Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[yaco]

[1] No I did not do that. I wrote a rather lengthy post where I explained what I did, everybody else seemed to get it. There might be some nuance to it but it's hardly apocryphal. If you don't understand the difference despite being explained to you it's not on me.
[2] Again I addressed that. We cannot. TEsts can be beaten, not adminestered, samples can get lost or inadvertently destroyed (Tyler Hamilton says hi). There are plenty, multitudes of examples which conveniently you choose to ignore despite being one google search away. But I am not going to do it for you
[3] A clean rider is a rider that is not using chemical, or mechanical doping. And because I sense an attempt at sophistry here, a given substance does not have to be in the list of banned substances to be considered perfromance enhancing. There is a broader definition of what is doping based on the purpose and effect of said substance.

[4] His exploits on La Redoute have been extensively analysed by others. Worth a read.
[5] Says who? Paula Radcliffe (for example) had 3 adverse biological passport findings and noone knew nothing about it until a TV programme brought it to light. Let me repeat myself again for your benefit
a) we have established that tests can be beaten or results changed.
b) we have established that federations collude with star athletes to bury advserse findings, (and the UCI is one of the worst offenders)
c) you yourself implied in 3 that he might be using something that's not known yet (which of course IS doping)

You still haven't explained how he can be that much better, not compared to his contemporaries (which have also done ridiculous things) but compared to riders such as Armstrong and Pantani, that used "bags of blood and EPO" in your words.

Point three. We may as well give up sport if as a professional athlete you are not seeking to improve. Athletes or coaches will always ( and they should ) use nutrition as a key pillar to enhane performance.

You mention the word Doping which is over-used in the sports vernacular. It's pretty simple. There is moral doping which is using or experimenting with substances or methods which means you are WADA compliant, while there is administrative doping which means you are not WADA compliant. Everything and anything which a team does to improve performances such as training, equipment, nutrition etc could be construed as moral doping.

Finally, it would be embarrassing for the sport if today's riders are not riding faster than 30 or 40 years ago.

 

[pelotonIQ]

[1] No I did not do that. I wrote a rather lengthy post where I explained what I did, everybody else seemed to get it. There might be some nuance to it but it's hardly apocryphal. If you don't understand the difference despite being explained to you it's not on me.

You keep doing it, you have no idea whether Pogacar is doping i.e taking something banned or not but since you believe he is doping, you bring up Lance Armstrong to compare and draw parallels.

[2] Again I addressed that. We cannot. TEsts can be beaten, not adminestered, samples can get lost or inadvertently destroyed (Tyler Hamilton says hi). There are plenty, multitudes of examples which conveniently you choose to ignore despite being one google search away. But I am not going to do it for you

If tests can be beaten, why are you in favor of having them? When I asked you what you would do if you were in the place of the UCI and anti-doping you said ''I would start by testing him... Him and his bike(s).'' So, which is it? You'd still call Pogacar a doper even though he does every single one of your tests

[3] A clean rider is a rider that is not using chemical, or mechanical doping. And because I sense an attempt at sophistry here, a given substance does not have to be in the list of banned substances to be considered perfromance enhancing. There is a broader definition of what is doping based on the purpose and effect of said substance.

Then we have a different idea of what a 'clean' rider is, I don't see anything wrong with performance enhancing as long it's not banned. It's up to the UCI and anti-doping to conduct their research, stay updated and be on top of things.

[4] His exploits on La Redoute have been extensively analysed by others. Worth a read.

I see no links, is it only me?

[5] Says who? Paula Radcliffe (for example) had 3 adverse biological passport findings and noone knew nothing about it until a TV programme brought it to light. Let me repeat myself again for your benefit
a) we have established that tests can be beaten or results changed.
b) we have established that federations collude with star athletes to bury advserse findings, (and the UCI is one of the worst offenders)
c) you yourself implied in 3 that he might be using something that's not known yet (which of course IS doping)

Paula Radcliffe was wrongly accused, they misinterpreted the data. The case was dropped and she wasn't guilty. Why are you saying things that aren't true?

Paula Radcliffe cleared by IAAF over doping allegations

The IAAF has given its support to Paula Radcliffe and said there were “plausible explanations” behind the abnormal blood values leaked to the media

www.theguardian.com

You still haven't explained how he can be that much better, not compared to his contemporaries (which have also done ridiculous things) but compared to riders such as Armstrong and Pantani, that used "bags of blood and EPO" in your words.

Are you insisting that Pogacar uses the same ''stuff' as Armstrong and now Pantani? You're hell-bent on Pogacar using something illegal when there is no indication or evidence of that. On the other hand there is evidence of UAE, Visma and maybe other top teams using ''stuff/methods'' in the grey zone.

 

[Divergence]

Let's take it one step at a time then. Say, the bunch was moving at a certain speed v before Pogo's bike burst of power. That required, for example, a steady 600W of power, most of which went into the increase of their potential energy in the gravitational field since they were going up quite a steep hill. Some power was also required to produce work against air and rolling resistance as well as the totality of internal friction. Up a steep hill, all those are relatively small. While the speed is constant, no power is used to increase the kinetic energy. Let us then say that Pogo+bike's Newton-like acceleration increased the speed from v to 1.5v.

What was the power during that burst and directly after when Pogo and his bike bike pretty much maintained the extra speed for a while? First of all, the power needed to maintain a higher speed increased mostly proportionally to the speed increase. (Actually it had to increase a bit more since the power going into potential energy increase grew proportionally, but that needed to do work against air and rolling resistance grew faster -- roughly as third and second power of speed, respectively.)

Then, during the acceleration period, some more power -- that is on top on what was required to maintain the given instantaneous speed -- was needed to increase the Pogo+bike kinetic energy. How large was that increase? Assuming the mass of Pogo+bike system to be about 72kg, the initial speed of 6m/c and the speed after the acceleration period of 9m/s, we obtain 72*(9^2-6^2)/2=1620 J. Assuming the time during which the acceleration was taking place to be 3s (it happened mighty quickly, remember), we obtain the average of 1620/3=540W worth of extra power. Now, towards the end of the acceleration episode, when the speed of 9m/s was almost gained, we have the total instantaneous power of roughly 1.5*600+540=1440W. The acceleration could last a bit longer and likely was not exactly constant and Pogo+bike power probably never went to quite that number, but the ballpark of numbers is pretty clear and pretty telling. wouldn't you say? And I do not even want to mention what kind of pedal force would a motor-free seated dirty-faced Pogo have to exert on the poor pedals and how realistic that would be. You can do that math yourself. 🙂

P.S. As a small off-topic bit, but slightly Newton laws related: I happen to have a PhD in physics. Do you?

I do not quite understand your analysis here. Say 600W would be enough for a steady velocity of v and 900W for 1.5v. Then the increase of KE happens during the time 900W is being produced but 1.5v is not quite reached (during this time dv/dt >0). Once the forces are balanced again he moves with constant 1.5v and no acceleration happens.
Math and Electrical Engineering here btw.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

Finally, it would be embarrassing for the sport if today's riders are not riding faster than 30 or 40 years ago.

Why would it be embarrassing when we know some riders reached HCT levels of over 60% 30 years ago?
I personally find it more embarrassing when riders are able to match records from that time.

 

[Red Rick]

Why would it be embarrassing when we know some riders reached HCT levels of over 60% 30 years ago?
I personally find it more embarrassing when riders are able to match records from that time.

The most embarrassing part is pretending humans discovered carbohydrates over a century after Einstein's theory of relativity to justify the performance jumps

 

[Raest]

Point three. We may as well give up sport if as a professional athlete you are not seeking to improve. Athletes or coaches will always ( and they should ) use nutrition as a key pillar to enhane performance.

You mention the word Doping which is over-used in the sports vernacular. It's pretty simple. There is moral doping which is using or experimenting with substances or methods which means you are WADA compliant, while there is administrative doping which means you are not WADA compliant. Everything and anything which a team does to improve performances such as training, equipment, nutrition etc could be construed as moral doping.

Finally, it would be embarrassing for the sport if today's riders are not riding faster than 30 or 40 years ago.

WTF is "moral" doping? Patting one on the back?
You'd find it embarrassing for the sport if riders didn't ride faster than Armstrong and Pantani?

 

[Raest]

[1]You keep doing it, you have no idea whether Pogacar is doping i.e taking something banned or not but since you believe he is doping, you bring up Lance Armstrong to compare and draw parallels.

[2]If tests can be beaten, why are you in favor of having them? When I asked you what you would do if you were in the place of the UCI and anti-doping you said ''I would start by testing him... Him and his bike(s).'' So, which is it? You'd still call Pogacar a doper even though he does every single one of your tests

[3]Then we have a different idea of what a 'clean' rider is, I don't see anything wrong with performance enhancing as long it's not banned. It's up to the UCI and anti-doping to conduct their research, stay updated and be on top of things.

I see no links, is it only me?

[4]Paula Radcliffe was wrongly accused, they misinterpreted the data. The case was dropped and she wasn't guilty. Why are you saying things that aren't true?

Paula Radcliffe cleared by IAAF over doping allegations

The IAAF has given its support to Paula Radcliffe and said there were “plausible explanations” behind the abnormal blood values leaked to the media

www.theguardian.com

[5]Are you insisting that Pogacar uses the same ''stuff' as Armstrong and now Pantani? You're hell-bent on Pogacar using something illegal when there is no indication or evidence of that. On the other hand there is evidence of UAE, Visma and maybe other top teams using ''stuff/methods'' in the grey zone.

[1] When I see Superman fly over I won't need a blood test to know he isn't human. I drew parallels with the garbage people spewed at the time to justify Armstrong's performance. Clearly you missed that so when, eventually (two posts ago) I actually compared his performance to Armstrong I made it explicit so that you can understand it. I failed as you keep claiming that I compared him to Armstrong.
[2] Because there is nothing else. And to spell it out for you (again) I don't believe that he is being tested properly or even at all.
[3] Then explain to us what performance enhancing he is doing that is so much more effective than "bags of blood and EPO".
[4] The case was dropped on a technicality which was allowed exactly because the passport is circumventable. Which was my point.
[5] None of the grey zone stuff explains his performance levels, not just his of course but he is the most blatant one.

 

[SorelyBoy]

Some people use to flip out at Sky’s marginal gains programme. But that’s what it was. *Marginal* gains. Little advantages eked out through better designed training schedules, better diet, more rest, by pushing certain medical (ahem) boundaries. But nothing, nothing like what we appear to be witnessing now and certainly nothing in terms of performance outcomes.
Do we expect riders to get faster overall? Yes, but incrementally. Shavings. What we’re seeing now is the equivalent of what Johnson and Flo Jo did back in the day, but week in week out. Doping doesn’t entirely explain it. And especially judging by the circus act we witnessed on Sunday, I’d say cycling has a big effing problem.

 

[topcat]

I think I might try it: Fake an asthma diagnosis, take salbutamol for the boost and to mask the other drugs, ahem I mean for my lungs, and go on to crush all the little people. I could be the next Froome or Indurain. If I test positive for Salbutamol, I'll have plausible deniability and it will go away.
But Pog is different, he would never do anything wrong.

 

[Raest]

For the record I am just glad you are not propagating the motor doping nonsense. I can accept Pogi is doping but I cannot accept motors. The problems of the passport are of a legal and motivational point of view. I think if the passport were strictly administered there would be much less wiggle room. Your post suggests this isn't happening.

It was established long ago that autologous doping is detectable via the passport. And in theory EPO micro-dosing can't cover all the markers tracked which is why I reposted the ABP a day or so ago - recopied below. The markers tracked are under 2.1.1 Haematological Module.

Everyone who makes opinion here needs to read this. The only way this gets circumvented is lack of motivation by the UCI and the level of proof set by lawyers being too high. I am sure that could be challenged in court to but then that comes back to motivation (and money).

https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/athlete-biological-passport-abp-operating-guidelines

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/commons-committees/culture-media-and-sport/WADAs-athlete-doping-prevalence-survey.pdf

Current markers of the Athlete Blood Passport do not flag microdose EPO doping - PubMed

The Athlete Blood Passport is the most recent tool adopted by anti-doping authorities to detect athletes using performance-enhancing drugs such as recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO). This strategy relies on detecting abnormal variations in haematological variables caused by doping, against...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[yaco]

Why would it be embarrassing when we know some riders reached HCT levels of over 60% 30 years ago?
I personally find it more embarrassing when riders are able to match records from that time.

Well then cycling has gone backwards as a sport. Every sport in the world has got faster and stronger.

 

[yaco]

WTF is "moral" doping? Patting one on the back?
You'd find it embarrassing for the sport if riders didn't ride faster than Armstrong and Pantani?

There is such a thing as human and society evolution where humans advance in all aspects of their life. And of course this applies to sport where evolution means athletes are getting faster and stronger.

 

[E_F_]

There is such a thing as human and society evolution where humans advance in all aspects of their life. And of course this applies to sport where evolution means athletes are getting faster and stronger.

"Evolution"? Like in the Darwin sense? In less than 30 years?

 

[E_F_]

Well then cycling has gone backwards as a sport. Every sport in the world has got faster and stronger.

Their blood was so thick that they had to get up constantly at night, to avoid having their heart stop beating. Death was literally the only barrier. No way to beat that, which doesn't involve doping. It's as simple as that.

 

[Raest]

There is such a thing as human and society evolution where humans advance in all aspects of their life. And of course this applies to sport where evolution means athletes are getting faster and stronger.

One could argue that judging from the current state of western societies this is unlikely but we are not discussing societal change but physiological change. Human physiology is exactly the same as it was 30 years ago. Nothing has changed.

 

[Ripper]

I think I might try it: Fake an asthma diagnosis, take salbutamol for the boost and to mask the other drugs, ahem I mean for my lungs, and go on to crush all the little people. I could be the next Froome or Indurain. If I test positive for Salbutamol, I'll have plausible deniability and it will go away.
But Pog is different, he would never do anything wrong.

No need to fake it, you just need the right doctor or expert to diagnose it and prescribe it

Salbutamol isn't enough 🤪💩

 

[pelotonIQ]

[1] When I see Superman fly over I won't need a blood test to know he isn't human. I drew parallels with the garbage people spewed at the time to justify Armstrong's performance. Clearly you missed that so when, eventually (two posts ago) I actually compared his performance to Armstrong I made it explicit so that you can understand it. I failed as you keep claiming that I compared him to Armstrong.

[3] Then explain to us what performance enhancing he is doing that is so much more effective than "bags of blood and EPO".

[5] None of the grey zone stuff explains his performance levels, not just his of course but he is the most blatant one.

I've already told you that I believe that all top cyclists are on grey-zone substances that may or may not get banned in the future depending on the research of anti-doping. There's proof of that. What makes you think that blood doping & EPO are the most effective methods? What if Pogacar is also genetically gifted combined with grey-zone? What if new training methods and the ability to take in more carbs/hour than ever before in addition to being genetically gifted together with grey-zone. Many what-if's yet you're still hell-bent on the idea that he is taking illegal and banned substances and still can't explain what and how he's taking them.

[2] Because there is nothing else. And to spell it out for you (again) I don't believe that he is being tested properly or even at all.

Let me spell it out for you for the 3rd time. I asked you how would you go about to catch Pogacar, you replied ''I would start by testing him... Him and his bike(s).'', and in the hypothetical scenario where you're in charge of anti-doping and hes being tested however you want, you'd still call him a doper because all tests are ''circumventable''. You're accusing Pogacar of taking illegal/banned substances whilst having no clue about what he's taking and no idea on how to catch him

[4] The case was dropped on a technicality which was allowed exactly because the passport is circumventable. Which was my point.

What technicality? Elaborate. I'm still waiting for links of the so called ''Redoute analysis'' you said was worth reading. Do they exist? Surely they'd only strengthen your arguments, so why haven't you posted them?

 

[Casual cyclist]

I do not quite understand your analysis here. Say 600W would be enough for a steady velocity of v and 900W for 1.5v. Then the increase of KE happens during the time 900W is being produced but 1.5v is not quite reached (during this time dv/dt >0). Once the forces are balanced again he moves with constant 1.5v and no acceleration happens.
Math and Electrical Engineering here btw.

Let us then draw (in our heads) the graph of the deduced Pogo+bike system produced power as a function of time. Up to the moment the acceleration starts, we have a constant 600W (horizontal line on our graph). Then we have an instantaneous in our model (very quick in reality) jump to 600+540=1140W. At the moment acceleration begins, the speed is still 6m/s, so first term in that sum (power going into potential energy increase) is still 600W. Then the speed starts growing, and the first term grows as well (say, linearly) from 600W to 900W. The acceleration is still in place during that whole second period and the power producing it (the part of it going into kinetic energy increase) is still (in our model) a constant 540W. Thus the power grows from the initial value of 1140W to the final one of 900+540=1440W. Now the acceleration is finally done, and the power drops instantaneously (in our simplified model) to the new constant value of 600+300=900W where it continues until the finish or close to it. So we indeed have a peak power of over 1400W which had to be maintained for at least a couple of pedal strokes. The latter would require, according to our earlier calculation, a force of 2 (two!) Pogo's body weights. And he still exerted that seated?!!! Are you going to give me that break or do I have to take it from you? 🙂

Remember also that we've totally neglected the supralinear dependence of the constant velocity component of the required power on the velocity itself. That power consists -- when going up a steep hill -- of the "gravity fighting" component and that producing work against air and rolling resistance (plus a bit of internal friction as well). Now, the first component, as we noted, is the dominant one on a hill like Huy, and it exhibits linear dependence. But the air resistance at 9m/s is already quite significant exceeding that at 6m/s by a factor of approximately 1.5^3=3.3 (rounding down to your benefit). So, in our model, that constant component of power, to which Pogo+bike system goes to after the acceleration phase is done, would be more than 900W.

Now that we have done -- at your prompt -- these simple approximate calculations, I actually start thinking that the power of Pogo's bike assist that he seemingly activated by an under-hood button press was more than even 500W (easy-peasy for a brushless+lipo system -- I know that from experience). In fact, the likely reason he did not stand on the pedals and looked somewhat "disjointed" during that acceleration phase was that the assist -- "dialed' by the old ghoul Mauro -- was so strong that he was literally afraid to lose his balance by standing on the pedals. That also explains his unhappy look at the finish.🙂

P.S, You can easily feel the power dependence we discussed here by doing, for example, a standing time trial start. In the beginning you really mash the pedals (standing, of course) and can literally feel the power flowing through you (it is still easy at this point as you are totally fresh). Then you reach your intended cruising speed (say, 45 km/h) and, in spite of your speed being the highest so far, can get back on the saddle as the power demand has just dropped.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

He did a sub 40 plateue de beille man. 39.50.

Doped to the eyeballs goat climber pantani did 43.20
Doped to the eyeballs contador and Rasmussen did 44.08 in 2007

Froome, Valverde and contador, all with doping blemishes or bans, did 45:31 in 2015

39.50 man. Sub 40 minutes. After destroying everyone and winning at pla d'adet the day previously in scorching heat

 

[Netserk]

He did a sub 40 plateue de beille man. 39.50.

Doped to the eyeballs goat climber pantani did 43.20
Doped to the eyeballs contador and Rasmussen did 44.08 in 2007

Froome, Valverde and contador, all with doping blemishes or bans, did 45:31 in 2015

39.50 man. Sub 40 minutes

But have you taken evolution into account?

 

[Raest]

[1]I've already told you that I believe that all top cyclists are on grey-zone substances that may or may not get banned in the future depending on the research of anti-doping. There's proof of that. What makes you think that blood doping & EPO are the most effective methods? What if Pogacar is also genetically gifted combined with grey-zone? What if new training methods and the ability to take in more carbs/hour than ever before in addition to being genetically gifted together with grey-zone. Many what-if's yet you're still hell-bent on the idea that he is taking illegal and banned substances and still can't explain what and how he's taking them.

[2]Let me spell it out for you for the 3rd time. I asked you how would you go about to catch Pogacar, you replied ''I would start by testing him... Him and his bike(s).'', and in the hypothetical scenario where you're in charge of anti-doping and hes being tested however you want, you'd still call him a doper because all tests are ''circumventable''. You're accusing Pogacar of taking illegal/banned substances whilst having no clue about what he's taking and no idea on how to catch him

[3]What technicality? Elaborate. I'm still waiting for links of the so called ''Redoute analysis'' you said was worth reading. Do they exist? Surely they'd only strengthen your arguments, so why haven't you posted them?

[1] That's just obfuscation. A way for you to say that he is probably doping but you don't call it doping you call it "grey zone" that might be legal (only it's actually doping as it was explained to you). What if he is genetically gifted? Every top cyclist is genetically gifted they are all outliers. Training methods? His training protocol is rather simple, he has gone over it many times (unless he lied of course). His coach has trained other athletes that have gone to other teams, it's not rocket science or anything top secret, it's exercise physiology. What's next? Ah yes the FAD of the month, increase carbs consumption, training the gut and so on. Except that carbs do nothing for power outputs they only alleviate the effects of fatigue.
[2] I've answered your question, you keep ignoring the answer. Not my problem. I don't need to know what he takes and how he takes it to know that his results are illegally enchanced. I've told you before, I don't need a blood test to know that Superman is not human. There is nothing in the scientific literature to explain his performance. And I've provided examples from the scientific literature that show (and explain) that the anti-doping tests can be circumvented.
[3] It wasn't even a technicality they just dismissed the allegation claiming that it misrepresented her blood values but there was no explanation as to how it did so. It's not the first time UKAD did this of course, they pretty much did something similar with Wiggins, Froome and Farah.

 

[AttaqueDeRolland]

You're hell-bent on Pogacar using something illegal when there is no indication or evidence of that.

Evidence or proof? No. There's none of that. But to act as if there are no "indications" is absurd and so detached from reality that it's bordering on outright delusion.

• Pogi just had arguably the best season of all time.
• He sets record after record, whether it's climbs or average speeds, easily beating EPO-era guys like Pantani, Riis, etc.
• He "peaks" from February through October, something we've mainly seen from "suspicious" riders like Valverde.
• He excels in all thinkable terrain, there's absolutely no way people wouldn't question it if Froome or Contador had dominated spring classics like Pogi does, or if Cancellara or Boonen had started competing for Grand Tours.
• And then we can start listing all the suspicious people with whom he is associated:
  • Mauro Gianetti, first and foremost. Famously almost doped himself to death. Was then part of the notorious Saunier-Duval.
  • Matxin Fernandez, Gianetti's partner in crime at Saunier-Duval.
  • Neil Stephens, DS at UAE in 2019 and 2020, was part of Festina, admitted to doping, and later part of Liberty Seguros, which had loads and loads of incidents.
  • Fabrizio Guidi, DS at UAE, had several incidents in his career and was part of both Phonak and Polti.
  • Manuele Mori, DS at UAE, was part of Saunier-Duval under Gianetti and Matxin alongside Bertogliati, and was involved in the Mantova investigation.
  • Marco Marcato, DS at UAE, was part of Vacansoleil, involved with Dr. Ferrari.
  • Aart Vierhouten, DS at UAE in 2022, was part of both Rabobank and Vacansoleil, the latter of which abused TUEs.
  • Andrej Hauptmann, DS at UAE, DNS'ed the Tour in 2000 because of unnaturally high haematocrit values.
  • Rubens Bertogliati, DS at UAE, part of the 2002 Lampre incident, later part of Saunier-Duval under Gianetti and Matxin alongside Mori.
  • Martin Hvastija, Slovenian national team youth coach who worked with Pogi during Pogi's youth, was famously excluded from the Tour in 2004 after he was part of the Blitz investigation in Italy.
• UAE is generally just run by people who ran one of the absolutely most notorious doping-case-ridden teams in the history of the sport. I won't say that Pogi is guilty by association, but the mere fact that his bosses are Gianetti and Matxin makes it completely valid and legitimate to ask critical questions.

Odds are that I have forgotten other dubious associates.

Look, it's completely legitimate to say: There is no concrete evidence or proof. But to pretend that there are no "indications" is some grade-A BS. If the reasons listed above are not enough to merit the notion of "indications," then there has similarly never been any "indications" for the likes of Padun or Foliforov.

 

[Froome]

Say no to drugs.

 

[yaco]

One could argue that judging from the current state of western societies this is unlikely but we are not discussing societal change but physiological change. Human physiology is exactly the same as it was 30 years ago. Nothing has changed.

What. You cant compare the training regime of 30 years to today. 30 years ago in many sports you weren't even allowed to have a drink during a training session because you were considered weak. Athletes are much better prepared than 30 years ago, whether it is specific training, equipment, rest, nutrition, the use of monitoring devices to test training loads etc,etc, etc. We are no longer living in the Stone Age. Of course some athletes in all sports continue to take banned substances or operate in the grey zone, but the fact is that in every endurance sport times are quicker and will continue to get quicker. I can't accept the argument that there should never be advancements in aspects of life or otherwise, we would never be communicatring over the internet.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

Evidence or proof? No. There's none of that. But to act as if there are no "indications" is absurd and so detached from reality that it's bordering on outright delusion.

• Pogi just had arguably the best season of all time.
• He sets record after record, whether it's climbs or average speeds, easily beating EPO-era guys like Pantani, Riis, etc.
• He "peaks" from February through October, something we've mainly seen from "suspicious" riders like Valverde.
• He excels in all thinkable terrain, there's absolutely no way people wouldn't question it if Froome or Contador had dominated spring classics like Pogi does, or if Cancellara or Boonen had started competing for Grand Tours.
• And then we can start listing all the suspicious people with whom he is associated:
  • Mauro Gianetti, first and foremost. Famously almost doped himself to death. Was then part of the notorious Saunier-Duval.
  • Matxin Fernandez, Gianetti's partner in crime at Saunier-Duval.
  • Neil Stephens, DS at UAE in 2019 and 2020, was part of Festina, admitted to doping, and later part of Liberty Seguros, which had loads and loads of incidents.
  • Fabrizio Guidi, DS at UAE, had several incidents in his career and was part of both Phonak and Polti.
  • Manuele Mori, DS at UAE, was part of Saunier-Duval under Gianetti and Matxin alongside Bertogliati, and was involved in the Mantova investigation.
  • Marco Marcato, DS at UAE, was part of Vacansoleil, involved with Dr. Ferrari.
  • Aart Vierhouten, DS at UAE in 2022, was part of both Rabobank and Vacansoleil, the latter of which abused TUEs.
  • Andrej Hauptmann, DS at UAE, DNS'ed the Tour in 2000 because of unnaturally high haematocrit values.
  • Rubens Bertogliati, DS at UAE, part of the 2002 Lampre incident, later part of Saunier-Duval under Gianetti and Matxin alongside Mori.
  • Martin Hvastija, Slovenian national team youth coach who worked with Pogi during Pogi's youth, was famously excluded from the Tour in 2004 after he was part of the Blitz investigation in Italy.
• UAE is generally just run by people who ran one of the absolutely most notorious doping-case-ridden teams in the history of the sport. I won't say that Pogi is guilty by association, but the mere fact that his bosses are Gianetti and Matxin makes it completely valid and legitimate to ask critical questions.

Odds are that I have forgotten other dubious associates.

Look, it's completely legitimate to say: There is no concrete evidence or proof. But to pretend that there are no "indications" is some grade-A BS. If the reasons listed above are not enough to merit the notion of "indications," then there has similarly never been any "indications" for the likes of Padun or Foliforov.

To be fair, it's still not that easy to come across teams that don't have any ex-dopers or or other dodgy people among their staffs.