The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
The higher lactate threshold and clearance were excuses that Armstrong's camp made back in the 00s. It doesn't mean of course that it's false but I'd guess that pretty much every elite endurance athlete have a (much) higher than average lactate threshold.
This makes more sense than most other explanations imo, I don’t know anything else about it other than the above though.
what exactly should they say ? what excuse would clinic investigators believe, it doesnt matter what they say some people have already decided; athlete to good, clearly doping, probably the only sport in the world "fans" are reacting like this.
Not an expert on anything but I think motors is more likely than genetic engineering. I'd say the most likely is pushing more traditional methods and maybe some new tweaks (like monoxide) further than others because UAE are protected by money armor and less timid regarding rider health etc.
Listen, you clearly don't get it, cycling doesn't work that way. I shall spell this out for you. If Pogacar under Giannetti-Matxin puts a string of seasons together like this one, the other teams will get pi$$ed. You get my meaning? Since they know how the game is played and the sponsors will stop wanting to invest in losers. What will happen is either they (Giannetti-Matxin) dial it back a bit, to give the others some breathing space and a piece of the pie, or Pogacar gets brought down. In the first case they will say he won the Tour at 21, thus the aging effect set in early, or the competition got better (meaning he was doped over the top, so we had to calm it down). Mark my words.
No one is forcing you to read this topic if you don't like the reactions we are having.
why not ? since Seinfeld is not more this is a good alternative
The racing sucks and it’s directly attributable to what can only realistically be a destructive amount of doping. The sport has become unwatchable this year for anyone not religiously devoted to this one rider.
You have followed the sport for the last 30, 40 years, no? Had you, you would have no doubts or if you have and still have faith, then I have a used car to sell you (or a nice pair of glasses). It's a great deal!
That is possible. But, at the same time, one should not underestimate the intellectual level (or, rather, lack thereof) of the current crop of new fans of the instagram/tik-tok generation. As for other riders losing interest in the whole thing if the circus goes too far, one also should not underestimate the power of money. An average person these days will put up with a lot if paid a little extra. The vast majority of the pro peloton goes without any significant wins their whole career anyway.
That is certainly the case. It is cheap sci-fi. There is even a disclaimer provided: that complicated looking text about "CRISPR" is said to be AI generated, i.e. produced by an entity with no brain at all. Of course, there exists an abstract possibility of producing positive genetic changes and making a person stronger, faster longer lived... Just like there exist an abstract possibility of organizing a successful manned mission to Mars, for instance. Moreover, both of these will be done some day. But not today and not tomorrow. The modern science and technology is not even close yet.
Yeah, but the vast majority of pro cyclists get paid to help their leaders win. If their leaders don't win anymore then the sponsors pull out or drastically lower wages. It's the market baby. If over a prolonged period one leader is a hog (through "piggy eating up the slop" or devouring new slop), then sooner or later the competition and the union gets infuriated, then hostile. We haven't quite gotten to that point yet, but, if he keeps this up, the tables will inevitably turn on him. It's like tax invasion. You can't be a pig or else, sooner or later, they come after you.
This is the best thread ever, because we are talking about the biggest cheater of all time.
Do you also consider xenon a smokescreen, a simple-minded idea?
As long as were not beeing hypocrits right. Hes just the best of all time the hate is awkward.
I agree to what you are saying and consider this scenario fairly likely at this point. I am just not quite sure that such "sponsor mutiny" is inevitable. First, sponsors can surely be incentivized by the overall system to endure the circus a bit longer. Second, just think about how many riders -- even team leaders -- actually do get big wins, and for how many teams -- and respective sponsors -- just placings, stages etc. are enough to stay interested. Take Pinot, for example, the rider I liked quite a lot, by the way. He was a centerpiece of his team for quite a long time and achieved some very good results. But how many of them were big wins? Lombardia, Tour podium and then some top 5's and 10's in grand tours. Three stages in TDF and a few more in Giro and Vuelta. The sponsors stayed relatively happy all that time and did not pull out. Now take the current circus scenario. The new Merckx (and even better, according to the old Eddy himself) is cannibalizing all the big wins (with something still left to Matt vdP, Remco and maybe a couple more lucky ones). The official narrative goes like: "What a time to be a cycling fan!", "We feel blessed to live now!" etc., i.e. just like now. So the relatively minor placings by "normal" riders take on a higher significance: "He took 5th in TDF in the great Pog era." etc. Sponsors might just be happy with that. We will see where the circus goes in the next couple of years.
I love Pinot, who kisses his donkies, but he is French and satisfied that market by almost being the first viable contender for the Tour since alas Hinault. The great hope as it were. Yet this won't satisfy global financial expectations. The new mega-sponsors with no history in the sport just want the big prizes, otherwise they turn to sailing or whatever. The quaint historical compensations of lesser victories/placings are no longer relevant today. It's a viscious competitive beast, with doping the only constant. The Romans said if you want peace make war. In response to this, according to Tacitus, the Scottish chief Calgagus said of the Romans: " ...they make a desert and call it peace (ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant)". Well if the present war being played out with Pogacar turns into a desert, there might not be anybody left to enjoy the peace, because the sport shall be dead. The teams feel this presure and know a rigged game cannot go beyond certain limits or else collapse.
I´m sorry but have you noticed the progress that Pogacar made this winter? He didn´t just tart cycling, he was already 25 years, 2 times TDF winner, multiple monument winner and dominant no 1 in the world...no way it is a natural progression to improve your level around 10% and beating every other rider by a margin...
The fact that almost all of the 2nd tier guys posted their best "numbers" suggests the technology, such as it is; is shared across the teams. Pogacar's version is certainly more potent. As for UAE's role in all of it IMO we all likely share the same opinion. Not good for the sport.
But we ask ourselves, why does a nation like UAE invest so fragrantly in the sport at all? Is cycling popular in that country? Are there any real financial incentives for those invested to fund cycling, other then expanding capital portfolios? Who watches cycling in UAE? We know the answer, but we might get censored for pointing this out.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram