Watt the hell are you talking about.

Yes.

Point to consider:

The doping generation also raced less. Some of them only peaked for on race, like the tour.

Post doping, we had 10 years of doldrums- no records broken, meh racing.

Past 5 years we’ve all the sudden seen every record smashed. And not just by the top guys. The 2nd and third group are often beating climb records.

Bike advancements - sure.

But - pure power numbers and W/kg are at levels never seen.
-It’s not all about sugar. Because we see these levels in short TT’s.
-It happened seemingly overnight. They couldn’t, then they could.
—and here is the biggie
They come into the racing season at levels higher than the dopers peaked at- and maintain those numbers thru the entire season.

Pogi breaks records that were set in races/at peak form time, while he is in training camp.


The ability to be faster/stronger out of the gate and all year long is nuts.

And if they are flat for the most part all year, what could they actually do if they trained solely for a peak/one race?

IF there are new PEDs being used in the peloton today by it's top racers,
THEN the UCI and other governing bodies are in "Too Big to Fail" mode,
WHERE revealing the PED use would topple the whole system that they've spent years building to new heights.
Careers and legacies will be in RUINS.

THUS they are choosing to look the other way
and it will take an authority/organization OUTSIDE of the system
to blow the WHISTLE.

We've seen this play before.

WHAT’S with all the random CAPITALIZATION?

At LEAST it's entire WORDS, not rANDom lettErs.

So no problem with those who spend their money differently than you? I mean some folks just like top of the line gear for whatever reason. Does anyone think twice about people who, for instance, choose to buy photographic gear above their "level"?

By the way, I think it's dumb that the average mediocre rider will gain in any meaningful way from gear. And to seek validation from others about these sort of decisions is also dumb. Everyone should spend their money however they want and not worry about "speed' or other's approval. Do it for enjoyment and motivation.

You seem to be disagreeing with me.

And now you seem to be agreeing with me. I'm almost as confused as you seem to be.

And you're missing the point which I have now made in (if I'm counting correctly) three posts: these are people who come here to ASK for advice. I have no problem with people spending their money differently than I do. But when they ask for advice, I might give it. Is that a problem?

Just having a conversation my man. Don't worry about it.

Concerning the side-discussion about how many days the pros race now versus the past: the average number has steadily declined for the last several decades. My guess is that there's increasingly sophisticated analysis behind those numbers and that the current practice is close to the ideal for the maximum rest/performance ratio.

And, about doping, omerta, too big to fail: Sure, that's all possible.

Another guess: that the training/nutrition/res/tetc. variables have been massaged to the point where there's no more performance to be squeezed out of riders, no matter how sophisticated the doping program.

I do agree that it's more fun to be cynical about the state of pro racing, though. Enjoy.

If you're conversing, it helps to actually read posts before responding to them, and it also helps if your response actually makes sense -- i.e., doesn't contradict itself.

It’s clear that they race fewer days but it could be argued that training has become much more intense and focused. Training days are probably as hard or harder than some faux criterium. Time in the saddle and intensely minutes are probably higher currently.

It’s interesting seeing the pro-teams to blood analysis pre and post training rides to determine lactate and other blood markers related to the efforts. Based on results of telemetry on HR, respiration, power numbers, each athlete is analyzed to maximize their performance by adjusting nutrition, rest and training. Unlike the old days, each rider has there own specialized program to maximize their performance.

Of course training has become more intense/hard days have become harder. But programmed rest periods have also become more frequent, and Zone 2 riding has replaced much of the time formerly spent riding in higher zones.

Anyone who owns a smart trainer and has subscribed to a sophisticated trainer software program such as Xert can get a glimpse of how state-of-the-art feedback-based training is conducted.

I used Xert for four months a couple of winters ago. For the first several weeks, I actually thought the software was giving me too easy a program, because I was used to doing much harder workouts on the road.

But I stuck with it, and the software gradually ramped up the workouts for the hard days, to the point that I was grateful for the easy days. By the time spring arrived, my FTP had increased by 17 watts.

Doesn't sound like much, but I was already pretty fit when I started with Xert, having ridden around 16 to 20 hours a week throughout the summer and fall. All I'd hoped for was to maintain my fitness level, so I was surprised that it had improved, especially given that I'd just turned 72.