Pogacar

Could his time up there be something simple like a better road surface , tailwind , great lead out etc . If he wins the overall would it be possible that he could have a crack at the Vuelta ?

Maybe he’s got internal motors in his legs?
The ultimate mechanical doping.
They don’t x-ray the riders , so whose going to know?

I don’t care, all i know is Pog is ace and Armstrong was a dick.

Electro-stimulation of leg muscles via the “radio”

Maybe he’s got internal motors in his legs?

hmmm – long shorts definitely en vogue currently … 😉

I Think we had this same discussion last 2 years….except then it was Vingo in the frame…..I guess there’s always doubters, but I’m in the frame of mind that these guys are freaks of nature, and with all the data on multiple variables the teams have, they can tweak the athletes’ performance and they can control effort as they ride to decide how hard to push. So is tech info a kind of doping – if you have better data analyses- or is that competitive advantage.  And where altitude training is concerned are they still using hyper/hypobaric tents or whatever to simulate altitude. And is me using AI algorithms to decide my winter Zwift program also doping (not gonna win anything me)

Never knew this about testosterone:

The average T / E ratio for a normal functioning male is a 1:1 ratio, but WADA allows up to a 4:1 ratio without testing positive for elevated testosterone.

So you’re allowed to boost your testosterone up to 4 x your normal levels and still be below the threshold that WADA will see as a positive test. Bonkers.

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/from-microdosing-to-designer-steroids-uncovering-how-athletes-cheat-in-the-21st-century-1

So you’re allowed to boost your testosterone up to 4 x your normal levels

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).

I pretty much work on the principle that they are extraordinary athletes. I’ve known a few people who have freakish endurance and fitness. Whereas I need to keep on top of it just to be below average (a mate pedalled up la belles filles and super belles in the middle of the block whereas I was blowing out my arse and slammed on the big ring).

But also they are nudging the rules of what is testable and probably trying stuff that isn’t yet illegal. Add to that the modern sports science and you get absolute peak athletes. Could they all do it? No. You have to have the base. Pog, Ving and Armstrong, pantini had the physical starting point that many in the peleton don’t what is done after that makes the difference.

Not all cheating is about making them muscularly strong/ able to endure. Getting oxygen to muscles by upping red blood cells, getting fuel to cells by upping carbohydrate intake are two sides of the same coin. 8 years ago I was told by someone in BC that there was about to be a big step in road cycling.

Again they are extraordinary athletes to begin with how you tune that athlete is the question.  Enjoy the racing in the knowledge that currently they are all within the rules.

Jonas would definitely be winning the stages that Pog is winning now, had he got his normal team, his body not till a teeny bit broken and his race fitness completely back. Then we would be discussing Jonas not Tadej.

Then we would be discussing Jonas not Tadej.

I know that’s the OPs title, but much of the discussion is much more wide reaching.

There are two aspects to the current crop that makes you squint a bit – the gap between the very best (and I’m looking at Cross, XC and tour mountain stages here) and the rest; especially as the rest are also on fancy pants 2024 bikes and have access to 2024 nutritional and training science too. But it’s not just that, it’s also the advancements in terms of time on the previous generation.

I’ve said it before earlier in the thread – one of the warning bells 25 years ago that got a lot of people twitchy was when average stage speeds started creeping up and up with the superstars still able to ride off the front with apparent ease. People pointed to the improvements in tech, nutrition and training back then too. With a bit of justification it has to be said. But it wasn’t just that was it and the whole house of cards came tumbling down. It’s pretty understandable that there’s the odd Roger Moore style eyebrow raise now given the duping we all got back then. Sins of the fathers and all that.

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.

https://www.ineos.com/sports/

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”.

@johndoh

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.

@johndoh

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.”

Hardly bold.
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/amatuer-downhill-and-enduro-racer-banned-for-4-years-for-using-or-possessing-10-banned-substances.html

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)