The 90s were distorted by widespread use of the most effective drug the sport has ever known.today is more distorted than the 90s.
pogi and vingegaard are greater outliers than pantani and indurain were
The 90s were distorted by widespread use of the most effective drug the sport has ever known.today is more distorted than the 90s.
pogi and vingegaard are greater outliers than pantani and indurain were
Whose numbers? And when exactly does "post-Covid" start?It may not have been decades ago, but wasn’t there a significant boom in numbers post-COVID? Yes, so his point remains valid.
this is not the clinic, pleaseThe 90s were distorted by widespread use of the most effective drug the sport has ever known.
Would you mind going into a bit more detail as to how you think sports science distorts the sport today in ways not related to doping, and more so than EPO in the 90s?this is not the clinic, please
whatever the cause is, sports science nowadays distorts the sport more
i dont have a view behind the curtains, so i cant speak as to the mechanicsWould you mind going into a bit more detail as to how you think sports science distorts the sport today in ways not related to doping, and more so than EPO in the 90s?
You can respond in the clinic in whatever thread seems appropriate.
Most of these exploits come from a very small circle of riders (often just one, in fact). If we compare the performances of Gilbert and Pogacar, the main difference, IMO, is that Pogacar is inherently much better. It's something you see across all sports every now and then.i dont have a view behind the curtains, so i cant speak as to the mechanics
i can see the consequences, the state of the peloton
gaps are bigger now, dominant riders dominate more. a decade ago was the opposite, much smaller gaps than in the 90s
the long solo of gilbert in ronde was nothing like the long solo of pogi in rwanda. completely different worlds
and vingegaard is also just inherently much better than everyone but pogiMost of these exploits come from a very small circle of riders (often just one, in fact). If we compare the performances of Gilbert and Pogacar, the main difference, IMO, is that Pogacar is inherently much better. It's something you see across all sports every now and then.
1) In climbing, and to a lesser extent time-trialling, in a GT context and depending on the profile.1) and vingegaard is also just inherently much better than everyone but pogi
2) and rogla inherently so much better (for a while)
3) and van der poel inherently so much better
4) if you assume the conclusion, that the dominant riders dominate to this degree because of their inherent characteristics and not because of this age of cycling, sure
