I think it's in the tyres. Wider tyres give riders more comfort, saving their energy that would be otherwise wasted on a bumpy road by bouncing in the seat.
juiced to the gills.... not only freak of nature, 10-15 years of pro cycling, discipline, mental strength and duabillity luck, injure free, AND JUICE... and Blood pain killers and everything....
well i think alot of pro cyclists do actually perform much better and the bikes itself are also better but i think they are also using some form of doping.
Yes, I'm still suspicious. Better tech obviously includes better juice. In a few years we'll probably know what today's riders/teams are doing, but for now it's not tested for or it's being hidden to deflect criticism and increase cash flow for everyone involved.
Current riders are linked to past dopers through the team owners, director sportives and doctors who are still in the sport today despite decades of doping riders...
Riders are committing long term to people that have only known one thing their entire career, as rider and as teammanager, and that's doping (Gianetti, anyone?). And now that the stakes are higher than ever, they are doing things clean all of a sudden? I wouldn't want to have anything to do with that kind of people, but apparently cyclist have very fucked up ethics.
Also what really is doping. To many people it's taking banned substances but that's a game of cat and mouse. Something gets banned and scientists tweak it on the molecular level and technically the new thing isn't banned. To some people doping is doing something unnatural, consuming 120g+/hr of glucose is pretty unnatural. Wouldn't be surprised at all to know these guys are using some crazy substances that aren't technically anabolic steroids and aren't illegal but certainly aren't what people would call "natural". Like bike tech, this is simply part of the game at a certain point.
@@devidia The logic failures from you people amaze me. So, you're just assuming that all of the hype about "doping" must be true because X drugs will make you winners over "clean" riders, without question. Doctors got involved through medical research and during the last 100 and then some years some nations also wanted to field "the best" athletes and they created "cheating" programs that combined performance theories with emerging medical practices of each generation. The most effective doping regimes from a performance perspective are also the same protocols used by doctors to treat aging males who want to keep from getting weaker with age. IOW, the margins we're talking about are very small. And if you take all of the top athletes that race and train under similar conditions and pressures you're going to get athletes competing against each other with very small marginal differences. So these medical interventions do help, marginally, to keep the athletes recovering properly and that generally helps them achieve higher levels than they would without these medical aids. And if they train with EPO as one example that also helps them learn about how they respond to stress and what they need to recover. If they are guided properly they can take this information and start the next season without losing performance once they know precisely what seasonal loads they can handle. They might have to race fewer days, for example, or train more like Pogacar claims to train (and many others). That's why "zone 2" is such a big fad lately. IOW, getting your training right is likely just as effective as getting help from Professor Conconi or one of his proteges. It's not easy getting your training right and riders very often get tempted to meet certain aspirations without a willingness to wait. You guys all have missed the fact that pro cyclists and many other athletes are generally competing much longer than previously where a 30 year old athlete prior to the 1980s was considered over the hill. And all of that "heart rate training zone" research was legitimate but they also "normalized blood values" to get more reliable data. That means blood packing and later EPO and so forth. But the training protocols were validated very precisely whereas before the research was done they just had an idea of something like 3 training zones marked by how much you would struggle to keep up with your breathing rate.
''Modern day riders have nothing to do with what happened in the past'' - yeah true, except that the past is still very much present in the form of doctors, managers and directors from the 90s and 00s running the teams and supervising rider preparation, so yeah, nothing dodgy going on clearly
@AutiSam1974Nothing has changed. It is just business as usual in cycling, and in other sports, the only difference cyclists get tested more than in other sports that makes it much cleaner.
@Kenzou-bp3rb 😂 only works at the rider at the front, and it's so marginal too, my avg speed is 14 mph, you telling me, if I brought a new bike , that's heavier then my current bike, my avg speed will be 18 mph +? 😂😂😂😂😂 the MOST aerodynamic bike is banned from racing , the "old faithful "
Yes it is entertainment it is not real. People eith sub notmal IQs believe it is just the bikes and the clothes and the nonsense of marginal gains. But if your read the books the "sauce" has been patt of the game since the start of the very start of pro cycling.
I absolutely agree with everything in here. We have so much better access to information, the information has gotten exponentially better, and the tech is also better. I was an avid cyclist in my 20’s during the rise of carbon fiber. I found cycling through the love of fitness and considered my self to be very fast. I fell out of cycling, health & fitness for about 20 years (I got unhealthy and overweight). About 3 years ago I decided I needed to make a return to cycling and get in shape again. I have several new medium to top end new bikes. I don’t have any of my old training records but at the age of 47 I set a 100 mile PR at 4:39:00. I have so many other PRs that are so far beyond anything I can remember in my 20’s that I can only attribute to the tech and knowledge of fueling strategies. I remember in my 20’s I could squat somewhere in the neighborhood of 400lbs and now I can maybe to 250lbs so I know the performance increases are not due to an increase in fitness, but rather an increase in tech, knowledge of aerodynamics, rolling resistance, body positioning and fueling for a long ride. When I hear that pro-cycling is clean, I can absolutely believe it, but with a small amount of healthy skepticism that I have with any sport where people get paid to win. I’d also like to say that I attribute a lot of knowledge I’ve gained to the excellent content from GCN. You guys were the first cycling content creators I found on my journey back to health and fitness and I’m eternally grateful for the work you guys do bringing knowledge and awareness about our ever changing sport, so thank you!
Similar. I've already posted. Age 69, heart attack in 2020, on current bike, faster than on Reynolds 531 bike in 1980 when I was riding 10 miles or more each way every day. I lack my old explosive speed but wonder how fast I'd have been averaging then if on my current carbon fibre Ultegra bike.
0:35 by far most stunning for me is the pre WW1 average oft about 25km/h. Steelbikes on gravel"roads", 300+ km per stage, no teams, stopping for nutrition, no help with mechanical problems. I dont know how you can get 25+ per hour. Insane.
And...THEY DIDN'T HAVE GEARS BACK THEN 😱 I mean when mountain uphill started they had to stop, unmount rear wheel, turn it around (to get lower gear) and then hit the uphill (rear derailleur was invented in 1930s by Campagnolo). Still 25 kmh. That's ridiculous.
My god! I myself can simply go onto the web and sign up for testosterone “treatment” with an online doctor and legitimate prescription, of course Picachoo is doing something sophisticated and undetectable.
And experimental substances. If you have enough cash, you also can also secure that a specific kind of substance is exclusively sold to you. The big hitters don‘t rely on the old stuff, there are substances out there in experimental state, most of us never heard of, let alone the effects. The more money is to gain the weirder it gets.
I think the concern that most people have is one particular rider who is at a completely different level physically than everyone else (more power, better endurance and amazing recovery... regardless of technology...his bills are paid by a State that has become synonymous with Sports Washing... This is a very fluffy discussion - it kind of discusses the increase in average speeds of races, which is fine and I don't think anyone disputes this... but doesn't really go there... we've been here before. The wrong questions are being asked.
What do you claim are the right questions to ask? And how did Pogacar lose two Tours if he has these dominant "Capitalist" advantage that nobody can overcome?
It's not just cycling. All professional sports are on the same boat when it comes to suspicions of cheating. There is big money involved, careers to make, glory... It's obviously tempting to take shortcuts. I think from a mental sanity perspective you have to watch it with a certain suspension of disbelief and enjoy the show and hope and trust that the regulating bodies will do their job properly to keep it as clean as possible.
Great stuff! Gives a lot of confidence to fans of the sport like myself while enjoying its complexity. This also shows the increasing support around cycling and suggests cyclists depend more on others who support them - coaches, teammates, researchers - for enhancing their performance. This does not sound like the sport is becoming more individualistic and toxic but on the contrary, for improvement you need healthy ecosystems, relations to support you.
Greg Lemond’s takes, Icarus documentary, continuing cheats getting caught. I’ll watch races and enjoy watching them but I’m not naive anymore to thinking these guys aren’t enhanced. Training and tech has undoubtedly advanced, so has doping and not getting caught.
Exactly, the question is does the public even care anymore? I think the general understanding amongst them is good enough they know there’s always some dubious stuff going on and always will be.
@@Thatinvestmentguy sport is in the first place a matter of talent and a lot of hard work, doping is as old as sport itself , it was always there, and it wil always be there!!! test are there to prevent it from becoming a freak show!!! that is all!!! people have to stop acting like hypocrites. 1. For sure cyclists are not more or less doped then in any other sport, there is much more testing in cycling 2.People who keep whining about it have to watch something else on tv , go watch a movie, or the fake news ! hard working sporters don't need your hypocrites opinion! 3. Don't forget to take you meds before you go to work 😅
My problem is that I have been watching the grand tours since the 1980s and have always given those riders who shone the benefit of any doubt. Winning margins, particularly recently for the likes of Wiggins and Froome have often been wafer thin and so, to me at least , believable. And of course all my naive beliefs in some winners from the past have been shattered, making me into a cynic, so much so that this last season, I have for the first time followed the circus without any of the enthusiasm that I have retained for the last 40 years. Whilst on holiday, I missed part of the Vuelta and didn't care. I have not been able to believe in the huge and repeated winning margins that we have seen achieved with apparent ease, the last 3 words being the most important.
Our memory is short lived. About 10 years ago, it was all about marginal gains - better materials, equipment, professionalism, and so on. But today, the gains we’re seeing are far from marginal, yet the same old story is being told. None of these factors-whether it's technology, materials, or aerodynamics-can fully explain the recent dramatic increases in power outputs.
Heat adaptation is not marginal. Ive tried it. If you look at conors test, he dropped 50% watts over 1 hour. If you want more evidence look at the first week of vuelta this year compared to rest of vuelta. It was obvious some rides were better heat adapted than others, gaining an advantage in the first week, think Mas over Roglic, also yates and carapaz super strong, later weeks roglic made them look like juniors. 10 years ago, all pros would’ve been like conor here. Seeing as they’re taking the tour de france speeds a lot here, it is very meaningful, as it’s a hot race. And even in colder races, it matters due to the latest advancements in sports science, understanding of heat shock proteins, etc. Not things people knew 10 yrs ago and far from just marginal
@@Elonpocalyps420 Heat adaptation improves your relative performance in the heat (i.e., your performance doesn't decline as much, even as you experience cardiac drift during the ride), but not your absolute numbers-at least not to the extent we're seeing today. Otherwise, African and South Asian cyclists would dominate the sport the way Ethiopian runners dominate long-distance running
@paddymurphy-oconnor8255 , speed is a completely irrelevant metric here. These guys are applying more power to the pedals than the worst dopers of the past. Better tires, more aerodynamic frames, etc., won't help you to apply more power to your pedals.
As someone who got Into cycling in the mid 90s , "Once bitten twice shy" springs to mind, When I see a rider on the limit, and along comes Pog looking fresh, breezing past , and then when he crosses the line and he still looks incredibly fresh, then I can't believe he's not cheating in some form, Iam convinced that in the future we we will find out how they are cheating weather its mechanical or physical doping
But who says that they are all genetically/physically in the same league. Let me compare it to height. I don't know where you live but in most countries being 6ft. or 183cm tall is above average, if you look in the NBA athletes being 6ft6" or 200cm tall isn't unusual, and maybe you would think they aren't natural as well, if height doping would be a thing. Yet even these NBA Players are no where near the tallest guys in the world which are 240+cm tall or 8ft. And they all grew to be that large naturally. The thing with height is, that everyone can see it, and if you are a giant it is obvious and that is why we know they exist. If you had a super powered Metabolismus or Oxygen saturation capability you wouldn't notice that unless they aspire to become a world tour athlete. There are probably hundred more pogacars in the world, but they will never get into professional cycling so we will never know, and think that Tadej is the only freak, when in fact there is a small group of individuals with that genetic trait that made him so superior. Just seeing someone being so much better than everyone else isn't really a good argument for doping. Unless someone can explain how they artificially improved Pogacar performance to that level, and why it is just him, I won't show any respect for the doping accusations.
@@CLONisKINGunless everyone is doping and on top of that pogi is also a bigger genetic freak. As said, not only pogis speed has gone up over everyone, overall peloton speed has
I agree with you but I do hesitate we'll ever find out. UCI does not seem interested in shaking things up. This type of racing is bringing spectators and therefore money. There won't be another doping macro scandal because it would be the death of road cycling. In the past few years, some teams have showed sudden performance improvements and when suspicions raised up, those teams went curiously back to normal. Endurance races are boring by nature and not very broadcast friendly. Even more with the short attention span of nowadays with social networks and the like. Spectators want heroes and attacks. UCI will comply with that
@@trinerdSome play better, but after a couple of years everyone does. This is a known thing with most professional sports. The issue here is that three racers have dominated for the last few years. Jonas was a wonder child until he crashed, hard. Poj took his place. Someone will take his place, maybe. I suspect after a major incident. What I hope doesn't happen is another Lance. Then professional cycling will be done.
Incredible video, Thank you for doing this. As a long time fan of cycling I think some of the reasons for gains are fairly obvious, i.e. technology, but you brought to light several factors which are not necessarily common knowledge. Also, its incredible to actually hear the numbers (watts) associated with these gains. Simply amazing. I think I will always be somewhat skeptical of big performances, and I think everyone should be- we have to be; or history will repeat itself(Armstrong). As fast as all of these new tactics and tech are developing, i can only hope that doping tech detection is developing at the same clip. I would personally love to see behind the scenes of the antidoping authorities and how they are keeping up with the very rapidly changing landscape of pro cycling.
Really loving all of Connor's Videos recently. They all have interesting topics, go indepth and are very well done. Some of the best videos on GCN lately, love seeing them! These videos alongside Lloydie's Journey back to Health and Si's Videos about commuting are all great! Thanks for the Content!
Mauri Gianetti. How about we talk about him GCN? How could anyone know his disgraceful history in the sport, watch him hugging Pogacar at the finish line, leader of the most powerful team, and conclude that cycling is clean?
Exactly. If Pogacar moved to another team he would stop winning. Better training and nutrition is complete BS that people like to believe. The fact records set in the 90s by riders who were doped to the eyeballs are now being beaten says it all. Pogacar can destroy the entire peloton and cross the line hardly out of breath.
@@mrstanhope1516you are so dumb its not even funny... you seriously compare 20years old records to modern cycling? Lol PEDs that Pantani and Lance used are easily achieved by todays altitude and heat camps.. 😂😂 And moved to another team? Are you saying that only UAE is doping and Visma or Quickstep are sqeaky clean??? 😂😂 Made your mind at least bud...
Correct. I would say not the performances are suspect necessarily, could be down to better training, tech, nutrition, etc. But the people running the teams are highly suspect, and makes me sceptical.
Technology, training, diet and race tactics have all improved and have led to faster races, but im not naive enough to believe all riders are clean, all sports will have some rougue athletes and with the history of cycling, there will always be suspicion. There have been some unbelieveable results in recent years that will always raise suspicion.
I am not sure that anyone suggested all riders are suddenly clean. The question is can today's super achievers possibly or plausibly be clean. I would say many or even most are.
@@JonCannings What changed between 2023 and 2024 that suddenly made Pogacar 5%+ better, and removed all his previous weaknesses, allowing him to do the first triple crown since the 80's?
The same people involved in teams that doped 20 years ago are still in the sport. Doctors, team managers, etc. it’s not believable these characters aren’t doing what they always have done. The UCI is not consistently prosecuting cases where the biological passport has suspicious results.
But a lot of things have changed in 20 years. And a lot of things did change back then. Until 1998 team doping was real, then it became more a personal thing
@@fabiovalentinuzzi5589 1999 was the start of armstrong’s seven TdF runs, that whole team was a ‘team dope’; michele ferrari was the us postal team doctor until 2006!
If you tell me Pogi is doping ? I'll tell you, your full of chit. And this young man shouldn't have to endure the bullchit that came from the old. Especially his very very hard work. We need to be very careful of inaccurate responses to someone's very hard work. These young men deserve so much more than what the as*holes from the past did.
Great Vid. as per usual. Any chance of doing a (longer, several parts) info video on doping? the how why’s and wherefore, the role of WADA, how are riders being controlled, types of doping, a sheer endless amount of sub-topics.
The quality of the content on your channel has skyrocketed in the past few months. The sailing one was awesome, ineos was interesting and this ine is 🔥 You got me back after a 2 year hiatus
That this is still a discussion surprises me. Every pro Sport is dirty. Doping is not an exeption, it is the norm. I trained a lot of athletes over 20years and this is what is up: Doping is everywhere, it is an entertainment industry and higher, further, faster sells. You need good talent and a high tolerance for performance enhancing drugs/therapies. Every Sport can dope, it just looks different from sport to sport. Clean sport would not sell anymore, because if a sport would be clean by next week through a miracle, no records would be broken for a very very long time. Athletes who got caught in the last 10years are usually people who were a thorn in the side of officials or were a problem for the governing bodies of a sport, club etc. they simply messed with the wrong person, club etc. . Even sports with not much money are not clean. Athletes identify with sport, to be a pro and want to be the best, a lot of them identify their selfworth through success and doping can give it to them.
I think we also need to take into consideration that stages have gotten shorter in general over the years thus more explosive. 1987 TdF 4,200 kilometers, 25 stages. 2024 TdF 3,500 kilometers, 21 stages.
The average stage length of these figures you give are within 2km of each other, so not very telling. It does seem that even the flat stages these days are raced nearly flat out from start to finish. Seems the announcers are always saying the field is way ahead of even the predicted early finish time.
@@gcn enjoying and being incredibly skeptical of the nonsense that unfolds in front of you is even better. Have you guys lived with your head buried in the sand for the last 30yrs?
@@abedfo88 They benefit from having good relations with teams and riders. It's a company in the same industry. They wouldn't make this video any other way.
There have been dramatic performance improvements not only in pro biking, but in marathoning as well. I am very skeptical of endurance sports in general, not just cycling.
GCN are never going to turn around, address this properly and accuse riders/ teams of doping. So this was 35 minutes that I'll never get back. According to this; doping science has sat still for 30 years while every other science has evolved. All this while staff members/ directors with a history of doping continue to dominate the sport. It isn't just Pogacar, Decathlon have come from no-where to start winning big races. 13 riders broken the record up Plateau de Beille.
Don't overlook Marc Hirschi randomly showing up and winning multiple races over a few weeks, and then going back into the shadows for a while, and then coming back and doing it again. Not sus at all..
@@DreExploresSports If you are going to have a serious conversation about doping. You've got to mention reasons that show that doping could be part of the reason why the speeds are so high and times are being destroyed and that Pogacar can "do a Landis" for the entire season. Also, on the testing thing... don't forget that the dopers will always be ahead of the testers and that not testing positive is meaningless. Lance supposedly only failed 2 and look at how many other pro's didn't fail tests but later admitted it.
One of the most interesting videos I have watched in recent times. Kudos! Would love to see more of this from GCN. Long time watcher of this channel. First time commenting. It was that compelling for me! 🙏
What you've done with this video is that you had your conclusion and then found evidence to justify it. There's a lot of claims made here about the effects of training and machanical developments. Are they correct. Why are cyclists training harder and why are we seeing all these developments? Have we seen similar jumps in such a short time in other sports and if so, are they comparable? Cycling has been professional for a long time and human nature hasn't changed in the last few years. There's plenty of people from the bad old days still around the sport. Have they all really had their road to Damascus and are now committed to clean racing? To be an honest documentary, you need to present the other side of the story and do it fairly. Speak to sceptical voices, investigate claims made rather than taking everything at face value. Basically go back and have another go. Be an investigative journalist, not a bunch of chummy ex pro cyclists who want to keep access. A nothing to see here from a few people in the industry isn't enough.
I think you're missing something important here. GCN is not a news outlet, these are not journalists, there is no need for impartiality. I enjoy watching GCN but let's call it what it is, it's an advertisement show for the bike industry with some clever people in production and charismatic people in front of the camera, and that's fine with me. Perhaps they shouldn't be making this kind of video in the first place.
@@danielc196 This video is different from their normal content in that it purports to be a journalistic enquiry into why professional cyclists are going so much faster this last few years. As such, it does not fulfil the basic requirements.
@@Richarddraper Couldn't agree more. On reflection it was probably a mistake to make this video given their ties to the industry and people they are supposed to be covering.
Sure. Lap times in the swimming pool. Average drive lengths in golf. Points per game in NBA. Lap times in F1. As mentioned in the video, there are also rule changes that play a factor. Is it drugs and doping? Historically, yes. Could it be different now? Some of us hope so.
Been a cycling fan since the 90s and sad to say but I believed back then that many performances were not natural. I truly want to believe that the sport is as clean as it professes to be but here’s why I’m sceptical: Back in the hay day of US Postal we heard the same thing, ‘we’re more scientific about the sport, more professional, train better etc’ and we all know now what was going on. And as we hear in this video, there are certain things that if you’re not doing today as a World Tour team you can’t compete - we’ll then all it needs is for one team to successfully evade testing and we’re back to what caused the doping arms race back in the 90s. I remain to be convinced that any amount of technology and training can bridge the gap between a clean and doped rider at the elite level.
Well as a former sports Journo in Ireland, I can tell you only this, I do not know what TP is on, but on something he certainly is. Let's look at some evidence, his team management were rampant ex dopers (esp Gianetti) they hired a dodgy doctor Mianard from a dodgy Portuguese outfit. His times are outstripping well known ex dopers (Armstrong/Pantani) and doing it at a canter...hardly struggling like the season previously. How did he go from "I've got nothing left" in 2023, TDF to 3 to 4 minute 50klm break aways in multiple races...seriously. Are you seriously asking that all of this normal.
He had a Crash before the tdf 23 and lack of training. No surprise he bonked. Funny thing, no one is asking how Jonas came back only 3 month after intensive care. 🤡
The difference, for me, from the 1990s to today is that everybody knew the peloton was doping back then. They just couldn't catch them. There were whispers circulating all over the place. The thing now is there is none of that.If there were some miracle drug that teams (plural) were using just like use of EPO. It was known in journalistic circles back in the day, WADA knew it too - I cannot believe that not a single rumour has leaked out from a mechanic, a soigneur, a press officer. It only needs one person and the snowball begins. It doesnt need to be UAE or Pogacar, it could be anyone from any team, and it hasnt happened.
That’s not “evidence” Go on …..publish that about TP and see how long before you end up being sued for libel. I look forward to you using that as a defence.
Pogacar in the 2020-2023 was a generational talent. In 2024, he became a living God. He lost two tours doing ~6.5w/kg and suddenly past winter changed his nutrition and got to 7w/kg any day of the year, no matter how much fatigue he was carrying. I can't understand how a well trained athlete can make that improvement (0.5w/kg or close to 40w) naturally
@@exigency2231 He's gossiping about VAM to power divination. All Tour winners are suspect if that's how cheaters are supposedly exposed. These gossips don't even have power meter data. They don't understand drag coefficients and fluid dynamics in open road racing, especially on mountains (that usually have interesting wind patterns that nobody here ever thinks about).
@@indonesiaamerica7050 Lantern Rouge & co have calculated his power to 6.98 eW/kg for ~40:00 minutes. These calculations have been proven correct multiple times, and pros have confirmed them. Even if it wasn't very accurate that would still put his sea level ftp well in excess of 7wkg.
This vid could be summed up in two words: "Citation" and "needed". We hear aerodynamic improvements have resulted in "20, 30, maybe 40%" improvements in efficiency. Well that's an interestingly broad range. Which is it? Training is "ten-fold" more intense. Well, is it? Is that measured? Essentially this vid assumes the conclusion from the start. It acknowledges that the speed increases look unbelievable, but then takes at face value the statements by people deeply invested in continuing as is. Where are those who are _actual_ sceptics with knowledge of this sport? The conclusion of this video that riders are training harder and that bikes are quicker is hardly going to reassure anyone in the face of that average speed graph in lieu of some actual data.
@@thecaveofthedead you’ve noticed the GCN “doing science” methodology. Their way of ‘proving’ something is to start with a theory then try to prove it rather than the correct way which is to try, and then fail to disprove it.
I love their videos buts it's almost like saying "this financial offer looks way too good to be true, well don't worry we talked to the people involved and they say it's chill.."
Great post. GCN heavily invested in Omertà. Guys that actually take this stuff apart forensically say Pog’s tech gains over Pantani about 20 watts. Not a lot. Guys who have run the numbers say Pog has improved 10% this year. That is pretty much impossible. Impossible to the point even more dope doesn’t make sense. So hence all the motor talk. It ain’t subtle gains guys, we’re talking 50 watts here. GCN doesn’t get specific because when you do, everything suddenly gets painfully obvious. It’s not carbs, lol.
Would be interesting to visit the WADA what they are doing to monitor new possible ways of doping. I think cycling is clean today but I also hope that they are advances in anti-doping as well
It definitely always seems like WADA are caught on the back foot when it comes to new doping techniques, new drugs, any sort of wrinkle comes along and WADA's just completely ill-prepared for it. They seem to be in a constant state of solely attempting to address the mistakes of the past rather than prep for the future.
great video, so interesting to hear from the people who are in a position to judge how the various improvements work together to make the riders faster and faster
Quite a lot of this improvement is accessible by the average person if you are willing to educate yourself and put energy into it. I'm old. When I was young we trained ourselves into the ground every single session (though I was a runner, not a cyclist at the time). We burned outselves out, or got injury after injury. Although forms of polarised has been around for a very long time, it wasn't embraced by very many. Similarly, I remember seeing Chris Boardman get ridiculed for putting emphasis on aerodynamics. Even now, people poo-poo energy savings from narrower bars, position on the bike, aero socks, waxed chains, etc. People used to *avoid* fructose as a fuel and now we know it's critical in allowing people to absorb glucose dramatically faster. But you don't have to trust any of this. You can try it yourself. This is what is amazing to me.
Good start to a challenging topic. Two other vectors to pursue... (1) Pull in the opinions/analysis of current cycling journalists who have covered the sport for a long time (someone like David Walsh, for example, who called out Armstrong). And (2), share what doping controls are now in place (vs the past), how well they are/aren't working and how cyclists might still try to get around them.
Happy to see this. I love you guys but GCN's recent race reporting leaves me shaking my head at the utter lack of questioning these ridiculous performances. Stakes are high, people cheat. True for cycling and every other pro sport. What a bummer.
Thank you for addressing this Conor and GCN. I have been getting totally fed up with every social media post being commented on with many unfounded accusations of doping, it's frankly depressing. So it's good to see this video explain other factors that have contributed to increasing speeds. GCN - please do keep tackling all those controversial topics!
Very interesting documentary. Well done. It gives a answer about the performances. The influence of proper food before, during and after races is not mentioned. This ia also a (big) factor for improving performances. I'd liked to see more of this.
i think we should be very sceptical. as someone wrote. alot of team owners, sports directors and the like have a skeptical history in the sport. but also pro sports in general have doping issues i guess(hockey, football, swimming, cross country skiiing etc etc) but in pogacars case, u have to compare him with other super duper elite pro bike riders, and he just smokes them, THAT is very suspicious.
LOVE LOVE LOVE THIS EPISODE.... This is one is for The Nerds and The Science Geeks like me and I loved it. Along the same lines, the quality of the content in GCN videos has improved exponentially over the past 2 yrs! Thanks Connor/GCN.
That was a great film - thank you. I'm one of the people mentioned a few times in the film - really just want to see good racing, be that on old bikes of the 60s and 70s or with the new tech of now. And I'm happy plodding out the miles on my own bit of old(ish) tech bike. But an insight into the techniques and professionalism of the riders today is fascinating.
It’s NOT about them being faster than before. It’s the fact that ONE rider is stronger than an entire peloton! This ONE rider will bridge a 4-min gap to a sizeable breakaway on his own and goes past them and the entire peloton that he left behind could not chase him for the next 80kms+. Does this mean he is the only one doping? Absolutely not. The problem with doping is that people respond differently. It’s like alcohol. I get tipsy with just one bottle of beer but some people could empty a case and still walk in a straight line. If alcohol improves performance then I would be the biggest loser. Pogacar is so doped to the bones.
It’s simple to disprove the theory being shoved down our throat here. Take a modern day rider and put him on a 1995 bike and ride the same route with state of the art equipment. You’ll notice a difference, but it doesn’t explain the massive gaps that we are seeing. Creating a video about this subject and not explore drugs is just silly. You’re avoiding the elephant in the room.
It's a little more nuanced and a lot more complicated than your proposition. You'd also need to train differently, eat differently, and have an altogether different mindset (ex. team professionalism).
Bahamontes was doing an estimated ~6.5w/kg and destroying everyone else by larger margins in the 1950s with prehistoric feeding patterns and not doping with anything that actually worked. I don't think it's unrealistic to assume that in-race nutrition and heat+altitude training have advanced in 65 years such that someone else could be doing ~0.3 w/kg more for similar durations while also being head and shoulders above their peers
Well, I was in college when England's first pro cycling hero Tommy Simpson overdosed on Mont Ventoux and I'm still not over that! So I am happy to see such amazingly detailed responses from so many cycling fans giving carefully considered reasons why this show was pretty much one-sided from the starting gun. My small contribution is to collect all the dozen comments in favor and list them here as a brief survey of those who believed the presenters point of view. IMHO they all look like Slovenian AI or a robo operation in Moscow to me, just one line and not a single fact or logical thought, only formulaic words of congratulations on being the world's best online bike team........Judge for yourself: "Really loving all of Connor's Videos recently/Great Vid. as per usual/ Love it!!! Very interesting, good research, well structured. Please do more like that, great stuff!/Conor is such good presenter. Great episode folks/Great video GCN/Great program! Really appreciated, for I'm a cyclist fan/former weekend warrior. Keep up the good work! Bravo/i really hope this video ages well/Great piece. The heat training section was super informative./Thanks Conor and crew , I see money being a big factor as well /This is a very well-done piece of work. Thank you, Conor & team/Finally a credible channel that has the guts to discuss the obvious." What do you think?
Why didn’t testing catch people before and why do we believe it will catch people now. No doubt everyone is talented and trains super hard - that isn’t at question. We should be talking about testing and correct funding of testing
I watched some interviews with doctors that used to do the doping. Many said that they all knew what was being tested and what not. And often how good the tests were/what was considered an abnormality. If you know that, its quite easy to get around it.
This was one of the best videos of the year. Thanks for taking such a thoughtful look at a complex and surely not well understood area of racing a bike.
I've been giving this topic a lot of thought since I watched the video. As a student of cycling since the mid-1980's (I started with BMX racing then transitioned to road racing), it's hard not to recognize the consistent increase in speeds over time. This is not isolated to cycling; every sport is getting faster. Runners are faster now, swimmers are faster now, etc. Science and technology have played an immense role of sport for a very long time. If you recall, Francesco Moser blew up Merckx's hour record in 1984 on a bike with a radical redesign that could never have been imagined during Merckx's cycling career. That bike threw out all the rules of bike design at the time, and introduced technology that changed the course of design evolution. Within two years, most of the teams switched to aero bikes with disc wheels for their TT machines. Lemond carried that thinking forward into the late 1980's when in the '89 TdF he adopted the use of triathlon bar extensions on his TT bike. It too was revolutionary, and again, within two years all the teams adopted them. The evolution of technology has given us the sleek, fast bikes we see in 2024. I would caution, and argue, that modern road bikes have allowed the peloton to become too fast. As with a speeding car, reaction times need to be faster. Crashes are more inevitable, and possibly more serious to the riders. I would like to know if a study can be performed to see if rider reaction times can keep up with the speed increases. It would also be interesting to determine if there's a link between the increased average speed and an increase in crashing and serious injury. While I hope it never happens again, the potential of a deadly crash increases under these circumstances, and it's usually when a death occurs that radical changes are made to make the sport safer. I'm a bit surprised that the crash earlier this year at the Itzulia Basque Country wasn't a bit of a wakeup call.
A lot of the ideas discussed in this video can be tested (and probably have been at various times). The areas that generate the most concern are those that are physiological in nature. What I would like to see are things like hemoglobin counts for Sherpas to see what is physiologically possible and controlled tests (using hypobaric chambers) to see how long it takes for hemoglobin to reach their peak at various altitudes. Another test I would like to see is determining haw mush power a cyclist can sustain using various amounts of carbohydrate intake during an endurance ride (using factors such as blood lactate and heart rate levels as indicators). The test I would most like to see, although it is not possible, is to take the likes of Pantani and Armstrong at their peaks and put them through modern training and dietary regimes to determine how much greater their performances would be.
Fantastic film Big Man, really interesting, makes you sit up and pay attention to the advancements in sports science and how the pros teams keep pushing the boundaries or I should say unlocking doors. It also highlights our own performance and abilities especially when we go aboard and experience big temperature changes and wonder why that 5 hrs ride was so tough, we all need a better understanding of what's going on internally with our own bodies, top film, thanks!!!!
On cycling speeds... This 69-year old heart attack survivor, this summer, I was astonished to look down at screen and realise I was hammering along at 45 kph slightly uphill after riding up Polhill north of Sevenoaks. I'd done nearly 65 km by then. On my 2nd hand 2018 Roubaix with cable Ultegra and 25C tyres, swapped out bars to get rid of the silly winged originals, down from 42 cm to 38 cm wide, and a longer stem with no spacers. In my 30s, I averaged just 17 to 20 mph on similar East London to Tunbridge Wells and back route on 531 frame, 23C tyres, Weinmann concave rims. Thing is, I'd just done four 60 km rides in the two weeks before as a way of getting back on the bike. I did regret it as I ended up with a head cold and pulled something in my lower right back which took ages to get over. So, anecdotally, I can fully accept speeds by pros are faster than in past. But, having been a child on the back side of the Sahara Desert, I've always tended to function relatively better than most fellow white Brits in hot, dry summers at cricket, football, rugby, cycling. The bikes, training, diets, heat management, Sky 'follies' like mattress and pillows, chef, warm downs, etc make for greater speed. Doesn't mean there aren't illegal or edge of legality supplements as well but the wider stuff is so much faster than past. If I could afford it, I'd like a modern fit and a new bike with short cranks, C35 top spec tyres, and appropriate rims just to see what I could manage before I turn 70. And get a heater for our large garden shed for workouts at higher temperatures than house central heating.
A great video, I really enjoyed hearing the insights from the experts and Connor did a super job of engaging them and summarising the context of how so may changes in all aspects of cycling have accumulated to delivered the massive performance gains we are now witnessing in races. It would also be great to learn more about the organisational improvements in how teams are operating. Well done to everyone that contributed to this video.
Awesome video Connor, you sourced top experts and covered every aspect of why the level of professionalism has gone up. I think there’s still a lot of margin for improvement, mostly around nutrition and tech. It’s also worth thinking that the high and hard work required to be up there will force people to try to cheat again, there will ALWAYS be people willing to take shortcuts….
I agree with Conor. I think the bulk of the riders in the peloton are clean, especially the main protagonists. It's all down to professionalism, training and mentality, that's what is getting the gains. Great episode, well done Conor
The real question is “Should you believe pro sports?” The answer is no. There is too much money and fame to be gained. The pressure on these highly competitive, talented young men is immense. If there is an advantage to be gained there are always people willing to make the bargain. I have no problem with doping, I don’t like lying. Let them do what they want, under doctors supervision, and let the chips fall. All the doping controls and penalties and suspensions are theater at best, a diversion at worst. And Lance Armstrong is the greatest grand tour rider ever.
Armstrong was the greatest Tour de France rider ever, if you don't care about the doping. I'm starting to agree with your stance on being okay on doping, but not with lying about it. If it was assumed that all pro athletes doped to gain maximum performance, it would still be thrilling to watch - and one could take solace knowing that the winners were the best of all the dopers. When it becomes doubtful that testing can catch the most advanced PED use, pro-sports fans will either lose interest in watching pro-sports (I'm coming to that point, and it's taken my 72 year lifetime to get there), or continue watching doped competitions. Unfortunately, it then becomes meaningless to compare athletes of different eras, where PED's were either not taken or were much inferior to contemporary PED's. The concept of a G.O.A.T. needs to either go away, or forever come with footnotes. BTW, I still remember how thrilling it was to watch Roger Maris's longtime home run record get beaten in the late 90's, until the contest between Sammy Sosa, Mark McGuire, and Barry Bonds finally ended when Bonds hit 73 home runs in 2001, beating the long standing record of Maris hitting 61 homers in 1961, a record that stood for nearly four decades. It was at that point doping investigations got serious, and many of the dopers were caught (around 80 in total). In Major League Baseball, the home run records were allowed to stand, but none of the dopers have been admitted to the Hall of Fame. As with cycling, this all occurred around the turn of the century. Doping in cycling seems to be more sophisticated, as muscular atrophy doesn't seem to correlate with wins for most forms of bicycle racing.
I'm 40 and American, grew up idolizing Lance and turned my back on pro cycling after it became clear who he was. I get the hate in these comments, Pogi does look too good to be true given how things turned out the last time someone was too good to be true. But I want to believe cycling is clean (whatever that needs to look like) because the races are better than I ever remember, and it's not just about speed or who wins, it's about how the teams are working today vs. 25 years ago and a new generation that are completely upending race dynamics. This is a great video. I hope you do more and look into what's changed at the UCI (if anything), what's changed with team "doctors" (if anything), and interview more recently retired pros.
Everything points to Pogacar being an incredible talent. He has been at the top of the sport from the moment he entered the peleton, he is competitive and indeed dominant in every race he enters. Contrast that to someone like Armstrong. A decent one day rider, won WC in 1993 from a lucky solo break away, won a couple TDF stages in similar situations but was never even on the radar as a possible grand tour champion.... then all of a sudden he starts dominating the TDF. Yet in other races outside of the tour during that time he was still average. This is because his doping protocol allowed him to be very good for a period of time but he didnt have the natural talent to maintain that throughout the season. Peaking is a real thing in training but its importance has been way over blown. Natural Athletes can stay at close to their best for long periods of time, meaning a truly great racer should be able to maintain competitiveness throughout the season. It is also a very good sign that Pogi does have bad days as well which were almost non existent for Lance during the tour. I cant say if the current crop of racers are or arent doing something, but I am saying that other than speed, the regular tale tale signs of the past arent there.
Conor, you're a right proper journalist! I really appreciated this report. And while I'm still🤷♀as to what's going on under the hood in pro cycling today, the results on the road are astounding to see.
Track and Field looks worse than a lot of sports because they actually have an effective and independent anti-doping agency that actively bans athletes who cheat. Compare that to most other sports where the anti-doping agencies are really there just to create the illusion of clean sport so the sponsorship money keeps flowing. If an anti-doping agency isn't finding any athletes who cheat, it probably isn't because the athletes are all clean.
No one really argues that better bikes and some new training will make folks faster. The question is how much is due to that? And are they also doping. Enjoyed your video and it’s about technology advancements, doesn’t answer, nor really address, the question of drugs.
I keep saying, since the covid tour, stuff got fishy. And the last two years some teams even went up another 3 gears. It's too much on such a short time, it just can't be just 'nutrition' and 'mechanical' improvements. I don't have proof, but there are too many red flags, like way too many.
Covid forced them all to have more highly structured training with fewer race days. Of course they all would have come back stronger if not for certain side effects from certain experimental therapies required by many governments.
It's their job to be the fittest possible and fastest possible. Of course they're going to dance on the line of legality, trying to do everything that is allowed, avoiding what is banned like a pest, and most of all using of what is not banned yet. I just hope what they are doing overall doesn't hurt the athletes in the long term.
It's the same for all sports. Tech aside: Training is better, rest is better, nutrition is optimized. Everything is individualized and maxed out. Sports-science has been taking huge steps in recent years and the accessability of the data.
Came here to say the same thing. As was alluded to in the show, young athletes (across all sports) are starting training earlier, they're training smarter, eating cleaner, and focusing solely on their chosen sport. The results of this are evident. There is no "off season" for professional athletes anymore. It's just an opportunity to build strength, power, and speed, without the interruptions of events.
None of this explains one man winning essentially every race he participates in, be it a classic or a 3 week race. If they are all doing, and perfecting, their training - how come they are so far apart?
But doping wouldn't explain that either. Basically Pogacer is either an outlier responder to training or an outlier responder to doping; merely positing doping as a potential explanation doesn't help resolve anything (unless you believe Pogacer is the only one doping, which strikes me as *by far* the least likely scenario of all).
But there have always been different levels of talent. You could just as easily ask how Eddy Merckx won so much given that the same opportunites for performance gains were available to all of his competitors. There may or may not be cheating going on, but why is the fact that somebody wins evidence either way?
I don't think pogi is clear . He's definitely strong and one of the most talented riders ever. but i don't think one can do almost everything . like one day race and grandtour and win them so easily. what's more . attacking from 80kms or so . and mostly he didn't seem get tired if you see how easily outbeat the remeco and jonas in the tour the wc. its a shame and making the race boring. whats even more disgraceful is no one question him.
Thanks for this video! I’ve been thinking about this issue so the timing is great. You know, the past 10-20 years have seen phenomenal advances in technology across many fields as information has become more available and computing power has increased to take greater advantage of it. It stands to reason that professional cycling would benefit from these advances as much as any other arena. So maybe we really shouldn’t be surprised to see improvements in bikes, in aero, in training, in fueling, etc. that aggregate into much higher performance.
Well done GCN, an excellent video. No matter what field you are intersted in performance improvements are only achievable through looking at every aspect of the 'system'. This video demonstrates how cycling performance improvements have been acheived through the application of systems thinking. I believe the pro sport is clean but know that amature cycling has issues.This may be an investigative topic for a future video.
Good piece Conor, and as a coach I know much of what was covered in here, although I only recently heard about the heat training, which is clearly the new altitude training! As a long term fan of the sport, and another one who was burned by he who shall not be named, I hope the current crop are playing true, and get the feeling the vast majority are. But I will always remain vigilant for those performances that don't add up.
There was an old adage in GT racing that it wasn’t until you hit your thirties that you were in peak multi-week endurance fitness. The belief went that it took that many years for deep endurance to develop. Well, it just turned out that the life of a pro-doper was not one that happened over night. Rather, slowly but surely you were introduced to the life, reaching your doping+physical peak at that age. That we now have young people in their early 20’s winning GT events, with Egan being the first, turns this on its head. Either; people are doping ten years earlier than before, or natural talent is being given a chance to shine. I’ve never been bothered by doping. However, I’m bothered by sociopathic people who will ruin the lives of others to protect their own lives. Here’s looking at that clown with cancer. If you want to dope, good luck to you. If you want to bring down people who attempt to out your doping, go to hell.
Well I’d like to believe the ‘chance to give talent to shine’ theory but when they are now absolutely destroying times set by the best riders on synthetic blood in the 90s it becomes rather harder to fathom.
What I want as a cyclist is the healthy trickle-down technology that I can use to ride better. Racing provides a platform for us to learn these things. I've been riding since the early 70s and have benefitted from much trickle-down tech. Keep it fun folks!
Hmm… at least half these comments sound as if they didn’t listen carefully to the discussion and science presented in this video. Thanks for taking this subject on, pursuing the various components (tech, nutrition, training methodology) and determining the scale of effect that evolution in each of these areas has made. Well done!
How do disc brakes fit into this? In the US the bike industry is basically run by 60 year old men buying $15k bikes for gran fondo riding while the racing scene is gutted and usa cycling is in debt. No young college aged person can afford a good racing bike anymore and nobody really cares for the immense cost of it. If the $2-5k bikes from 10 years ago were available now, we'd be looking at things differently. Now $2k buys you a pretty heavy road bike that will never be competitive. Technolgy isn't trickling down to be cost-effective for the entry levels anymore.. if anyone cares about the future of the sport.
Another major deterrent is lack of road races. It's mostly crit racing in the USA, and I simply don't want to risk crashing myself out of the ability to return to work on Monday because of some super sketchy office park crit. At least in road racing you can race "conservatively" and still enjoy the competition. as an amateur with no ambition to rise in the ranks.
@@charliedillon1400Exactly.. personally I also find crits incredibly fun but also worry about the risks. I have raced amateur for a while if only to prove something to myself and rise as high as i can as an individual with a job but it does somtimes feel like usacycling as an organization only cares about the young pros rising through the ranks, and the top tier cat 1 races and fails to recognize the base of their funding comes from a LOT of amateurs coming to race for fun. The elitism around racing has been a big turn off for a lot of my cycliny friends.
99.99% of people in the US care absolutely nothing about the future of cycling in the US or elsewhere. Most would be hard pressed to even name a current US pro or a major world tour level race other than the TDF. I've been following for decades and none of my friends, family, or coworkers have ever had any interest in the riders or races. There was that short period where Armstrong was popular and there was a belief and a resurgence in cycling but he, and some of the other US riders, basically ruined the sport in the US probably for many years still to come.
I started watching cycling in the early 2000s, and I cant remember a time where I didn't know that Lance Armstrong was cheating. The evidence was all there and the only ones who were surprised when he admitted to doping were either naive or wilfully ignorant. In the past there was always additional circumstances that made a rider suspicious. There were rumours they worked with a dubious doctor, they had high hemoglobin, there were journalists expressing doubts based on insider information from different teams etc. Today the only thing that is suspicious are performances. We haven't got any rumours or murmurs about doping other than people accusing someone based solely on performance and that they're winning a lot. Of course that doesn't mean that every rider is clean, but it's hard to think that doping is going on at the same industrial scale as it was into the 2010s.
But it's equally likely that doping isn't the means with which someone would cheat today. As I said in another comment, if someone explains their performance by saying "zone 2" which is "ride along without being out of breath" then, if that were misdirection for cheating it would seem obvious that what you're trying to misdirect is something that let you put power into the pedals without getting out of breath, right?
@@michael1 I understand your point, but I don’t get the impression that there are any cyclists now who claim that they have a miracle method which is responsible for their success. Most emphasise smart and dedicated training
This was a really good video. To complement it, I would like to see a study of doping detection methods and protocols that asks whether those have improved at the same pace, or whether teams have just gotten smarter about doping.
The improvements made in the peloton during the past ten to fifteen years reminds me of a recovering addict. The peloton hit rock bottom, went to rehab and became better. The rehab has been improvements in bike technology, nutrition, training, and data, and applied knowledge. Let’s call it, evolution of cycling.
What are your thoughts on present-day pro cycling? 🚴♂
I think it's in the tyres. Wider tyres give riders more comfort, saving their energy that would be otherwise wasted on a bumpy road by bouncing in the seat.
juiced to the gills.... not only freak of nature, 10-15 years of pro cycling, discipline, mental strength and duabillity luck, injure free, AND JUICE... and Blood pain killers and everything....
well i think alot of pro cyclists do actually perform much better and the bikes itself are also better but i think they are also using some form of doping.
We may never know what, if anything is going on, but GCN you are right to ask questions given cycling’s history.
Yes, I'm still suspicious. Better tech obviously includes better juice. In a few years we'll probably know what today's riders/teams are doing, but for now it's not tested for or it's being hidden to deflect criticism and increase cash flow for everyone involved.
Current riders are linked to past dopers through the team owners, director sportives and doctors who are still in the sport today despite decades of doping riders...
Riders are committing long term to people that have only known one thing their entire career, as rider and as teammanager, and that's doping (Gianetti, anyone?). And now that the stakes are higher than ever, they are doing things clean all of a sudden? I wouldn't want to have anything to do with that kind of people, but apparently cyclist have very fucked up ethics.
Nexuses!
Also what really is doping. To many people it's taking banned substances but that's a game of cat and mouse. Something gets banned and scientists tweak it on the molecular level and technically the new thing isn't banned. To some people doping is doing something unnatural, consuming 120g+/hr of glucose is pretty unnatural. Wouldn't be surprised at all to know these guys are using some crazy substances that aren't technically anabolic steroids and aren't illegal but certainly aren't what people would call "natural". Like bike tech, this is simply part of the game at a certain point.
@@devidia The logic failures from you people amaze me. So, you're just assuming that all of the hype about "doping" must be true because X drugs will make you winners over "clean" riders, without question. Doctors got involved through medical research and during the last 100 and then some years some nations also wanted to field "the best" athletes and they created "cheating" programs that combined performance theories with emerging medical practices of each generation. The most effective doping regimes from a performance perspective are also the same protocols used by doctors to treat aging males who want to keep from getting weaker with age. IOW, the margins we're talking about are very small. And if you take all of the top athletes that race and train under similar conditions and pressures you're going to get athletes competing against each other with very small marginal differences. So these medical interventions do help, marginally, to keep the athletes recovering properly and that generally helps them achieve higher levels than they would without these medical aids. And if they train with EPO as one example that also helps them learn about how they respond to stress and what they need to recover. If they are guided properly they can take this information and start the next season without losing performance once they know precisely what seasonal loads they can handle. They might have to race fewer days, for example, or train more like Pogacar claims to train (and many others). That's why "zone 2" is such a big fad lately. IOW, getting your training right is likely just as effective as getting help from Professor Conconi or one of his proteges. It's not easy getting your training right and riders very often get tempted to meet certain aspirations without a willingness to wait. You guys all have missed the fact that pro cyclists and many other athletes are generally competing much longer than previously where a 30 year old athlete prior to the 1980s was considered over the hill. And all of that "heart rate training zone" research was legitimate but they also "normalized blood values" to get more reliable data. That means blood packing and later EPO and so forth. But the training protocols were validated very precisely whereas before the research was done they just had an idea of something like 3 training zones marked by how much you would struggle to keep up with your breathing rate.
Correct!
''Modern day riders have nothing to do with what happened in the past'' - yeah true, except that the past is still very much present in the form of doctors, managers and directors from the 90s and 00s running the teams and supervising rider preparation, so yeah, nothing dodgy going on clearly
@AutiSam1974Nothing has changed. It is just business as usual in cycling, and in other sports, the only difference cyclists get tested more than in other sports that makes it much cleaner.
@AutiSam1974 source: trust me bro
I’ve been watching pro cycling since the 1980s, and sadly every time some performance has seemed to be too good to be true, so it has proven to be.
You're conditioned to think that since the Festina Affair. You think "media" is the cutting edge of "knowledge" or something?
@@indonesiaamerica7050higher speeds, yet the heaviest bikes? ..😂
@@LM42 ever heard about aerodynamics?
@Kenzou-bp3rb 😂 only works at the rider at the front, and it's so marginal too, my avg speed is 14 mph, you telling me, if I brought a new bike , that's heavier then my current bike, my avg speed will be 18 mph +? 😂😂😂😂😂 the MOST aerodynamic bike is banned from racing , the "old faithful "
Yes it is entertainment it is not real. People eith sub notmal IQs believe it is just the bikes and the clothes and the nonsense of marginal gains. But if your read the books the "sauce" has been patt of the game since the start of the very start of pro cycling.
I absolutely agree with everything in here. We have so much better access to information, the information has gotten exponentially better, and the tech is also better. I was an avid cyclist in my 20’s during the rise of carbon fiber. I found cycling through the love of fitness and considered my self to be very fast. I fell out of cycling, health & fitness for about 20 years (I got unhealthy and overweight). About 3 years ago I decided I needed to make a return to cycling and get in shape again. I have several new medium to top end new bikes. I don’t have any of my old training records but at the age of 47 I set a 100 mile PR at 4:39:00. I have so many other PRs that are so far beyond anything I can remember in my 20’s that I can only attribute to the tech and knowledge of fueling strategies. I remember in my 20’s I could squat somewhere in the neighborhood of 400lbs and now I can maybe to 250lbs so I know the performance increases are not due to an increase in fitness, but rather an increase in tech, knowledge of aerodynamics, rolling resistance, body positioning and fueling for a long ride. When I hear that pro-cycling is clean, I can absolutely believe it, but with a small amount of healthy skepticism that I have with any sport where people get paid to win. I’d also like to say that I attribute a lot of knowledge I’ve gained to the excellent content from GCN. You guys were the first cycling content creators I found on my journey back to health and fitness and I’m eternally grateful for the work you guys do bringing knowledge and awareness about our ever changing sport, so thank you!
@@williamsylvia3962 thanks for the support of the channel
Similar. I've already posted. Age 69, heart attack in 2020, on current bike, faster than on Reynolds 531 bike in 1980 when I was riding 10 miles or more each way every day. I lack my old explosive speed but wonder how fast I'd have been averaging then if on my current carbon fibre Ultegra bike.
Thank you for your support of the channel and considered comment! 🫶🫶
0:35 by far most stunning for me is the pre WW1 average oft about 25km/h. Steelbikes on gravel"roads", 300+ km per stage, no teams, stopping for nutrition, no help with mechanical problems. I dont know how you can get 25+ per hour. Insane.
I couldn’t manage that on a 160 km ride on a modern bike in 2010.
average speed is a killer.
Cocaine
And...THEY DIDN'T HAVE GEARS BACK THEN 😱 I mean when mountain uphill started they had to stop, unmount rear wheel, turn it around (to get lower gear) and then hit the uphill (rear derailleur was invented in 1930s by Campagnolo). Still 25 kmh. That's ridiculous.
Amphetamines.
Great show, enjoyed the interviews and insights presented, plus the longer format for a topic like this was nice.
Glad you enjoyed it!
More information also applies to doping. Methods to avoid detection. Periodization. Microdosing. etc.
The UCI ignoring irregular biological passport results.
My god! I myself can simply go onto the web and sign up for testosterone “treatment” with an online doctor and legitimate prescription, of course Picachoo is doing something sophisticated and undetectable.
Coke, liquor and a bianchi... Is that cheating?
@@paultunney5848 source?
And experimental substances. If you have enough cash, you also can also secure that a specific kind of substance is exclusively sold to you.
The big hitters don‘t rely on the old stuff, there are substances out there in experimental state, most of us never heard of, let alone the effects. The more money is to gain the weirder it gets.
I think the concern that most people have is one particular rider who is at a completely different level physically than everyone else (more power, better endurance and amazing recovery... regardless of technology...his bills are paid by a State that has become synonymous with Sports Washing...
This is a very fluffy discussion - it kind of discusses the increase in average speeds of races, which is fine and I don't think anyone disputes this... but doesn't really go there... we've been here before.
The wrong questions are being asked.
What do you claim are the right questions to ask? And how did Pogacar lose two Tours if he has these dominant "Capitalist" advantage that nobody can overcome?
@@indonesiaamerica7050 Stop trolling.
@@MB-pq4hx Right. I'm the troll.
Not to mention his manager is literally Gianetti.
100% this
It's not just cycling. All professional sports are on the same boat when it comes to suspicions of cheating. There is big money involved, careers to make, glory... It's obviously tempting to take shortcuts. I think from a mental sanity perspective you have to watch it with a certain suspension of disbelief and enjoy the show and hope and trust that the regulating bodies will do their job properly to keep it as clean as possible.
Thanks for sharing your opinion!
it's not about shortcuts. The level of performance necessary is in most cases not achievable without performance enhancing drugs.
Great stuff! Gives a lot of confidence to fans of the sport like myself while enjoying its complexity. This also shows the increasing support around cycling and suggests cyclists depend more on others who support them - coaches, teammates, researchers - for enhancing their performance. This does not sound like the sport is becoming more individualistic and toxic but on the contrary, for improvement you need healthy ecosystems, relations to support you.
Thanks for the comments and support of GCN 🫶
Greg Lemond’s takes, Icarus documentary, continuing cheats getting caught. I’ll watch races and enjoy watching them but I’m not naive anymore to thinking these guys aren’t enhanced. Training and tech has undoubtedly advanced, so has doping and not getting caught.
Exactly, the question is does the public even care anymore? I think the general understanding amongst them is good enough they know there’s always some dubious stuff going on and always will be.
@@Thatinvestmentguy Greg Lemond is a hypocrite
@@FTA38yearfreeride He May very we’ll be but it doesn’t negate his ongoing assertion that doping still exists.
@@Thatinvestmentguy sport is in the first place a matter of talent and a lot of hard work, doping is as old as sport itself , it was always there, and it wil always be there!!! test are there to prevent it from becoming a freak show!!! that is all!!! people have to stop acting like hypocrites. 1. For sure cyclists are not more or less doped then in any other sport, there is much more testing in cycling 2.People who keep whining about it have to watch something else on tv , go watch a movie, or the fake news ! hard working sporters don't need your hypocrites opinion!
3. Don't forget to take you meds before you go to work 😅
My problem is that I have been watching the grand tours since the 1980s and have always given those riders who shone the benefit of any doubt. Winning margins, particularly recently for the likes of Wiggins and Froome have often been wafer thin and so, to me at least , believable. And of course all my naive beliefs in some winners from the past have been shattered, making me into a cynic, so much so that this last season, I have for the first time followed the circus without any of the enthusiasm that I have retained for the last 40 years. Whilst on holiday, I missed part of the Vuelta and didn't care. I have not been able to believe in the huge and repeated winning margins that we have seen achieved with apparent ease, the last 3 words being the most important.
Our memory is short lived. About 10 years ago, it was all about marginal gains - better materials, equipment, professionalism, and so on. But today, the gains we’re seeing are far from marginal, yet the same old story is being told. None of these factors-whether it's technology, materials, or aerodynamics-can fully explain the recent dramatic increases in power outputs.
Heat adaptation is not marginal. Ive tried it. If you look at conors test, he dropped 50% watts over 1 hour. If you want more evidence look at the first week of vuelta this year compared to rest of vuelta. It was obvious some rides were better heat adapted than others, gaining an advantage in the first week, think Mas over Roglic, also yates and carapaz super strong, later weeks roglic made them look like juniors.
10 years ago, all pros would’ve been like conor here. Seeing as they’re taking the tour de france speeds a lot here, it is very meaningful, as it’s a hot race. And even in colder races, it matters due to the latest advancements in sports science, understanding of heat shock proteins, etc. Not things people knew 10 yrs ago and far from just marginal
Did that. At age 40, averaged 24 mph for 100 miles in a BIG group. Did my first pull at 60 miles!
@paddymurphy-oconnor8255 speed is a completely irrelevant metric here. The guys are applying more power to pedals than the worst dopers of the past.
@@Elonpocalyps420 Heat adaptation improves your relative performance in the heat (i.e., your performance doesn't decline as much, even as you experience cardiac drift during the ride), but not your absolute numbers-at least not to the extent we're seeing today. Otherwise, African and South Asian cyclists would dominate the sport the way Ethiopian runners dominate long-distance running
@paddymurphy-oconnor8255 , speed is a completely irrelevant metric here. These guys are applying more power to the pedals than the worst dopers of the past. Better tires, more aerodynamic frames, etc., won't help you to apply more power to your pedals.
As someone who got Into cycling in the mid 90s ,
"Once bitten twice shy" springs to mind,
When I see a rider on the limit, and along comes Pog looking fresh, breezing past , and then when he crosses the line and he still looks incredibly fresh, then I can't believe he's not cheating in some form,
Iam convinced that in the future we we will find out how they are cheating weather its mechanical or physical doping
But who says that they are all genetically/physically in the same league.
Let me compare it to height. I don't know where you live but in most countries being 6ft. or 183cm tall is above average, if you look in the NBA athletes being 6ft6" or 200cm tall isn't unusual, and maybe you would think they aren't natural as well, if height doping would be a thing. Yet even these NBA Players are no where near the tallest guys in the world which are 240+cm tall or 8ft.
And they all grew to be that large naturally.
The thing with height is, that everyone can see it, and if you are a giant it is obvious and that is why we know they exist. If you had a super powered Metabolismus or Oxygen saturation capability you wouldn't notice that unless they aspire to become a world tour athlete. There are probably hundred more pogacars in the world, but they will never get into professional cycling so we will never know, and think that Tadej is the only freak, when in fact there is a small group of individuals with that genetic trait that made him so superior.
Just seeing someone being so much better than everyone else isn't really a good argument for doping.
Unless someone can explain how they artificially improved Pogacar performance to that level, and why it is just him, I won't show any respect for the doping accusations.
@@CLONisKINGunless everyone is doping and on top of that pogi is also a bigger genetic freak. As said, not only pogis speed has gone up over everyone, overall peloton speed has
I agree with you but I do hesitate we'll ever find out. UCI does not seem interested in shaking things up. This type of racing is bringing spectators and therefore money. There won't be another doping macro scandal because it would be the death of road cycling.
In the past few years, some teams have showed sudden performance improvements and when suspicions raised up, those teams went curiously back to normal.
Endurance races are boring by nature and not very broadcast friendly. Even more with the short attention span of nowadays with social networks and the like. Spectators want heroes and attacks. UCI will comply with that
@@CLONisKINGyeah, but you have a bunch of NBA players around same height range not a single guy miles above everyone else.
@@trinerdSome play better, but after a couple of years everyone does. This is a known thing with most professional sports. The issue here is that three racers have dominated for the last few years. Jonas was a wonder child until he crashed, hard. Poj took his place. Someone will take his place, maybe. I suspect after a major incident. What I hope doesn't happen is another Lance. Then professional cycling will be done.
Incredible video, Thank you for doing this. As a long time fan of cycling I think some of the reasons for gains are fairly obvious, i.e. technology, but you brought to light several factors which are not necessarily common knowledge. Also, its incredible to actually hear the numbers (watts) associated with these gains. Simply amazing. I think I will always be somewhat skeptical of big performances, and I think everyone should be- we have to be; or history will repeat itself(Armstrong). As fast as all of these new tactics and tech are developing, i can only hope that doping tech detection is developing at the same clip. I would personally love to see behind the scenes of the antidoping authorities and how they are keeping up with the very rapidly changing landscape of pro cycling.
Really loving all of Connor's Videos recently. They all have interesting topics, go indepth and are very well done. Some of the best videos on GCN lately, love seeing them! These videos alongside Lloydie's Journey back to Health and Si's Videos about commuting are all great! Thanks for the Content!
thank you for the comment and the love for GCN! 🫶
Mauri Gianetti. How about we talk about him GCN? How could anyone know his disgraceful history in the sport, watch him hugging Pogacar at the finish line, leader of the most powerful team, and conclude that cycling is clean?
Basically this.
Couldn’t agree more. And then add Matxin to the mix and there isn’t even a question if Pogacar is juiced
Exactly. If Pogacar moved to another team he would stop winning. Better training and nutrition is complete BS that people like to believe. The fact records set in the 90s by riders who were doped to the eyeballs are now being beaten says it all. Pogacar can destroy the entire peloton and cross the line hardly out of breath.
@@mrstanhope1516you are so dumb its not even funny... you seriously compare 20years old records to modern cycling? Lol PEDs that Pantani and Lance used are easily achieved by todays altitude and heat camps.. 😂😂 And moved to another team? Are you saying that only UAE is doping and Visma or Quickstep are sqeaky clean??? 😂😂 Made your mind at least bud...
Correct. I would say not the performances are suspect necessarily, could be down to better training, tech, nutrition, etc. But the people running the teams are highly suspect, and makes me sceptical.
Technology, training, diet and race tactics have all improved and have led to faster races, but im not naive enough to believe all riders are clean, all sports will have some rougue athletes and with the history of cycling, there will always be suspicion. There have been some unbelieveable results in recent years that will always raise suspicion.
There will always be a fool who cheats, but training methods and information/research has improved such a massive amount in a handful of years
Agreed. Some amazing improvements in bike tech and training but I think it's unlikely that it's all natural
I am not sure that anyone suggested all riders are suddenly clean. The question is can today's super achievers possibly or plausibly be clean. I would say many or even most are.
@@JonCannings What changed between 2023 and 2024 that suddenly made Pogacar 5%+ better, and removed all his previous weaknesses, allowing him to do the first triple crown since the 80's?
@@olelimc I don't know, I'm not Tadej's coach
The same people involved in teams that doped 20 years ago are still in the sport. Doctors, team managers, etc. it’s not believable these characters aren’t doing what they always have done. The UCI is not consistently prosecuting cases where the biological passport has suspicious results.
This.
Yep
But a lot of things have changed in 20 years. And a lot of things did change back then. Until 1998 team doping was real, then it became more a personal thing
@@fabiovalentinuzzi5589 1999 was the start of armstrong’s seven TdF runs, that whole team was a ‘team dope’; michele ferrari was the us postal team doctor until 2006!
If you tell me Pogi is doping ? I'll tell you, your full of chit. And this young man shouldn't have to endure the bullchit that came from the old. Especially his very very hard work. We need to be very careful of inaccurate responses to someone's very hard work. These young men deserve so much more than what the as*holes from the past did.
Great Vid. as per usual. Any chance of doing a (longer, several parts) info video on doping? the how why’s and wherefore, the role of WADA, how are riders being controlled, types of doping, a sheer endless amount of sub-topics.
no-one who currently has a undetectable way of doping is gonna talk about it on youtube. So the episode would be useless.
And the UCI might ban it like the gravel world champs video…
The quality of the content on your channel has skyrocketed in the past few months. The sailing one was awesome, ineos was interesting and this ine is 🔥
You got me back after a 2 year hiatus
That this is still a discussion surprises me. Every pro Sport is dirty. Doping is not an exeption, it is the norm. I trained a lot of athletes over 20years and this is what is up: Doping is everywhere, it is an entertainment industry and higher, further, faster sells. You need good talent and a high tolerance for performance enhancing drugs/therapies. Every Sport can dope, it just looks different from sport to sport. Clean sport would not sell anymore, because if a sport would be clean by next week through a miracle, no records would be broken for a very very long time. Athletes who got caught in the last 10years are usually people who were a thorn in the side of officials or were a problem for the governing bodies of a sport, club etc. they simply messed with the wrong person, club etc. . Even sports with not much money are not clean. Athletes identify with sport, to be a pro and want to be the best, a lot of them identify their selfworth through success and doping can give it to them.
I think we also need to take into consideration that stages have gotten shorter in general over the years thus more explosive. 1987 TdF 4,200 kilometers, 25 stages. 2024 TdF 3,500 kilometers, 21 stages.
The average stage length of these figures you give are within 2km of each other, so not very telling. It does seem that even the flat stages these days are raced nearly flat out from start to finish. Seems the announcers are always saying the field is way ahead of even the predicted early finish time.
@@6SpeedsGood Racing 700km over 4 extra days. That is meaningful.
Conor is such good presenter. Great episode folks
@@MR-dv6ms thanks
I'm honestly always questioning, but I'm hooked and will always watch the big races.
Enjoying and giving them the benefit of the doubt is a good decision.
@@gcn enjoying and being incredibly skeptical of the nonsense that unfolds in front of you is even better. Have you guys lived with your head buried in the sand for the last 30yrs?
@@abedfo88 They benefit from having good relations with teams and riders. It's a company in the same industry. They wouldn't make this video any other way.
Great job Connor! This was very informative and I especially enjoyed the session on heat training.
There have been dramatic performance improvements not only in pro biking, but in marathoning as well. I am very skeptical of endurance sports in general, not just cycling.
This is a very well-done piece of work. Thank you, Conor & team.
GCN are never going to turn around, address this properly and accuse riders/ teams of doping. So this was 35 minutes that I'll never get back.
According to this; doping science has sat still for 30 years while every other science has evolved. All this while staff members/ directors with a history of doping continue to dominate the sport. It isn't just Pogacar, Decathlon have come from no-where to start winning big races. 13 riders broken the record up Plateau de Beille.
Don't overlook Marc Hirschi randomly showing up and winning multiple races over a few weeks, and then going back into the shadows for a while, and then coming back and doing it again. Not sus at all..
@@charliedillon1400 too be fair, look at the opposition he beat. Hardly any if at all tier 2/3 riders in most of them.
@@charliedillon1400see now cyclist fans start to sound like conspiracy theorists.
Uh, doping science and testing are continually evolving. I'm sure they could have made mention about all that, but it wasn't the point of the video.
@@DreExploresSports If you are going to have a serious conversation about doping. You've got to mention reasons that show that doping could be part of the reason why the speeds are so high and times are being destroyed and that Pogacar can "do a Landis" for the entire season.
Also, on the testing thing... don't forget that the dopers will always be ahead of the testers and that not testing positive is meaningless. Lance supposedly only failed 2 and look at how many other pro's didn't fail tests but later admitted it.
One of the most interesting videos I have watched in recent times. Kudos! Would love to see more of this from GCN. Long time watcher of this channel. First time commenting. It was that compelling for me! 🙏
yay for confirmation bias
What you've done with this video is that you had your conclusion and then found evidence to justify it. There's a lot of claims made here about the effects of training and machanical developments. Are they correct. Why are cyclists training harder and why are we seeing all these developments? Have we seen similar jumps in such a short time in other sports and if so, are they comparable? Cycling has been professional for a long time and human nature hasn't changed in the last few years. There's plenty of people from the bad old days still around the sport. Have they all really had their road to Damascus and are now committed to clean racing?
To be an honest documentary, you need to present the other side of the story and do it fairly. Speak to sceptical voices, investigate claims made rather than taking everything at face value. Basically go back and have another go. Be an investigative journalist, not a bunch of chummy ex pro cyclists who want to keep access. A nothing to see here from a few people in the industry isn't enough.
Very well put. Though surely journalistic integrity is a reach for those who as you say are just chummy ex pros and for sure are not journalists?
I think you're missing something important here. GCN is not a news outlet, these are not journalists, there is no need for impartiality. I enjoy watching GCN but let's call it what it is, it's an advertisement show for the bike industry with some clever people in production and charismatic people in front of the camera, and that's fine with me. Perhaps they shouldn't be making this kind of video in the first place.
@@danielc196 This video is different from their normal content in that it purports to be a journalistic enquiry into why professional cyclists are going so much faster this last few years. As such, it does not fulfil the basic requirements.
@@Richarddraper Couldn't agree more. On reflection it was probably a mistake to make this video given their ties to the industry and people they are supposed to be covering.
Sure. Lap times in the swimming pool. Average drive lengths in golf. Points per game in NBA. Lap times in F1. As mentioned in the video, there are also rule changes that play a factor. Is it drugs and doping? Historically, yes. Could it be different now? Some of us hope so.
Great program! Really appreciated, for I'm a cyclist fan/former weekend warrior. It really puts things in perspective. Keep up the good work! Bravo
Been a cycling fan since the 90s and sad to say but I believed back then that many performances were not natural. I truly want to believe that the sport is as clean as it professes to be but here’s why I’m sceptical: Back in the hay day of US Postal we heard the same thing, ‘we’re more scientific about the sport, more professional, train better etc’ and we all know now what was going on. And as we hear in this video, there are certain things that if you’re not doing today as a World Tour team you can’t compete - we’ll then all it needs is for one team to successfully evade testing and we’re back to what caused the doping arms race back in the 90s. I remain to be convinced that any amount of technology and training can bridge the gap between a clean and doped rider at the elite level.
Very helpful! I've seen this across all sports. The big data, the tech in equipment and training is incredible
Well as a former sports Journo in Ireland, I can tell you only this, I do not know what TP is on, but on something he certainly is. Let's look at some evidence, his team management were rampant ex dopers (esp Gianetti) they hired a dodgy doctor Mianard from a dodgy Portuguese outfit. His times are outstripping well known ex dopers (Armstrong/Pantani) and doing it at a canter...hardly struggling like the season previously. How did he go from "I've got nothing left" in 2023, TDF to 3 to 4 minute 50klm break aways in multiple races...seriously.
Are you seriously asking that all of this normal.
He had a Crash before the tdf 23 and lack of training. No surprise he bonked. Funny thing, no one is asking how Jonas came back only 3 month after intensive care. 🤡
@@dgenerationx5855 Sure, same applies there, to be honest it's going to be the race of who is the better doper next July for the TDF
The difference, for me, from the 1990s to today is that everybody knew the peloton was doping back then. They just couldn't catch them. There were whispers circulating all over the place. The thing now is there is none of that.If there were some miracle drug that teams (plural) were using just like use of EPO. It was known in journalistic circles back in the day, WADA knew it too - I cannot believe that not a single rumour has leaked out from a mechanic, a soigneur, a press officer. It only needs one person and the snowball begins. It doesnt need to be UAE or Pogacar, it could be anyone from any team, and it hasnt happened.
I mean it’s quite obvious isn’t it 😂
That’s not “evidence” Go on …..publish that about TP and see how long before you end up being sued for libel. I look forward to you using that as a defence.
Great piece. The heat training section was super informative.
Great video GCN 🤝
It's great isn't it
Wow! This assignment was incredible and so well done, really something that can be called true cycling journalism!
This video was 35 minutes longer than it needed to be.
Saying “yes” takes only a second
Well done video, Connor. Very thoughtful and well documented.
Felt like watching a GCN+ video back in the days. Love it!!! Very interesting, good research, well structured. Please do more like that, great stuff!
This is the kind of videos I hoped to see when I first subscribed. I feel like lately GCN has taken things up a level. Great work Conor!
Thank you. Dan
Pogacar in the 2020-2023 was a generational talent. In 2024, he became a living God. He lost two tours doing ~6.5w/kg and suddenly past winter changed his nutrition and got to 7w/kg any day of the year, no matter how much fatigue he was carrying. I can't understand how a well trained athlete can make that improvement (0.5w/kg or close to 40w) naturally
Or maybe his closest rivals all nearly died in a massive crash a month and a half before the tour? Of course he dominated them
What's your data source?
@@exigency2231 He's gossiping about VAM to power divination. All Tour winners are suspect if that's how cheaters are supposedly exposed. These gossips don't even have power meter data. They don't understand drag coefficients and fluid dynamics in open road racing, especially on mountains (that usually have interesting wind patterns that nobody here ever thinks about).
@@exigency2231 Pog doing 7 w/kg has f all of nothing to do with whether his competitors were injured.
@@indonesiaamerica7050 Lantern Rouge & co have calculated his power to 6.98 eW/kg for ~40:00 minutes. These calculations have been proven correct multiple times, and pros have confirmed them. Even if it wasn't very accurate that would still put his sea level ftp well in excess of 7wkg.
Great interviews and insights, keep it coming GCN
This vid could be summed up in two words: "Citation" and "needed". We hear aerodynamic improvements have resulted in "20, 30, maybe 40%" improvements in efficiency. Well that's an interestingly broad range. Which is it? Training is "ten-fold" more intense. Well, is it? Is that measured?
Essentially this vid assumes the conclusion from the start. It acknowledges that the speed increases look unbelievable, but then takes at face value the statements by people deeply invested in continuing as is. Where are those who are _actual_ sceptics with knowledge of this sport?
The conclusion of this video that riders are training harder and that bikes are quicker is hardly going to reassure anyone in the face of that average speed graph in lieu of some actual data.
@@thecaveofthedead you’ve noticed the GCN “doing science” methodology. Their way of ‘proving’ something is to start with a theory then try to prove it rather than the correct way which is to try, and then fail to disprove it.
I love their videos buts it's almost like saying "this financial offer looks way too good to be true, well don't worry we talked to the people involved and they say it's chill.."
@@SecwetGwiwer What's stopping you from doing it right?
Great post. GCN heavily invested in Omertà. Guys that actually take this stuff apart forensically say Pog’s tech gains over Pantani about 20 watts. Not a lot. Guys who have run the numbers say Pog has improved 10% this year. That is pretty much impossible. Impossible to the point even more dope doesn’t make sense. So hence all the motor talk. It ain’t subtle gains guys, we’re talking 50 watts here. GCN doesn’t get specific because when you do, everything suddenly gets painfully obvious. It’s not carbs, lol.
@@MB-pq4hx "Citation needed."
Great video, very informative and interesting to see the progress in cycling in the last few years. I would be nice if the UCI could keep up!
Would be interesting to visit the WADA what they are doing to monitor new possible ways of doping. I think cycling is clean today but I also hope that they are advances in anti-doping as well
It definitely always seems like WADA are caught on the back foot when it comes to new doping techniques, new drugs, any sort of wrinkle comes along and WADA's just completely ill-prepared for it.
They seem to be in a constant state of solely attempting to address the mistakes of the past rather than prep for the future.
great video, so interesting to hear from the people who are in a position to judge how the various improvements work together to make the riders faster and faster
Quite a lot of this improvement is accessible by the average person if you are willing to educate yourself and put energy into it. I'm old. When I was young we trained ourselves into the ground every single session (though I was a runner, not a cyclist at the time). We burned outselves out, or got injury after injury. Although forms of polarised has been around for a very long time, it wasn't embraced by very many. Similarly, I remember seeing Chris Boardman get ridiculed for putting emphasis on aerodynamics. Even now, people poo-poo energy savings from narrower bars, position on the bike, aero socks, waxed chains, etc. People used to *avoid* fructose as a fuel and now we know it's critical in allowing people to absorb glucose dramatically faster. But you don't have to trust any of this. You can try it yourself. This is what is amazing to me.
Good start to a challenging topic. Two other vectors to pursue... (1) Pull in the opinions/analysis of current cycling journalists who have covered the sport for a long time (someone like David Walsh, for example, who called out Armstrong). And (2), share what doping controls are now in place (vs the past), how well they are/aren't working and how cyclists might still try to get around them.
Happy to see this. I love you guys but GCN's recent race reporting leaves me shaking my head at the utter lack of questioning these ridiculous performances. Stakes are high, people cheat. True for cycling and every other pro sport. What a bummer.
Really interesting video. The gains from heat acclimation are insane
Thank you for addressing this Conor and GCN. I have been getting totally fed up with every social media post being commented on with many unfounded accusations of doping, it's frankly depressing. So it's good to see this video explain other factors that have contributed to increasing speeds.
GCN - please do keep tackling all those controversial topics!
hi! thanks for the comment and glad you enjoyed the video!
Very interesting documentary. Well done. It gives a answer about the performances. The influence of proper food before, during and after races is not mentioned. This ia also a (big) factor for improving performances. I'd liked to see more of this.
i think we should be very sceptical. as someone wrote. alot of team owners, sports directors and the like have a skeptical history in the sport. but also pro sports in general have doping issues i guess(hockey, football, swimming, cross country skiiing etc etc) but in pogacars case, u have to compare him with other super duper elite pro bike riders, and he just smokes them, THAT is very suspicious.
No it isn't, doc explains all of it, I do understand why you feel it is though.
LOVE LOVE LOVE THIS EPISODE.... This is one is for The Nerds and The Science Geeks like me and I loved it. Along the same lines, the quality of the content in GCN videos has improved exponentially over the past 2 yrs! Thanks Connor/GCN.
hey thank you for the comment! ❤
About as believable as that lady running a sub 2:10 marathon recently 😂
😂
Really insightful video guys, pls keep this up!
This was massively informative and really interesting.
Really enjoyed this video. Thanks Conor..lost of food for thought.
That was a great film - thank you.
I'm one of the people mentioned a few times in the film - really just want to see good racing, be that on old bikes of the 60s and 70s or with the new tech of now. And I'm happy plodding out the miles on my own bit of old(ish) tech bike. But an insight into the techniques and professionalism of the riders today is fascinating.
It’s NOT about them being faster than before. It’s the fact that ONE rider is stronger than an entire peloton! This ONE rider will bridge a 4-min gap to a sizeable breakaway on his own and goes past them and the entire peloton that he left behind could not chase him for the next 80kms+. Does this mean he is the only one doping? Absolutely not. The problem with doping is that people respond differently. It’s like alcohol. I get tipsy with just one bottle of beer but some people could empty a case and still walk in a straight line. If alcohol improves performance then I would be the biggest loser.
Pogacar is so doped to the bones.
Great video. This sort of documentary is really interesting.
It’s simple to disprove the theory being shoved down our throat here. Take a modern day rider and put him on a 1995 bike and ride the same route with state of the art equipment. You’ll notice a difference, but it doesn’t explain the massive gaps that we are seeing. Creating a video about this subject and not explore drugs is just silly. You’re avoiding the elephant in the room.
I think the point of this video is just to sell the goods and services being advertised here. Drug chat is what draws the punters in!
As noted in the video, the bike is something but the bike is only something.
It's a little more nuanced and a lot more complicated than your proposition. You'd also need to train differently, eat differently, and have an altogether different mindset (ex. team professionalism).
@@DreExploresSports Still the winner of TdF is miles better than the rest of the supermen. Just like in the early 2000s…
Bahamontes was doing an estimated ~6.5w/kg and destroying everyone else by larger margins in the 1950s with prehistoric feeding patterns and not doping with anything that actually worked. I don't think it's unrealistic to assume that in-race nutrition and heat+altitude training have advanced in 65 years such that someone else could be doing ~0.3 w/kg more for similar durations while also being head and shoulders above their peers
Well, I was in college when England's first pro cycling hero Tommy Simpson overdosed on Mont Ventoux and I'm still not over that! So I am happy to see such amazingly detailed responses from so many cycling fans giving carefully considered reasons why this show was pretty much one-sided from the starting gun. My small contribution is to collect all the dozen comments in favor and list them here as a brief survey of those who believed the presenters point of view. IMHO they all look like Slovenian AI or a robo operation in Moscow to me, just one line and not a single fact or logical thought, only formulaic words of congratulations on being the world's best online bike team........Judge for yourself: "Really loving all of Connor's Videos recently/Great Vid. as per usual/ Love it!!! Very interesting, good research, well structured. Please do more like that, great stuff!/Conor is such good presenter. Great episode folks/Great video GCN/Great program! Really appreciated, for I'm a cyclist fan/former weekend warrior. Keep up the good work! Bravo/i really hope this video ages well/Great piece. The heat training section was super informative./Thanks Conor and crew , I see money being a big factor as well /This is a very well-done piece of work. Thank you, Conor & team/Finally a credible channel that has the guts to discuss the obvious." What do you think?
Why didn’t testing catch people before and why do we believe it will catch people now. No doubt everyone is talented and trains super hard - that isn’t at question. We should be talking about testing and correct funding of testing
@@simonw-yi5uo it did catch people beforeen.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling
I watched some interviews with doctors that used to do the doping. Many said that they all knew what was being tested and what not. And often how good the tests were/what was considered an abnormality. If you know that, its quite easy to get around it.
And whether they really want to taint the sport by catching loads of people..
This was one of the best videos of the year. Thanks for taking such a thoughtful look at a complex and surely not well understood area of racing a bike.
I've been giving this topic a lot of thought since I watched the video. As a student of cycling since the mid-1980's (I started with BMX racing then transitioned to road racing), it's hard not to recognize the consistent increase in speeds over time. This is not isolated to cycling; every sport is getting faster. Runners are faster now, swimmers are faster now, etc. Science and technology have played an immense role of sport for a very long time. If you recall, Francesco Moser blew up Merckx's hour record in 1984 on a bike with a radical redesign that could never have been imagined during Merckx's cycling career. That bike threw out all the rules of bike design at the time, and introduced technology that changed the course of design evolution. Within two years, most of the teams switched to aero bikes with disc wheels for their TT machines.
Lemond carried that thinking forward into the late 1980's when in the '89 TdF he adopted the use of triathlon bar extensions on his TT bike. It too was revolutionary, and again, within two years all the teams adopted them. The evolution of technology has given us the sleek, fast bikes we see in 2024.
I would caution, and argue, that modern road bikes have allowed the peloton to become too fast. As with a speeding car, reaction times need to be faster. Crashes are more inevitable, and possibly more serious to the riders. I would like to know if a study can be performed to see if rider reaction times can keep up with the speed increases. It would also be interesting to determine if there's a link between the increased average speed and an increase in crashing and serious injury. While I hope it never happens again, the potential of a deadly crash increases under these circumstances, and it's usually when a death occurs that radical changes are made to make the sport safer. I'm a bit surprised that the crash earlier this year at the Itzulia Basque Country wasn't a bit of a wakeup call.
A lot of the ideas discussed in this video can be tested (and probably have been at various times). The areas that generate the most concern are those that are physiological in nature. What I would like to see are things like hemoglobin counts for Sherpas to see what is physiologically possible and controlled tests (using hypobaric chambers) to see how long it takes for hemoglobin to reach their peak at various altitudes.
Another test I would like to see is determining haw mush power a cyclist can sustain using various amounts of carbohydrate intake during an endurance ride (using factors such as blood lactate and heart rate levels as indicators).
The test I would most like to see, although it is not possible, is to take the likes of Pantani and Armstrong at their peaks and put them through modern training and dietary regimes to determine how much greater their performances would be.
Fantastic film Big Man, really interesting, makes you sit up and pay attention to the advancements in sports science and how the pros teams keep pushing the boundaries or I should say unlocking doors. It also highlights our own performance and abilities especially when we go aboard and experience big temperature changes and wonder why that 5 hrs ride was so tough, we all need a better understanding of what's going on internally with our own bodies, top film, thanks!!!!
On cycling speeds... This 69-year old heart attack survivor, this summer, I was astonished to look down at screen and realise I was hammering along at 45 kph slightly uphill after riding up Polhill north of Sevenoaks. I'd done nearly 65 km by then. On my 2nd hand 2018 Roubaix with cable Ultegra and 25C tyres, swapped out bars to get rid of the silly winged originals, down from 42 cm to 38 cm wide, and a longer stem with no spacers. In my 30s, I averaged just 17 to 20 mph on similar East London to Tunbridge Wells and back route on 531 frame, 23C tyres, Weinmann concave rims. Thing is, I'd just done four 60 km rides in the two weeks before as a way of getting back on the bike. I did regret it as I ended up with a head cold and pulled something in my lower right back which took ages to get over. So, anecdotally, I can fully accept speeds by pros are faster than in past. But, having been a child on the back side of the Sahara Desert, I've always tended to function relatively better than most fellow white Brits in hot, dry summers at cricket, football, rugby, cycling.
The bikes, training, diets, heat management, Sky 'follies' like mattress and pillows, chef, warm downs, etc make for greater speed. Doesn't mean there aren't illegal or edge of legality supplements as well but the wider stuff is so much faster than past.
If I could afford it, I'd like a modern fit and a new bike with short cranks, C35 top spec tyres, and appropriate rims just to see what I could manage before I turn 70. And get a heater for our large garden shed for workouts at higher temperatures than house central heating.
we know Polhill well! Keep up the great riding!
A great video, I really enjoyed hearing the insights from the experts and Connor did a super job of engaging them and summarising the context of how so may changes in all aspects of cycling have accumulated to delivered the massive performance gains we are now witnessing in races. It would also be great to learn more about the organisational improvements in how teams are operating.
Well done to everyone that contributed to this video.
Awesome video Connor, you sourced top experts and covered every aspect of why the level of professionalism has gone up. I think there’s still a lot of margin for improvement, mostly around nutrition and tech. It’s also worth thinking that the high and hard work required to be up there will force people to try to cheat again, there will ALWAYS be people willing to take shortcuts….
I agree with Conor. I think the bulk of the riders in the peloton are clean, especially the main protagonists. It's all down to professionalism, training and mentality, that's what is getting the gains. Great episode, well done Conor
The real question is “Should you believe pro sports?” The answer is no. There is too much money and fame to be gained. The pressure on these highly competitive, talented young men is immense. If there is an advantage to be gained there are always people willing to make the bargain. I have no problem with doping, I don’t like lying. Let them do what they want, under doctors supervision, and let the chips fall. All the doping controls and penalties and suspensions are theater at best, a diversion at worst.
And Lance Armstrong is the greatest grand tour rider ever.
Armstrong was the greatest Tour de France rider ever, if you don't care about the doping. I'm starting to agree with your stance on being okay on doping, but not with lying about it. If it was assumed that all pro athletes doped to gain maximum performance, it would still be thrilling to watch - and one could take solace knowing that the winners were the best of all the dopers. When it becomes doubtful that testing can catch the most advanced PED use, pro-sports fans will either lose interest in watching pro-sports (I'm coming to that point, and it's taken my 72 year lifetime to get there), or continue watching doped competitions. Unfortunately, it then becomes meaningless to compare athletes of different eras, where PED's were either not taken or were much inferior to contemporary PED's. The concept of a G.O.A.T. needs to either go away, or forever come with footnotes. BTW, I still remember how thrilling it was to watch Roger Maris's longtime home run record get beaten in the late 90's, until the contest between Sammy Sosa, Mark McGuire, and Barry Bonds finally ended when Bonds hit 73 home runs in 2001, beating the long standing record of Maris hitting 61 homers in 1961, a record that stood for nearly four decades. It was at that point doping investigations got serious, and many of the dopers were caught (around 80 in total). In Major League Baseball, the home run records were allowed to stand, but none of the dopers have been admitted to the Hall of Fame. As with cycling, this all occurred around the turn of the century. Doping in cycling seems to be more sophisticated, as muscular atrophy doesn't seem to correlate with wins for most forms of bicycle racing.
Well by that account you shouldn't believe any sport. At all. Ever.
😂😂😂😂 Armstrong is a nobody. I've won as many GT's as he has and I did it without doping. So I'm better than him.
@@out_spocken yes. It’s just for fun so I don’t care. Basically reality tv featuring genetic freaks.
@@agamemnonhatred no, you didn't.
I'm 40 and American, grew up idolizing Lance and turned my back on pro cycling after it became clear who he was. I get the hate in these comments, Pogi does look too good to be true given how things turned out the last time someone was too good to be true. But I want to believe cycling is clean (whatever that needs to look like) because the races are better than I ever remember, and it's not just about speed or who wins, it's about how the teams are working today vs. 25 years ago and a new generation that are completely upending race dynamics.
This is a great video. I hope you do more and look into what's changed at the UCI (if anything), what's changed with team "doctors" (if anything), and interview more recently retired pros.
Everything points to Pogacar being an incredible talent. He has been at the top of the sport from the moment he entered the peleton, he is competitive and indeed dominant in every race he enters.
Contrast that to someone like Armstrong. A decent one day rider, won WC in 1993 from a lucky solo break away, won a couple TDF stages in similar situations but was never even on the radar as a possible grand tour champion.... then all of a sudden he starts dominating the TDF. Yet in other races outside of the tour during that time he was still average. This is because his doping protocol allowed him to be very good for a period of time but he didnt have the natural talent to maintain that throughout the season.
Peaking is a real thing in training but its importance has been way over blown. Natural Athletes can stay at close to their best for long periods of time, meaning a truly great racer should be able to maintain competitiveness throughout the season. It is also a very good sign that Pogi does have bad days as well which were almost non existent for Lance during the tour.
I cant say if the current crop of racers are or arent doing something, but I am saying that other than speed, the regular tale tale signs of the past arent there.
😂 that's hilarious.
No one can maintain peak performance through an entire season. It's physiologically impossible.
Conor, you're a right proper journalist! I really appreciated this report. And while I'm still🤷♀as to what's going on under the hood in pro cycling today, the results on the road are astounding to see.
It’s dirty. Track and Field still has a huge doping issue, it just isn’t going to be 100% clean, ever
Track and Field looks worse than a lot of sports because they actually have an effective and independent anti-doping agency that actively bans athletes who cheat. Compare that to most other sports where the anti-doping agencies are really there just to create the illusion of clean sport so the sponsorship money keeps flowing. If an anti-doping agency isn't finding any athletes who cheat, it probably isn't because the athletes are all clean.
No one really argues that better bikes and some new training will make folks faster.
The question is how much is due to that? And are they also doping.
Enjoyed your video and it’s about technology advancements, doesn’t answer, nor really address, the question of drugs.
I keep saying, since the covid tour, stuff got fishy. And the last two years some teams even went up another 3 gears. It's too much on such a short time, it just can't be just 'nutrition' and 'mechanical' improvements. I don't have proof, but there are too many red flags, like way too many.
Nothing is enforced like so many things in life,then that makes you think Pogačar is not natural.🤔
Covid forced them all to have more highly structured training with fewer race days. Of course they all would have come back stronger if not for certain side effects from certain experimental therapies required by many governments.
And of course, a plethora of other things raised in the video. Did you even watch it?
@@TBirdTD No it's basically nutrition and better gear mate.
Great to hear a coach’s view from Stephen Barrett.
It's their job to be the fittest possible and fastest possible. Of course they're going to dance on the line of legality, trying to do everything that is allowed, avoiding what is banned like a pest, and most of all using of what is not banned yet.
I just hope what they are doing overall doesn't hurt the athletes in the long term.
Exactly... like Jonas himself said... I am not using anything illegal... that might mean it is not illegal YET...
It is also their job not to get caught cheating.
They are going to do whatever they can get away with. That does not mean avoiding anything banned "like the plague".
This is a very thorough examination of a question that I think is on all of our minds. Thank you!
It's the same for all sports. Tech aside: Training is better, rest is better, nutrition is optimized. Everything is individualized and maxed out. Sports-science has been taking huge steps in recent years and the accessability of the data.
Came here to say the same thing. As was alluded to in the show, young athletes (across all sports) are starting training earlier, they're training smarter, eating cleaner, and focusing solely on their chosen sport. The results of this are evident. There is no "off season" for professional athletes anymore. It's just an opportunity to build strength, power, and speed, without the interruptions of events.
such a good video, thank you. I choose to believe in the training and amazing performance
None of this explains one man winning essentially every race he participates in, be it a classic or a 3 week race. If they are all doing, and perfecting, their training - how come they are so far apart?
But doping wouldn't explain that either. Basically Pogacer is either an outlier responder to training or an outlier responder to doping; merely positing doping as a potential explanation doesn't help resolve anything (unless you believe Pogacer is the only one doping, which strikes me as *by far* the least likely scenario of all).
How come Jordan was so much better than anyone else?
How come Messi was so far apart from anybody else?
some people respond better than others. Lance Armstrong won 7 TDF in a row in an age where everyone on the top was doping heavily.
But there have always been different levels of talent. You could just as easily ask how Eddy Merckx won so much given that the same opportunites for performance gains were available to all of his competitors. There may or may not be cheating going on, but why is the fact that somebody wins evidence either way?
@@andrasszabo1570bingo!
One of the best videos from GCN. Thanks so much.
Thanks for leaving the comment! 🫶
I don't think pogi is clear . He's definitely strong and one of the most talented riders ever. but i don't think one can do almost everything . like one day race and grandtour and win them so easily. what's more . attacking from 80kms or so . and mostly he didn't seem get tired if you see how easily outbeat the remeco and jonas in the tour the wc. its a shame and making the race boring. whats even more disgraceful is no one question him.
You seem to be the smartest one in the comment section. You get the point mate
Thanks for this video! I’ve been thinking about this issue so the timing is great. You know, the past 10-20 years have seen phenomenal advances in technology across many fields as information has become more available and computing power has increased to take greater advantage of it. It stands to reason that professional cycling would benefit from these advances as much as any other arena. So maybe we really shouldn’t be surprised to see improvements in bikes, in aero, in training, in fueling, etc. that aggregate into much higher performance.
Well done GCN, an excellent video. No matter what field you are intersted in performance improvements are only achievable through looking at every aspect of the 'system'. This video demonstrates how cycling performance improvements have been acheived through the application of systems thinking. I believe the pro sport is clean but know that amature cycling has issues.This may be an investigative topic for a future video.
Good piece Conor, and as a coach I know much of what was covered in here, although I only recently heard about the heat training, which is clearly the new altitude training! As a long term fan of the sport, and another one who was burned by he who shall not be named, I hope the current crop are playing true, and get the feeling the vast majority are. But I will always remain vigilant for those performances that don't add up.
There was an old adage in GT racing that it wasn’t until you hit your thirties that you were in peak multi-week endurance fitness. The belief went that it took that many years for deep endurance to develop.
Well, it just turned out that the life of a pro-doper was not one that happened over night. Rather, slowly but surely you were introduced to the life, reaching your doping+physical peak at that age.
That we now have young people in their early 20’s winning GT events, with Egan being the first, turns this on its head.
Either; people are doping ten years earlier than before, or natural talent is being given a chance to shine.
I’ve never been bothered by doping. However, I’m bothered by sociopathic people who will ruin the lives of others to protect their own lives. Here’s looking at that clown with cancer.
If you want to dope, good luck to you. If you want to bring down people who attempt to out your doping, go to hell.
Well I’d like to believe the ‘chance to give talent to shine’ theory but when they are now absolutely destroying times set by the best riders on synthetic blood in the 90s it becomes rather harder to fathom.
What I want as a cyclist is the healthy trickle-down technology that I can use to ride better.
Racing provides a platform for us to learn these things.
I've been riding since the early 70s and have benefitted from much trickle-down tech.
Keep it fun folks!
Hmm… at least half these comments sound as if they didn’t listen carefully to the discussion and science presented in this video. Thanks for taking this subject on, pursuing the various components (tech, nutrition, training methodology) and determining the scale of effect that evolution in each of these areas has made. Well done!
@@joebobby1184 yeah, Perfect example of the Level of discussion here.
@deborahdeluca883 thanks for the comment!
Excellent piece, definitely more like this please 👍🏻
How do disc brakes fit into this? In the US the bike industry is basically run by 60 year old men buying $15k bikes for gran fondo riding while the racing scene is gutted and usa cycling is in debt. No young college aged person can afford a good racing bike anymore and nobody really cares for the immense cost of it. If the $2-5k bikes from 10 years ago were available now, we'd be looking at things differently. Now $2k buys you a pretty heavy road bike that will never be competitive. Technolgy isn't trickling down to be cost-effective for the entry levels anymore.. if anyone cares about the future of the sport.
Another major deterrent is lack of road races. It's mostly crit racing in the USA, and I simply don't want to risk crashing myself out of the ability to return to work on Monday because of some super sketchy office park crit. At least in road racing you can race "conservatively" and still enjoy the competition. as an amateur with no ambition to rise in the ranks.
@@charliedillon1400Exactly.. personally I also find crits incredibly fun but also worry about the risks. I have raced amateur for a while if only to prove something to myself and rise as high as i can as an individual with a job but it does somtimes feel like usacycling as an organization only cares about the young pros rising through the ranks, and the top tier cat 1 races and fails to recognize the base of their funding comes from a LOT of amateurs coming to race for fun. The elitism around racing has been a big turn off for a lot of my cycliny friends.
99.99% of people in the US care absolutely nothing about the future of cycling in the US or elsewhere. Most would be hard pressed to even name a current US pro or a major world tour level race other than the TDF. I've been following for decades and none of my friends, family, or coworkers have ever had any interest in the riders or races. There was that short period where Armstrong was popular and there was a belief and a resurgence in cycling but he, and some of the other US riders, basically ruined the sport in the US probably for many years still to come.
The one in a hundred intelligent and interesting GCN video. Well done Connor.
I started watching cycling in the early 2000s, and I cant remember a time where I didn't know that Lance Armstrong was cheating. The evidence was all there and the only ones who were surprised when he admitted to doping were either naive or wilfully ignorant.
In the past there was always additional circumstances that made a rider suspicious. There were rumours they worked with a dubious doctor, they had high hemoglobin, there were journalists expressing doubts based on insider information from different teams etc.
Today the only thing that is suspicious are performances. We haven't got any rumours or murmurs about doping other than people accusing someone based solely on performance and that they're winning a lot. Of course that doesn't mean that every rider is clean, but it's hard to think that doping is going on at the same industrial scale as it was into the 2010s.
But it's equally likely that doping isn't the means with which someone would cheat today. As I said in another comment, if someone explains their performance by saying "zone 2" which is "ride along without being out of breath" then, if that were misdirection for cheating it would seem obvious that what you're trying to misdirect is something that let you put power into the pedals without getting out of breath, right?
@@michael1 I understand your point, but I don’t get the impression that there are any cyclists now who claim that they have a miracle method which is responsible for their success.
Most emphasise smart and dedicated training
Remember the good old days when everybody had asthma? Contador, Froome, etc. Seems so antiquated now, lol!
This was a really good video. To complement it, I would like to see a study of doping detection methods and protocols that asks whether those have improved at the same pace, or whether teams have just gotten smarter about doping.
The improvements made in the peloton during the past ten to fifteen years reminds me of a recovering addict. The peloton hit rock bottom, went to rehab and became better. The rehab has been improvements in bike technology, nutrition, training, and data, and applied knowledge. Let’s call it, evolution of cycling.
More like a relapsing addict.
If you think 7w/kg for over 30 minutes is achievable naturally you are just not well enough informed on the topic
An interesting way to look at it. 🤔