-
This bases itself on a possibly false, and sadly unprovable assumption- the theory that years trained as a child outweigh years trained as an adult.
Whilst there is obviously no good science, there is significant anecdotal evidence that this is a fallacy.
Add to this the amount he trains- have a look at his Strava, it is bonkers- and the guy is clearly dedicated.
No amount of money makes up for those hours in the saddle, and the fact that he can, and probably has self-funded this far is not something to discredit him by.I'm not going to dive into the doping question. I think the complexity of professional sport is too great, and frankly a suspension of disbelief makes the whole thing enjoyable to watch again. [Any sport]
deleted-
The guy is clearly a wanker
Which obviously doesn't mean he is a doper.
What is interesting is that he has had a meteoric rise but only does well when left to his own devices, he never lasts long in teams. Now that could be due to his personality!
-
What those guys just stop training when they hit 18? You know what PEDs are really good for? Recovery, letting you train a lot more than you'd otherwise be able to. Dude went from full time stock broker, not exactly a job known for it's short hours, to pro conti level in a year. I don't buy it. Also he's got all the stuff about being dropped from One Pro Cycling removed from Google. We've been through this before https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/167432/?offset=7525#14233775
leggy_blonde
Sumo
Only if they're winning things. Otherwise it's just domestic level racing, dude could be deep in PEDs as long as its not in his blood on race day. Guy decides to quit working in banking and throws money at becoming a pro cyclist with no history of racing. Some short months later he's beating people who have been doing it since they were 12. Nah.