That’s a pretty poor quality article, IMO.
It starts off fine, until they claim with no evidence whatsoever that the common practice of 2:1 is wrong, and advocate for 1:1 again with no evidence or data. They also mention that you can’t exceed 60g with just glucose, and mention that you’ll want between 0.8:1 to 1:1 fructose:glucose, and then also recommend 144g carb intake. That can’t work on 60g glucose, because math. And if we’re maxed on 60g glucose, you’re between 48-60g fructose if you keep with their recommendation of 0.8 - 1. That puts total carb intake per their own recommendations at 108-120g, which is quite a bit less than the 144g they advocate for.
In their conclusion, they sum things up by mentioning that supplementing with fructose is good for longer endurance activities. That’s fine, and not technically always wrong. But its misleading, and it depends entirely what you’re using for the base of your sports drink. Most commonly is sucrose, which is already 1:1 glucose:fructose. To which, adding more glucose is the commonly accepted best practice, otherwise the plan would literally be, “just pour more table sugar on it” and it turns out its not quite that simple.
I’ve not seen any conclusive data that says one way or the other whether or not we can exceed 90g per hour of carb intake, given the right composition. I’ve seen compelling arguments both ways, so I don’t have a good answer on that front, excpt for try exceeding 90, and see if it works for you. But I have seen a lot of information specificlaly referring to the 2:1 glucose:fructose ratio, and until I see ANY information that refutes that, I would keep my drinks with that ratio in mind, even if you’re exceeding the standard dose by a bit.