Originally Posted by
Kommisar89
I'm quite certain that human beings have not changed appreciably genetically in the last 100 years. That's like asking whether Babe Ruth was better than the baseball players of today. Any given rider, like Eddie, might have had superior genetic potential compared to a particular rider today but that is as much random chance as anything. We don't breed humans like dogs or horses so there is no reason to think that humans being would have gotten better but there is also no reason to think they have gotten worse. Training regimens today are better than they were in the classic period and while riders certainly doped back in the day, the "dope" of today is far more potent and effective than the crude stimulants they were using back then. So my guess would be that if you took a random selection of pros today and had them ride vintage equipment under the same conditions as back in the day, they would be faster on average due to their superior training and conditioning. Now as to whether Lance would be faster than Eddie or vise versa, well, I'll leave that descussion to the same guys that like to argue about the relative merits the Babe and Bronko Nagurski vs. today's players.

Well said. The key factors are: 1) Genetic potential; 2) Performance enhancing drugs; and 3) Training regimes. There have been many advances both in drugs and training. At the pyschological level, I can't believe that the top riders today are any less competitive than those in the past. For top atheletes, particularly in the Olympic type sports, the desire to win is often the central motivator in their lives.