Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

Page 368 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 20, 2011
1
14
8,540
Very long-time lurker (no idea why I chose that username back in the day) but thought I'd finally chip in. This is all like a big, giant puzzle that we're all helping each other to solve. I've been following cycling since 2003 so I've seen my fair share but this is all just something else, as most of you also seem to agree. I'll go through the thoughts I've had on the whole motor question after just setting the scene.

So, what is going on with Pogacar, that is the big question. We already know the facts - a rider that wins in every terrain, all year round, without looking tired, and who went from being the best cyclist in the world to suddenly being by far the best during winter 2023/24, now producing watts that are absolutely unheard of.

It almost seems like there are two of him by now. There's a surprisingly human one that comes out once in a while (Le Lioran, Amstel, Dauphiné time trial the other day) and reminds us of the Pogacar of 2019-23, but that one is so far always followed by the super machine that absolutely cripples everyone else. Where, for other riders, a bad day is often sign that more bad days are coming, for Pogacar a bad day is sign that he is going to destroy everyone a few days after.

Why does the question of motors keep coming up? Probably because it lets us fit a lot of things together that we now have a hard time explaining because we're missing that 'something' (for example, a new drug) that might otherwise explain things. Unless, of course, you buy the Javier Sola story, which you might, but which you probably don't unless you're new to cycling

The use of motors is, on the face of it, a ludicrous idea. I still think so, but not as much as I used to. Looking into it over the past couple of years, my attitude has changed mainly because there's now just so much smoke about past use that - given the history of cycling - it is not unreasonable to claim there may have been a fire. We have the chief of the French Anti-Doping Agency being told by insiders that 12 riders used motors during the 2015 Tour (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-investigates-hidden-motors-and-pro-cycling/), we had the by now famous French documentary showing what may very well have been use of motors during Strade in 2016 (that video has now been taken down from YouTube, I see), there's the LeMond saying he heard that Cancellara used motors (
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNFyYjKCcKU
), and then there's former UCI anti-motordoping tsar Péraud who just last year said that he was "confident it’s not happening any more" (https://spectrum.ieee.org/motor-doping-cycling). That is, confident it's not happening "any more". And lastly, there's the journalists speaking out in the Ghost In the Machine podcast who seem certain that it was going on, who have found evidence that a pro team bought motorized bikes, but who just cannot get someone to speak out publicly. There's also a former pro in that podcast saying that motorized bikes were used.

So, by now there's now a lot of people who need to be lying for no particular reason (nobody's become rich claiming something on motors) if we still want to claim that motors weren't used in the past. So, if it was happening 10 years ago, why wouldn't it be happening today? I think that's an interesting question.

There are two often-heard claims against the motordoping theory. One is not very good, the other better, I think.

The first one is that UCI would not allow it, that they would easily catch the ones doing. I don't believe that. They apparently haven't found the people using motors in the past. And say Pogacar was using a motor, and you put yourself in the shoes of the UCI. What do you do? Imagine you catch him using a motor and go public, and you have the biggest cycling scandal ever. You then probably lose the sponsorships of the UAE - who sponsor two cycling teams, one of the biggest cycling races, who sponsor the World Championships on road in 2028 and track in 2029, and who are indirectly the main sponsor behind the UCI's e-bike World Championships. The UCI have NO interest in catching Pogacar. This fits how the UCI tried to hide Armstrong's and Contador's doping cases. Most probably, they don't check bikes in a very thorough manner - they do just enough to show that something is being done but not enough to ever catch someone. And if you follow Lappartient on Twitter, you can see him glorifying Pogacar - no way he wants to take him down.

One should remember that many of the big cycling busts have come with the help of police investigations. This was because doping was seen as a threat to public health. But there's no threat to public health here, so the police won't care. Another vessel of doping busts were journalists. But cycling journalism has mostly become fanboy-ism. Everyone's a freelancer these days needing their next contract so nobody wants to mess with the show. In Denmark, we used to have some quite good, critical journalists (who played large parts in getting Riis and Michael Rasmussen down) but none of these are in cycling journalism anymore; instead, because of the great success of Danish cycling, nobody probably is allowed to rock the boat anymore.

The better objection against use of motors is that, if one team is using them, why not others? There's no good argument here, only that perhaps some teams are less willing to take that risk than others. Reading Michael Rasmussen's memoirs, it's clear that the old Rabobank leadership were never supportive of the full doping programme that Rasmussen needed to win the Tour, they always tried to hold him back a little from those last blood bags at the right time, seemingly afraid of the consequences. It may also be that there's a technical aspect where one team has an advantage, not unlike Formula 1 where you might also say "why don't the others just do this" - and the answer is that they don't know exactly what the others are doing.

So, none of this proves that Pogacar is using a motor. But the motor explanation just helps us right now. It explains the massive increase in ability between 2023 and 2024. It explains the seated accelerations. It explains why he's never tired, it explains how he can be so good all the time, how he can increase his level massively from one day to the other, and may also explain why he seems less and less happy to actually win. It doesn't, however, explain why he just once in a while doesn't perform. What was wrong on the time trial the other day? Why was Pogacar so interested in Vingegaard's bike?

Here's a theory I had: Pogacar is a true winner, above all else he wants to win. He was humiliated on Comboux in 2023. How could Vingegaard be so good, he must have thought, I did pretty well myself. Ok so, during winter 2023/24, UAE conjure up something. They quickly realize that this is just some next level stuff they've found, whatever it is. They know that people are going to ask questions. So, they leak some information of the transformed Pogacar to the most gullible, attention-seeking people around them that they know of. And there's somebody who catches on to it, his name is mou. So now mou spreads all these stories about the transformed Pogacar and the better training and so on, so that when Pogacar turns on the heat in the third week of the Tour 2024, it comes as less of a surprise. Of course he's so good now, UAE can then say, people already knew of this back in March! And now there's no turning back. Pogacar and UAE are too big to fail.

And a last interesting point, there's talk in the peloton - not about motors per se, but about whether UAE are doping or not. Some in the peloton think they are, said Magnus Cort in a recent interview (unfortunately behind paywall now: https://www.feltet.dk/nyheder/tanker_om_pogacar_og_ucis_dumme_boeder/10830607)
 
Jul 15, 2023
85
277
1,080
Hang on guys. Some are claiming on here that motor doping wouldn't be possible because it would be impossible to hide. That's very naive. Consider that doping programmes have become more and more sophisticated over the decades. Types of drugs. Different usage levels. Types of countermeasures to avoid detection such as masking agents etc. The programmes have developed in both scope and sophistication. We know they happened almost in plain sight and probably still do. We also know some of them were just plain crude and stupid (Hi Floyd). So why would we think that motor doping techniques and sophistication wouldn't both develop over time and vary depending on relative levels of intelligence and resource availability? History tells us that technology, whether bio or mechanical, with the right amount of investment, can be developed to avoid almost any detection technique currently available. After all, such detection systems can be easily replicated and tested against in a lab to help develop motorised systems that can defeat them. Much like malware can be developed to avoid antimalware systems. And what else do we know? Well, that human nature doesn't change. Some human beings are greedy and open to being corrupted, and cycling has historically been shown to be as vulnerable to such people as any other walk of life, maybe more so even. You think that couldn't happen again, that the ultimate detection avoidance technique (collusion, paying people off) couldn't be triggered by a cycling team that, say, just happened to be managed by documented cheats and a petrostate with limitless funds and zero scruples? Open your eyes.
 
Not sure I understand. Pogacar already had an underwhelming TT this week by his standards so this statement is plainly wrong. Asking why every race shouldn't be won also seems to relate to Armstrong's 'no gifts' statement in 2004. How would Vingegaard or anyone else feel if Pogacar gifted them a win - dare I say humiliated?

I also really doubt its got anything to do with Pogacar wanting to humiliate the opposition or lacking self confidence. Pogacar was on the receiving end of such a beating just two years back.
Armstrong gifted a stage win to Basso in 2004, and Vingegaard did explicitly say after stage 20 last year that he hoped that Pogi wouldn't contest the stage win.
 
It may also be that there's a technical aspect where one team has an advantage, not unlike Formula 1 where you might also say "why don't the others just do this" - and the answer is that they don't know exactly what the others are doing.
The problem with this IMO is that it's hard to imagine what that "technical aspect" could even be. The major obstacle to motors is making them undetectable to casual observers, but that technological hurdle was cleared eons ago. If the UCI isn't really looking for motors, then there are no real technical limitations and the only limit is how obvious you're willing to make it look. Which is something where pushing the envelop could give you a temporary edge, but once your rivals saw there were no repercussions even though you were literally making vroom vroom noises with your mouth as you sped up the mountains then why wouldn't they increase the power of their own motors? It would be trivial to do so, as far as I can tell.
 
People are talking about motors without proof. I have an idea: let's buy a Colnago Tadej edition bike and inspect it. If it has no motor then all the rumours should stop. It's a bit too expensive for me (like 17k euro) but let's share the cost in the name of the ultimate truth!

Maybe we could get him to make a video where he takes it apart? That'll save us some money, and we've already seen this week that he likes to feel the material.
 
Very long-time lurker (no idea why I chose that username back in the day) but thought I'd finally chip in. This is all like a big, giant puzzle that we're all helping each other to solve. I've been following cycling since 2003 so I've seen my fair share but this is all just something else, as most of you also seem to agree. I'll go through the thoughts I've had on the whole motor question after just setting the scene.

So, what is going on with Pogacar, that is the big question. We already know the facts - a rider that wins in every terrain, all year round, without looking tired, and who went from being the best cyclist in the world to suddenly being by far the best during winter 2023/24, now producing watts that are absolutely unheard of.

It almost seems like there are two of him by now. There's a surprisingly human one that comes out once in a while (Le Lioran, Amstel, Dauphiné time trial the other day) and reminds us of the Pogacar of 2019-23, but that one is so far always followed by the super machine that absolutely cripples everyone else. Where, for other riders, a bad day is often sign that more bad days are coming, for Pogacar a bad day is sign that he is going to destroy everyone a few days after.

Why does the question of motors keep coming up? Probably because it lets us fit a lot of things together that we now have a hard time explaining because we're missing that 'something' (for example, a new drug) that might otherwise explain things. Unless, of course, you buy the Javier Sola story, which you might, but which you probably don't unless you're new to cycling

The use of motors is, on the face of it, a ludicrous idea. I still think so, but not as much as I used to. Looking into it over the past couple of years, my attitude has changed mainly because there's now just so much smoke about past use that - given the history of cycling - it is not unreasonable to claim there may have been a fire. We have the chief of the French Anti-Doping Agency being told by insiders that 12 riders used motors during the 2015 Tour (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-investigates-hidden-motors-and-pro-cycling/), we had the by now famous French documentary showing what may very well have been use of motors during Strade in 2016 (that video has now been taken down from YouTube, I see), there's the LeMond saying he heard that Cancellara used motors (
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNFyYjKCcKU
), and then there's former UCI anti-motordoping tsar Péraud who just last year said that he was "confident it’s not happening any more" (https://spectrum.ieee.org/motor-doping-cycling). That is, confident it's not happening "any more". And lastly, there's the journalists speaking out in the Ghost In the Machine podcast who seem certain that it was going on, who have found evidence that a pro team bought motorized bikes, but who just cannot get someone to speak out publicly. There's also a former pro in that podcast saying that motorized bikes were used.

So, by now there's now a lot of people who need to be lying for no particular reason (nobody's become rich claiming something on motors) if we still want to claim that motors weren't used in the past. So, if it was happening 10 years ago, why wouldn't it be happening today? I think that's an interesting question.

There are two often-heard claims against the motordoping theory. One is not very good, the other better, I think.

The first one is that UCI would not allow it, that they would easily catch the ones doing. I don't believe that. They apparently haven't found the people using motors in the past. And say Pogacar was using a motor, and you put yourself in the shoes of the UCI. What do you do? Imagine you catch him using a motor and go public, and you have the biggest cycling scandal ever. You then probably lose the sponsorships of the UAE - who sponsor two cycling teams, one of the biggest cycling races, who sponsor the World Championships on road in 2028 and track in 2029, and who are indirectly the main sponsor behind the UCI's e-bike World Championships. The UCI have NO interest in catching Pogacar. This fits how the UCI tried to hide Armstrong's and Contador's doping cases. Most probably, they don't check bikes in a very thorough manner - they do just enough to show that something is being done but not enough to ever catch someone. And if you follow Lappartient on Twitter, you can see him glorifying Pogacar - no way he wants to take him down.

One should remember that many of the big cycling busts have come with the help of police investigations. This was because doping was seen as a threat to public health. But there's no threat to public health here, so the police won't care. Another vessel of doping busts were journalists. But cycling journalism has mostly become fanboy-ism. Everyone's a freelancer these days needing their next contract so nobody wants to mess with the show. In Denmark, we used to have some quite good, critical journalists (who played large parts in getting Riis and Michael Rasmussen down) but none of these are in cycling journalism anymore; instead, because of the great success of Danish cycling, nobody probably is allowed to rock the boat anymore.

The better objection against use of motors is that, if one team is using them, why not others? There's no good argument here, only that perhaps some teams are less willing to take that risk than others. Reading Michael Rasmussen's memoirs, it's clear that the old Rabobank leadership were never supportive of the full doping programme that Rasmussen needed to win the Tour, they always tried to hold him back a little from those last blood bags at the right time, seemingly afraid of the consequences. It may also be that there's a technical aspect where one team has an advantage, not unlike Formula 1 where you might also say "why don't the others just do this" - and the answer is that they don't know exactly what the others are doing.

So, none of this proves that Pogacar is using a motor. But the motor explanation just helps us right now. It explains the massive increase in ability between 2023 and 2024. It explains the seated accelerations. It explains why he's never tired, it explains how he can be so good all the time, how he can increase his level massively from one day to the other, and may also explain why he seems less and less happy to actually win. It doesn't, however, explain why he just once in a while doesn't perform. What was wrong on the time trial the other day? Why was Pogacar so interested in Vingegaard's bike?

Here's a theory I had: Pogacar is a true winner, above all else he wants to win. He was humiliated on Comboux in 2023. How could Vingegaard be so good, he must have thought, I did pretty well myself. Ok so, during winter 2023/24, UAE conjure up something. They quickly realize that this is just some next level stuff they've found, whatever it is. They know that people are going to ask questions. So, they leak some information of the transformed Pogacar to the most gullible, attention-seeking people around them that they know of. And there's somebody who catches on to it, his name is mou. So now mou spreads all these stories about the transformed Pogacar and the better training and so on, so that when Pogacar turns on the heat in the third week of the Tour 2024, it comes as less of a surprise. Of course he's so good now, UAE can then say, people already knew of this back in March! And now there's no turning back. Pogacar and UAE are too big to fail.

And a last interesting point, there's talk in the peloton - not about motors per se, but about whether UAE are doping or not. Some in the peloton think they are, said Magnus Cort in a recent interview (unfortunately behind paywall now: https://www.feltet.dk/nyheder/tanker_om_pogacar_og_ucis_dumme_boeder/10830607)
Condensing 14 years of missed posts into one, noice. Maybe you chose the username because you foresaw the advent of Blobloblo?
 
The thing with motors is, if the technology is there motors won't give you an edge over any competitors who are also using motors (and if the technology is there and it's normal and people are not being caught, why wouldn't they). Compare to PEDs which give a much more variable edge depending on how good of a responder you are, which PEDs you're using and how good your doctor is. Compare also the volume of information and credible whispers about doping in the peloton compared to motors.

At present, the motor theory is just a magic solution to any problem. "Can't explain this, must be motors".
The thing with that is there's no motors without having UCI okaying it anyway.