify than that? Watts per kilo comes after.

 

[Oldermanish]

I wouldn't be so sure about the actual one beeing more reliable. 2 cents.

He doesn't want scandal in his sport until his new position with the IOC is secure. Might look like he couldn't mind his small store compared to the Olympic enterprise.

 

[troll hunter]

You are still not addressing the issue that most people are talking about: improvement since 2020.

I have already addressed this in previous posts. Roughly:

• New UCI President
• end of the British dark age
• some super talents appear
• they start to improve year on year and begin to reach the ceiling of their physical ability
• ??? profit

[[content deleted]]

 

[E_F_]

• New UCI President
• end of the British dark age
• some super talents appear
• they start to improve year on year and begin to reach the ceiling of their physical ability
• ??? profit

Doesn't make any sense though...

 

[Salvarani]

I have already addressed this in previous posts. Roughly:

• New UCI President
• end of the British dark age
• some super talents appear
• they start to improve year on year and begin to reach the ceiling of their physical ability
• ??? profit

Could you stop trolling? Look at the previous page, I've already written factual evidence that cycling is much more international than it was 25 years ago. Not to mention the 45 years you're talking about, when LeMond won the WJC. Which you also prove my point. I couldn't find the full start list for the 1979 World Junior Championships, but it says that 23 nations were represented in the whole event - https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/202027/

This year there were 60 nations in the junior race. Almost triple the number in 1979.

Great points being made.

 

[Ripper]

Doesn't make any sense though...

Agreed. When the accumulation of evidence looks super fishy, folks start to focus on this one thing or that one thing. Is bike racing more international than 30+ years ago? To some extent, sure it is. However, Slovenia is not some remote nation with no cycling history ... quite the opposite in fact. Moreover, some of what we have seen in the past 5 years has been so beyond the pale that really, the only comparator with respect to mind-blowing performances would be the mid to late 90's.

I guess the ceiling of physical ability has suddenly jumped recently! And with less signs betraying physical effort

 

[Rechtschreibfehler]

I have already addressed this in previous posts. Roughly:

• New UCI President

How does that explain increase in performance of the entire field? Or even singular athletes.

• end of the British dark age

Again how does that increase the performance of british and nonbritish riders after it's end?

• some super talents appear

Let's say it's granted that somehow we have Supertalents that are more talented than the previous Generations: how does that explain the developement of everybody else? Again we end up with your apparent theory that a lager talent base (i.e. more potential talents) somehow to qualitative improvement of the talent of the supertalents, yet you have given near zero reason as to why that would be the case. I've expressed my issues with this in the other post you quoted.

• they start to improve year on year and begin to reach the ceiling of their physical ability

Sure, no one will question that talents improve and at some point reach their ceiling. But following your argument we'd have to see the introduction of better talent on a grand scale (not just the supertalents) basically all starting more or less at the same time with similar ages to explain the jump. This should be easy to show but wouldn't explain for one minute what exactly happened to say Thomas, Landa and all the other older chaps who produce their best ever numbers within the last 2 years.

• ??? profit

I am as lost as you are as to why this would increase the bodily potential of anyone.

 

[Extinction]

I have already addressed this in previous posts. Roughly:

• New UCI President
• end of the British dark age
• some super talents appear
• they start to improve year on year and begin to reach the ceiling of their physical ability
• ??? profit

Could you stop trolling? Look at the previous page, I've already written factual evidence that cycling is much more international than it was 25 years ago. Not to mention the 45 years you're talking about, when LeMond won the WJC. Which you also prove my point. I couldn't find the full start list for the 1979 World Junior Championships, but it says that 23 nations were represented in the whole event - https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/202027/

This year there were 60 nations in the junior race. Almost triple the number in 1979.

But the absolute numbers haven't changed. There are more cyclists around the world, but far less in the countries that historically matered. Many don't want to send their children out on the roads in Europe today. Too many cars, another mentality.

View: https://youtu.be/oxppuo_rhvM?si=4LYTSP1dFzHj9UFv

 

[Rechtschreibfehler]

But the absolute numbers haven't changed. There are more cyclists around the world, but far less in the countries that historically matered. Many don't want to send their children out on the roads in Europe today. Too many cars, another mentality.

You could argue that it's way easier to find talent though through all these 'quantification of the self' gimmicks.
But I have no Idea how scouting in cycling works tbh, would be interesting to know if it got better though.

 

[Extinction]

You could argue that it's way easier to find talent though through all these 'quantification of the self' gimmicks.
But I have no Idea how scouting in cycling works tbh, would be interesting to know if it got better though.

My point is that I don't think talent changes in humanity to justify Pog's dominance. You can find new talents all you want, but their engineering is what's different. Gimmicks have by far improved, not the base talent.

 

[Rechtschreibfehler]

My point is that I don't think talent changes in humanity to justify Pog's dominance. You can find new talents all you want, but their engineering is what's different. Gimmicks have by far improved, not the base talent.

Sure, I was just thinking about if the pool of pro cyclist could be better by better scouting. Not that for some reason the quality of human talent changes. I don't find the talent base explanation for Pogacar credible at all, was just pondering the thought if there could be something to the Idea that there is "more talent" in the sport now by simply finding it better.

 

[peterfin]

Globilization had no meaningful impact. Procycling stats shows no meaningful average speed increase in WT races from 2000 to 2020. The last 4 years the average speed started to increase and is 3-4% higher in 2024 than 2000-2020. The number of nations scoring PCS points increased by almost 50% since 2000. If there was an impact because of globalization we should have seen it earlier. The increase since 2020 is only about 10%.

 

[Extinction]

Sure, I was just thinking about if the pool of pro cyclist could be better by better scouting. Not that for some reason the quality of human talent changes. I don't find the talent base explanation for Pogacar credible at all, was just pondering the thought if there could be something to the Idea that there is "more talent" in the sport now by simply finding it better.

They have been scouting well for decades, but what's changed is finding the diamond in the rough, so to speak, and then being able to take that diamond to unfathonable heights. Today this requires a huge budget that has perfected a "system" in which responding well, investments and so forth have altered natural capacity far beyond recognition, not improved base line talent.

PS: You still have to be a master of your craft, which Tadej doutless is, but all the rest makes Frankenstein.

 

[noob]

Re journalism. I didn't know he even calls himself a journalist. I thought I were the only one doing so lol.

x.com

twitter.com

 

[CleanCiclismo]

Cycling and athletics have both have massive improvements in the post covid era. Records that were thought to last forever are being broken.

 

[peterfin]

Cycling and athletics have both have massive improvements in the post covid era. Records that were thought to last forever are being broken.

They both claim to have an explanation: in athletics it's the shoes and in cycling it's the bike. And of course nutrition suddenly improved a lot too! Our scientists became so much smarter since covid. It must be an alien virus. And maybe it's not such the technologie. Pogi got covid. He might be alien after all?

 

[YellowSocks]

GCN finally tried to talk about the elephant in the room with a 35 min whitewashing video. I don’t think they expected what followed in the comments

In the same vein, an opinion poll was carried out last week in France about Pogacar (don't ask me why...). The sample is representative of the French population. Cycling fans were treated separately (which makes sense, since cycling in France is nowhere near as popular as it used to be, when Bernard Hinault was probably as famous as Michel Platini - 95% of the people I know have never heard of Pogacar).

The poll states that while Pogacar is generally appreciated, 60% of cycling fans consider that his domination detracts from the races in which he takes part, and 54% of cycling fans consider his performances to be dubious.

Let's just say that there were mistakes in UAE's strategy.

You can find the poll here (in French) : 75% of cycling fans appreciate Pogacar

 

[troll hunter]

How does that explain increase in performance of the entire field? Or even singular athletes.



Again how does that increase the performance of british and nonbritish riders after it's end?



Let's say it's granted that somehow we have Supertalents that are more talented than the previous Generations: how does that explain the developement of everybody else? Again we end up with your apparent theory that a lager talent base (i.e. more potential talents) somehow to qualitative improvement of the talent of the supertalents, yet you have given near zero reason as to why that would be the case. I've expressed my issues with this in the other post you quoted.



Sure, no one will question that talents improve and at some point reach their ceiling. But following your argument we'd have to see the introduction of better talent on a grand scale (not just the supertalents) basically all starting more or less at the same time with similar ages to explain the jump. This should be easy to show but wouldn't explain for one minute what exactly happened to say Thomas, Landa and all the other older chaps who produce their best ever numbers within the last 2 years.



I am as lost as you are as to why this would increase the bodily potential of anyone.

My thought is that with all the high-profile busts in the early 2010s, the guys somehow got cleanish or didn't go too extreme.

With the British UCI presidency and eventually the WADA presidency, the guys were kept on a very short leash while Sky was allowed to do all sorts of dirty things that helped them win races with less talented British riders.

Something similar has happened in athletics, where the British government has installed its man as IAAF president to ensure that "British interests are protected".

What later turned out to be in the British interest was that Paula Radcliffe's blood should not be tested again, and that the mediocre British long distance runner Mo Farah should not be busted after which he magically became a world-beater approaching his thirties.

With the French UCI presidency, other teams have probably been emboldened and have also started to move into or across grey areas. Which led to Sky/INEOS slowly losing its advantage.... and again, I'm not saying Pog or any of them are clean these days, just the situation is not as extreme as many people try to make it out to be.

This theory may not be correct, but then I would like to hear people's explanation about Froome. How is it possible that a talentless rider at the age of 26 with zero wins and never even close to winning has improved so much overnight that he enters the GT GOAT conversation? While his opponents are all moving backwards in performance..

As for the quality or scouting of talent in the current era. Just look at the 4 most successful GT drivers at the moment:

• 19yo Pogacar rides for a small Slovenian CT team, do you think 30 years ago the next step for him would have been to ride for the richest team in cycling? Of course not, and it would probably never have reached its full potential.
• Vingegaard in his early 20's in the modest Danish CT team, do you think 30 years ago one of the most successful teams would have discovered that with help and professionalism this guy could have a lot?
• Remco did a completely different sport to cycling until he was 17.
• Roglic is even more incredible how he became a cyclist...

30 years ago maybe none of these 4 guys would have been professional cyclists.

 

[Raest]

My thought is that with all the high-profile busts in the early 2010s, the guys somehow got cleanish or didn't go too extreme.

With the British UCI presidency and eventually the WADA presidency, the guys were kept on a very short leash while Sky was allowed to do all sorts of dirty things that helped them win races with less talented British riders.

Something similar has happened in athletics, where the British government has installed its man as IAAF president to ensure that "British interests are protected".

What later turned out to be in the British interest was that Paula Radcliffe's blood should not be tested again, and that the mediocre British long distance runner Mo Farah should not be busted after which he magically became a world-beater approaching his thirties.

With the French UCI presidency, other teams have probably been emboldened and have also started to move into or across grey areas. Which led to Sky/INEOS slowly losing its advantage.... and again, I'm not saying Pog or any of them are clean these days, just the situation is not as extreme as many people try to make it out to be.

This theory may not be correct, but then I would like to hear people's explanation about Froome. How is it possible that a talentless rider at the age of 26 with zero wins and never even close to winning has improved so much overnight that he enters the GT GOAT conversation? While his opponents are all moving backwards in performance..

As for the quality or scouting of talent in the current era. Just look at the 4 most successful GT drivers at the moment:

• 19yo Pogacar rides for a small Slovenian CT team, do you think 30 years ago the next step for him would have been to ride for the richest team in cycling? Of course not, and it would probably never have reached its full potential.
• Vingegaard in his early 20's in the modest Danish CT team, do you think 30 years ago one of the most successful teams would have discovered that with help and professionalism this guy could have a lot?
• Remco did a completely different sport to cycling until he was 17.
• Roglic is even more incredible how he became a cyclist...

30 years ago maybe none of these 4 guys would have been professional cyclists.

In other words because Froome, won four GTs and you can't explain how he won them it was because the british led UCI allowed Ineos cyclists to use PEDs whilst they enforced strict anti-doping tests to everyone else.
That's "God of gaps" line of argument right there.
Aside from that your central premise up to this point was that the talent level was very low until cycling discovered Slovenia's existence. Which one is it? Selected enforcement of anti-doping or lack of talent? And what do Paula Ratcliffe and Mo Farah have to do with UCI and cycling? If anything what their cases show is that the biological passport is not a good enough deterrent which agrees with what everyone has been saying regarding the miraculous performances of the past 4 years. In all endurance sports, not just cycling.

 

[troll hunter]

In other words because Froome, won four GTs and you can't explain how he won them it was because the british led UCI allowed Ineos cyclists to use PEDs whilst they enforced strict anti-doping tests to everyone else.
That's "God of gaps" line of argument right there.
Aside from that your central premise up to this point was that the talent level was very low until cycling discovered Slovenia's existence. Which one is it? Selected enforcement of anti-doping or lack of talent? And what do Paula Ratcliffe and Mo Farah have to do with UCI and cycling? If anything what their cases show is that the biological passport is not a good enough deterrent which agrees with what everyone has been saying regarding the miraculous performances of the past 4 years. In all endurance sports, not just cycling.

I'm not going to take the bait and engage you in a silly, endless conversation. Because you clearly don't understand even the most basic points I've made.

But just for historical facts, Froome won 7 GTs not 4. He won all three GTs. He finished 2nd three times, one of which he could easily have won had there been no team orders. He finished 3rd and 4th once.

Quite an achievement after such a run-up, as a week later he was already beginning his journey to becoming a GT goat ->

I still want to hear people's theories on how it's possible if mine is so lame.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Something similar has happened in athletics, where the British government has installed its man as IAAF president

Congratulations. You have forced me into the position of feeling that I want to defend a British government, probably for the first time in my life. There is a world of difference between trying some soft diplomatic lobbying and having the power to install someone in a position.

 

[Raest]

I'm not going to take the bait and engage you in a silly, endless conversation. Because you clearly don't understand even the most basic points I've made.

But just for historical facts, Froome won 7 GTs not 4. He won all three GTs. He finished 2nd three times, one of which he could easily have won had there been no team orders. He finished 3rd and 4th once.

Quite an achievement after such a run-up, as a week later he was already beginning his journey to becoming a GT goat ->

I still want to hear people's theories on how it's possible if mine is so lame.

I meant TdF's not GTs and didn't bother to correct it. That was not the point of my argument though and you failing to address it shows that you can't. It's been pointed out to you that what you are saying doesn't make sense and it's largely contradictory. You are throwing stuff out hoping something will stick (make sense). Well it doesn't. It's not even circumustancial evidence that you present, it's no evidence at all.

 

[troll hunter]

Congratulations. You have forced me into the position of feeling that I want to defend a British government, probably for the first time in my life. There is a world of difference between trying some soft diplomatic lobbying and having the power to install someone in a position.

[[content deleted]]

I suppose there is often a bit of politics involved in the appointment of high-level sports officials. But for a country to instruct its ambassadors to lobby for the IAAF presidency, pay his campaign and secure diplomatic channels is a bit far-fetched. Since the vote was close with Bubka, I guess without that much backing he wouldn't have got the job. So I think it's fair to say that the UK government installed him there.

 

[Raest]

[[content deleted]]

I suppose there is often a bit of politics involved in the appointment of high-level sports officials. But for a country to instruct its ambassadors to lobby for the IAAF presidency, pay his campaign and secure diplomatic channels is a bit far-fetched. Since the vote was close with Bubka, I guess without that much backing he wouldn't have got the job. So I think it's fair to say that the UK government installed him there.

a) What does Coe have to do with cycling?
b) You seemed to imply that the same happened with the UCI in order to safeguard british interests however, as you can read in this Guardian article, https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jan/22/british-government-iaaf-sebastian-coe, the same documents show that there was not government involvement in the election of Brian Cookson as president of the UCI.
Your allegation that there was a british conspiracy to hinder all cycling teams bar Sky/Ineos remains unfounded

 

[troll hunter]

Who's counting the pittance of £120,000 that the British government spent on Cookson's presidential campaign?

It is not the first time UK Sport has supported a presidential campaign – it spent £120,000 helping Brian Cookson’s campaign for the presidency of the UCI, cycling’s international body.

UK Sport spent £63,000 on Sebastian Coe’s bid for the IAAF presidency

Sebastian Coe’s campaign for the IAAF presidency was supported by public money

www.theguardian.com

https://twitter.com/x/status/383515567438962688

View: https://x.com/SportsOrla/status/383515567438962688


A £120,000 bribe is about 6 votes. Exactly what he needed to beat his opponent in a close vote who wasn't even supported by his own country