Team Visma LAB

[Rackham]

Kruijswijk finished 124th in stage 1 of this year's Tour. Doesn't say anything, it's just a dom taking it easy. Tony Martin finished 81st in the first ITT in last year's Tour.

Following that logic, any miraculous transformation becomes justifiable.

Within context, Vingegaard was never viewed as a future GT winner in November 2020. The only ones who imagined such a scenario would be Jumbo's staff themselves based on the data they had.

But let's not rewrite history or find excuses, i.e. this is a Froome level type transformation from nothing to legendary climber & ITT specialist. You can always dig into a rider's past & find xyz stage or result which might hint at some star potential, but as a whole, Vingegaard's youth results & performances until early 2021 do not paint the picture of a Tour de France winner less than 2 years later.

 

[BR2]

I think that he was taken for Chris Harper when he first broke through (albeit I think by Kirby, so... okay...) not long ago, says a bit about how he was viewed then: a random domestique. However, I guess there must be something special about him, if only respondence, otherweise Sepp Kuss would, from a marketing view, probably be more favourable? Or is a Dane in these times more desirable?
But it's still difficult for me to go for Vingegaard specifically, with this team.

I have been wondering, is Jumbo using the same substances/methods as UAE? If so, why do they concentrate on Pogacar when it's possible to do the whole team? They don't strike me as very risk averse- and they do have the money. So either they want to sell Pogacar as a god, or it's a different doping method?

 

[Netserk]

Following that logic, any miraculous transformation becomes justifiable.

Within context, Vingegaard was never viewed as a future GT winner in November 2020. The only ones who imagined such a scenario would be Jumbo's staff themselves based on the data they had.

But let's not rewrite history or find excuses, i.e. this is a Froome level type transformation from nothing to legendary climber & ITT specialist. You can always dig into a rider's past & find xyz stage or result which might hint at some star potential, but as a whole, Vingegaard's youth results & performances until early 2021 do not paint the picture of a Tour de France winner less than 2 years later.

No, it doesn't. The logic merely holds that you should pick better examples. A poor ITT of a domestique in a GT is not very telling. An upper bound of previous climbing performances is far more telling.

Froome's jump in performance was far more sudden and greater in magnitude (at a later age and at the end of his contract when he was most desperate).

 

[noob]

@Rackham I don't speak Dutch so I have zero idea of what they said in Dutch in the team cars.

But I get it. As long as a guy starts doping really early he's believable and can be a cycling hero, because that's how to be able to get results as a junior too.

As if junior cycling was and is clean.

 

[Blobs]

Following that logic, any miraculous transformation becomes justifiable.

Within context, Vingegaard was never viewed as a future GT winner in November 2020. The only ones who imagined such a scenario would be Jumbo's staff themselves based on the data they had.

But let's not rewrite history or find excuses, i.e. this is a Froome level type transformation from nothing to legendary climber & ITT specialist. You can always dig into a rider's past & find xyz stage or result which might hint at some star potential, but as a whole, Vingegaard's youth results & performances until early 2021 do not paint the picture of a Tour de France winner less than 2 years later.

Roglic was losing 20 minutes on the mountain stages of the 2016 giro. Clearly showed no climbing promise. Magic transformation.

Pointless argument.

 

[noob]

I think that he was taken for Chris Harper when he first broke through (albeit I think by Kirby, so... okay...) not long ago, says a bit about how he was viewed then: a random domestique. However, I guess there must be something special about him, if only respondence, otherweise Sepp Kuss would, from a marketing view, probably be more favourable? Or is a Dane in these times more desirable?
But it's still difficult for me to go for Vingegaard specifically, with this team.

I have been wondering, is Jumbo using the same substances/methods as UAE? If so, why do they concentrate on Pogacar when it's possible to do the whole team? They don't strike me as very risk averse- and they do have the money. So either they want to sell Pogacar as a god, or it's a different doping method?

This. UAE not even doing something by Almeida to me shows it's Pog only. In Jumbo it's probably the whole team.

 

[Rackham]

Roglic was losing 20 minutes on the mountain stages of the 2016 giro. Clearly showed no climbing promise. Magic transformation.

Pointless argument.

The funny thing is Jumbo were totally useless in 2016. Frans Maassen even admitted they had no idea how to do an ITT with Roglic at first. It makes sense they didn't know how to prepare for the mountains either.

It was amateur hour & it took progressive steps to build something up to 2019 when the team was ready to fight for GT's. And without anyone knowing what those 'steps' involve, it's as plain as a nose on the face Vingegaard directly benefitted from being catapulted into a ready-made environment.

I think that he was taken for Chris Harper when he first broke through (albeit I think by Kirby, so... okay...) not long ago, says a bit about how he was viewed then: a random domestique. However, I guess there must be something special about him, if only respondence, otherweise Sepp Kuss would, from a marketing view, probably be more favourable? Or is a Dane in these times more desirable?

They actually tried with Sepp Kuss (a lot of talk a couple of years ago about him being leader in the Vuelta & improving his ITT), but for whatever reasons it hasn't worked out. He's still killing it as the last super dom on the Jumbo train of course (Alpe was his usual impressive self), but as a GT winner? No.

Then there's the Tom Dumoulin elephant in the room, i.e. a rider who clearly rejected whatever work environment they have there going on at Jumbo & his career is coming to an awkward end this year.

 

[Blobs]

Not hypocritical because they were different eras. We are talking about unfair advantages. In the 90s virtually every professional took EPO.

Pantani didn’t transform overnight like Vingegaard. Check his record it is blindingly obvious. I tend to agree with the theory that after the humiliation of the 2020 TdF Jumbo needed a top responding lab creation to correct the injustice. Viola!

So Riis and Gewiss were competing on an even playing field? No unfair advantage. Riis would have demolished the 96 tour, if no one was doped?

It makes no sense to talk about the 90's as the greatest era of cycling, and then condemn doping today. From an anti doping stand point, the 90's were the dark ages. "It was a different era" - Yes, it was the most dope fueled era in the history of the sport. The EPO era. Yes it's hypocritical to glorify that, and then condemn modern riders for doing the same thing, but much less so.

 

[Blobs]

And if we're talking natural talent & results at a youth level, Pogacar > Vingegaard, without doubt in my mind. One is a freak talent on a program, the other is a lab creation in a team copying Sky & Froome.

You clearly don't know much about Vingegaards history. On his old team ColoQuick they tested him back in 2016 and it was clear he was a complete physical freak. They talked about him as a potential winner of the Tour even back then. This is three years before he even joined Jumbo. At 20 he broke his femur, and his development was set back probably at least a year.

This notion that he came out of absolutely no where is just plain wrong. Clearly he burst onto the scene quite suddenly, but he was seen as a climbing prodigy, even in his teenage years.

 

[Netserk]

The funny thing is Jumbo were totally useless in 2016. Frans Maassen even admitted they had no idea how to do an ITT with Roglic at first. It makes sense they didn't know how to prepare for the mountains either.

It was amateur hour & it took progressive steps to build something up to 2019 when the team was ready to fight for GT's. And without anyone knowing what those 'steps' involve, it's as plain as a nose on the face Vingegaard directly benefitted from being catapulted into a ready-made environment.

It was far more sudden. Rogla was a completely different climber in the 2017 Tour compared to the 2016 Giro. That was a bigger difference than that of Vingegaard from the 2020 Vuelta to the 2021 Tour.

With your own standard, you might as well call that a Froome-like transformation. But that too would be a poor comparison.

 

[hrotha]

@Rackham I don't speak Dutch so I have zero idea of what they said in Dutch in the team cars.

But I get it. As long as a guy starts doping really early he's believable and can be a cycling hero, because that's how to be able to get results as a junior too.

As if junior cycling was and is clean.

This is dumb. As long as a guy starts getting good results early, he gets the benefit of a doubt to a degree. No one assumes them to be clean or even to have raced clean as juniors, but the possibility exists that they are massive natural talents. The same cannot be said of someone who never performed until they suddenly became a GT dominator at 58 or something. Early excellence is a sine qua non, not proof or anything.

Sorry your problematic fave is in the same league as the likes of Riis.

 

[Blobs]

Sorry your problematic fave is in the same league as the likes of Riis.

And Pogacar is not?

 

[Netserk]

Sorry your problematic fave is in the same league as the likes of Riis.

I don't know how many levels you operate with, but I wouldn't put Vingegaard nor Rogla in the same league as Riis, Wiggins, Froome, Thomas.

 

[hrotha]

And Pogacar is not?

Obviously not. Regardless of his chemical status, Pogačar broke out at an early age. That's kinda the whole point.

I don't know how many levels you operate with, but I wouldn't put Vingegaard nor Rogla in the same league as Riis, Wiggins, Froome, Thomas.

Honestly I have no idea who I was replying to so I just defaulted to "Skybot".

 

[Blobs]

Obviously not. Regardless of his chemical status, Pogačar broke out at an early age. That's kinda the whole point.

Being on a super advanced doping program from a younger age, doesn't make you more entitled to it.

 

[Pantani Attacks]

"I'm sorry you don't believe in fish oil" - Jonas Vingestrong

 

[Blobs]

"I'm sorry you don't believe in fish oil" - Jonas Vingestrong

Too bad they can't dope up to 90's Pantani levels, so we can have another golden era of cycling.

 

[PhiLiz]

Too bad they can't dope up to 90's Pantani levels, so we can have another golden era of cycling.

Uh, risky prediction...

 

[hrotha]

Being on a super advanced doping program from a younger age, doesn't make you more entitled to it.

I invite you to read my previous post on this topic kthxbye

 

[ciranda]

I mean just relax... it's only cycling!

Viola!

 

[Blobs]

I invite you to read my previous post on this topic kthxbye

So if you get on a top program at 20 and go from good junior to world beater in no time, then that's fine, but if you add a little bit to it year by year, and only get to that level of doping at 25, then that's bad? Riders didn't use to hit their primes until their mid 20's. I find these wonderkids much more suspicious than people who progress more naturally.

And it's not like Vingegaard shocked everyone with his accomplishments. In his old team they talked about him being a potential tour winner when he was still a teenager. His numbers were that good.

 

[hrotha]

Riders didn't use to hit their primes until their mid 20's.

Strawman. It's not about reaching your prime, it's about talent showing early. Which it absolutely did before the 90s-00s. Young people bursting into the scene and standing out right away and then steadily improving before reaching their prime in their mid-to-late 20s is absolutely the historical norm.

The rest of your post is just a repetition of what I already covered, plus an assertion that (potentially wildly optimistic) assesments by a young rider's own team are reliable or relevant.

 

[Blobs]

Strawman. It's not about reaching your prime, it's about talent showing early. Which it absolutely did before the 90s-00s. Young people bursting into the scene and standing out right away and then steadily improving before reaching their prime in their mid-to-late 20s is absolutely the historical norm.

The rest of your post is just a repetition of what I already covered, plus an assertion that (potentially wildly optimistic) assesments by a young rider's own team are reliable or relevant.

And he did show talent early. Pogacar also showed talent early, but nothing that would indicate his level would suddenly explode and he would be the goat at 22.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Roglic was losing 20 minutes on the mountain stages of the 2016 giro. Clearly showed no climbing promise. Magic transformation.

Pointless argument.

Er, if you look at his results with Adria Mobil, Roglič was signed as a potential unpolished diamond, and he was signed largely on the back of his performances as a climber. He had never done long ITTs at the pro level before he went to Lotto-Jumbo, but he had been 2nd to Lacul Balea and 2nd to Paltiniș in the Sibiu Tour in 2014, and 2nd to Učka in the Tour of Croatia, 1st in the Trije Kralje MTF at the Tour de Slovénie and won a high altitude mountain stage in the Tour of Qinghai Lake, as well as winning the GCs in the Tour of Azerbaijan and the Tour de Slovénie.

When he went to the 2016 Giro he'd never done a race that long before and it was over a week longer than the 2nd longest race he'd done, and I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the péloton at the Giro d'Italia is stronger than that of the Tour of Qinghai Lake. He lacked pack skills at the time and wasn't a protected rider.

Roglič showed plenty of climbing promise, it was precisely that which got him a top tier contract in the first place. In fact you can probably dig out a post of mine in August-September 2015 when he signed with Lotto-Jumbo hyping him as a prospective KOM at the Giro if he dropped time and was allowed into breaks.

 

[Blobs]

Er, if you look at his results with Adria Mobil, Roglič was signed as a potential unpolished diamond, and he was signed largely on the back of his performances as a climber. He had never done long ITTs at the pro level before he went to Lotto-Jumbo, but he had been 2nd to Lacul Balea and 2nd to Paltiniș in the Sibiu Tour in 2014, and 2nd to Učka in the Tour of Croatia, 1st in the Trije Kralje MTF at the Tour de Slovénie and won a high altitude mountain stage in the Tour of Qinghai Lake, as well as winning the GCs in the Tour of Azerbaijan and the Tour de Slovénie.

When he went to the 2016 Giro he'd never done a race that long before and it was over a week longer than the 2nd longest race he'd done, and I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the péloton at the Giro d'Italia is stronger than that of the Tour of Qinghai Lake. He lacked pack skills at the time and wasn't a protected rider.

Roglič showed plenty of climbing promise, it was precisely that which got him a top tier contract in the first place. In fact you can probably dig out a post of mine in August-September 2015 when he signed with Lotto-Jumbo hyping him as a prospective KOM at the Giro if he dropped time and was allowed into breaks.

It was deliberately chosen to be an equally bad example as the one Rackham was giving