Question Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

Page 60 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
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.
 
Reactions: vanderbob
Jan 29, 2021
321
268
1,180
im not sure +6 is considered normal, at least from what i remember it was always referred to as absolute minimum to win a grand tour - so obviously anything below that is "weak" when talking about gc which is what the doctor is talking about, the group of other pre/con-tenders on that stage was weak and you dont even need the numbers to support that - when Formolo pulled out he stayed in that group untill the finish, they even caught Carapaz ...on that specific day the rest of gc was underperforming, while pogacar maintained what would be expected from him

on ventoux stage, his level dropped off a bit while others were stronger, again supported by the overall times, especially last 6km from vingegaard were extremely fast

im pretty sure all grand tour winners and contenders are capable of 6+ performances, how often and how much above 6 depends on quality (quality of athlete and quality of PEDs) ranging from armstrong/pantani(6,5+) levels through pog (on good day 6,5), contador somewhere around same ability, bernal must be pretty high as well

on the other end TGH was the luckiest grand tour winner since Hesjedal, the level of competition was so low he probably only scratched 6 watts even on good days
TGH and hindley make some good performances on giro. They did 6.3 w/kg on piancavallo.
 
and in the end was 8min down, I imagine he will be better this year; if we compare 2020 top 10 with this year;
rogla out, Porte much worse, Landa out, Mas +6min in the end, I expect about the same this year; Lopez much worse,Uran,....
Uran only had 5 race days after coming back from a big injury last year so he faded hard, Lopez and Porte crashed this year and Mas last year struggled out of lockdown. Gaps are far larger this year.
 
Good post. I've also raised that point here: as if 6.3w/kg for two consecutive hard climbs and in that type of weatherwas "normal" or nothing to look at...

Absurd indeed.
This discussion gets to the heart of the matter: We simply don't have a solid baseline notion of what is "humanly possible" against which to assess the use of modern doping methods in endurance athletes.

Like many here, I raise my eyebrows when I see some of the performances, and I don't accept at face value the 'marginal gains,' or the 'I get tested all the time,' or even the secret but 'off-the-charts' training and recovery data responses from teams and riders. Yet, this begs the question: In comparison to what?

Recent scientific studies suggest that efforts to prolong human life much beyond current levels are doomed and that our systems just wear down over time until systemic failure sets in. This challenges the idea that ultra-low caloric intake, for example, offers open-ended longevity. So we would be right to be skeptical at least if someone claims to be, say, 130 years old (or some such cut-off).

With endurance sports, we don't even have that vague a guideline, but it seems clear there are terminal points at which the logic of human physiology takes over and ever faster times are no longer really possible.
 
Reactions: Nick2413
One question, is it really crazy or unexpected that Pogacar would have a 5min lead on a guy like Uran ?
I think you know the answer, but it really depends on which Uran shows up to a GT. He can be pretty inconsistent and it is very much based on his lead up. He seems pretty sharp this year ... somewhat reminiscent of 2017. But last year he faded badly for reasons already noted.
 
This discussion gets to the heart of the matter: We simply don't have a solid baseline notion of what is "humanly possible" against which to assess the use of modern doping methods in endurance athletes.

Like many here, I raise my eyebrows when I see some of the performances, and I don't accept at face value the 'marginal gains,' or the 'I get tested all the time,' or even the secret but 'off-the-charts' training and recovery data responses from teams and riders. Yet, this begs the question: In comparison to what?

Recent scientific studies suggest that efforts to prolong human life much beyond current levels are doomed and that our systems just wear down over time until systemic failure sets in. This challenges the idea that ultra-low caloric intake, for example, offers open-ended longevity. So we would be right to be skeptical at least if someone claims to be, say, 130 years old (or some such cut-off).

With endurance sports, we don't even have that vague a guideline, but it seems clear there are terminal points at which the logic of human physiology takes over and ever faster times are no longer really possible.
I think I get your main points and generally agree that there is not, as far as I am aware, an evidence based max power level we should see for natural capacities for racing. This goes even more for GT style races, where we have multiple climbs requiring FTP style efforts. Or, if it has been clearly identified, I am not aware. I know there is a fair bit of cycling info on maximum watts that have been identified in racers at the world class level, but given it is not known to what extent these values are 'assisted', it is hard to take this as awesome data to benchmark.

For fun, those who race might take the w/kg we see spoken about on a regular basis in this forum, but plug in the numbers from, let's say, one's local race seen. If you are lucky, you might have an excellent pro scene with some incredibly strong riders. This way you can start comparing the extraterrestrial capacities of some of those in the pro tour and what mortals might achieve and can be worth a chuckle.
 
Dec 2, 2020
69
62
280
This discussion gets to the heart of the matter: We simply don't have a solid baseline notion of what is "humanly possible" against which to assess the use of modern doping methods in endurance athletes.

Like many here, I raise my eyebrows when I see some of the performances, and I don't accept at face value the 'marginal gains,' or the 'I get tested all the time,' or even the secret but 'off-the-charts' training and recovery data responses from teams and riders. Yet, this begs the question: In comparison to what?

Recent scientific studies suggest that efforts to prolong human life much beyond current levels are doomed and that our systems just wear down over time until systemic failure sets in. This challenges the idea that ultra-low caloric intake, for example, offers open-ended longevity. So we would be right to be skeptical at least if someone claims to be, say, 130 years old (or some such cut-off).

With endurance sports, we don't even have that vague a guideline, but it seems clear there are terminal points at which the logic of human physiology takes over and ever faster times are no longer really possible.
I think about this all the time. If a rider had infinite VO2Max they’d still be limited by something, such as lactate threshold or even calorie absorption capacity. This also addresses the idea that certain riders respond better to performance enhancers than others. Maybe a rider has the perfect physiology within the muscles but just needs the VO2Max to match, or vice versa. Sometimes riders are nowhere near their max HR when their effort is maxed out so what’s the limiting factor then?

I think any time you have a top climber winning flat TTs you have a physiological impossibility unless the rider is doped heavily. Going to get pretty scientific here, but the two disciplines rely on separate mechanisms, W/kg and W total (effectively, or W/CdA), and there is no way to be #1 in both. A world class bigger rider will always have higher W/CdA because of allometric scaling unless the field is not saturated. Some people are saying cycling has not taken on the same way sports like running and soccer/football have and therefore isn’t saturated so that’s always a possibility, but is that what we’re going with then?
 
Reactions: VeloMaster
and in the end was 8min down, I imagine he will be better this year; if we compare 2020 top 10 with this year;
rogla out, Porte much worse, Landa out, Mas +6min in the end, I expect about the same this year; Lopez much worse,Uran,....
Those type of comparisons many times have failed in the past. With or without doping. I have been watching cycling for 40 years and drawing conclusions like A>B, and B>C therefore A>C many times fail. Do you know how many people have defeated Caruso?
And what about if Pogacar gets defeated at the Vuelta by someone unexpected?
I am leaning to believe that these type of up and downs by cyclists are product of doping. Taking the crashes out of the equation it is a problem to deduct logical results from what you said. 6 years ago, before Uran went to Cannondale, his career was almost done.
I tell you that Pogacar is very talented rider but I am sure that Matxin and Co are very surprised at the product they have with the current program.
 
Reactions: Luthor and Mr. 64%
Has Pog ever had a bad day on the bike? The one's that GC leaders have where their legs just don't perform on a certain day.
his worst performance this season as a whole was probably national TT or Basque country TT and the only one who even briefly challenged him whole year as far as gc battle goes was vingegaard...on top of that, unlike roglic, he never seems to crash or have bad mechanical
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 8

ASK THE COMMUNITY