Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[Salvarani]

So you are saying that when people type here,over and over, and over again that Pogacar is doping and using hidden illegal motors, that is universal, unanimous praise?
Where is saying someone is too good to be true, taking drugs to cheat a form of praise?
And if questions are asked as you are putting forth, here I will give reasonable, catch all ,answers to the two most repeated requests
1. Pogacar since racing as a professional since 2017, has never tested positive for any banned substance, he has never had issues with missed tests both in and out of competition. And before turning pro ,Pogacar never had any abnormal drug tests.
2 . throughout Pogacar racing as an amateur or professional has ever been relegated for using illegal equipment, to include electric motors..
broad time sensitive, wide ranging answers, that are going back to the beginning and up to the minute.
So why would anyone not include a decade plus of testing, with zero negative outcomes as part of any smearing, silly, unfounded, unfortunate questions about either form of cheating..
No rational person would say with any confidence or conviction that they are sure Pogacar is cheating, the data just doesn't support it..
Maybe unicorn racing has a forum. Tinfoil helmets.

This clarifies quite a lot how things stand.

 

[meat puppet]

Oh, it's that time of the year again.

Relative performance differentials between riders are the essence of racing.

However, it is the absolute performance levels that top riders have exhibited in the post covid (hahaha-) era that require an explanation. One strategy is to take a performance, work out the w/kg, and ask what it implies, physiologically.

Here is an attempt to decode Plateau se Beille from last year: https://solaarjona.substack.com/p/data-analysis-of-stage-15-of-the

The basic framework is similar to what physiologists used when the w/kg based performance sniff tests were introduced some 15years ago, e.g.: https://sportsscientists.com/2010/07/cycling-performance-what-is-possible/

I reckon the first piece as apologistic in that it seeks to chalk the performance of 6,8w/kg for 40min off as plausible. After a serious and informed discussion of the implications the author essentially sports the "he is just that good argument" as a one liner.

The latter piece is informative not only in that it essentially has similar analytics but it too discusses the implications of riding 40min at around 6,8w/kg. The author of that piece was of the opinion that topping 6-6,2w/kg would be suspicious. So quite a bit more conservative.

That said, the first piece too is informative in that uses the standard apparatus: the interplay of vo2max, fractional utilization, and efficiency. This way it helps to ground the discussion of the implications of that ride by presenting a neat table that maps a range of (NB: can't be arsed to check the calculations) of, say, implied vo2max values and how they are impacted when assumptions about fractional utilization and efficiency change.

As the first writer notes, what he reckons middle of the road assumptions (ie. Pog rode at 85% of vo2max and 23% efficiency) imply that Pog must have had a vo2max slightly higher than the highest ever value recorded in a lab test.

Amidst a tdf? After 4000 or so kJ during that day (contrary to what the author of the apologistic piece claims, I do think that expending that amount climbing/coasting matters and has implications vis-a-vis the last climb)?

So yeah, not buying it. Not that I buy Vinge either. But it's not about rider to rider differentials that begs most questions. It's the observed performance levels that require explanation first and foremost.

But maybe talent, Sola plus long threshold intervals, and short cranks are all that's required to reach the levels of Riis, Armstrong, et al.

 

[Lorzenz08]

Also the best climber I would say. His such a total clown, that these days im lost of words. Keep on believing, for me this joker is the worst I have ever witnessed in the modern sports. Slovenia in whole is starting to look extremely suspicious, a nation with 2 million is producing world class talent after another🤡🤌It's not like their genepool is so different compared to other European or even Eastern- European nations. A beatifull country, but in sports massively dubious, add in Gianetti&Co and voila!

Ex-Yugo countries genepool is pretty exceptional though. Imagine, only 15 millions people, they have a Basketball team that rivalize with the USA (Serbia). They have a football team that went World Cup Final and Semi Final consecutively (Croatia). They have the best tennis player in history (Serbia) ...

Per-capita I dont think there is a country (ex-country though) in the world that performs so well accross so many different sports.

 

[Stablo]

Ex-Yugo countries genepool is pretty exceptional though. Imagine, only 15 millions people, they have a Basketball team that rivalize with the USA (Serbia). They have a football team that went World Cup Final and Semi Final consecutively (Croatia). They have the best tennis player in history (Serbia) ...

Per-capita I dont think there is a country (ex-country though) in the world that performs so well accross so many different sports.

Yeah it's exactly the same with the balkans as it was in the DDR. They had really good results and records in a wide variety of sports,compared to the population. I wonder how on earth that was achieved. Now there are certain indications, that at least the small Balkan nation of Slovenia has something suspicious going on. Serbia also has some shady indications in the past, not to even mention Djokos really long almost injury free career and hitting the best years after turning 30 years old.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Yeah it's exactly the same with the balkans as it was in the DDR. They had really good results and records in a wide variety of sports,compared to the population. I wonder how on earth that was achieved. Now there are certain indications, that at least the small Balkan nation of Slovenia has something suspicious going on. Serbia also has some shady indications in the past, not to even mention Djokos really long almost injury free career and hitting the best years after turning 30 years old.

Doping aside, I do think ex-Yougoslavia guys have very good sports genes. Maybe the best in the world.
It's hard to believe that such a small population produced the best guys (or even GOAT candidates) in widespread disciplines like tennis, cycling and basketball without any hidden parameters favoring them.

 

[Vudy]

Yeah it's exactly the same with the balkans as it was in the DDR. They had really good results and records in a wide variety of sports,compared to the population. I wonder how on earth that was achieved. Now there are certain indications, that at least the small Balkan nation of Slovenia has something suspicious going on. Serbia also has some shady indications in the past, not to even mention Djokos really long almost injury free career and hitting the best years after turning 30 years old.

Slovenia is not a Balkan nation. Jamaica is also suspicious by your metrics winning almost every sprint in athletics. Same could be applied almost to every developed country.

 

[Salvarani]

Doping aside, I do think ex-Yougoslavia guys have very good sports genes. Maybe the best in the world.
It's hard to believe that such a small population produced the best guys (or even GOAT candidates) in widespread disciplines like tennis, cycling and basketball without any hidden parameters favoring them.

Football, handball, gymnastics, alpine skiing, figure skating... the list is long.

I believe it has been documented a lot about how such a small region are just so prominent and great when it comes to many different sports, for a very long time.

 

[Stablo]

Slovenia is not a Balkan nation. Jamaica is also suspicious by your metrics winning almost every sprint in athletics. Same could be applied almost to every developed country.

Well a part of Ex-Yugoslavia anyway and yes they had well documented programs(like someone just mentioned)there, just like they had in the DDR. And I dont trust the roots of those programs regarding sports echantment have gone anywhere. Jamaica pretty likely has some juice in use aswell, but also their roots come from the unfortunate slave trade. The biggest, strongest and fastest got mostly picked up for the Atlantic crossing and they where also the most likely to survive, but maybe dwelling to that sad part of history is a bit off topic in this thread.

 

[Cookster15]

Domination is a lot easier when noone even really knows how to train properly, a large proportion of the field is basically semi professional, and the talent pool is like 5 countries deep at best. The sport was less advanced and less diverse, with overall speeds being lower making drafting a lesser benefit in general.

There's probably several dozen reasons we should not expect this level of dominance in a level playing field, so "I guess it was about time someone was this much more talented" doesn't quite cut it.

So how was Merckyx not a level playing field?

Some of your points are valid some aren't - like 5 countries deep at best. That would be France, Belgium, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands. The same 5 who dominate the peloton today.

Noone even really knows how to train properly - well actually they didn't have the sports science to prove it but they were effectively doing zone 2 training back then. Even in the 50s.

The sport was less advanced and less diverse, with overall speeds being lower making drafting a lesser benefit in general. This is irrelevant to Pogacar's dominance.

And riders like Poulidor, De Vlaeminck or Gimondi were certainly not semi professionals. And a reminder that Merckyx won the 1972 Tour by nearly 11 minutes ahead of Gimondi (Poulidor was 11 minutes back). How? That is dominant and there was no oxygen vector doping around then in cycling.

Every sport you can name is more advanced compared to 1974. Merckyx still rode 116 hours at 38km/h to win the 1974 Tour by 8 minutes ahead of Poulidor.

 

[ColonelKidneyBeans]

So how was Merckyx not a level playing field?

Some of your points are valid some aren't - like 5 countries deep at best. That would be France, Belgium, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands. The same 5 who dominate the peloton today.

Noone even really knows how to train properly - well actually they didn't have the sports science to prove it but they were effectively doing zone 2 training back then. Even in the 50s.

The sport was less advanced and less diverse, with overall speeds being lower making drafting a lesser benefit in general. This is irrelevant to Pogacar's dominance.

And riders like Poulidor, De Vlaeminck or Gimondi were certainly not semi professionals. And a reminder that Merckyx won the 1972 Tour by nearly 11 minutes ahead of Gimondi (Poulidor was 11 minutes back). How? That is dominant and there were no oxygen vector doping around then in cycling.

Every sport you can name is more advanced compared to 1974. Merckyx still rode 116 hours at 38km/h to win the 1974 Tour by 8 minutes ahead of Poulidor.

Merckx won by such a big margin in 1972 because Ocana got sick and had to retire.
I would not be so sure about the "no oxygen vector doping" either, we known Zoetemelk was using transfusions during the 70's and Merckx himself claimed that he was offered one to prepare for his hour record (which he declined ofc, according to himself). Steroids were already there too.

Thats is not what I have said, nor what I responded to.

A rider winning monuments and GTs... he is not the first in history to do that. It is not impossible.

And again he's not merely "winning monuments and GTs"

 

[Ripper]

It's a heroic, dramatic sport that people love, not hate. For many - me included - it's the best sport of all. Ultimately people do want to know if the drama is 'real'. Those who come her have a gut feeling it's not or even an understanding that it simply cannot be real. The clinic is basically the spot to write about our frustration. Frustration for the love of a sport that deserves to be real.

+1000

 

[Cookster15]

Merckx won by such a big margin in 1972 because Ocana got sick and had to retire.
I would not be so sure about the "no oxygen vector doping" either, we known Zoetemelk was using transfusions during the 70's and Merckx himself claimed that he was offered one to prepare for his hour record (which he declined ofc, according to himself)

Merckx won the 1969 Tour by 18 minutes! Poulidor was 22 minutes down! And if both Merckyx and Zoetemelk were using rudimentary transfusions I find it hard to believe that others were riding clean.

 

[Peyroteo94]

The other sports you're referencing are a lot more multifactorial than cycling, which is basically pure physiology and can be much more quantified than other sports. Lionel Messi or Novak Djokovic may not even be in the top 0.1 %ile for any isolated physiological trait. Yet because they dominate we should find it normal that Pogacar dominates by basically 5% or more? That doesn't make sense.

A bigger talent pool doesn't mean outliers should be bigger from the other top professionals. It means the overall level should be higher.

And if the idea is "he's just more talented" he would show it at an early age. Which he didn't. He was a good junior, but nothing to suggest he would go on to do as he did. And if we have to go to anecdotes of lapping u12 races we're basically in fantasyland anyway.

He was winning important races at 19 years old. Do you know some people mature later, others earlier. He comes from a small country with zero history in cycling - so he wasn't training professionally like many other young riders who come from Belgium, Spain, Danmark, Italy, etc.
Was Usain Bolt the best sprinter in his youth? (I don't know but I have a hard time believing he was so dominant like he was in his prime). Was Federer the best when he was 17? No he wasn't. Djokovic? Messi? There is anyone who thought Messi would be able to score 90 goals in a season when he was 17 years old?
There are more examples for sure.

 

[Peyroteo94]

It's a heroic, dramatic sport that people love, not hate. For many - me included - it's the best sport of all. Ultimately people do want to know if the drama is 'real'. Those who come her have a gut feeling it's not or even an understanding that it simply cannot be real. The clinic is basically the spot to write about our frustration. Frustration for the love of a sport that deserves to be real.

It's not real when Pogacar is winning but when Remco dominates a race against humans is a masterclass and real.
Nothing to be seen here, I follow cycling for too long and I know, almost no one cares about doping unless our favorite rider isn't winning.
I'm the first to one to admit Pogacar is far too dominant, is far too talented and he is doped to the gills. Even if I think he is an all time great and riders like him don't appear often, I still think he and Vingegaard are so mutant than both should be caught and get a ban. However, this will never happen after Armstrong's "confession" and how bad it hurt cycling. Pogacar is the face of cycling, clearly the most popular rider in the world and for that reason he will not be caught. Bolt never got caught and there are facts who clearly show he was doping (his teammates got banned, In a year, he showed a 0.7 seconds improvement in 200 m races when he took previously 4 years to run 0.3 seconds faster).

 

[Lorzenz08]

The other sports you're referencing are a lot more multifactorial than cycling, which is basically pure physiology and can be much more quantified than other sports. Lionel Messi or Novak Djokovic may not even be in the top 0.1 %ile for any isolated physiological trait. Yet because they dominate we should find it normal that Pogacar dominates by basically 5% or more? That doesn't make sense.

A bigger talent pool doesn't mean outliers should be bigger from the other top professionals. It means the overall level should be higher.

And if the idea is "he's just more talented" he would show it at an early age. Which he didn't. He was a good junior, but nothing to suggest he would go on to do as he did. And if we have to go to anecdotes of lapping u12 races we're basically in fantasyland anyway.

He is the youngest Tour de France since 1904.

And no before 20yo because each person matures differently it doesn't mean much to win more or less.
The body is still growing until 20, and some people grow faster than others.

Even in amateur, non competitive fields (pure hobby), I know many people who took big leap between 17-19, with no change of training compared to others.

 

[Cookster15]

However, this will never happen after Armstrong's "confession" and how bad it hurt cycling

Good post but not sure about this part? Armstrong’s confession hurt cycling for a few years but it’s back bigger and “better” than ever - look at the commercialization of the sport, that can overcome bad press and Armstrong's case proves that.

Plus, in choosing not to address the problem of Gianetti the UCI would be opening itself up to much bigger trouble in the future. Especially if they are choosing to look the other way with an Eastern European when there are rival riders, teams and their sponsors losing potentially many millions of USD or EUR with Pog's dominance.

 

[Cookster15]

Well a part of Ex-Yugoslavia anyway and yes they had well documented programs(like someone just mentioned)there, just like they had in the DDR

I think you might be barking up the wrong tree here? Ex Yugoslav nations have never been as notorious as East Germany (DDR). I am not reading a lot of chat here about Djokovic who is Serbian? Current chat is about world #1 Jannik Sinner who is Italian.

 

[Red Rick]

He is the youngest Tour de France since 1904.

While already working with Gianetti and UAE.

Before, he was nothing crazy

 

[Cookster15]

While already working with Gianetti and UAE.

Before, he was nothing crazy

Before he was only 18 years old. For sure Pogi has to be doping but I don’t think we can read too much because any doping gains are masked by natural variation as he matures at such a young age. That is my issue with reasoning by the OP for this thread. Someone the other day mentioned the 2016 junior WC when he finished like 50th? Other than maybe it was a sprinter friendly course, when I look at the names there were maybe two in the top 25 or so who I recognised in the current peloton. One was Harry Sweeney the other McNuggets.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

While already working with Gianetti and UAE.

Before, he was nothing crazy

He had very decent results in Tour of Slovenia races at the age 18-19. A leap of performance at some age is something that happens to almost all top cyclists, just look at historical riders. Obviously in case of Pogacar (and not only him) it's physical progression at a young age plus a top doping program by UAE.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Good post but not sure about this part? Armstrong’s confession hurt cycling for a few years but it’s back bigger and “better” than ever - look at the commercialization of the sport, that can overcome bad press and Armstrong's case proves that.

Plus, in choosing not to address the problem of Gianetti the UCI would be opening itself up to much bigger trouble in the future. Especially if they are choosing to look the other way with an Eastern European when there are rival riders, teams and their sponsors losing potentially many millions of USD or EUR with Pog's dominance.

It hurt forever when we are talking about doping. The first sport people think when they talk about doping is cycling. It's automatic. General People associate cycling with doping without knowing sports like swimming, track & field, biathlon, etc are full of dopers, maybe even more than cycling since no other sport has more controls and tests than cycling.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

It hurt forever when we are talking about doping. The first sport people think when they talk about doping is cycling. It's automatic. General People associate cycling with doping without knowing sports like swimming, track & field, biathlon, etc are full of dopers, maybe even more than cycling since no other sport has more controls and tests than cycling.

Cycling is very dirty but it's also true that a lot have been done to fight doping in this sport (compared to other disciplines). Its reputation arises from all those uncovered doping scandals. Nowadays the image of cycling is improving compared to 10-20 years ago as there are no scandals involving top dogs (this doesn't mean it's any cleaner OFC, probably it's much worse than in the 2010s).

 

[Lorzenz08]

All Im saying is that Pogi dominance over the others is the same as other GOAT dominance compared to others.

Meaning Pogi is not more dominant over the rest of the field as Messi and Ronaldo were. Or Michael Jordan was.

 

[Red Rick]

Cycling is very dirty but it's also true that a lot have been done to fight doping in this sport (compared to other disciplines). Its reputation arises from all those uncovered doping scandals. Nowadays the image of cycling is improving compared to 10-20 years ago as there are no scandals involving top dogs (this doesn't mean it's any cleaner OFC, probably it's much worse than in the 2010s).

The funniest one is literally every single one of Usain Bolt's competitors, teammates and trainers getting busted but the Golden Boy is sparkly cleanz.

 

[Salvarani]

The funniest one is literally every single one of Usain Bolt's competitors, teammates and trainers getting busted but the Golden Boy is sparkly cleanz.

Perhaps because they were trying to beat him.