Question Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

Page 90 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I mean foundations of athletes are usually some tax scheme. I could imagine someone proposing it to Pogacar after Zigart's mother died: Look, we can do some good research on cancer metabolism and it's financially of advantage to you, too.
I wouldn't expect much from it from a scientific point of view.
 
Could understand Pogačar launching a cancer charity, considering the recent death of his mother in law. But reading what's actually written https://pogacar.org/ , one gets severe Armstrong vibes.

It is difficult to understand imperfection if we don’t understand perfection in the first place and through the lessons learned from studying the perfect metabolism of elite athletes, like Tadej, it is possible to understand imperfections in cellular processes that can lead to multiple diseases, including cancer.

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/fmk_RoI/status/1545705843836043265
At least his foundation is funding research and not “awareness”.
 
The way I see it, all the riders are using performance enhancement.

With some riders their transformation is so obviously, that you have to "believe" in order to not see it or maybe just don´t care.
When I see Pogacar ride, I think back to Armstrong, they are similar in many ways and their actions as well.. History just repeat itself.

The rider just behind him are obviously also using enhancement (just look at Vingegaard) and trust me, I know for certain he is using performance enhancements.. That is no secret in cycling at all.. even in other sports we have the same thing, it is just less obvious, when a football player is using enhancements, since they need more than just endurace and speed and they rely on others.


Looking at the TDF ie. I enjoy the scenary, and see the stages as "plays" where I am to be "entertained" I can often predict what will happen, with minor twists ofc.
To enjoy cycling, I look at it like F1. It is more about how the teams maximize their performance with "enhancements" "tactics" and sometimes in secret getting the upper edge by new tech (while staying within guidelines or hiding enough to not get caugh) Obviously the teams with the best personel to "enhance" them, is the teams that enjoys the most success.


Pogacar´s transformation could be a fabled story, he is not just good, he is a young wonderkid, that does not really need experience, tactics or anything.. he just needs to hit the turbo when he wants to win or else just automatically stride a long.. I am yet to have seen any real weakness (outside smaller kinks) I had the same feeling with Armstrong, whom were dead obvious... like... people that believed him, were either turning a blind side on purpose, or had no clue about how performance enhancements works and sports in general for that matter.

In my country (easy spoiler now) Riis made cycling extremely popular back in the 90´s and that is why the tour have even started here this year (it all comes back to the foundation) But nobody.. as in nobody I know, believed Riis was clean in 96´ and he is not even the worse or most obvious that we have seen...

Without going to detailed, I also knew that Bo Hamburger was using performance enhancement and many around him knew it! The thing is.. many people just look at the riders, instead of the whole sport and their organizations.. Take the teams themselves, they want to win, they want as much "stable" predictions to their investments as possible and the most performance from their riders, there is a great amount of pressure on riders to "enchance" infact I dare claim, that it is a "must do" I understand why the riders hate all the focus being on them and also the overly hyped focus on cycling, compared to other types of sports, but when it is so dead obvious, as it is here and when the individual performance have such a high impact on result, then that is a evil, they will persist.


Pogacar is basically the new Armstrong. He looks as light as a feather, consistent (this is a big one, nobody is 100% consistent without enchancements) and will somehow always catch up or even just stride away from people that attack at great moments.. but we love those scenes, that is what encompass cycling..
As far as I can see, people are split between liking Pogacar, but overall I think he is popular enough to not be sacrificed as a "doping victim" infact I think he might have a real chance of becoming the most winning rider in the tour, if this "consistency" persist.


With that being said.. if we can just take a blind side or accept what modern cycling is (what is the best doctor? maybe they should get a yearly award for that) then it would be more enjoyable, let tech and modern enhancements come out in the open, so that we get even more science behind it (that would also in some cases open up for a more even race)


Anyway.. I might have strided a bit away from Pogacar only.. But what I don´t like about him, is his monster (unrealistic in my opinion) transformation and his featherly ease... With all that being said, I rather have Pogacar, than Armstrong & Froome, so well.
 
The way I see it, all the riders are using performance enhancement.

With some riders their transformation is so obviously, that you have to "believe" in order to not see it or maybe just don´t care.
When I see Pogacar ride, I think back to Armstrong, they are similar in many ways and their actions as well.. History just repeat itself.

The rider just behind him are obviously also using enhancement (just look at Vingegaard) and trust me, I know for certain he is using performance enhancements.. That is no secret in cycling at all.. even in other sports we have the same thing, it is just less obvious, when a football player is using enhancements, since they need more than just endurace and speed and they rely on others.


Looking at the TDF ie. I enjoy the scenary, and see the stages as "plays" where I am to be "entertained" I can often predict what will happen, with minor twists ofc.
To enjoy cycling, I look at it like F1. It is more about how the teams maximize their performance with "enhancements" "tactics" and sometimes in secret getting the upper edge by new tech (while staying within guidelines or hiding enough to not get caugh) Obviously the teams with the best personel to "enhance" them, is the teams that enjoys the most success.


Pogacar´s transformation could be a fabled story, he is not just good, he is a young wonderkid, that does not really need experience, tactics or anything.. he just needs to hit the turbo when he wants to win or else just automatically stride a long.. I am yet to have seen any real weakness (outside smaller kinks) I had the same feeling with Armstrong, whom were dead obvious... like... people that believed him, were either turning a blind side on purpose, or had no clue about how performance enhancements works and sports in general for that matter.

In my country (easy spoiler now) Riis made cycling extremely popular back in the 90´s and that is why the tour have even started here this year (it all comes back to the foundation) But nobody.. as in nobody I know, believed Riis was clean in 96´ and he is not even the worse or most obvious that we have seen...

Without going to detailed, I also knew that Bo Hamburger was using performance enhancement and many around him knew it! The thing is.. many people just look at the riders, instead of the whole sport and their organizations.. Take the teams themselves, they want to win, they want as much "stable" predictions to their investments as possible and the most performance from their riders, there is a great amount of pressure on riders to "enchance" infact I dare claim, that it is a "must do" I understand why the riders hate all the focus being on them and also the overly hyped focus on cycling, compared to other types of sports, but when it is so dead obvious, as it is here and when the individual performance have such a high impact on result, then that is a evil, they will persist.


Pogacar is basically the new Armstrong. He looks as light as a feather, consistent (this is a big one, nobody is 100% consistent without enchancements) and will somehow always catch up or even just stride away from people that attack at great moments.. but we love those scenes, that is what encompass cycling..
As far as I can see, people are split between liking Pogacar, but overall I think he is popular enough to not be sacrificed as a "doping victim" infact I think he might have a real chance of becoming the most winning rider in the tour, if this "consistency" persist.


With that being said.. if we can just take a blind side or accept what modern cycling is (what is the best doctor? maybe they should get a yearly award for that) then it would be more enjoyable, let tech and modern enhancements come out in the open, so that we get even more science behind it (that would also in some cases open up for a more even race)


Anyway.. I might have strided a bit away from Pogacar only.. But what I don´t like about him, is his monster (unrealistic in my opinion) transformation and his featherly ease... With all that being said, I rather have Pogacar, than Armstrong & Froome, so well.
The "Just enjoy the show" stance? No, thanks, not for me. I don't want to watch the "who's the most reckless" race or even congratulate or cheer on the winner of that race.
 
Reactions: F_Cance and Riek s
The "Just enjoy the show" stance? No, thanks, not for me. I don't want to watch the "who's the most reckless" race or even congratulate or cheer on the winner of that race.
I fully understand that, I don´t watch all of every stages (like I did back back in the day)
My point is, that if you have to watch it, then you need to either accept or understand what is at play.

It is great, that some people actually voice their opinion and call for another era, I just don´t think it is realistic anymore.
The most enjoyable about the tour is the scenery, I really enjoy seeing it and hearing about sites etc.

Anyway. I don´t think many people believe in Pogacar´s transformation.
 
Jul 8, 2022
5
13
60
I fully understand that, I don´t watch all of every stages (like I did back back in the day)
My point is, that if you have to watch it, then you need to either accept or understand what is at play.

It is great, that some people actually voice their opinion and call for another era, I just don´t think it is realistic anymore.
The most enjoyable about the tour is the scenery, I really enjoy seeing it and hearing about sites etc.

Anyway. I don´t think many people believe in Pogacar´s transformation.
I find this kind of odious, defeatist, post-moral nihilism absolutely nauseating.

“Just accept that they’re doping! Just enjoy the lie!”

Actually, how about NO? How about the radical idea that cheating is wrong? Maybe a shared code of morals is actually important for humans living in a society where we have to trust and rely each other?

Maybe a cynical, juiced-up race to the bottom, where the most flagrant cheats and amoral narcissists win everything, is NOT good?
 
I find this kind of odious, defeatist, post-moral nihilism absolutely nauseating.

“Just accept that they’re doping! Just enjoy the lie!”

Actually, how about NO? How about the radical idea that cheating is wrong? Maybe a shared code of morals is actually important for humans living in a society where we have to trust and rely each other?

Maybe a cynical, juiced-up race to the bottom, where the most flagrant cheats and amoral narcissists win everything, is NOT good?
The point is that everybody is cheating and that it is obvious.
There is a thin line already on what is "allowed" and "not"

Morals are made to control, not to uphold.

With that being said, yes it would be pretty awesome if it came down to tactics and natural fitness (since that is less consistent) but we actually have a lot of other factors now (not just performance enhacing drugs) but also the bike itself and its parts, can give you an edge, even your clothes, helmet.. not to talk about breathing excercises.

Money has also become a big part of the "game" everything is about the "show" and trust me.. if it was super inconsistent, then you would be harder pressed to find sponsers and people that invested in riders and tech.


Don´t get me wrong. I would rather a race on equal terms, but to me that is utopia.. I had this debate decades ago and the same arguments.. I still remember when people on this forum assaulted others for pointing out that Armstrong was doping like a... infact I remember all the data showcased where people argued about it being natural etc... nobody question his cheating now.

Sadly.. unlike back then, when it went a bit overboard, today it is all about the "individuals" we have darlings (Pogacar is one of them) and they wont face any consequences, atleast as long as they are likeable.
Cycling is tainted and most likely will forever, even if its unfair, because I really love it when we see proper tactics, timings, etc. But now a days that is a rarity.


At the end of the day, I guess I could accept all the small nick nacks, as long as the riders were a little more human now and then and inconsistent.


I am yet to see this from Pogacar.. he is like a machine.. again I saw the same with many other tour winners.
 
Reactions: noob
The point is that everybody is cheating and that it is obvious.
There is a thin line already on what is "allowed" and "not"

Morals are made to control, not to uphold.

With that being said, yes it would be pretty awesome if it came down to tactics and natural fitness (since that is less consistent) but we actually have a lot of other factors now (not just performance enhacing drugs) but also the bike itself and its parts, can give you an edge, even your clothes, helmet.. not to talk about breathing excercises.

Money has also become a big part of the "game" everything is about the "show" and trust me.. if it was super inconsistent, then you would be harder pressed to find sponsers and people that invested in riders and tech.


Don´t get me wrong. I would rather a race on equal terms, but to me that is utopia.. I had this debate decades ago and the same arguments.. I still remember when people on this forum assaulted others for pointing out that Armstrong was doping like a... infact I remember all the data showcased where people argued about it being natural etc... nobody question his cheating now.

Sadly.. unlike back then, when it went a bit overboard, today it is all about the "individuals" we have darlings (Pogacar is one of them) and they wont face any consequences, atleast as long as they are likeable.
Cycling is tainted and most likely will forever, even if its unfair, because I really love it when we see proper tactics, timings, etc. But now a days that is a rarity.


At the end of the day, I guess I could accept all the small nick nacks, as long as the riders were a little more human now and then and inconsistent.


I am yet to see this from Pogacar.. he is like a machine.. again I saw the same with many other tour winners.
Let's just say I have days when I am equally cynical as you. And sometimes I wish all doping was just legal. But then...

I think that's equally utopian. Because probably more riders would die as a result.

I agree about the scenery being the star. But then I must say I love the giro even more.

Tdf is like a drama series. Giro is like a costume movie. ;D
 
Maybe years from now, if the Tour de France is still going, they will joke about and enjoy swapping anecdotes on what the riders did to dope in the 2020's .
Just like we do now with old stories from last century about riders jumping in the back of trucks or onto trains and consuming alcohol and cocaine to aid performance.
These tales are repeated with big smiles on people's faces and almost a tear in their eye as they reminisce about the "good old days" of the tour.
What's the difference?
 
Let's just say I have days when I am equally cynical as you. And sometimes I wish all doping was just legal. But then...

I think that's equally utopian. Because probably more riders would die as a result.

I agree about the scenery being the star. But then I must say I love the giro even more.

Tdf is like a drama series. Giro is like a costume movie. ;D
I don't think everybody on a program.
 
Reactions: noob
In my country (easy spoiler now) Riis made cycling extremely popular back in the 90´s and that is why the tour have even started here this year (it all comes back to the foundation) But nobody.. as in nobody I know, believed Riis was clean in 96´ and he is not even the worse or most obvious that we have seen...
Out of curiosity; how old are you? I was only 10 in 96, but it was not my impression that people were aware of how widespread doping was in sports at the time, but it might have been because I was a kid. I think the general public only realised after the 98 Festina doping scandal. I definitely remember people being surprised by it.
 
Reactions: noob and Riek s
I don't think everybody on a program.
Me either. Not literally. And definitely not to the same degree. But...

When adding in factors like dictatorships and states well known for corruption then I really wonder.

Like the Rodchenkov the Russian story was extreme, but I doubt it won't be the last.

With states like Bahrain and UAE as sponsors I really think it's more likely with more extensive programs than for example Denmark and Belgium.

Or for that matter Italy is more known for corruption than Netherlands etc etc. Those contexts I believe does factor in.

Like it's no coincidence Russia had an extremely extensive doping program.
 
Oh and another factor for being more likely to dope of course is like in Lance case pathology.

I wasn't around to watch the Lance story. Or Froome. Not even Contador. But watching Pog, Van Aert etc I do enjoy looking for the signs.

Like I like to play "spot the dark triad" or other pathologies/diagnosis, because I'm nerdy that way.
 
Reactions: DrSahl
Me either. Not literally. And definitely not to the same degree. But...

When adding in factors like dictatorships and states well known for corruption then I really wonder.

Like the Rodchenkov the Russian story was extreme, but I doubt it won't be the last.

With states like Bahrain and UAE as sponsors I really think it's more likely with more extensive programs than for example Denmark and Belgium.

Or for that matter Italy is more known for corruption than Netherlands etc etc. Those contexts I believe does factor in.

Like it's no coincidence Russia had an extremely extensive doping program.
After what I had to learn about Germany in recent months my trust in seemingly trustworthy and not too corrupted countries is shattered.
 
Reactions: noob
After what I had to learn about Germany in recent months my trust in seemingly trustworthy and not too corrupted countries is shattered.
I do think full scale corruption is even worse in dictatorships but still it definitely happens in more stabilized countries too.

But! I feel you on having ones world shattered </3 When I first witnessed corruption in my own country it was a truly traumatic, an absolutely shockingly painful experience. Those things can be so immensely painful. Much more so than they are given credit for honestly. <3
 
Me either. Not literally. And definitely not to the same degree. But...

When adding in factors like dictatorships and states well known for corruption then I really wonder.

Like the Rodchenkov the Russian story was extreme, but I doubt it won't be the last.

With states like Bahrain and UAE as sponsors I really think it's more likely with more extensive programs than for example Denmark and Belgium.

Or for that matter Italy is more known for corruption than Netherlands etc etc. Those contexts I believe does factor in.

Like it's no coincidence Russia had an extremely extensive doping program.
Of course, Denmark is not a corrupt country at all. They just help the americans spy on European leaders like Merkel... and gives them the opportunity to spy on almost all European citizens. Meanwhile, they only arrested one person, their own spy chief who leaked this to the media.
 
Of course, Denmark is not a corrupt country at all. They just help the americans spy on European leaders like Merkel... and gives them the opportunity to spy on almost all European citizens. Meanwhile, they only arrested one person, their own spy chief who leaked this to the media.
What does that have to do with corruption? It's realpolitik (which I support). You could say just the same about the US nukes on Greenland during the first decades of the Cold War.

I find this kind of odious, defeatist, post-moral nihilism absolutely nauseating.

“Just accept that they’re doping! Just enjoy the lie!”

Actually, how about NO? How about the radical idea that cheating is wrong? Maybe a shared code of morals is actually important for humans living in a society where we have to trust and rely each other?

Maybe a cynical, juiced-up race to the bottom, where the most flagrant cheats and amoral narcissists win everything, is NOT good?
You can accept reality for what it is without enjoying nor supporting it. In turn, you don't have to deny what is real for you to oppose the practice. And yet it's possible to still enjoy the show with open eyes, not because of the doping, but despite of it.
 
I find this kind of odious, defeatist, post-moral nihilism absolutely nauseating.

“Just accept that they’re doping! Just enjoy the lie!”

Actually, how about NO? How about the radical idea that cheating is wrong? Maybe a shared code of morals is actually important for humans living in a society where we have to trust and rely each other?

Maybe a cynical, juiced-up race to the bottom, where the most flagrant cheats and amoral narcissists win everything, is NOT good?
Strong words, but it's not about whether or not one approves of doping or jaded cynicism. It's simply being willing to face reality and frankly admit that certain average speeds, certain climbing records still being smahed today, in the so-called clean age of cycling, can't be done on pane e acqua alone. As for a shared code of moral values and human society, it's ever a work in progress set against a constant level of more or less legalized corruption sanctioned by the state within the political-economic partnership.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: DrSahl
What does that have to do with corruption? It's realpolitik (which I support). You could say just the same about the US nukes on Greenland during the first decades of the Cold War.
It is still corruption and abuse of power even if you hide behind an overused word.

Which, combined with cheap slogans like american exceptionalism, makes people believe that americans can do whatever they want without any consequences. We are now back to the early 1950's when (West) Europe was a completely junior partner to the americans and helped them kill a third of the population of North Korea.

I guess no one wants to go the way of Olof Palme nowadays, or if they do, there is an endless propaganda and disinformation campaign trying to destroy them like they did in the UK with Corbyn.
 
Reactions: F_Cance
It is still corruption and abuse of power even if you hide behind an overused word.

Which, combined with cheap slogans like american exceptionalism, makes people believe that americans can do whatever they want without any consequences. We are now back to the early 1950's when (West) Europe was a completely junior partner to the americans and helped them kill a third of the population of North Korea.

I guess no one wants to go the way of Olof Palme nowadays, or if they do, there is an endless propaganda and disinformation campaign trying to destroy them like they did in the UK with Corbyn.
Yeah go ahead, spread more of your propaganda here.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY