The demand for the hundred guns is one. Is Nibali clean? And for corollary: can you trust what we saw on the mythical climbs of France? Can you win a Tour from “clean” athletes today? Answering in a comprehensive way is very, very difficult. To see the shining eyes of the Messina on the podium and to put together a whole series of concordant clues (the man always intact and never chatted, the “human” performances, his strong stand against the forbidden pharmacy, never a failed control, etc. . etc.) one could tend towards yes. But I prefer not to give a definitive answer. Not for lack of trust in the Sicilian, but because I think that on me, as on many others, insiders and simple enthusiasts, weigh the faults of a world cycling for luster impregnated with doping to the bone. From the first international leader to the last follower. From the “covers” in Armstrong of the former UCI number one, Verbruggen, revealed by the Texan himself – to the last athlete pinched only a few weeks ago. With some rare exceptions, of course. I have been repeating for some time that in the environment of the two-wheel pedals I would not trust even my brother. However, I immediately say, for the avoidance of doubt, that nothing – I mean nothing at all – can feed suspicions about the Sicilian until now. Starting with the technical performance analysis. Those of the “Squalo” result in the context of the acceptable according to the rules of known physiology. From the first international leader to the last follower. From the “covers” in Armstrong of the former UCI number one, Verbruggen, revealed by the Texan himself – to the last athlete pinched only a few weeks ago. With some rare exceptions, of course. I have been repeating for some time that in the environment of the two-wheel pedals I would not trust even my brother. However, I immediately say, for the avoidance of doubt, that nothing – I mean nothing at all – can feed suspicions about the Sicilian until now. Starting with the technical performance analysis. Those of the “Squalo” result in the context of the acceptable according to the rules of known physiology. From the first international leader to the last follower. From the “covers” in Armstrong of the former UCI number one, Verbruggen, revealed by the Texan himself – to the last athlete pinched only a few weeks ago. With some rare exceptions, of course. I have been repeating for some time that in the environment of the two-wheel pedals I would not trust even my brother. However, I immediately say, for the avoidance of doubt, that nothing – I mean nothing at all – can feed suspicions about the Sicilian until now. Starting with the technical performance analysis. Those of the “Squalo” result in the context of the acceptable according to the rules of known physiology. revealed by the same Texan – to the last athlete pinched only a few weeks ago. With some rare exceptions, of course. I have been repeating for some time that in the environment of the two-wheel pedals I would not trust even my brother. However, I immediately say, for the avoidance of doubt, that nothing – I mean nothing at all – can feed suspicions about the Sicilian until now. Starting with the technical performance analysis. Those of the “Squalo” result in the context of the acceptable according to the rules of known physiology. revealed by the same Texan – to the last athlete pinched only a few weeks ago. With some rare exceptions, of course. I have been repeating for some time that in the environment of the two-wheel pedals I would not trust even my brother. However, I immediately say, for the avoidance of doubt, that nothing – I mean nothing at all – can feed suspicions about the Sicilian until now. Starting with the technical performance analysis. Those of the “Squalo” result in the context of the acceptable according to the rules of known physiology. that nothing – I mean nothing at all – can feed suspicions on the Sicilian so far. Starting with the technical performance analysis. Those of the “Squalo” result in the context of the acceptable according to the rules of known physiology. that nothing – I mean nothing at all – can feed suspicions on the Sicilian so far. Starting with the technical performance analysis. Those of the “Squalo” result in the context of the acceptable according to the rules of known physiology.

They also say “navigated” technicians like the French Vayer, one who did not discount anyone in his book “Tous dopés? La preuve par 21” (“All doped? The proof for 21”) in which analyzing the power expressed in climbed by the protagonists of the past, even recent, it comes to the conclusion that they are doped performances, outside the limits of human physiology. And among those 21 there are almost all the protagonists of the world cycling of the last twenty years: winners of Tours, Tour, World Championships, Olympics. From Ullrich to Armstrong, passing through Pantani & C. Vayer works on estimated data, which is very close to reality, but which, of course, is not just reality. Nibali’s spirited uphill acceleration, however, would seem to be within the acceptable “range”. Albeit at the highest levels of the “fork”. On the border between what Vayer calls “human” and “suspect”. But we are still very far from the levels defined “miraculous” and “mutant”, that is extraterrestrial. As confirmed also by the checks with the most common use formulas (Di Prampero, Ambrosini, Grappe, etc.). For the five climbs where the Sicilian was the protagonist (Chamrousse, Risoul, Port de Bales, Pla d’Adet and Hautacam) the technician calculates an average power of 417 watts and signals it in red with a hint of malice. But French chauvinism is well known and, if you only think that without Nibali the French would have hit a double that has been missing since 1984 (Fignon-Hinault) you can understand that there is not much sympathy for the “Shark” beyond the Alps. Vayer instills the doubt: while the adversaries of the Sicilian, Pinot, Peraud, Valverde and Bardet (whose values ​​are marked in green …), go in falling as the stages and the epic climbs pass, as it is natural for the sum of the labors, Nibali is always at the highest level. But Nibali, according to the same calculations as Vayer, has only 11 watts more average than Pinot (406) at the end of the great ascents. That is 3%, not an abyss. And, as we do the calculations with the various formulas, in the end the figure of average power in relation to weight (man + bike) expressed by Nibali in the mentioned climbs settles around 5.6 w / kg. That is: a value considered acceptable for physiology. But acceptable performance is only a clue, not absolute proof. Valverde and Bardet (whose values ​​are indicated in green …), go into decline as the stages pass and the epic climbs, as is natural for the sum of the labors, Nibali remains always at the highest level. But Nibali, according to the same calculations as Vayer, has only 11 watts more average than Pinot (406) at the end of the great ascents. That is 3%, not an abyss. And, as we do the calculations with the various formulas, in the end the figure of average power in relation to weight (man + bike) expressed by Nibali in the mentioned climbs settles at around 5.6 w / kg. That is: a value considered acceptable for physiology. But acceptable performance is only a clue, not absolute proof. Valverde and Bardet (whose values ​​are indicated in green …), go into decline as the stages pass and the epic climbs, as is natural for the sum of the labors, Nibali remains always at the highest level. But Nibali, according to the same calculations as Vayer, has only 11 watts more average than Pinot (406) at the end of the great ascents. That is 3%, not an abyss. And, as we do the calculations with the various formulas, in the end the figure of average power in relation to weight (man + bike) expressed by Nibali in the mentioned climbs settles at around 5.6 w / kg. That is: a value considered acceptable for physiology. But acceptable performance is only a clue, not absolute proof. it is natural for the sum of the fatigues, Nibali always remains at the highest level. But Nibali, according to the same calculations as Vayer, has only 11 watts more average than Pinot (406) at the end of the great ascents. That is 3%, not an abyss. And, as we do the calculations with the various formulas, in the end the figure of average power in relation to weight (man + bike) expressed by Nibali in the mentioned climbs settles at around 5.6 w / kg. That is: a value considered acceptable for physiology. But acceptable performance is only a clue, not absolute proof. it is natural for the sum of the fatigues, Nibali always remains at the highest level. But Nibali, according to the same calculations as Vayer, has only 11 watts more average than Pinot (406) at the end of the great ascents. That is 3%, not an abyss. And, as we do the calculations with the various formulas, in the end the figure of average power in relation to weight (man + bike) expressed by Nibali in the mentioned climbs settles at around 5.6 w / kg. That is: a value considered acceptable for physiology. But acceptable performance is only a clue, not absolute proof. as the calculations are made with the various formulas, in the end the average power figure in relation to weight (man + bike) expressed by Nibali in the mentioned climbs is settled at around 5.6 w / kg. That is: a value considered acceptable for physiology. But acceptable performance is only a clue, not absolute proof. as the calculations are made with the various formulas, in the end the average power figure in relation to weight (man + bike) expressed by Nibali in the mentioned climbs is settled at around 5.6 w / kg. That is: a value considered acceptable for physiology. But acceptable performance is only a clue, not absolute proof.

In sophisticated modern doping, care is taken not so much to make a single extraordinary performance, but to accelerate recovery, which is crucial in a long stage race like the Tour or the Giro. The winner is whoever recovers first and better. And, as for recovery, Nibali has always enjoyed a good reputation. Technicians and coaches agree: he has an above-average dowry. And, if the maximum oxygen consumption data reported by his trainer Slongo (85 ml / kg / m for the VO2max, “super-super” figure, but still physiologically palatable) is real, it is also credible that it is, because with such high values ​​the rider does not need to squeeze himself to the end when confronted with opponents who have a lower VO2max and commit to levels closer to their maximum. This could explain the relative freshness of Nibali even at the end of the toughest stages. But current doping is made up of meticulous research, of micro-doses whose traces are below those found by analysis machines and substances (and / or practices) that are difficult to identify. The list of prohibited products is an authentic sieve, which removes any credibility from the equation: “not positive for the tests = clean”. At the last Giro the tam-tam of the platoon spoke of a new EPO that disappears in a few hours, therefore not traceable. And also in this Tour there are plenty of disturbing signs: the French Pinot, for example, on the Port de Bales (11.8 km at 7.8%) scaled in 32’25 “broke the record of Contador (2010) doped to clenbuterol, pedaling at 417 watts average. The question if in a hypothetically clean cycling you can do similar performances if not equal to those of the ultra-doped cycling of the past years it would take us far. It is a ground to be excavated. And nobody unfortunately cooperates.

So even on the “social” enthusiasm is mixed with doubt. The distrust of the “sunburn” of the past shines through. Why? It is the absolutely self-referencing control system that fuels suspicions. Although on the top of the UCI executive pyramid there has recently been a change that many consider to be significant: the move from the much-talked-about Dutch Verbruggen to Cookson. The cycling that controls itself has not worked in the past. The system has revealed devastating episodes of compromise for the sole purpose of defending “business”, clientele and business. Hence the doubts about the present and the future. Which also lengthen the way in which the only instrument that in recent years has proved effective in the struggle is used: the biological passport. A system for monitoring the athlete’s blood data that has functioned as an important “calmiere” for the race to the forbidden pharmacy (in 2015 it will be expanded from blood to hormones) and that depends a lot on how the controls are managed and programmed. That is, from the desire to dig deep or not. The effect of the “passport” on performance is palpable in cycling. The “Martians” have almost disappeared, although certain performances are still at the limit of the drug. There is a generation of young people, of which even the Italians are witnesses (Trentin, De Marchi, Oss, etc.) of great good will and very human performances. And above all – what really makes the difference – the “nouvelle vague” is very ill-disposed towards cheating and tricks. Although the surprises are still on the agenda (see the Ulissi case). The danger is always around the corner; the dopers of the past are still numerous in the platoon. And those who have been used to cheating for a lifetime are unlikely to stop. A Nibali, spearhead of a cycling that would like to turn the page, we ask now not to disappoint. Not to spoil the joy of having rediscovered a cycling more on a human scale. And let’s cross our fingers. Not to spoil the joy of having rediscovered a cycling more on a human scale. And let’s cross our fingers. Not to spoil the joy of having rediscovered a cycling more on a human scale. And let’s cross our fingers.