Tadej Pogacar and Mauro Giannetti

[Gianetti_Is_The_Goat]

I'm seeing more and more anti Pog stuff on socials. The greed will be his downfall (hopefully)

I doubt it, but the TdF will be unpleasant if Seixas becomes a real competitor,

 

[Glorious]

I think Gianetti's greed should not be underestimated; that creep is waiting for him here too. Gianetti wants to take everything he can to forget his past.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

I'm seeing more and more anti Pog stuff on socials. The greed will be his downfall (hopefully)

How is this only happening now it's been going on for years

 

[onefortheroad]

I doubt it, but the TdF will be unpleasant if Seixas becomes a real competitor,

Competitor for second place against Vingegaard over three weeks? Doubt he even gets that far.
Winning a couple of mythical stages? Also unlikely, Pogi usually doesn’t leave scraps lying around.
And the kid better not get too confident or the UAE hype machine (and hate) will kick in fast.
Unless there’s illness, injury, or a crash, this looks… suspiciously easy for Pogi. Almost too easy.

 

[onefortheroad]

His sociopathic greediness will be his downfall. Even Lance knew when to be chill.

Let him keep "cannibalizing" every stage. That way, when the downfall finally happens, at least the crash will be spectacular. But will he anticipate it? When the tide turns and he starts getting overtaken, will his pride even withstand such a fatal decay? It’s going to be fascinating to witness. But it’s still such a long way off.

When he starts getting beaten in the mountains just like he was in the Kigali ITT by Remco, physically overtaken and humiliated by more than 2:30 minutes, it will be priceless. But will it actually happen?!
Right now his greed knows no bounds, especially after seeing him trying to devour all these "stupid" sprints too.

 

[Ulle97]

Just tuned into the highlights of today's stage.
My goodness.
Pogacar breezes past Godon (who is a decent sprinter this year) in the sprint.

The image at the end of the highlights shows Pogacar crossing the line with his arm raised, smiling, and mouth closed.

A bunch sprint effort should require a massive watt spike for the human body.

The others behind him are out of breath and defeated. Faces etched in fatigue.

The optics of it are simply ridiculous.

 

[Divergence]

Yeah, ok. But…Your claim is built on a stack of assumptions that collapse the moment you compare them with what we actually know about elite cycling from the 1980s onward. If you will forgive me for saying so, it’s a classic case of presentism—imagining that people in the past were naïve, lazy, or ignorant simply because they didn’t have today’s tools. It’s a belief system, not an analysis. It’s the same mindset that assumes ancient people were stupid because they didn’t have smartphones. The argument is built on belief, not evidence. You even admit:

That’s the key. It’s a belief system, not an analysis. Let’s break it down a bit. The claim for example that “top riders didn’t train hard” is historically false. From the 1980s onward, we have extensive documentation—training diaries, interviews, lab tests, team archives—showing that top riders trained huge volumes and often at intensities that would break most amateurs. Examples:

• Hinault routinely did 30–35 hour weeks, massive tempo blocks, and brutal winter base miles.
• Induráin was doing 5–6 hour rides at high aerobic power, plus lab‑verified VO₂max work.
• Ullrich’s training logs show enormous volume and intensity, especially under Rudy Pevenage.
• Armstrong’s pre‑Tour blocks under Carmichael and Ferrari were famously extreme: long climbs at threshold, motorpacing, repeated maximal efforts.

These riders weren’t doing “coffee rides”. They were doing huge, structured, periodised work, often with sports scientists, physiologists, and coaches who were ahead of their time. So any idea that they “thought they trained hard but didn’t” is simply not compatible with the evidence.

The argument confuses energy availability with training knowledge. Yes, modern riders fuel more aggressively. However, the statement treats “not consuming enough energy” as if it were a revelation. In reality, when it did happen, it was a deliberate trade‑off in an era obsessed with power‑to‑weight.

The claim that Pogacar trains hard “all year” and others didn’t or don’t is a myth. The best riders still do huge volumes, just like the best riders always have. Likewise, the idea that Pogacar is the first rider to train hard year‑round is fantasy. Merckx, Hinault, Induráin, Armstrong, Contador—these were obsessive, year‑round workers. The difference is how they trained, not whether they trained. But let’s not think that the outputs deliver anything more than relatively marginal improvements.
Nor is there any evidence that Pogačar is uniquely disciplined compared to his rivals. Vingegaard spends months at altitude, Evenepoel is famously obsessive, Roglič built his career on monastic preparation, and the entire UAE, Visma, and Soudal ecosystems are built around relentless, year‑round training, as are all the top teams. Pogačar stands out in results, some might say talent (I have serious reservations about such claims), but not in work ethic.

You use a single anecdote (Geraint Thomas riding at 240W) as if it proves anything. This is a classic logical error in that:

• Anecdote ≠ evidence
• One rider’s easy ride ≠ historical training norms
• One power number ≠ a training philosophy

Geraint Thomas riding at 240W on a recovery day tells you nothing about:

• his threshold
• his training load
• his periodisation
• his race preparation

It’s like seeing a surgeon drinking tea and concluding surgeons don’t work hard.
The argument also assumes “training hard every day” is good training. This is another misunderstanding. Elite training in any sport is not about going hard every day. If you train hard every day, you don’t adapt—you burn out. The statement confuses effort with effectiveness.

OK, I appreciate that I get a thought out response, albeit a bit condescending (I could say much more regarding this point but I would rather my post do the talking). Let me try to argue some points.
First, sure, I admit I do not know what exactly the riders were doing in the 80s or in the 90s but I have some pretty good indications.

"Examples:

• Hinault routinely did 30–35 hour weeks, massive tempo blocks, and brutal winter base miles.
• Induráin was doing 5–6 hour rides at high aerobic power, plus lab‑verified VO₂max work.
• Ullrich’s training logs show enormous volume and intensity, especially under Rudy Pevenage.
• Armstrong’s pre‑Tour blocks under Carmichael and Ferrari were famously extreme: long climbs at threshold, motorpacing, repeated maximal efforts."

1. This is largely self reported and made for publicity. Yes, he trained and he was really good, but did he really do "massive tempo blocks"? Did he really do as tough as training as modern riders do? I do not believe so. And yes, it is a belief and not a proof but you cannot prove your claim either.
2. Indurain was an excellent time trials and a very efficient rider by all accounts, but again doing some 5-6 hour rides at what he thought was high aerobic power proves nothing when it comes to the question whether he was really training at a high enough power or even whether he was training like that constantly. Plus not to mention that with a body like his he would be nowhere today.
3. Come on. Let us be serious. Jan was an example of how not to behave as a serious sportsmen. Being so much off form during the winter is ridiculous.
4. Lance had some coaching but I listen to the guy who was there for all his win (Bruynel) and he really is clueless when it comes to training for the most part. Dr Ferrari had some good insights bat that was mostly for his doping program and not his day to day training as far as I know. Also, Lance was saying how he was always blown off on the Poggio in Sanremo. That shows that he was not really training well all the time.
"These riders weren’t doing “coffee rides”. They were doing huge, structured, periodised work, often with sports scientists, physiologists, and coaches who were ahead of their time. So any idea that they “thought they trained hard but didn’t” is simply not compatible with the evidence."
I never said riders were doing only coffee rides. I said doing those rides does nothing for training. It is as if you did not train that day. Maybe even worse.
Hah, sports scientists. Let me not go too deep into this topic. I will just write that the propensity of papers where the test group is something like 6 people or the conclusions are something like x has a 5% to 67% chance of happening is astounding. It is just not a serious scientific field and the word scientist in sports scientist is kind of an oxymoron.

So yes, I do believe they thought they trained hard but they did not. Before you say it, you also do not have the data to support your claim that they actually did.
"more aggressively. However, the statement treats “not consuming enough energy” as if it were a revelation. In reality, when it did happen, it was a deliberate trade‑off in an era obsessed with power‑to‑weight."
POwer to weight is still the king today and I am quite glad the the usual bonebrakers are getting beat more an more on what is regarded as their terrain. It would be a good day for cycling when 80+kg riders and sprinters are no longer in the peloton.
Addressing the point concretely. What we learned is that you can diet after the training buy you pretty much have to be fueling your training very well on the bike.
"The claim that Pogacar trains hard “all year” and others didn’t or don’t is a myth. The best riders still do huge volumes, just like the best riders always have. Likewise, the idea that Pogacar is the first rider to train hard year‑round is fantasy. Merckx, Hinault, Induráin, Armstrong, Contador—these were obsessive, year‑round workers. The difference is how they trained, not whether they trained. But let’s not think that the outputs deliver anything more than relatively marginal improvements.
Nor is there any evidence that Pogačar is uniquely disciplined compared to his rivals. Vingegaard spends months at altitude, Evenepoel is famously obsessive, Roglič built his career on monastic preparation, and the entire UAE, Visma, and Soudal ecosystems are built around relentless, year‑round training, as are all the top teams. Pogačar stands out in results, some might say talent (I have serious reservations about such claims), but not in work ethic. "
Oh, it really matter how you train and it matters a lot. I do not think it is just marginal. Before you say it, yes it is a belief of mine buy you do not have a proof for the contrary either .
Vingegaard is hugely disciplined and that is his best talent. Unfortunately he lacks in other departments. That is why he is way better than the giants of the past. Because just being hugely disciplined can bring you a looong way. Evenepoel is another good example. Idk if he is obsessive but he is fat. And as long as he is fat he will never be good on climbs, which is what road cycling is all about. Rog is another good example. Whilst he was extremely motivated he could be among the best (I even thought he was the best for some period), but when he lost his motivation he became just another rider now. Idk about these other teams and what they are doing but there is no other team-rider combo capable of training as well as Pog. I guess Seixas is now going well so he must be training well also.
"
You use a single anecdote (Geraint Thomas riding at 240W) as if it proves anything. This is a classic logical error in that:

• Anecdote ≠ evidence
• One rider’s easy ride ≠ historical training norms
• One power number ≠ a training philosophy

Geraint Thomas riding at 240W on a recovery day tells you nothing about:

• his threshold
• his training load
• his periodisation
• his race preparation

It’s like seeing a surgeon drinking tea and concluding surgeons don’t work hard.
The argument also assumes “training hard every day” is good training. This is another misunderstanding. Elite training in any sport is not about going hard every day. If you train hard every day, you don’t adapt—you burn out. The statement confuses effort with effectiveness. "

YEs, I admitted it was an anecdote but is says something about what the riders and the "doctors" or coached though was good training. And even G himself has said that the training he was doing in 24' or so was completely different to what he used to do.

To conclude: Elite training is about going as hard as you can without suffering those negative consequences you described. However, that is quite ofter a bit harder than most people thought in the past. And when riders do feel bunt out it is then due to other things impacting recovery and not the hard training itself. You have to sleep well, not be out all day running after your kids etc... Now I am not advocating for distancing your family but it is just the reality of cycling at the very top.

 

[Divergence]

-Almost won Giro della Valle d'Aosta in the u23 ranks vs Mas.
- 5th on the gc in the baby Giro.
- Won the Misurina MTF in the Adriatica-Ionica race, by dropping Fatco (yes, he still was back then) and the gc.

Not saying that he was clean, but he always had high highs and low lows and always was inconsistent. Actually becoming better in the u23 ranks after leaving Locatelli's shady team is also not the worst indicator that he had some talent.

Of course the way he never repeated his 2021 performance is fishy, but compared to other riders and their transformation (climbing Wout during the peak-Visma era) it was at least an absurdly strong showing by someone who had always been a great climber. Frankly, before the 2021 Tour Vingegaard didn't exactly have a much better case for being a future gt star...

Idk, you might be right but the way he dominated those two sages back to back (if I am not mistaken) and then he did not even get on the TdF team and was sold and his next team then dropped him... That was very strange.

 

[bah]

Guy could beat Mario Cippolini in a sprint it seems.