Question Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
there is def a new juice...you'd think TP would be paying from his solo effort yesterday...but nope...fresh and outsprinting everyone haha...
WADA admitted that they did 95% less testing durning the various lockdowns and the ongoing pandemic, so I don't think that we need a new wonder drug to explain the climbing speeds and results.
The riders could prepare and load up durning that time, there was pretty much no random drug testing/ooc testing at all.
 
WADA admitted that they did 95% less testing durning the various lockdowns and the ongoing pandemic, so I don't think that we need a new wonder drug to explain the climbing speeds and results.
The riders could prepare and load up durning that time, there was pretty much no random drug testing/ooc testing at all.
If that's the case then it's surprising that there hasn't been a random no-name turning up in monster shape. Someone who did a Riis/Ricco and really pushed the boat out with what they were taking. But pretty much all riders at the sharp end are reasonably well established.
 
Reactions: gregrowlerson
If that's the case then it's surprising that there hasn't been a random no-name turning up in monster shape. Someone who did a Riis/Ricco and really pushed the boat out with what they were taking. But pretty much all riders at the sharp end are reasonably well established.
I mean, Pogi wasn't the only guy who was climbing really fast yesterday, Roglic ad Quintana went as fast as Vino and Mayo in 2003 while playing tactical games on the climb, not to menion the whole JV team since the races have restarted. Of course other factors also have a huge impact on the form that the riders have.
 
Please do away with the post-voting Q&A setting.

I quite like Pogacar, have not seen anything i would label as suspicious, other than the fact he indeed did not have a clinic thread yet, unlike Evenepoel, because he's apparently more likable. It shows the hypocrisy of the clinic dwellers, who supposedly only have only the best interest of the sport at heart. Ahaha.
If you’re posting here, you’re a clinic dweller.
 
Reactions: Red Rick
No IT IS Not. Obviously Pogacar isn't the only who is on the new stuff. Nobody Claims that. But You can't be AS blind Not to realize that 1850+ Vam in a less then 8 percent climb over more than 20 minutes has hardly ever happened. If It Has happened at all.
Pogacar's VAM is 1841. So it has happened before on Hautacam in 1996. In contrast, Quintana and Roglic managed 1787 VAM.

But I really think the wind was advantageous on Peyresourde. You have to consider that it is a climb where you head the same direction for most of the time - only the last three switchbacks were without direct tailwind.

The circumstances of the performance make it a lot less suspicious than if it had been achieved later in the race and with less advantageous wind conditions.
 
Hmmm. Above the fray but using name-calling to try and make a point. Gotcha.
What name-calling? Saying people are hypocrites for attacking rider A but not rider B (often cheering for rider B), in the so called best interest of the sport, and based on speculation? That's simply an observation. Not even trying to make a point, the point is there for everyone to see.
 
Reactions: Cookster15
It's about time we address Pogacars remarkable rise since he joined UAE in 2019.

His first season as a junior wasn't anything special, but we have to remember that he was born later in year (September) which is a disadvantage at that age.
In his second season he definitely proved his talent by winning the Giro della Lunigiana.
However, in the entire season he only won two stages and never put any distance on his competitors.
His time trial abilities were less impressive. A 25th and 68th spot.

His first season as a U23 rider wasn't too great either.
He won a few youth jerseys, but didn't record a single stage win.

His second season was definitely better, but still hit and miss.
He won the Tour de l'Avenir, but didn't record a stage win.
He also finished 7th at the WC road race.

Promising, but not exceptional.

Then he moved to UAE. Its CEO is Mauro Gianetti, possibly the dirtiest rider and sports director in history.
Suddenly he started to win stage races (Algarve, California, and individual mountain stages in the Vuelta against the likes of Valverde and Roglic.
He also became a much better time trialist beating Mohoric and Tratnik in the Slovenian championship.

Give me a break.
I am not saying that he is not doping but to the bold I do not agree. That was really good if you ask me.

Having said that we are witnessing one of the craziest Tours in years. These guys, and mostly him, is breaking record after record.
 
I admire Evenepoel, but I don't have a problem with fair competition. I don't like cheating though. When I look at Evenepoel or MvdP, I see consistency from their junior days until today. I can accept Roglic superiority in 2019, Rohan Dennis' domination in the WC time trials, because I don't see anything wrong with it.

I can't accept the dirtiest manager in cycling screwing the sport up again and it's unacceptable to me that people like Gianetti are welcomed back. The strongest cheating indicator are the climbing times and we should be alarmed when a 21 year old weighing 66 kg blows away the best climbers in the world on a 4 km stretch.
This is not normal:
http://www.climbing-records.com/2020/09/tadej-pogacar-crushes-peyresourde-record.html
Are you defending Lefevere?
 
Somehow I feel that there were lack of controls this year leading into the race. Maybe I am wrong but if you can train with free reign there will be big differences come race days.

You can't just break records every day and don't ask the question if something is wrong.
 
Somehow I feel that there were lack of controls this year leading into the race. Maybe I am wrong but if you can train with free reign there will be big differences come race days.

You can't just break records every day and don't ask the question if something is wrong.
Yes, although Podacar sprung up last year, most impressively in the Vuelta....pre-covid.
 
The only things in Pogacar's favour from my personal perspective are:

1) the wind conditions showing excellent performance from the other GC contenders on the same climb, even though they were constantly attacking each other rather than riding with peak efficiency. This includes guys like Porte, Quintana, Landa and Bardet who are all arguably on the downside of their careers.

2) the fact he was noticeably less dominant the day following his major effort.

3) his youth - I am way more likely to find a guy in his early 20s like Pog or Bernal converting okay age group performance into stellar early pro career than I am to believe in some dude finding peek form when they are north of 30. (I think the 80s, 90s and 00s with their false narrative of 'you don't peak until your late 20s' was misinterpreting that you often had to have been around the block a bit before getting reliable race winning assistance and protection).

The above is enough for me to give the benefit of the doubt for now.

But I respect any opinion that we should be wary of these performances, given the make up of the team and the fact we are getting an increasing number of teams with headline sponsors from unpleasant regimes (who are unlikely to struggle to get to sleep at night at the prospect of some foul play contributing to success).

I would quite like to see Pogicar fade compared to someone like Bernal targeting 100% effort in one stage and doing the minimum effort during the rest of the race (which is what I think will happen wearing my rose tinted glasses of a cleanish race).
 
Please do away with the post-voting Q&A setting.

I quite like Pogacar, have not seen anything i would label as suspicious, other than the fact he indeed did not have a clinic thread yet, unlike Evenepoel, because he's apparently more likable. It shows the hypocrisy of the clinic dwellers, who supposedly only have only the best interest of the sport at heart. Ahaha.
I welcome you to our dwelling. Now you can never leave.

Really the pretense that cycling is cleanz just because you like a current rider is much more magical thinking than a scepticism fed by decades of cycling history. If wanting to engage in an open minded discussion about the whats, whys and how of doping makes one a hypocritic dweller, thats your problem.

Or maybe I should just be really sorry I don't believe in miracles.
 
Last edited:
If wanting to engage in an open minded discussion about the whats, whys and how of doping makes one a hypocritic dweller, thats your problem.
I'm seeing an awful lot of closed minds here. Minds which say cyclists doped, cyclists will always dope, all cyclists dope. Minds closed to evidence - minds that actually congratulate their own ignorance - but full of belief in their own worldview.
 
Reactions: Cookster15
I'm seeing an awful lot of closed minds here. Minds which say cyclists doped, cyclists will always dope, all cyclists dope. Minds closed to evidence - minds that actually congratulate their own ignorance - but full of belief in their own worldview.
The reasons to be sceptical are very simple. People cheat to get to the top, especially in hyper competitive environments, and plenty of top riders who we later found out doped never tested positive. Add in basic statistics - a minority of dopers will be highly overrepresented at the very top if doping provides any significant benefit, and it becomes pretty hard for me to believe the biggest outliers in the sport are clean.

To say there's nothing suspicious going on when they're breaking blood bag era records on the most frequently climbed pass in the Tour, and absolutely smashing said record, basically implies there can never be anything suspicious, which I guess could only potentially make sense if you think doping doesn't even work and all variance can be attributed to something else?

Now as for this part

minds that actually congratulate their own ignorance - but full of belief in their own worldview.
Blindly believing the opposite, riders are clean despite decades of the sports history suggesting the contrary, is just magical, religious thinking. It's cleanz because I want to believe, because I have to believe these athletes for no logical cause I've told myself it's important these guys are clean. This includes believing managers and directors who have doped during their careers suddenly having a change of heart and full on cleanz. And if people are skeptical, they must be close minded, prideful in their cynicism and self congratulatory. Suuuuure.

When something looks like ***, smells like ***, and tastes like ***, it's not a unicorn.
 
The reasons to be sceptical are very simple.
Stop. Most times many people in the Clinic - and here on this thread - go beyond scepticism and trade in pure, unadulterated cynicism. I'm all for scepticism, it's the cynicism that's the problem, cause there's no discussion with cynics, their minds are made up and not for changing. Sceptics at least have an open mind and change with the facts, rather than just changing, or ignoring, the facts.
 
Reactions: Cookster15
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 8

ASK THE COMMUNITY