Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[MartinGT]

LOL

Has someone turned back time to the 90s?

 

[BullsFan22]

I mean, at least Armstrong had the grace and intelligence to pick his stages and share out the baubles with the lesser mortals. Pogacar wants to win everything and grind everyone into dust. Neither does there appear to be any attempt to conserve energy, probably in the knowledge that he doesn’t need to, that there will be no real impact on his energy and performance levels. Or if there is, then no one is going to be able to capitalise because the gap to the rest is so great in any case. That arrogance/exuberance (take your pick) can be his Kryptonite, especially when up against someone who can pick him off over a few days at high altitude (Jonas) but unfortunately this race is already over bar an accident. Overall I just don’t believe what I’m seeing, but it sure the hell isn’t sport, and I’m also sick of listening to the Eurosport ‘isn’t he amazing’ crap. No he’s not amazing, he’s a very naughty boy.

Then don’t watch. Nobody’s forcing you to follow races he is in.

 

[Cookster15]

LOL

Has someone turned back time to the 90s?

Which GC rider did this in the 90s?

 

[Red Rick]

Oooh, the real Teddy? 'roid rage?!
https://cyclinguptodate.com/cycling...uments-that-giro-is-won-before-it-even-starts

Proceeds to race literally as if it's all about him.

 

[SorelyBoy]

Then don’t watch. Nobody’s forcing you to follow races he is in.

Without actually realising it, you’ve just identified the problem with doping. Apart from robbing clean riders of their just rewards, their glory, riders and teams who dope represent an existential threat to the sport. They’re enemies of the sport because if people can’t believe what they’re seeing people *will* stop watching it. I’ve seen plenty of comments on these pages to that effect. If they stop watching then sponsors will withdraw, TV will do the same, and that’s the end. We’ve seen this happening to athletics, and it almost happened to cycling post Armstrong. And yet all the same people from that era, bar a few sacrificial offerings are still hanging around doing pulling the same crap they’ve always pulled. Human beings. They don’t effing learn.

 

[SorelyBoy]

Which GC rider did this in the 90s?

Quite a few of them. You should look it up.

 

[Cookster15]

Quite a few of them. You should look it up.

It should not be difficult to quote one then. I watched racing in the 90s.

 

[BullsFan22]

Without actually realising it, you’ve just identified the problem with doping. Apart from robbing clean riders of their just rewards, their glory, riders and teams who dope represent an existential threat to the sport. They’re enemies of the sport because if people can’t believe what they’re seeing people *will* stop watching it. I’ve seen plenty of comments on these pages to that effect. If they stop watching then sponsors will withdraw, TV will do the same, and that’s the end. We’ve seen this happening to athletics, and it almost happened to cycling post Armstrong. And yet all the same people from that era, bar a few sacrificial offerings are still hanging around doing pulling the same crap they’ve always pulled. Human beings. They don’t effing learn.

Who exactly are these ‘clean riders?’ Name one.

 

[SorelyBoy]

It should not be difficult to quote one then. I watched racing in the 90s

I’d start with the Festina Affair and take it from there.

 

[SorelyBoy]

Who exactly are these ‘clean riders?’ Name one.

Why?

 

[GuntherL1]

Who exactly are these ‘clean riders?’ Name one.

Evenepoel. Pidcock. Possibly Roglic.

 

[BullsFan22]

Evenepoel. Pidcock. Possibly Roglic.

What constitutes a ‘clean’ rider?

 

[nayr497]

I think the majority of pro peloton guys are probably using something to the best of their own/team's wallet capabilities.

But having 3-4 guys race 10 months a year and win by wide margins and contest every stage of a GT really makes me lose interest in following at all. This type of winning and winning across all parcours by a few guys wasn't the norm in the Lance era or the Sky era. It makes me much less interested in tuning in.

 

[Nick2413]

I've seen Pumping Iron a few times and I think Arnold and that whole generation of bodybuilders looked so much better and more natural (despite the steroids and whatever else), their bodies and muscles looked well-defined and well-proportioned. (Especially Arnold.) The muscle monsters of today look like bloated freaks who look more like cartoons... of course, the bodybuilding community has standards of its own, to them the obvious steroid freak (like Ronnie Coleman or Jay Cutler) looks beautiful, I guess.

I don’t follow closely but I think they’re getting a bit away from the HGH gut these days. Peak size was Ronnie Coleman around 15 years ago then peak gut with the Phil Heath era 5-10 years ago and now it seems attention is less focused on the bloated gut look. The “physique” competitors look the most like the old school days and are gaining popularity I think. The synthol and mass at all costs got disgusting.

 

[Rob5091]

Just for curiousity's sake has anyone compared Teddy's numbers to peak Lance? I know it'll be a bit like apples and oranges but just to see how much aero gels and altitude nutrition have made clean riders so much better.

 

[noob]

I didn't watch it. I still haven't. I literally only saw the first update in this thread after the race and knew what had happened instantly.

I guess for someone who registered on this forum for the clinic I should be happy. But this doesn't even fascinate me. It's just too hilarious. Clearly the guy has but 1 goal; to beat Merx. And seems Merx himself hopes it happens too. I guess this is the only competition there is.

 

[GuntherL1]

I think the majority of pro peloton guys are probably using something to the best of their own/team's wallet capabilities.

But having 3-4 guys race 10 months a year and win by wide margins and contest every stage of a GT really makes me lose interest in following at all. This type of winning and winning across all parcours by a few guys wasn't the norm in the Lance era or the Sky era. It makes me much less interested in tuning in.

I only see 1 guy doing that.

 

[kingjr]

I think the majority of pro peloton guys are probably using something to the best of their own/team's wallet capabilities.

But having 3-4 guys race 10 months a year and win by wide margins and contest every stage of a GT really makes me lose interest in following at all. This type of winning and winning across all parcours by a few guys wasn't the norm in the Lance era or the Sky era. It makes me much less interested in tuning in.

It's not that this doesn't happen in other sports where doping isn't really a factor.

 

[nayr497]

I only see 1 guy doing that.

Yeah, probably true. But van der Poel and Van Aert are still devouring Classics and plenty of stages in GTs. We haven't seen a rider do that in quite some time.

But yes, Pogacar truly is the lone outlier. Guys used to lean on their speciality to win a GT or win a specific Classic. Now we have guys winning on all types of parcours and in both one-days and GTs. All sports are more and more specialized, so to suddenly have all-arounders who are a level above is just tough to accept.

 

[Netserk]

It's not that this doesn't happen in other sports where doping isn't really a factor.

I can't think of an example of that, but maybe it's because I misunderstand what you mean by "this" and "sports where doping isn't really a factor".

 

[kingjr]

I can't think of an example of that, but maybe it's because I misunderstand what you mean by "this" and "sports where doping isn't really a factor".

"having 3-4 guys race 10 months a year and win by wide margins and contest every stage of a GT"

I don't believe this would be any less likely to occur without any doping at all.

 

[Netserk]

"having 3-4 guys race 10 months a year and win by wide margins and contest every stage of a GT"

I don't believe this would be any less likely to occur without any doping at all.

Plausibly. But what does that have to do with other sports?

 

[QueenStagiaire]

"having 3-4 guys race 10 months a year and win by wide margins and contest every stage of a GT"

I don't believe this would be any less likely to occur without any doping at all.

It would be less likely without doping because with doping there are the two factors of aerobic talent/leg muscle makeup and doping response on top of it. Of course those are intertwined but in general, doping adds another factor you can be talented at, thus making the disparity between the outliers and the average pro bigger.
This added margin for error allows those aerobic freak-super responders to fight for victories year round instead of having to focus on one or two main goals.

 

[QueenStagiaire]

Plausibly. But what does that have to do with other sports?

I think the debate was about a few guys dominating all season long and if this makes people lose interest in cycling. If I understand this correctly, the argument here is that other sports are similar oligopolies and thus cycling wouldn‘t be at a competitive disadvantage in the sports market because of doping.

 

[kingjr]

Plausibly. But what does that have to do with other sports?

Looking at examples in other sports (or types of competition) suggests that superiority of a select few or just one competitor over the rest is possible without foul play. QueenStagiaire basically already addressed this above, specifically with regard to a sport like cycling. "there are the two factors of aerobic talent/leg muscle makeup and doping response on top of it [...]"doping adds another factor you can be talented at, thus making the disparity between the outliers and the average pro bigger" my question now would be how much bigger.