Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[Extinction]

Merckx was caught three times anyway.
Consider the opposition.
Many races looked more like a Belgian championship.
LBL 1969: 7 Belgians in top 20.
MSR: 1969: 6 Belgians in top 10.
Amstel 1969: top 7 (!): all Belgians and only two nationalities in top 20.
Omloop Het Volk 1972: 18 Belgians in top 20
Tour of Flanders: 9 Belgians in top 10.

Merckx basically rode against regional opposition.

I don't know how the km are relevant in this story. Considering most riders in Merckx era rode similar full programs, Pogacars domination is even more remarkable. There was very little specialization in the Merckx era.

In that region of that era were all the biggest talents, so what is your point? You can't mix apples with oranges. Or else we could magically put Pogi in the Merckx era and vice versa.

 

[Cookster15]

I don't know how the km are relevant in this story

Merckyx achieved more wins than Pogacar despite less recovery (see next quote). Maybe Merckyx's talent had something to do with that? Maybe Pogacar's talent has something more to do with his record than purely doping?

There was very little specialization in the Merckx era.

Modern specialisation methods aid both recovery and performance. Less specialisation makes Merckyx more impressive compared to Pogacar.

Many races looked more like a Belgian championship.

That is an exaggeration based upon one day races. Casually looking at grand tours Merckyx won, there were also riders like Poulidor (France), Gimondi (Italy) and Ocaña (Spain) or Zoetemelk (Netherlands). All famous non Belgian names today.

Merckx basically rode against regional opposition.

A very large exaggeration. This is the farmers slur against all those other riders of that era - see above.

But what hasn't been answered in this thread is how unqualified Gianetti knew Pogacar would be such a great responder when he brought him to UAE in the first place?

Pogacar was barely 20 years old when Gianetti noticed him. And I would say being a qualified medical physician Dr Michele Ferrari was far more qualified to understand doping practices for cyclists than unqualified Mauro Gianetti ever was (or is).

 

[Gianetti_Is_The_Goat]

"Modern specialisation methods aid both recovery and performance. Less specialisation makes Merckyx more impressive compared to Pogacar."

Sure. Winning all kinds of races against different riders who focus on specific races is less impressive than winning against the same peloton. If you say so. Whatever.

 

[Gianetti_Is_The_Goat]

In that region of that era were all the biggest talents, so what is your point? You can't mix apples with oranges. Or else we could magically put Pogi in the Merckx era and vice versa.

It means that cycling wasn't a global sport. The overall quality was much lower.

 

[BubbaChuck]

lol racing against specialist is less impressive,bahhha-like i said,pogacar murders remco and joans without fifty camps.lets be serius.

 

[aphronesis]

It means that cycling wasn't a global sport. The overall quality was much lower.

Huh, so rustic cycling was higher? Maybe, but why bother with the claim?

 

[Extinction]

It means that cycling wasn't a global sport. The overall quality was much lower.

You are aware that more people raced in Europe back then than people do around the world today?

 

[dr.eve]

Merckx was caught three times anyway.
Consider the opposition.
Many races looked more like a Belgian championship.
LBL 1969: 7 Belgians in top 20.
MSR: 1969: 6 Belgians in top 10.
Amstel 1969: top 7 (!): all Belgians and only two nationalities in top 20.
Omloop Het Volk 1972: 18 Belgians in top 20
Tour of Flanders: 9 Belgians in top 10.

Merckx basically rode against regional opposition.

I don't know how the km are relevant in this story. Considering most riders in Merckx era rode similar full programs, Pogacars domination is even more remarkable. There was very little specialization in the Merckx era.

Not sure why many are so going against your post, sure you write it a bit black and white. But I completely agree with you. That era, no offense, people can't claim quality and competition are comparable. My dad rode competively in that era and just seeing his material... Well that is laughable compared to this era.

 

[dr.eve]

You are aware that more people raced in Europe back then than people do around the world today?

I highly doubt this claim, any data anywhere to back this up?

 

[Cookster15]

"Modern specialisation methods aid both recovery and performance. Less specialisation makes Merckyx more impressive compared to Pogacar."

Sure. Winning all kinds of races against different riders who focus on specific races is less impressive than winning against the same peloton. If you say so. Whatever.

I was addressing your point about specialisation in Merckyx’s era not the rest.

And the OP also implied Pogacar came from nowhere when he was 20 years old. I’ve also challenged that assumption. Pog is also only 15 months older than Remco. Not sure what we think riders should be doing when they are 18?

That era, no offense, people can't claim quality and competition are comparable.

Of course but that wasn’t my point. The comment was “I don't know how the km are relevant in this story”. It’s relevant because nobody understood periodisation back then. Lack of recovery made Merckx’s feats even harder compared to today - regardless if all his competition did similar. And looking at Tour speeds on heavier, less aero and slower bikes that wasn’t exactly slow either (36km/h over 4,117km in 1969). These days they race about 800km less in the Tour compared to that same year (3,301km this year).

Of course I think Pogacar is doping. How could he not be with these performances. The question is do we think he has an unfair advantage? That’s where it gets murky.

 

[Gianetti_Is_The_Goat]

I highly doubt this claim, any data anywhere to back this up?

It's nonsense.

 

[Gianetti_Is_The_Goat]

Not sure why many are so going against your post, sure you write it a bit black and white. But I completely agree with you. That era, no offense, people can't claim quality and competition are comparable. My dad rode competively in that era and just seeing his material... Well that is laughable compared to this era.

On top of that:
1969 TdF: 130 riders
2025 TdF: 184 riders

Looking forward to the explanation how a larger peloton increases your chance for stage victories.

 

[Peyroteo94]

I was addressing your point about specialisation in Merckyx’s era not the rest.

And the OP also implied Pogacar came from nowhere when he was 20 years old. I’ve also challenged that assumption. Pog is also only 15 months older than Remco. Not sure what we think riders should be doing when they are 18?

Of course but that wasn’t my point. The comment was “I don't know how the km are relevant in this story”. It’s relevant because nobody understood periodisation back then. Lack of recovery made Merckx’s feats even harder compared to today - regardless if all his competition did similar. And looking at Tour speeds on heavier, less aero and slower bikes that wasn’t exactly slow either (36km/h over 4,117km in 1969). These days they race about 800km less in the Tour compared to that same year (3,301km this year).

Of course I think Pogacar is doping. How could he not be with these performances. The question is do we think he has an unfair advantage? That’s where it gets murky.

His leap in performance is completely due to his coach changing. Not doping related for sure.
Anyone here believes he wasn't doping or doping less in 2019-2023? Gianetti is there since the beginning... Pogacar was the only one in UAE to have this rise on his performance. All others had a steady progression. The only guy who was training with San Milan stagnated (Ayuso), curious...
Pogacar used to struggle in the heat, now he doesn't have any problems with this. It's ridiculous to think this has anything to do with doping.
I know some people will say it’s crazy but San Milan hampered him and Sola + his doping program (I don't believe they are in front of teams like RB, Visma, Lidl) made Pogacar the best ever. The potential was there, even in his first 2 TdF wins he carried some baby fat, not anymore.

 

[BubbaChuck]

people say pogacar has advantage ,cause of modern recovery.hilarius.everything aplies to his competition.when eddie fought dead competitors,pog is actualyl facing fresh chumps,who are preparing months for specific event.if everrybody was on same program,pogacar would look lik he is racing his kids.picture mvp fighting pog whole season,lmaoo.he would retire after 1 season.

 

[Rob5091]

But what hasn't been answered in this thread is how unqualified Gianetti knew Pogacar would be such a great responder when he brought him to UAE in the first place?

Pogacar was barely 20 years old when Gianetti noticed him. And I would say being a qualified medical physician Dr Michele Ferrari was far more qualified to understand doping practices for cyclists than unqualified Mauro Gianetti ever was (or is).

Funny you should mention it, as I was looking through Pogi's results from 2018 (when he turned 20 in September of that year and was riding for Ljubljana Gusto Xaurum). He seemed to be able to hold his own with the better guys. It does not come as a surprise that a WT team would test him out. I don't think Gianetti or UAE knew how good Pogacar would be, but it seems he's a super responder to something.

 

[TheKidsCallMeBoss]

In fact, when the UAE announced that they would sign Pogacar in 2018, he was essentially listed as a B-list rider behind Covi, who was also signed on the same day, in both the UAE team's press release and the media.. At the time, the UAE hardly knew what they had. But a few days later, they must have realised how good the guy was, given the way he won the Tour de l'Avenir.

 

[Gianetti_Is_The_Goat]

In fact, when the UAE announced that they would sign Pogacar in 2018, he was essentially listed as a B-list rider behind Covi, who was also signed on the same day, in both the UAE team's press release and the media.. At the time, the UAE hardly knew what they had. But a few days later, they must have realised how good the guy was, given the way he won the Tour de l'Avenir.

Ah, the Tour de l'Avenir where new signings of UAE suddenly outperform. I guess this is all due to Gianetti's motivational speeches.

 

[BubbaChuck]

pog is literally facing couple of armstrongs during season,lmaoo.same method.what they say,class is permament,form.....

 

[TheKidsCallMeBoss]

Ah, the Tour de l'Avenir where new signings of UAE suddenly outperform. I guess this is all due to Gianetti's motivational speeches.

He signed the contract on August 22 and won the race four days later. After Pog and Del Toro, Gianetti is now just one miracle away from being elevated to sainthood by the Pope.

 

[Netserk]

Vingegaard must have ticked the box marked 'let's make the most boring rider in the peloton the unlikeliest Tour de France winner' on the UCI's to-do list

Is this @Taxus4a? Froome was always a "diamond in the rough"?

 

[Cookster15]

He signed the contract on August 22 and won the race four days later

So in 4 days Gianetti "topped" Pogacar up before his 20th birthday and bingo he had a world beater? That seems like extraordinarily good luck?

How did Gianetti know Pogacar would respond that way? And I still struggle with this idea that Gianetti was a brilliant sports scientist. He was a doped rider like the rest of the peloton in the EPO era who then led a doped team who was exposed at the 2008 TdF.

But Gianetti never struck me as brilliant like Dr Michele Ferrari. Ferrari earned a degree in Medicine and Surgery (in Italy). Ferrari's doctoral thesis concerned the measurement of anaerobic threshold in the sport of running. I can't find Gianetti's educational qualifications anywhere but I see he earned infamy back in 1998:

Gianetti also has a history of being ‘creative’ in doping. This dates back to 1998 and the Tour of Romandie where Gianetti had a close encounter with death. Back then when Gianetti rode for Francaise des Jeux, he abandoned the race, reportedly because he didn’t feel good. Later that same day he fell unconscious and was rushed to a hospital in the little town Montigny. The doctors there quickly sent him on to the better-equipped hospital in Lausanne. The two doctors who treated Gianetti did several tests on him, but they suspected he had been given PFCs, or perfluorocarbon metabolites as the medical term is known. PFCs have a tremendous effect of carrying oxygen; as this NYT article says “it can carry oxygen five times the rate of hemoglobin.” Gianetti spent ten days in intensive care at the hospital, but he denied any transfusions at the time

Who is Mauro Gianetti? | Cyclismas

I also struggle to see why UAE trusted Gianetti to deliver them the results?

 

[Ripper]

So in 4 days Gianetti "topped" Pogacar up before his 20th birthday and bingo he had a world beater? That seems like extraordinarily good luck?

How did Gianetti know Pogacar would respond that way? And I still struggle with this idea that Gianetti was a brilliant sports scientist. He was a doped rider like the rest of the peloton in the EPO era who then led a doped team who was exposed at the 2008 TdF.

But Gianetti never struck me as brilliant like Dr Michele Ferrari. Ferrari earned a degree in Medicine and Surgery (in Italy). Ferrari's doctoral thesis concerned the measurement of anaerobic threshold in the sport of running. I can't find Gianetti's educational qualifications anywhere but I see he earned infamy back in 1998:

Who is Mauro Gianetti? | Cyclismas

I also struggle to see why UAE trusted Gianetti to deliver them the results?

Gianetti is not a doc, scientist, or even a doping expert. But past behaviours suggest the moral and ethical "flexibility" to know the means and be networked with/hire the right people.

Regarding "why UAE trusted Gianetti to deliver them the results" - that is a brilliant question. We can only infer and guess.

 

[Extinction]

I highly doubt this claim, any data anywhere to back this up?

Relative to population increase globally, I'd say so, yes. Look, back in Mercckx's day Europe was the "world of cycling", from which the only serious talent came. So saying global cycling is more impressive today lacks context. Merckx, then, faced the same scope of talent as Tadei does now. The only difference currently is that more countries are involved, however, in Europe today the pool is smaller, as modern sensiblities toward riding on the rode have changed and parents think twice about having their kids ride seriously. In fact, there are fewer racing now than at the time. I know this, because of how many historical amateur races no longer exist due to a decline in cycling's importance in the grand scheme of sport and it's dangers. In Europe cycling was still a working class sport in the 60s and 70s. Now it has become a dangerous activity only accessible to an élites that can afford 14,000 euro bikes. Sad but true, the market has taken over, which is the big elephant in the room nobody wants to see.