Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[Extinction]

Damn Jonas has 10 watts less than Pogacar but i didnt see you at his clinic page much, i am shocked by this.Second place in Tour after that crash and not a lot post from you, its look like you normalize this or dont even care.

Apart from this, let's analyze things. Pog was hurt last year and still got second. Vingo was hurt this year and still got second. Even score, evidently. The difference, however, is that this year Vingo put up his best numbers, despite the crash, so we should imagine that a crashless Pog might have closed the gap from last year (even more if Vingo's numbers can be believed this year), but not dominated him beyond all probability. Pog gave, in other words, the best Vingegaard the deficit accrued last year plus dividends. And I'm playing monopoly, a thoroughly repugnant game.

 

[Oldermanish]

Cadence from my experience falls into "style". There are those who fare well at a certain cadence/rhythm that are more efficient than Beethoven versus Bach. It's an art, you see? But who is superior Beethoven or Bach, at this level?

Agreed 100% In TTs it was spin into the wind and crush big gears on the tailwind leg; mindful of keeping a somewhat proximate cadence.
Climbing....I hate spinning and like the occasional bigger gear boost out of the saddle; then spin awhile. I couldn't imitate a Roglic cadence unless it was super steep and had the gearing for it. Then it would be a short imitation at best. Old habits die hard.

 

[AnotherArmChair]

The region and countries of Slovenia/Croatia are great sporting nations. Especially considering their small populations.

Throughout multiple sports.... Slovenia has or has had athletes like Doncic, Oblak, Kopitar, Maze, Majdic, Roglic, Pog, Ceh and many others. The next generation growing up during and after the war has been incredible.

Success, same or to an even more extent, is something that Croatia has had.

Maybe more countries should study how they been able to grow and achieve it. How they, both Slovenia and Croatia, are developing and nurturing athletes throughout so many different sports into some of the best in the world in their respective field. Both team and individual sports.

And yet the countries who are best at the Olympics where success is measure per capita or adjusted using probability models are as follows.....Croatia nor Slovenia are not on these lists ? And yet we should study them ???

Which countries exceeded expectations?
Use the dropdown to compare gold and total medal counts to other metrics, including the probability model ('goldilocks model') designed by academics to take differences in population into account. Last updated 12 August 2024
Ranking: Medals per 100bn GDPMedals per 10m peopleProbability modelExpected medalsWeighted medals

Country ▼	Gold medals ▼	Total medals ▼	Probability model ▼
Australia	18	53	41.648
France	16	64	32.659
Great Britain	14	65	32.415
Netherlands	15	34	26.403
United States	40	126	22.682

The nations exceeding expectations based on capita​

Image caption,
The USA finished 47th when measuring medals by a size of population measure

 

[AnotherArmChair]

Talking about naivety, I find the religious belief in doping being the one and only answer to anything exceptional in cycling quite naive. I get that it's a simple, black-and-white answer to things we don't understand, but from perusing this and other forums looking for any kind of hard evidence or indications of wrongdoing, it's quite striking how bare the cupboard is currently. Rather than a sign of superior critical thinking skills, the unflinching conviction about large-scale doping of so many cycling fans is a pure leap of faith.

Now, I hold an equally steadfast belief in the contrary. If doping were as endemic as some seem to believe, I find it quite incredible that no one in or around the sport has blown the whistle about it. Doping is a nice catch-all that we all hate. But that also goes for the many people engaged with the sport whose livelihoods are at stake. Don't try to tell me that the entire professional circuit, including journalists and all the passionate volunteers and fans of the sport, would accept cheating. If some major scheme involves one or more teams, new methods, and such, we will have some sort of sniff of it by now. Yet, at the moment, the only argument for doping seems to be that the performances are too good, without any science backing the claims about a hard limit to human performance on the bike or that we're surpassing it.

When it comes to a scheme by an individual team (i.e. UAE), the same thing goes. They have the most talented rider, and they can financially dope to basically buy half his rivals, all without the risks of doping. I don't understand why they would opt for a complex extra doping scheme. Riders talk, staff talk, they change teams, and in the end, this stuff always comes out somehow. The weight of risk and reward seems deeply skewed in the wrong direction, and as sports washing goes, it seems like exactly the thing you would not want your name on. That does not exclude riders doing stuff, but it does not seem plausible there's a large operation behind it.

A specific UAE scheme would also not explain the overall rising speed in the peloton, only specifically their dominance. Like in other sports, cycling is extremely unequal economically, and like in other sports, the distance between the best and the rest is increasing. This means that, realistically, UAE only has a couple of real competitors. JV is close to them but has had a disastrous season. Ineos is giving up. Who else would compete? I think the top teams buying up all the talent is a better explanation for their dominance this season, as with JV's dominance last year.

As for the man himself, Pog is obviously an outlier even if we accept rising speeds or UAE financial muscles. However, across sports, there are always outliers. It does not seem unreasonable to suggest that's the case also in cycling, where until recently, the talent pool was basically Belgium, some French and Italian communes, + weird loners around the world. For one, I find Messi's imperious talent for football, far beyond any of the 100s of millions of global fanatics, far more impressive. As for his progression, he's been the best cyclist in the world since he was 21. If you had told me in 2020, he would be unbeatable at 26, and it would seem completely within the realms of possibility as a career progression. Not to speak of the well-known improvements in all aspects of his preparation. It seems that the kid who won the Tour was far from the finished product, and far from the well-groomed professional. Which is also a normal thing for a young guy in a not-optimised team. It was also commonly known that JV was miles ahead of UAE some years ago in terms of its setup and professionalism. It seems Pog won the tour twice based on pure raw talent, which is arguably even more incredible than the current iteration as a fully developed steed in a well-oiled machine of a team.

Ultimately, the same argument applies to him as to the team: I'm sure he looks for any possible way to improve, but he was already at the top, already the best rider with the biggest salary for the best and richest team. Why would he do something to risk all that when he had room for improvement to arrive at JV's level of preparation even without risking it by hatching up an illegal scheme?

When it comes down to it, as there's not the slightest proof that something is largely wrong in the peloton, a belief in large-scale doping is simply a personal leap of faith. You may choose to believe what the riders are doing is impossible, although I have yet to see anyone give any weighty arguments for why it would be beyond human capabilities. You may also believe that the level difference between Pog and the rest is impossible, but again, sport is full of outliers, and I don't think you would find many people claiming Pog is the most dominant sportsperson ever.

I understand why people believe Pog/Uae/Peloton are doping. Of course, it's within the realm of possibility. But we should also accept that it's just as possible that they are clean. Not doing either is plainly naive and grossly exaggerates the extent of our knowledge of the situation. Of course, it's a personal choice to decide which myth to believe in. For my own part, I prefer enjoying the show, admiring the athletes, and believing that it will all come out, one way or the other. It's not naive; it's just accepting the limits of our knowledge and accepting to live with that uncertainty as a part of life.

However, I do keep a very close eye on this thread, as I trust the more misanthropic contributors on this forum will quickly alert me if more substantial indications of wrongdoing rise to the surface. Thank you all for wading through the vale of performance-enhanced tears so that the rest of us can experience the era of the cycling Messias in blissful ignorance!

PS: Wow, talking about chemically enhanced performances, that cup of coffee must have increased my rant length by at least 20%. I trust the Forum Antidoping Agency will take action.

You accuse cycling fans who believe in doping as lacking critical thinking ( in a very condescending manner btw) and yet you say "For my own part, I prefer enjoying the show, admiring the athletes, and believing that it will all come out, one way or the other. It's not naive; it's just accepting the limits of our knowledge and accepting to live with that uncertainty as a part of life.". How is this any better in critical thinking ? Who says it will come out well in the end or who wants to admire a show ? Critical thinking is believing that doping is as big a possibility as non doping which your posts leans very definitely away from and thus has the approval of Pogacar fans on here.


"Now, I hold an equally steadfast belief in the contrary. If doping were as endemic as some seem to believe, I find it quite incredible that no one in or around the sport has blown the whistle about it" It would seem you know nothing of the history of cycling , over many decades of the sport. How many years did Armstrong dominate without whistle blowers or other GT winners

. "When it comes down to it, as there's not the slightest proof that something is largely wrong in the peloton, a belief in large-scale doping is simply a personal leap of faith" There is where you are wrong. Absence of evidence is not proof of absence of wrong doing and thus should not be dismissed as a leap of faith, . Many contributors have pointed to the history of the sport where wrong doing was covered up for years and years , where omerta existed and where behind the scenes even today there are many reasons including the omerta, patronage and science of testing and control lagging behind as to why doping is a valid possibility , that should be explored without ridicule .What have people to guide their 'lack of believe" in sudden leaps in performance ( Pog from 2023 to 2024 for one ) other than abnormal performance and disquiet on comparisons with other riders.

" However, I do keep a very close eye on this thread, as I trust the more misanthropic contributors on this forum will quickly alert me if more substantial indications of wrongdoing rise to the surface. Thank you all for wading through the vale of performance-enhanced tears so that the rest of us can experience the era of the cycling Messias in blissful ignorance!" What is misanthropic about believing in doping which has given the history of cycling , a greater probability of existing in the peloton at least for some riders than not existing . Of course your efforts to balance your arguments with at least a nod to the possibility of doping rings hollow if you are enjoying cycling Messiahs in blissful ignorance and you feel the need to silence the doubters with ridicule . You views are very clear through the waffle you don't harbour the belief for one minute that Pog may be using enhancing methods as it doesn't suit your needs for him to be a clean champion. Pluuuuuuusssseee hold up the looking glass .

 

[Extinction]

Agreed 100% In TTs it was spin into the wind and crush big gears on the tailwind leg; mindful of keeping a somewhat proximate cadence.
Climbing....I hate spinning and like the occasional bigger gear boost out of the saddle; then spin awhile. I couldn't imitate a Roglic cadence unless it was super steep and had the gearing for it. Then it would be a short imitation at best. Old habits die hard.

7 watts per kg at 100 rpm is the same as 7 watts per kg at 80 rpm.

 

[Extinction]

You accuse cycling fans who believe in doping as lacking critical thinking ( in a very condescending manner btw) and yet you say "For my own part, I prefer enjoying the show, admiring the athletes, and believing that it will all come out, one way or the other. It's not naive; it's just accepting the limits of our knowledge and accepting to live with that uncertainty as a part of life.". How is this any better in critical thinking ? Who says it will come out well in the end or who wants to admire a show ? Critical thinking is believing that doping is as big a possibility as non doping which your posts leans very definitely away from and thus has the approval of Pogacar fans on here.


"Now, I hold an equally steadfast belief in the contrary. If doping were as endemic as some seem to believe, I find it quite incredible that no one in or around the sport has blown the whistle about it" It would seem you know nothing of the history of cycling , over many decades of the sport. How many years did Armstrong dominate without whistle blowers or other GT winners

. "When it comes down to it, as there's not the slightest proof that something is largely wrong in the peloton, a belief in large-scale doping is simply a personal leap of faith" There is where you are wrong. Absence of evidence is not proof of absence of wrong doing and thus should not be dismissed as a leap of faith, . Many contributors have pointed to the history of the sport where wrong doing was covered up for years and years , where omerta existed and where behind the scenes even today there are many reasons including the omerta, patronage and science of testing and control lagging behind as to why doping is a valid possibility , that should be explored without ridicule .What have people to guide their 'lack of believe" in sudden leaps in performance ( Pog from 2023 to 2024 for one ) other than abnormal performance and disquiet on comparisons with other riders.

" However, I do keep a very close eye on this thread, as I trust the more misanthropic contributors on this forum will quickly alert me if more substantial indications of wrongdoing rise to the surface. Thank you all for wading through the vale of performance-enhanced tears so that the rest of us can experience the era of the cycling Messias in blissful ignorance!" What is misanthropic about believing in doping which has given the history of cycling , a greater probability of existing in the peloton at least for some riders than not existing . Of course your efforts to balance your arguments with at least a nod to the possibility of doping rings hollow if you are enjoying cycling Messiahs in blissful ignorance and you feel the need to silence the doubters with ridicule . You views are very clear through the waffle you don't harbour the belief for one minute that Pog may be using enhancing methods as it doesn't suit your needs for him to be a clean champion. Pluuuuuuusssseee hold up the looking glass .

I've come to the conclusion that the poster in question is simply a sort of not very clever defense lawyer with an agenda, whose condscending lecturing becomes merely grotesque and absurd, when we consider the simple fact that the architects/engineers of team Pogi are Gianetti-Matxin. I wouldn't believe the fiction anyway, but that it happens on a team run by them makes me irate.