[bluedevil2k]

> How has the peloton gotten so fast?

This question in the article is almost comically naive. In the most drug-filled sport in history, with its most famous athlete a known drug cheat, the answer to this isn’t “carbohydrates”, it’s almost assuredly “drugs not being tested for”.

[Manfred]

That seems like an unfair response. There are certainly still drugs in the peloton and there are a lot of teams trying to stretch the gray areas. But given the amount of testing and verification of those tests by reputable journalists it's unlikely that it would have the same impact it did in the early 2000's.

Training methods and nutrition have made a large impact on all levels of cycling in the past 10 years, and from personal experience I know that's certainly not all drugs.

[zemvpferreira]

Lance Armstrong was USADA tested 60 times, and likely hundreds more by other organizations, without a single positive.

It's all drugs.

[Manfred]

The fact that someone cheated the system in the past is in no way proof that the same thing is happening now.

[vlovich123]

First it wasn’t just him. The entire sport has been plagued by accusations that the top performers are doping.

Secondly, he won 7 consecutive races. When he dropped out, the race times didn’t change that much and now the Tour de France winning times are faster than Armstrong.

You can claim that it’s better bikes, training, diet etc. The simplest explanation given all the facts though seems like doping.

[Dylan16807]

Of course it's not proof of cheating, but it is strong evidence not to trust the testing unless something very fundamental has changed.

And your argument strongly depends on accurate testing.

[pengaru]

Proof, no, but the best predictor of future behavior we have is past behavior.

[ImprovedSilence]

I’m not going to disagree with the sentiment that drugs are speeding up the peleton. but >>” most drug filled sport”. comes off as probably naive. o think footbal, hockey, soccer, or baseball are are more clean is laughable, they just dont test for anything EVER, except maybe steroids every so often. id bet my bottom dollar all those pro sports with $$$$ flying around HAMMER any drug cocktail that might get them the edge. its just not tested or as public as pro cycling.

[JauntyHatAngle]

Doping is probably still common, but the more endurance or speed based the more drugs help.

Soccer values attributes drugs exaggerate - but it has a skill component that is more important vs cycling. Soccer also has breaks and substitutes and ways to slow the game down to close the gap.

I'm not ignorant to the tactics and technique required in cycling, but its a smaller part of the sport vs tactics and skill in football.

So it's not as important to dope. But yes, still happens.

[eszed]

As I understand it, the main benefit of PEDs is improved recovery times. Regardless of the extent to which it affects the first race / game / training session, it permits your body to get back to peak condition more rapidly. The incremental gains from spending more time in the optimal performance window quickly compound.

[nradov]

There is a huge universe of PEDs, legal and otherwise. Some improve recovery times. Some accelerate muscle growth. Some, like EPO, directly boost aerobic capacity.

[alephxyz]

PEDs aren't just for endurance. Prescription painkillers, stimulants and corticosteroids are easy to get prescriptions for or even TUEs. The typical player in the NHL gets tested 2-3 times a year, and almost never in the off season. Some sports barely test more than once a year. In cycling it's closer to once a month for an average rider but it can get a lot higher if you're successful as most orgs will test their top 3 after every stage or race.

[Someone]

> In cycling it's closer to once a month for an average rider but it can get a lot higher

Extreme example (https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/jumbo-visma-and-uae-team-em...):

“Jonas Vingegaard has had no fewer than four blood tests in the last 48 hours. We are happy to participate in this.”

[ImprovedSilence]

No, the cardio/fitness aspect of soccer absolutely cannot be overlooked, especially at the top levels where players are at the margin and need that edge, and where the amount of competition and pay and global attention is two orders of magnitude higher than cycling. And you got shit like EPO which basically erases recovery time, but you'll never catch unless you test daily.

>> Soccer also has breaks and substitutes

Kiiiinda, but not really at the pro level.

[VeejayRampay]

this is absolutely the right answer to the question

that the peloton can go faster now that it did in the worst of the EPO years is a dire reminder that it'll always be a race between cheaters and the doctors that come up with reliable tests

other ludicrous explanations coming from people that make a living from the cycling industry is "improvement in bike technology" (which then again is absolutely laughable)

[lormayna]

I am an amateur cycling and I am pretty sure that bike technology is a key factor in improvement in cycling performances. Better aerodynamic, disk brakes and more sliding wheels are a thing.

There is also another factor that is having an huge impact on cycling performances: power meters. Power meters help a lot on energy and fatigue management and also on training in a scientific way. In the 90s (the EPO era that you are referring), pros used only HR monitor, right now pros are using PM and a lot of other sensors to track every details of their body.

I am not saying that there is no doping, but reducing the improvements only to doping is a bit silly.

[alephxyz]

They actually started using powermeters in the 90s, Lemond was one of the first to train using one. Nothing compared to what we have today though.

[lormayna]

I remember a former pro that I know bought tlhis first PM around 2005: it was crazy expensive (more than 1500€ at that time) an not comparable with the PM that we have now (Assioma Duo costs 6/700€).But what it was a really game changer is data analysis tool: right now using free tools like GoldenCheetah or intervals.icu you can have an incredible set of metrics and analytics. Thanks to that, there was an huge improvement on training theory in the last year: things like VO2Max or Z2 where unknown in the '00. And today pros are using also other sensors to have a more olystic overview of the body condition and training effects: glucose meter (banned on races), lactate sensor, basal temperature sensor, etc.

[mikestew]

Thanks to that, there was an huge improvement on training theory in the last year: things like VO2Max or Z2 where unknown in the '00

I had my VO2Max tested forty years ago, and "Zone 2" training is just a rehash of Arthur Lydiard's coaching from the 60s. This stuff has been known for decades, but just repackaged with new marketing and sold again. And I'll guess that nearly every pro in the peloton had a power meter on their bike during the "Lance years". Had one on my race bike at that time.

Beside, you can collect all the data you want, you still have to do the work. I've known plenty of amateur cyclists that thought staring at power meter graph would reveal the mystery of why they suck, when the problem is too much staring at the computer, not enough riding.

[VeejayRampay]

power meters and bike improvements (carbon, 3D-printed gadgets, aero, etc) happened around 10 years ago in the professional peloton (give or take)

the dramatic increase in power output happened less than five years ago so it's not about the gear, it's chemistry

we're seeing ludicrous numbers of about 7W/kg on long climbs like we used to see in the worst of the mid to late 90's, it should tell you that what's going on is bad

[Gualdrapo]

> its most famous athlete a known drug cheat

I'd bet you're thinking about Lance Armstrong, and arguably that person would be Eddy Merckx - but the funny thing is that with either one that premise holds true

[zimpenfish]

To be fair, with cycling, you can pick pretty much any famous one and you'd stand a fair chance of picking a doper (either exposed or widely suspected.)

[rokkitmensch]

I would love to see some good performance distribution charts. Outliers are interesting for all sorts of reasons!