Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[Gianetti_Is_The_Goat]

People in this thread have speculated that he uses blood bags, microdoses EPO and uses a motor.

I don't think he's referring to this thread.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Here's the evidence: draw your own conclusions.

Seems a stretch to make a paid-for article out of it.

 

[pelotonIQ]

People in this thread have speculated that he uses blood bags, microdoses EPO and uses a motor.

Motor-doping is ruled out, 0% chance since the bicycles are X-rayed and random strip-searched. If one get's caught, career immediately over. The days of hiding in hotel rooms doing blood transfusions are also over since the biological passports. We're left to microdosing EPO which doesn't make sense because Pogacar is putting better numbers than a doped up L.A so that points towards that he could be taking something in the grey-zone i.e non-banned or that is yet to be banned combined with his genetics, which there is proof of but since that isn't illegal or banned, the Pogacar accusers wont accept it.

 

[Casual cyclist]

It’s just money that can buy you anyone, nothing to do with Pogacar.

Could not have said it better myself. You've got to love that magical power of money in the modern mostly one-dimensional society. For the sake of quote completeness, I would only add "...anyone and anything..." which includes -- in the case at hand -- various cutting edge "smart assist" systems and also friendliness and good-natured "cooperation" of governing bodies and their employees.

Even without Pogacar they would be great

Especially given the last and this year developments, there can be little doubt left in the validity of that statement as well. In the sense that Pogo's personal pedal pushing ability appears to be of secondary importance, as witnessed by his easy fresh arrivals and permanent smiles -- defeated only occasionally by the perils of inclement weather. So yeah, if their choice had not fell on Pogo a few years ago, by all likelihood, the current crop of fans would have had another GOAT to adore.

 

[Ripper]

Even at the time when there was no proof of Armstrong, there were atleast suspicions/allegations of what he was taking, which was EPO amongst other things. When I ask the people that are hell-bent on Pogacar taking banned/illegal substances, they have no clue or idea what he could be taking.

EPO had been around quite some time by the time of Armstrong. In the earlier days of EPO use, a lot of people work who she is then did not know what was going on. I remember quite clearly, when Lemond was struggling after his comeback, in the early, early 90s, there was a lot of hypothesizing about what the problems were.

It's easy in hindsight to say things were more obvious when at the time, they were definitely not.

 

[Ripper]

That's correct. We don't know. We only know about the history of Saunier Duval. There are some differences though. Armstrong was a very controversial figure many people wanted to take down. There were also a lot of people involved.
Lessons have been learned since Armstrong. Sky was more discrete and UAE has taken it to another level. Everyone in that team has a shady history. You won't find an Emma O'Reilly On top of that: cycling journalism is dead. Nobody wants to experience what Walsh and Kimmage had to go through.

There are many suspicions around Pogacar. Allegations? No. You could say the same about Indurain or Gilbert 2011. Even Cancellara's antics in RvV and PR required an amateuristic Youtube video.

Also, Armstrong's GT transformation was right over the top, creating waves of reactions. And being post Festina (with a very different journalistic landscape), skepticism was rampant.

 

[Casual cyclist]

Motor-doping is ruled out, 0% chance since the bicycles are X-rayed and random strip-searched. If one get's caught, career immediately over.

About 40% of this sub-forum participants respectfully disagree. And 2/3 of those 40% disagree most decisively. You wonder why? It's called empirical evidence. This is what scientists sometimes call..., you know, things that can be seen directly by somebody's (pretty much everybody's in this case) eyes. Your righteous statements always seem to miss one important qualifier "in the perfect world". With that qualifier in place, I am sure, even those 40% would happily agree with you. Unfortunately, the world we all happen to currently live in is... slightly imperfect, let's put it this way. So the main condition of your theorems being absent, their conclusion is invalidated as well, I am sorry to say.

The days of hiding in hotel rooms doing blood transfusions are also over since the biological passports. We're left to microdosing EPO which doesn't make sense because Pogacar is putting better numbers than a doped up L.A so that points towards that he could be taking something in the grey-zone i.e non-banned or that is yet to be banned combined with his genetics, which there is proof of but since that isn't illegal or banned, the Pogacar accusers wont accept it.

Here we see this again. According to you, "micro-dosing" with possibly some innocent "grey-zone" stuff (advil, tylenol?), as far as results are concerned, walks all over the established "mega-dosing" of quite recent past. So much so, in fact, that the climbing times of those "mega-dosers" (and obvious natural climbers to boot -- think Pantani) are shattered by minutes, or, relatively speaking, by around 10%! That would be akin to improving the marathon record by over 12min, and that of 100m dash by about a full second! Think about that for a second if math is not your subject. As some folks jokingly mentioned on this thread, the sudden jack rabbit style restart of human biological evolution -- which lay dormant for 100,000 years or so -- would have to be brought in for a rational explanation of something like that. I guess, we should expect sub 9 second 100m runs and over 2.60m high jumps any time now.

 

[pelotonIQ]

About 40% of this sub-forum participants respectfully disagree. And 2/3 of those 40% disagree most decisively. You wonder why? It's called empirical evidence. This is what scientists sometimes call..., you know, things that can be seen directly by somebody's (pretty much everybody's in this case) eyes. Your righteous statements always seem to miss one important qualifier "in the perfect world". With that qualifier in place, I am sure, even those 40% would happily agree with you. Unfortunately, the world we all happen to currently live in is... slightly imperfect, let's put it this way. So the main condition of your theorems being absent, their conclusion is invalidated as well, I am sorry to say.

Here we see this again. According to you, "micro-dosing" with possibly some innocent "grey-zone" stuff (advil, tylenol?), as far as results are concerned, walks all over the established "mega-dosing" of quite recent past. So much so, in fact, that the climbing times of those "mega-dosers" (and obvious natural climbers to boot -- think Pantani) are shattered by minutes, or, relatively speaking, by around 10%! That would be akin to improving the marathon record by over 12min, and that of 100m dash by about a full second! Think about that for a second if math is not your subject. As some folks jokingly mentioned on this thread, the sudden jack rabbit style restart of human biological evolution -- which lay dormant for 100,000 years or so -- would have to be brought in for a rational explanation of something like that. I guess, we should expect sub 9 second 100m runs and over 2.60m high jumps any time now.

You're using a lot of big words but without coming to a point. Then you equate 'grey-zone' substances to tylenol and advil I can't take you serious. Then you make another strawman by saying that I said that hes mirodosing 'grey zone' substances. Don't you know that if something isn't banned/restricted, you don't have to micro-dose 🤦

 

[Casual cyclist]

You're using a lot of big words but without coming to a point. Then you equate 'grey-zone' substances to tylenol and advil I can't take you serious. Then you make another strawman by saying that I said that hes mirodosing 'grey zone' substances. Don't you know that if something isn't banned/restricted, you don't have to micro-dose 🤦

I said micro-dosing as opposed to mega-dosing EPO plus some "grey-zone", repeating your statements. Ok, now it is clearer. Pretty much all of this 10% has to be due to that unnamed "grey-area". Actually it has to be more than 10% since the micro-dosing is quite a step back from mega-dosing of the past riders, wouldn't you say? Good. So it is that "grey-area" that is so potent (giving 15% more or so, one would have to guess). Same conclusion: it should not take that long for that "grey-zone" magic to trickle down to other endurance athletes. Let's wait for those 12-15 minute improvements in marathon running times.

 

[pelotonIQ]

I said micro-dosing as opposed to mega-dosing EPO plus some "grey-zone", repeating your statements. Ok, now it is clearer. Pretty much all of this 10% has to be due to that unnamed "grey-area". Actually it has to be more than 10% since the micro-dosing is quite a step back from mega-dosing of the past riders, wouldn't you say? Good. So it is that "grey-area" that is so potent (giving 15% more or so, one would have to guess). Same conclusion: it should not take that long for that "grey-zone" magic to trickle down to other endurance athletes.

Are you not aware that world records are being broken in other endurance sports? Ever heard of Jakob Ingebrigtsen?

 

[Casual cyclist]

Are you not aware that world records are being broken in other endurance sports? Ever heard of Jakob Ingebrigtsen?

I understand that not everyone is a scientist or mathematician, and that's perfectly fine. But I used to assume that, in the modern world, everyone was aware of what percentage change is in things that can be quantified, like, for example, elapsed time -- in the case at hand. I just checked the athletic bio of the fine Norwegian distance runner referred to by you. A very talented individual, no question. Set a number of records including world ones. In particular, one record that came to my attention upon that quick perusal is that on 3000m run outdoors. The remarkable element about that record is that it stood for over two decades before being broken by Jacob in 2024.

Let us now look at the said percentage change. The old record was 7:20.67, or 440.67 seconds. The new record, set by Jacob, stands at 7:17.55, or 437.55 seconds. We have therefore an absolute improvement of 3.12 seconds which, in percentage, amounts to 3.12/440.67*100%=0.71%. That's less than 1%, as remarkable as it is! So, if you are correct about that magical "grey-zone" stuff Pogo is helping himself to, we should soon see Jacob (or, possibly, some other better "responder" to that mystical "grey" substance) to further drop that record by about 15% or approximately 437*15/100=65 seconds, i.e. by over a minute! Same should hold true with pretty much all long distances, not just 3000m.
So, as I said, let us sit and wait a bit. Should a year be sufficient for that "trickle-down"? What do you think?

 

[Ripper]

I understand that not everyone is a scientist or mathematician, and that's perfectly fine. But I used to assume that, in the modern world, everyone was aware of what percentage change is in things that can be quantified, like, for example, elapsed time -- in the case at hand. I just checked the athletic bio of the fine Norwegian distance runner referred to by you. A very talented individual, no question. Set a number of records including world ones. In particular, one record that came to my attention upon that quick perusal is that on 3000m run outdoors. The remarkable element about that record is that it stood for over two decades before being broken by Jacob in 2024.

Let us now look at the said percentage change. The old record was 7:20.67, or 440.67 seconds. The new record, set by Jacob, stands at 7:17.55, or 437.55 seconds. We have therefore an absolute improvement of 3.12 seconds which, in percentage, amounts to 3.12/440.67*100%=0.71%. That's less than 1%, as remarkable as it is! So, if you are correct about that magical "grey-zone" stuff Pogo is helping himself to, we should soon see Jacob (or, possibly, some other better "responder" to that mystical "grey" substance) to further drop that record by about 15% or approximately 437*15/100=65 seconds, i.e. by over a minute! Same should hold true with pretty much all long distances, not just 3000m.
So, as I said, let us sit and wait a bit. Should a year be sufficient for that "trickle-down"? What do you think?

I would add that most folks are quite aware that Track and Field has its own historical and present day issues with doping. And yes, the percentage change in many sports is not the level we are seeing in the road racing scene.

 

[Ripper]

Are you not aware that world records are being broken in other endurance sports? Ever heard of Jakob Ingebrigtsen?

What specific "grey zone" substances do you believe Pogi, Remco, and Vinnie are taking?

 

[Casual cyclist]

What specific "grey zone" substances do you believe Pogi, Remco, and Vinnie are taking?

For these guys, it is not that important. In their arguments, they mostly rely on the "magic of words". "Grey-area", "grey-zone" simply sounds mysteriously enough to amount to -- in their view -- an explanation of the inexplicable. Same with "generational" talent.

 

[SorelyBoy]

Nothing, not improvements in diet, training regimes, equipment, or human evolution (which happens across aeons, not merely a few generations) can adequately explain what has transpired since (checks notes) 2019/20 with Pogacar and his performances. He was acknowledged to be a talented but not otherwise remarkable rider in comparison to his peers. Until he signed up with UAE. Again, there are other indicators of compromise which we can associate with that team. Hitherto decent riders whose performances have improved drastically since signing with them. Adam Yates is an especially useful baseline in that he has a twin brother who also rides bicycles. His brother was always thought to be the superior of the two due to his better performances. A GT winner remember. Until Adam joins UAE. Then his performances start to far outstrip his hitherto better brother. Which could be down to Simon going off the boil, except Adam Gianetti developed an ability to ride consistently like a demon up those mountains in ways he had never previously shown an aptitude for.

 

[cnort]

EPO had been around quite some time by the time of Armstrong. In the earlier days of EPO use, a lot of people work who she is then did not know what was going on. I remember quite clearly, when Lemond was struggling after his comeback, in the early, early 90s, there was a lot of hypothesizing about what the problems were.

It's easy in hindsight to say things were more obvious when at the time, they were definitely not.

I started following cycling in 1989, and I remember the crazy stuff happening in the early 90s. I agree that for fans, it wasn't entirely clear how the Italians were suddenly so dominant. However, the Gewiss 1-2-3 and Ferrari's orange juice comment, both in 1994 I believe, made it quite apparent that "improved training methods" was a euphemism.

We might be in the early years of a new EPO, and maybe something will eventually leak out about it. I hope so and that it is pharmacological rather than motorized, because I'd like an explanation for the madness.

 

[pelotonIQ]

I understand that not everyone is a scientist or mathematician, and that's perfectly fine. But I used to assume that, in the modern world, everyone was aware of what percentage change is in things that can be quantified, like, for example, elapsed time -- in the case at hand. I just checked the athletic bio of the fine Norwegian distance runner referred to by you. A very talented individual, no question. Set a number of records including world ones. In particular, one record that came to my attention upon that quick perusal is that on 3000m run outdoors. The remarkable element about that record is that it stood for over two decades before being broken by Jacob in 2024.

Let us now look at the said percentage change. The old record was 7:20.67, or 440.67 seconds. The new record, set by Jacob, stands at 7:17.55, or 437.55 seconds. We have therefore an absolute improvement of 3.12 seconds which, in percentage, amounts to 3.12/440.67*100%=0.71%. That's less than 1%, as remarkable as it is! So, if you are correct about that magical "grey-zone" stuff Pogo is helping himself to, we should soon see Jacob (or, possibly, some other better "responder" to that mystical "grey" substance) to further drop that record by about 15% or approximately 437*15/100=65 seconds, i.e. by over a minute! Same should hold true with pretty much all long distances, not just 3000m.
So, as I said, let us sit and wait a bit. Should a year be sufficient for that "trickle-down"? What do you think?

That is a heck of a flawed way to compare 2 different sports. Of course the time gaps will be way smaller in short distance running than in cycling. Are you serious?

 

[topcat]

What specific "grey zone" substances do you believe Pogi, Remco, and Vinnie are taking?

I'm starting to go grey but I mask it well.
On the list, off the list: what he's doing is out of bounds.
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/news/wadas-2025-prohibited-list-now-force

 

[pelotonIQ]

What specific "grey zone" substances do you believe Pogi, Remco, and Vinnie are taking?

Like I mentioned earlier, Visma and UAE used the CO-rebreather method before it eventually got banned. That is an example of something that was in the 'grey-zone' which means teams are using non banned methods to their advantage. What specific banned substance do you believe Pogi, Remco and Vinnie are taking?

 

[topcat]

Like I mentioned earlier, Visma and UAE used the CO-rebreather method before it eventually got banned. That is an example of something that was in the 'grey-zone' which means teams are using non banned methods to their advantage. What specific banned substance do you believe Pogi, Remco and Vinnie are taking?

Was the CO-rebreather used to induce hypoxia? I'm sure you can give us the answer.

 

[cnort]

I understand that not everyone is a scientist or mathematician, and that's perfectly fine. But I used to assume that, in the modern world, everyone was aware of what percentage change is in things that can be quantified, like, for example, elapsed time -- in the case at hand. I just checked the athletic bio of the fine Norwegian distance runner referred to by you. A very talented individual, no question. Set a number of records including world ones. In particular, one record that came to my attention upon that quick perusal is that on 3000m run outdoors. The remarkable element about that record is that it stood for over two decades before being broken by Jacob in 2024.

Let us now look at the said percentage change. The old record was 7:20.67, or 440.67 seconds. The new record, set by Jacob, stands at 7:17.55, or 437.55 seconds. We have therefore an absolute improvement of 3.12 seconds which, in percentage, amounts to 3.12/440.67*100%=0.71%. That's less than 1%, as remarkable as it is! So, if you are correct about that magical "grey-zone" stuff Pogo is helping himself to, we should soon see Jacob (or, possibly, some other better "responder" to that mystical "grey" substance) to further drop that record by about 15% or approximately 437*15/100=65 seconds, i.e. by over a minute! Same should hold true with pretty much all long distances, not just 3000m.
So, as I said, let us sit and wait a bit. Should a year be sufficient for that "trickle-down"? What do you think?

I don't disagree with this per se, but I suspect the conditions in track and field are much more consistent and reproduceable. The distances stay the same. The training, diet and footwear have improved, and I don't know how much that has helped.

In cycling the climb itself is the same length, but how they get there, the days leading up to it, the assistance available on the climb, weather, bikes, road surface - they've all changed to a greater or lesser extent. With more variables at play, you could imagine there is more scope for improvement in a 40 minute climb than an 8 minute run.

Having said that, knocking 3 minutes off a Pantani record is ludicrous and, as has been pointed out in the Clinic, conditions and bike weights are not so different to the late 90s. To knock 10% off a record by a great climber with full EPO assistance is not explained by porridge and zone 2.

 

[Netserk]

Like I mentioned earlier, Visma and UAE used the CO-rebreather method before it eventually got banned. That is an example of something that was in the 'grey-zone' which means teams are using non banned methods to their advantage. What specific banned substance do you believe Pogi, Remco and Vinnie are taking?

It is not currently banned, but it is regulated and restricted. Performance enhancing use was already banned under S2.1.2: https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/2025list_en_final_clean_12_september_2024.pdf

 

[Casual cyclist]

That is a heck of a flawed way to compare 2 different sports. Of course the time gaps will be way smaller in short distance running than in cycling. Are you serious?

One more time for the folks with exclusively humanitarian education (but you still have to be able to count money, right?). We are talking relative improvement, the so called percentages, for the mathematically uninitiated. Example: if the previous record in anything was equal to 1 hour, then 1% improvement would amount to... 60*0.01 =0.6 minutes or 36 seconds. If another record was equal to 10 hours, then the equally impressive improvement would amount to 10*0.01=0.1 hours, or 6 minutes. We have 36 seconds in the first instance and 6 minutes in the second. But they represent the same relative improvement and therefore are equally surprising/impressive. Now, if someone were to improve that first record of 1 hour by 6 minutes, that would be a whopping 10% and therefore much, much more surprising/impressive than the 6 minute improvement in the second instance.

And that is what your boy on the team you are so vigorously trying to defend is doing. Last year he (casually!) improved Pantani's climbing record on that famous TDF by about 10%, from 40min down about 4. This would be fully equivalent (sorry for the use of "scientific" words) to that Norwegian runner dropping about 45 seconds from the 3000m running record which, in reality, he improved only by 3.

Now I could ask you to give me a single rational reason as to why a relative improvement could possibly differ by an order of magnitude (sorry about one more "scientific" language bit) in different endurance sports, but I won't. Simply because there is no rational reasons like that.

A word of advice, if I may, as an older and more knowledgeable person: do yourself a favor, young man, and stop fighting for the lost cause. What you are trying to prove is quite simply rationally unprovable. Go to the main Pogo thread and revel in the joy of "watching history" while the show continues.

 

[Casual cyclist]

I don't disagree with this per se, but I suspect the conditions in track and field are much more consistent and reproduceable. The distances stay the same. The training, diet and footwear have improved, and I don't know how much that has helped.

In cycling the climb itself is the same length, but how they get there, the days leading up to it, the assistance available on the climb, weather, bikes, road surface - they've all changed to a greater or lesser extent. With more variables at play, you could imagine there is more scope for improvement in a 40 minute climb than an 8 minute run.

Having said that, knocking 3 minutes off a Pantani record is ludicrous and, as has been pointed out in the Clinic, conditions and bike weights are not so different to the late 90s. To knock 10% off a record by a great climber with full EPO assistance is not explained by porridge and zone 2.

Absolutely correct. And neither can it be explained by the use of same or equivalent doping program.

 

[Ripper]

It is not currently banned, but it is regulated and restricted. Performance enhancing use was already banned under S2.1.2: https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/2025list_en_final_clean_12_september_2024.pdf

Are you referring to the section below?

M1.2. Artificially enhancing the uptake, transport or delivery of oxygen. Including, but not limited to: Perfluorochemicals; efaproxiral (RSR13); voxelotor and modified haemoglobin products, e.g. haemoglobin-based blood substitutes and microencapsulated haemoglobin products, excluding supplemental oxygen by inhalation.