Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[Pantani Attacks]

If this is a golden age – I don't use the term, but I've bee enjoying cycling more in the past 6 years than ever, and that's saying something – then the title of harbinger needs to be split at least four ways. Wout, Mathieu, and Remco have as much of a claim to it as Tadej, if not more. Mathieu perhaps the most, due to his sheer wildness.

Don't forget Vingegaard. Absolute batshit rise.

 

[kingjr]

Don't forget Vingegaard. Absolute batshit rise.

Yeah, but that was later. Harbinger wouldn't be appropriate.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Someone who shall not be named told me "the best rider just wins everything now cause they're all clean"

Who knows? You are ignoring the elephant in the room: COVID-caused evolutionary leap. All guys improved but Pogi's changes were the more severe (not his fault) and he became the ultimate mutant. Mauro (aka Professor X) just helps him harness his power. I guess some haters hope he will end up like Jean Grey/Dark Phoenix.

 

[Ripper]

Who knows? You are ignoring the elephant in the room: COVID-caused evolutionary leap. All guys improved but Pogi's changes were the more severe (not his fault) and he became the ultimate mutant. Mauro (aka Professor X) just helps him harness his power. I guess some haters hope he will end up like Jean Grey/Dark Phoenix.

Omg that is hilarious

 

[Extinction]

If this is a golden age – I don't use the term, but I've bee enjoying cycling more in the past 6 years than ever, and that's saying something – then the title of harbinger needs to be split at least four ways. Wout, Mathieu, and Remco have as much of a claim to it as Tadej, if not more. Mathieu perhaps the most, due to his sheer wildness.

He just rolls on the street, higher and higher, lklike Bowie and Freddy Mercury.

 

[aphronesis]

I guess we differ.

I really do not pay attention to any results or consider any of the prominent riders from 1991-2010 as in anyway legitimate.

It was an era when riders could be dropped on mere hills by semi-pros in the Tour of Gila, only to destroy the entire pro peloton five weeks later in France under the guidance of a doping doctor. Absolutely zero way of judging natural hierarchy from that.

I fear that the last two years seem a mirror to the start of the EPO era when only a handful of riders or a team had the advantage of a “super-drug” provided by a doctor.

I don’t think we differ absolutely. More in emphasis here and there. Hierarchy maybe not, but there was still a sense of natural or innate talent.

How does 2010 taper out then?

 

[aphronesis]

My point was about controlling the narrative. Evidently Pogi, under Gianetti, has his Vergil, Maceneas and Dionysus of Halicarnasus to present him as a renewer of the sport, the harbinger of a Golden Age. Only UAE sponsorship can make this happen, perhaps even more than US Postal could have mustered, because we aren't even dealing with market opportunities, but the pure preponderance of money as symbol for reality.

As far as doping as wedges are concerned, it's the typical manipulative divide et impera at work. You pit the fans against themselves and rule, just like over the working class.

A good percentage of fans may be subjugated along those lines prior or adjacent to cycling. Without thinking on it a lot, I’m not sure the simulacral overrides the market so much as saturates it. But that discussion won’t go far here.

 

[AlpRaid]

Hierarchy maybe not, but there was still a sense of natural or innate talent.

And that’s precisely where we disagree.

This statement actually negates itself. How can there be no sense of a natural hierarchy but still a sense of natural or innate talent?

Where do we put Delion? Was best young rider of the 1990 TDF, won two Lombardias, the last of which (at very least) beating riders on epo. Only to have to quit cycling shortly after as he refused to dope. Where does he stand in your “sense of natural or innate talent”?

Was Lemond, arguably one (if not the) greatest natural cycling talent, suddenly lesser talented than Chiappucci because the latter dropped him by 9 minutes in the Pyrenees in 1991?

Armstrong literally got dropped by semi-pro riders in the Tour of Gila only to destroy the “best in the world” at the TDF 5 weeks later with Dr Ferrari firing on all cylinders. Who then had “innate talent”?

Those years, if you lived them, were absolutely non-sensical.

I find any conversation discussing the riders prominent in that era absolutely ridiculous. Rominger was a nobody until he hooked up with epo. Contador never again won a stage of the TDF or podiumed once the blood passport came into effect. Verbier was a complete hallucination. Why even cite that performance?

100% pointless.

 

[aphronesis]

I lived them. I can’t talk about LeMond because of the rabid fanaticism that surrounds him. (And I was there.) Would relative hierarchy work for you? Are you saying that after 2010 the passport cleared things up and Sky got on with it?

 

[AlpRaid]

I can’t talk about LeMond because of the rabid fanaticism that surrounds him.

lol. I’m out.

 

[aphronesis]

lol.

Calm down. That predates the Armstrong era. It’s a national thing. You wouldn’t get it.

 

[Extinction]

And that’s precisely where we disagree.

This statement actually negates itself. How can there be no sense of a natural hierarchy but still a sense of natural or innate talent?

Where do we put Delion? Was best young rider of the 1990 TDF, won two Lombardias, the last of which (at very least) beating riders on epo. Only to have to quit cycling shortly after as he refused to dope. Where does he stand in your “sense of natural or innate talent”?

Was Lemond, arguably one (if not the) greatest natural cycling talent, suddenly lesser talented than Chiappucci because the latter dropped him by 9 minutes in the Pyrenees in 1991?

Armstrong literally got dropped by semi-pro riders in the Tour of Gila only to destroy the “best in the world” at the TDF 5 weeks later with Dr Ferrari firing on all cylinders. Who then had “innate talent”?

Those years, if you lived them, were absolutely non-sensical.

I find any conversation discussing the riders prominent in that era absolutely ridiculous. Rominger was a nobody until he hooked up with epo. Contador never again won a stage of the TDF or podiumed once the blood passport came into effect. Verbier was a complete hallucination. Why even cite that performance?

100% pointless.

Point being after the 80s there is no way of assessing "innate talent", as since then performance science, combined with ever increasing budget gaps, has taken over. As I've said before, you put Pogi, who may even be on the upper spectrum of innate talent, on a team managed by Gianetti with 60 million dollars to work with and you get the invincible god we are seeing. Otherwise it does not happen, thus the sport has become a circus, even one that is boring to watch. Kingjr up thread said cycling has been more entertaining over the last six years, but I would say the last two have become dreadfully boring. I have even lost interest and stopped watching races mid-course as never before.

 

[BubbaChuck]

lemond isnot greatest talent ever,lol.whats up with people and pogacar.is it personal.pog is by far greatest talent ever and rest are all chumps.never in history of popular sport difference between best and rest was so big and in a sport like cycling today.lets be serius.

 

[SorelyBoy]

lemond isnot greatest talent ever,lol.whats up with people and pogacar.is it personal.pog is by far greatest talent ever and rest are all chumps.never in history of popular sport difference between best and rest was so big and in a sport like cycling today.lets be serius.

Not sure if serious.