Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[jotafap]

We know. Well I know, anyway... It's still 1) an expression and 2) an expression.

 

[E_F_]

Expressions famously carry no meaning. That's why we call them expressions. Because they don't express anything!

 

[jotafap]

Expressions famously carry no meaning. That's why we call them expressions. Because they don't express anything!

Chagpt interpretation of you words: "Short answer: no, that statement doesn’t really make sense."

 

[Red Rick]

Riders words have meaning. And they very often communicate in such not-so-subtle ways to convey their thoughts.

They could choose their words more carefully, but chose not to

 

[SorelyBoy]

Florian Senechal talks about the recent Flanders race -
https://cyclinguptodate.com/cycling...-stunned-by-world-champions-speed-in-flanders
(original article in French at https://www.eurosport.fr/cyclisme/t...e-navais-jamais-vu-ca_vid60067207/video.shtml )

Two references to motorbikes in the same quote. He knows what he’s doing, no doubt. He isn’t even being subtle.

 

[E_F_]

Chagpt interpretation of you words: "Short answer: no, that statement doesn’t really make sense."

That was the point, my friend.

 

[noob]

Two references to motorbikes in the same quote. He knows what he’s doing, no doubt. He isn’t even being subtle.

Honestly I'm not sure he's knowingly hints at motors, but the fact that he did it twice makes it a bit more likely.

 

[E_F_]

Riders words have meaning. And they very often communicate in such not-so-subtle ways to convey their thoughts.

They could choose their words more carefully, but chose not to

In the first case it's not even an expression, he literally says that he legit thought Pogacar was a moto...

 

[Rechtschreibfehler]

Two references to motorbikes in the same quote. He knows what he’s doing, no doubt. He isn’t even being subtle.

Or he simply references his initial impression twice. He mistook him for a Motorbike, so that is what he compares him to. Maybe simply because as a rider, you are only used to being overtaken by a Motorbike in a situation when you and others are going all out. This needn't be a motor doping reference at all, but it of course appears as one when looks with the expectation to find such references, just like a fast moving object might appear to be a motorbike to a rider.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

Honestly I'm not sure he's knowingly hints at motors, but the fact that he did it twice makes it a bit more likely.

Things can also sound very different in writing than when they are spoken. Sénéchal is clearly no longer at the level he once was, but he did have a leader who was able to follow the so called motorbike, so Pogačar wasn't riding faster than what other people were able to do before later in the race.

I will not rule out motors, by the way, but people seem to be grasping at even the shortest straws, despite the fact that the traditional forms of doping still sound like way more plausible explanations.

 

[SorelyBoy]

Things can also sound very different in writing than when they are spoken. Sénéchal is clearly no longer at the level he once was, but he did have a leader who was able to follow the so called motorbike, so Pogačar wasn't riding faster than what other people were able to do before later in the race.

I will not rule out motors, by the way, but people seem to be grasping at even the shortest straws, despite the fact that the traditional forms of doping still sound like way more plausible explanations.

Read it again and it’s even more telling. He deliberately contextualises his observations. First of all he tells us that the peloton is going flat out, fast. Then he references two top strong riders in Laporte and Remco. And he says they’re riding very well but not moving up, not advancing, again to emphasise the speed of the peloton. Then he says Pogacar comes past everyone, the peloton, like he is on a motorbike. It’s so startling that Senechal says he was about to shout at the rider for such dangerous riding. But that’s not all. He gives crucial additional information by saying that Pogacar was riding in the wind. In other words, not that Pogacar was merely slaloming through a fast moving peloton, which would be impressive enough, rather he was riding on the outside and past them like they weren’t moving without any aero protection, into the wind. Senechal is deliberately and evocatively describing what he saw in order to communicate and elucidate the extraordinary nature of it, while twice dropping in comparisons to someone riding past on a motorbike.

 

[E_F_]

Read it again and it’s even more telling. He deliberately contextualises his observations. First of all he tells us that the peloton is going flat out, fast. Then he references two top strong riders in Laporte and Remco. And he says they’re riding very well but not moving up, not advancing, again to emphasise the speed of the peloton. Then he says Pogacar comes past everyone, the peloton, like he is on a motorbike. It’s so startling that Senechal says he was about to shout at the rider for such dangerous riding. But that’s not all. He gives crucial additional information by saying that Pogacar was riding in the wind. In other words, not that Pogacar was merely slaloming through a fast moving peloton, which would be impressive enough, rather he was riding on the outside and past them like they weren’t moving without any aero protection, into the wind. Senechal is deliberately and evocatively describing what he saw in order to communicate and elucidate the extraordinary nature of it, while twice dropping in comparisons to someone riding past on a motorbike.

Yes, I certainly read the statement as a description of an extraordinary experience. And as such I find it to be evidence of something being very off with Pogacar. Even though I personally think he probably didn't intend to insinuate motor doping.

 

[hrotha]

I think riders aren't making clever allusions to motors in front of the media, I think motorbikes have always been used as the obvious go-to hyperbole for riders who go really fast on a bike for literally any reason

 

[SorelyBoy]

I think riders aren't making clever allusions to motors in front of the media, I think motorbikes have always been used as the obvious go-to hyperbole for riders who go really fast on a bike for literally any reason

I think you’re missing quite a bit of what he’s saying. He just didn’t casually say Pogacar went past everyone like he was on a motorcycle. No. He deliberately and vividly paints the scenario in order to emphasise how extraordinary it was. How dramatic and strange. It’s not an off the cuff remark, but something said with thought and intent.

 

[hrotha]

I think you’re missing quite a bit of what he’s saying. He just didn’t casually say Pogacar went past everyone like he was on a motorcycle. No. He deliberately and vividly paints the scenario in order to emphasise how extraordinary it was. How dramatic and strange. It’s not an off the cuff remark, but something said with thought and intent.

I get it alright. All that embellishment amounts to "no seriously, he was going REAL fast"

Unless Pogačar was making vroom vroom noises with his mouth

 

[ashhutch1997]

I get it alright. All that embellishment amounts to "no seriously, he was going REAL fast"

Unless Pogačar was making vroom vroom noises with his mouth

He was probably fresh enough to make vroom vroom sounds tbf.

 

[SorelyBoy]

I get it alright. All that embellishment amounts to "no seriously, he was going REAL fast"

Unless Pogačar was making vroom vroom noises with his mouth

Yeah, so fast he must have been riding a motorbike. Not like he was, but that he actually was.

 

[Divergence]

But why is it in your opinion that the eye test it what counts? Like what are the upshots, or what, in your opinion? Or am I misunderstanding you?

I do not think the eye test should be reason enough for someone to believe in motodoping. It can be a pointer to look into something, but not more than that. What I was saying is that many people stop at just the eye test and immediately jump to the conclusion that he must be motodoping. I am suggesting that a much better approach is to analyze the eye test evidence mathematically (informed by physics) and only then to conclude A or B. Only then would you have something to back up your conclusions.
TLDR the eye test seems to be the only thing what the motodoping accusers are pointing to. There is no upshot to it.

I'll make one right now: You catergorically cannot rule it out.

Hmm, is is quite strange that this is the threshold for suspicion you are proposing. There are very few things one can completely rule out. For instance, one cannot rule out that the general theory of relativity or QED is wrong, but we still rely on them for all our predictions, Similarly, you cannot rule out that anyone in any race is riding a motorized bike (by your standard), so should we be saying everybody I motodoping?
My point is that there has not been any reasonable proof that Pog is motodoping. All the instances where he accelerates away form the competition are perfectly within human capability. A very capable human, but a human nonetheless.

 

[topcat]

I'm not ruling in motors and I'm not ruling them out.