My total guess is that it's more likely to be the lower ranking riders who might be doping, just to try to keep pace with the World Tour in the first place.
Sins of the fathers and all that.
Which I think has possibly made road cycling the cleanest endurance sport in the world. Certainly the most self-critical.
As convert said the tech and nutrition advancements make sense for average speed of the whole peleton to increase its the fact that these guys are still riding off the front with ease. Might not be your EPO of days gone but its some sort of secret sauce thats probaby on the grey side of legal.
Chakaping has a good point i think it would be a lower pro on a smaller team that would get caught old school because they wouldn’t have the money and the infamous around them to get smart
This climb may not have been used for 27 years
Apart from in 2015 when it was won by Rodriguez. I wonder how fast he was.
Slow probably. Quick skim of the transcript from CN he went on the attack very early with a decent size group. On the final climb had to chase down the leaders with 2 others then went solo. Far cry from sat in the pack all day then getting a lead out from fresh "domestiques" :0)
Rodriguez was not in the same league as Pog. Yes I'm deliberately not discussing possibility of doping.
https://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2015/stage-12/live-report/
But also they are nudging the rules of what is testable and probably trying stuff that isn’t yet illegal.
Through various conversations with international UCI Commissaires, I'm aware that there's a general "understanding" or "knowledge" within the top echelons of the sport that a couple of teams have been given notification by the UCI that they (the UCI) have an idea of what they (the teams) are up to and while it's not currently illegal, it's deemed a bit "not the done thing" and if they could please stop toeing the line quite that closely, it would be appreciated.
I think you're right, there's a whole grey area - not dissimilar to F1 where entire teams of engineers will pick over every aspect of the rules then design a floor that doesn't break the rules but really wasn't part of the intended rulebook!
I can understand why people might think it, but I don't think they're doping, and I REALLY hope that I'm right. Cycling has been through some terrible times because of all of the doping scandals and in recent years has made huge steps in recovering credibility. Perhaps I am too optimistic and have too much faith in human nature but I like to think that todays elites have the strength of character to not resort to doping, and the respect for those that have gone before them not to undo the work they've done in helping cycling move past the doping scandals.
Also consider the teams, Ineos for example. If they get caught up in a doping scandal it would negatively impact them in so many more areas - immediately Man Utd would be tarred with the same brush, along with all of the other teams and sports they are involved in.
Personally, I think there are many many reasons for the likes of Pog and Jonas to be doing so well and prefer to take a default view of innocent until proven guilty. Every year the tour fascinates me in different ways, but it never occurs to me to assume anyone is doping.
I think you’re right, there’s a whole grey area – not dissimilar to F1 where entire teams of engineers will pick over every aspect of the rules then design a floor that doesn’t break the rules but really wasn’t part of the intended rulebook!
Where it differs to F1 are the rules they are picking over and the marginal gains are to do with the "engineering" of a human body. And that might come with long term health issues. Part of the anti doping concept is about preventing unfair advantage. The other part is about not exploiting athletes (or allowing self harm) to their long term detriment just to be a bit better at riding a bike.
Agreed, Slovenia has produced quite a few outstanding riders recently, for a population of 2 million. That’s a population 2/3rds the size of Wales, who also have access to an outstanding development programme but haven’t yet produced any superhumans
You're going to be blown away by the Isle of Man....
I personally think you're taking individuals who have freakishly great genetics, then every aspect of their physical performance and that of the bike is being pushed to the limits.
I am more impressed by Jonas's recovery from the injuries he sustained than Pog. I think like many i love watching Pog race as he has been fallible in the past, he is a racer and enjoys pushing himself, even if a few times he has then blown up catastrophically..
I come from a rugby background, a sport that weirdly has a high number of banned athletes on WADA list often, but does not seem to get the tarnished reputation of cycling or athletics, I got tired of playing against another prop-forward who was smaller than me, only to see him next season, and he'd gained 2 stone, was spotty and had a bad attitude...
it’s not currently illegal, it’s deemed a bit “not the done thing”
Does not compute in professional sport. The emphasis being on professional. And if some well-funded teams can buy the new technology and others cannot, impose spending caps. UAE have the team they have because they can pay GC wages for domestiques. So they get GC riders to ride for their GC leader. And they can buy every legal technology possible. What about wages caps? It is not a level playing field, but it's hardly bike technology that is the differentiator.
Rugby players fail anabolic steroid tests, the average player has gained about 14kg. That's a lot of chicken. Curiously the badboys of WADA ADRV's are ... curling and equestrian sports. And of course bodybuilding. But Rugby has has about 1/200 ADRVs, curling is double that. Bodybuilding treble.
I imagine that, as stated above, those most tempted in the peloton are the lower ranking domestiques who need the boost in performance to maintain their jobs when the genetic freaks are off the pointy end.
I find it mildly amusing that a MTB website/ forum has a thread dedicated to the best 'all round' road rider of his generation - yet nothing for any of the current greats of MTB; Schurter, Neff, Bruni, Minnaar, PFP, Atherton, etc
I find it mildly amusing that a MTB website/ forum has a thread dedicated to the best ‘all round’ road rider of his generation – yet nothing for any of the current greats of MTB; Schurter, Neff, Bruni, Minnaar, PFP, Atherton, etc
So which of them are you saying is on the juice?
All? Maybe not enough advantage in DH mtb tho. Pidcock seems to be greater than Schurter anyway and we've mentioned him.
The carbon monoxide piece has been picked up (a bit) by the Guardian's coverage of yesterday's stage, with teams admitting they're using it to "measure" oxygenation. Given the dangers it's presumably ripe for the UCI to stop pretending it didn't know about it and ban anything involving carbon monoxide?
Interesting that Pog's performance and comparisons to Armstrong and Pantani were made on ITV's TDF highlights show last night. I didn't think they'd be biting the hand that feeds them. Or maybe it's just mitigating any future doping discoveries, by saying "we told you so".
No – the rules state ‘a normal functioning male’ – some males will have a naturally higher ratio but WADA wouldn’t allow four times higher (ie, if Pog’s ‘normal’ ratio is 2:1, he wouldn’t be allowed to have 8:1 without testing positive).
Er, did you read the quoted text and the article I lifted it from? It said the average male has a 1:1 ratio and the test threshold is 4:1, so you could in theory get a TUE to boost up to 4:1 if you were deemed to have a low testosterone level.
But I do understand how you could be confused by my comment if you only read part of it ?
Modern "aero" bikes and clothing alongside improved/increased nutrition during the races is a reasonable explanation for improved average speed in the pro peloton. The case for improved speeds up an 8% plus mountain climb seem less plausible. Sure there is an element of aero gains, but Pantani/Lance era bikes were marginally lighter than modern bikes and the drivetrain efficiency is basically unchanged.
It would also be naive to believe that there isn't a single downhill racer not taking some sort of steroid, especially to build muscle after an injury.
but Pantani/Lance era bikes were marginally lighter than modern bikes and the drivetrain efficiency is basically unchanged
My modern disc-braked carbon road bike is heavier than the high-end rim-brake one it replaced, but climbs quicker somehow (definitely not me being fitter).
Frame stiffness perhaps? Wider tyres some influence?
It would also be naive to believe that there isn’t a single downhill racer not taking some sort of steroid
Well that's a bold claim.
No – the rules state ‘a normal functioning male’ – some males will have a naturally higher ratio but WADA wouldn’t allow four times higher (ie, if Pog’s ‘normal’ ratio is 2:1, he wouldn’t be allowed to have 8:1 without testing positive).
Er, did you read the quoted text and the article I lifted it from? It said the average male has a 1:1 ratio and the test threshold is 4:1, so you could in theory get a TUE to boost up to 4:1 if you were deemed to have a low testosterone level.But I do understand how you could be confused by my comment if you only read part of it ?
You aren't allowed ANY synthetic testosterone though. Landis got caught for that.
It's possible you could with a TUE for a specific medical issue. IDK.
I love the tour, and I enjoy the Vingegaard Pogacar rivalry. And yes there are good technical reasons why the peloton is quicker than it used to be. However there is something inherently suspicious when two competitors are head and shoulders better than the rest.
Teams do not have their own secret labs and mad scientists working on unheard of drugs
Wasn't that just about exactly what BALCO was?
(apologies if someone already posted that)
Maybe they are just better than the rest just as MVDP is better at Cyclocross, Pidcock is better at XC and so on.
I heard/read elsewhere that Cavendish's time up the Plateau de Beille was also pretty close to Pantani's record.
"Well that’s a bold claim."
Refer back to the evidence that shows that 43% of athletes at the athletic world championship admitted to doping when asked in an anonymous way. The rewards and professionalism of cycling is such that it's naive to think it's no longer a factor.
Given a hefty enough budget, what other aspects of the performance could you enhance, if starting from a clean sheet of paper and avoiding the existing drug based restrictions?
Improve haemoglobin's quality, affecting the ability to collect and distribute oxygen into tissues.
Improve the overnight repair rate of muscle fibres.
Make those fibres more resilient, or reduce the hormones that control their breakdown during intense exercise.
Increase the quality of glycogen, (or its storage), so that there's more energy available in the ready use store.
Adapt stomach rates of absorbing carb fuel.
Once you open the door to genetic modification of riders physiology, the world's your lobster... If I can think of a handful of these dodgy options, I'm sure that the teams have already been considering these and many others.
I heard/read elsewhere that Cavendish’s time up the Plateau de Beille was also pretty close to Pantani’s record.
Heard that but frankly it's rubbish. I think they were journos on the ground after 2 weeks on Tour with no time to think.
Pog 3 minutes ish up on Pantani and also on the day on Remco. No way Cav rode it in the same time as Remco.
Hardly bold.
Erm, re-read this please:
there isn’t a single downhill racer not taking some sort of steroid
You'd agree with that? Everyone on the circuit is on steroids?
Utter bullshit.
Pog looks fresher at the end of rides than I do at the start. I’d like some of that juice.
I find it mildly amusing that a MTB website/ forum has a thread dedicated to the best ‘all round’ road rider
Is this a MTB forum? It's more diverse than that, surely.
I take as read that they are all doing something either side of the rules
It seems in my time watching the tour - 50 years - that it always been that way
I welcome a great mountain stage and both days were excellent - havent watched todays yet but looking forward to a battle in the alps
"Erm, re-read this please:
there isn’t a single downhill racer not taking some sort of steroid
You’d agree with that? Everyone on the circuit is on steroids?
Utter bullshit.
"
Ok fair point - I missed the double negative. I imagine what the poster meant was that it was unlikely that there isn't a single dher who was has taken steroids for non medical reasons.
"I heard/read elsewhere that Cavendish’s time up the Plateau de Beille was also pretty close to Pantani’s record."
He rode with several team mates including Cees Bol. Cees Bol did the climb in 56min 11s. (No idea how to quote the message from above)
I've been reading a french website that analyses cycling performances in great depth and then points out the ones that look suspicious.
They say that in the EPO bad days there were loads of records for outstanding performances set by doped riders. In the 2010 to 2019 era none of these records were broken. If Froome, Wiggins, Bernal etc. were on anything it obviously wasn't very good.
Suddenly from 2020 loads of the old records from the EPO era started being not just broken, but completely destroyed.
https://www.cyclisme-dopage.com/actualite/2024-07-15-cyclisme-dopage-com2c.htm
Mitch Docker talked on some podcast episodes about the change in training that happened around 2020 and how racing got dramatically harder. I think it probably coincided with modern sports nutrition and changes in training methodology (more low intensity training and smaller amounts of very high intensity work).
I don’t race, but I feel like my local road chain gangs have got dramatically faster too: I think bikes have improved more than people give credit for. I don’t think there’s much new doping going on amongst the chain gang lot either, fwiw - it’s just that bit easier to ride faster than it was 10 or 15 years ago.
Suddenly from 2020 loads of the old records from the EPO era started being not just broken, but completely destroyed.
COVID vaccines gave everyone superhuman abilities, innit.
Agree tech advances over recent years have been pretty major, especially aero stuff and wider tyres! Has much more of an effect at the speed the pros ride.
They say that in the EPO bad days there were loads of records for outstanding performances set by doped riders. In the 2010 to 2019 era none of these records were broken. If Froome, Wiggins, Bernal etc. were on anything it obviously wasn’t very good.
SKY not renowned for being remotely interested in beating records or even riding up a mountain faster than they need to to strangle the life out of the race. Typically they were the only team left with any quantity of domestiques so could just tap away at a pace.
Rewatch Sundays climb. Jumbos first man comes onto the climb flat out and hands over to Jorgenson who burys himself for as long as possible then Pogs last domestique does the same until 5km to go.
There are a good few people here who my Nigerian friend, the prince, would be really interested in establishing a business relationship with. Damn - where are the emojis when you need them to demonstrate you are not entirely serious <winky face>!
Let’s not forget that although the name of these teams changes as the sponsors come and go, the management can and does stay the same . The management of UAE , for example , have previous for doping offences.
As I said in the other thread , the Giro was made a mockery of and was boring. The same is happening in France and I have stopped watching this year’s race.
I hope I am wrong but will not be surprised to proven otherwise.
I’m sorry, but after today’s stage I’m finding it increasingly difficult to not be suspicious. The way he just rode past world class climbers as if they were stationary is getting too good to be true. Assuming that all the teams are using the best sport science to train and fuel properly both in the race and away fro the race then how can someone be that much better day after day and not blow up.
I’m sorry, but after today’s stage I’m finding it increasingly difficult to not be suspicious.
+1. I've given up on watching it.
If he were doping why would he thrash everyone by such a huge margin?
If he weren’t doping how would he be so much better than everyone else? It’s not even close.
And to be so good at so many different types of racing makes me really suspicious. Classics, monuments and GT.
"Pogačar on Isola 2000 averaged 6.83 ᵉW/Kg for 37:44 min and 7.21 ᵉW/Kg normalized for sea level. Despite it being at a high altitude, Pogačar’s raw ᵉW/Kg numbers still are incredible, and he did the second-greatest climbing performance of all time, losing only to his Stage 15 performance on Plateau de Beille. Evenepoel with Vingegaard on his wheel did 6.42 ᵉW/Kg for 39:26 min.
Adam Yates in the first 17:06 min averaged 6.96 ᵉW/Kg, while Pogačar, Vingegaard, Almeida and Evenepoel in the draft pushed 6.75 ᵉW/Kg. After Pogačar attacked, he did 7.00 ᵉW/Kg for 20:38 min. Evenepoel and Vingegaard slowed down with 6.22 ᵉW/Kg and 6.03 ᵉW/Kg in the second part of the climb, showing how much better the Slovenian superstar was, pushing almost 1 ᵉW/Kg more than Vingegaard in the final part."
Pogacar was reprimanded by none other than Lance Armstrong.
“It was really unnecessary to attack like that,” Armstrong said on his podcast. “This will only draw more attention to Pogacar. If there’s already speculation about his performance, this certainly doesn’t help
Or he's pushing huge numbers and taking time because he can and knows that he'll test clean because he is clean.
As I said before I believe they are all doing things that aren't illegal (yet) on top of being freakishly adapted to be elite cyclists.
It really is ridiculous now, they must have something near undetectable to cause the results they have.
