I suppose this is where I'm confused/skeptical. Since the 80s we've never had people who are both challenging in GTs and classics, and doing so all year round. Even in the Sky era where Wiggins and Froome were successful in week-long stage races early in the season, they never crossed over into the classics and dominated those as well. They were also racing much slower than those riding in the EPO era, which for all the accusations after the jiffy bag thing lent a sense that this was a clean era, especially as the winning margins were generally smaller and they weren't doing the kind of crazy long attacks you'd see from Pantani, Armstrong, FvdB et al. It was just dieseling up climbs at a tempo.
Now, not only are the times getting back towards (and past) those from the EPO era (having ridden the entire race much faster), but those who were hugely successful even a few years ago are nowhere to be seen anymore. The likes of Kwiato, Degenkob, Van Avermaet, and Sagan are generally absolutely nowhere these days. Ditto the likes of Carapaz, Yates, et al in GTs. We saw yesterday that Pidcock, who is clearly a very good rider, was just ridden off of Remco's wheel on a seemingly unchallenging bit of road. Sky was obviously famous for their "marginal gains" stuff, and while that was mocked, it's hard to see that nutrition and equipment and all that has gone through the roof in the space of 3-4 years and they've been left way behind.
It reminds me a bit of Pantani's 99 Giro, where the rest might as well not have bothered turning up such was his dominance. Of course, the legend has it that it was this dominance that contributed to his failed test as people weren't happy with it.
