Cavendish stronger on the road than in testing says Axel Merckx...

[epo1999]

Hi,

What caught my eye about this was the fact that Johan Museeuw was used as an example. Museeuw was convicted for doping, so I think it is safe to assume that he doped, even though anyone with eyes and a few PR tapes could have already told us that! Theory - no blood transfusion before the test, fat bag before the race. Maybe Cav is on the same program? Any thoughts?

Take care.

 

[D-Queued]

And what authority would Axel have?

Dave.

 

[bobbins]

This is just a re-hash of what is in Cavs book. He just can't perform on an ergo test but obviously goes well on the road.

 

[mercycle]

Does this really surprise anyone? How many greats (at whatever sport) need a competitor to actually bring out their best? Personal opinion: heart rate monitors and power meters are more useful during training to make sure you are going "appropriately" (hard enough when you want hard, easy enough when you want easy). During a race? Good for post race analysis, kind of hard to pull off "hey guys, could you ease up a bit, my HR is a little high".

I'll toss out that even the most doped to the gills rider would still need a desire to actually be able to use it.

As far as Axel's authority, if one reads the article he is basing it on time spent riding with Cavendish on the same team. Training and racing with a person can tell you a lot.

 

[washedup]

I wouldn't go so far as to say Cav is 100% clean, but I don't think his lack of lab power is that unusual. In my years, I saw this similar thing on a few occasions. Especially with sprinters and especially with guys who race out of their heads. I would bet if they tricked his mind into thinking it was actually sprinting for the line in the tour, his numbers would be much different.

 

[D-Queued]

...

As far as Axel's authority, if one reads the article he is basing it on time spent riding with Cavendish on the same team. Training and racing with a person can tell you a lot.

The opening post led with a doping line, and this thread is in the Clinic.

What authority does he speak from on this subject?

Dave.

 

[shouldawouldacoulda]

The opening post led with a doping line, and this thread is in the Clinic.

What authority does he speak from on this subject?

Dave.

Are you alluding to something? You tend to think 'they're all on drugs' so I'm curious what your opinion on Axel and Cavendish is?

 

[theswordsman]

That January, during our first training camp in Mallorca, we had to undergo some specific tests on endurance and strength,” Merckx told DH.be. “Cavendish was very disappointed to hear it said by the trainer that his test results weren’t worthy of a ProTour rider. And it’s true that his tests were lower than everybody else!”

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cavendish-stronger-on-the-road-than-in-testing-says-axel-merckx

 

[D-Queued]

Are you alluding to something? You tend to think 'they're all on drugs' so I'm curious what your opinion on Axel and Cavendish is?

I don't think they are all on drugs. Typically, it is a lot easier to talk about doping when there is actual evidence of it. This particular forum differs from most that I have participated on as posters here are allowed to discuss their suspicions. But, I am barely at 300 posts here and am just getting used to the new rules.

Now, to be fair, some performances are 'amazing' to cite the many Landis accolades after Stage 17. Even though NBC Sports ("Landis Topped Lemond and Lance") still states that "What Floyd did in stage 17 is greatest single-stage performance ever", I guess I am less convinced now about how amazing that particular performance was. In fact, long being an Axel fan (son of Eddy and all that), I was actually more amazed at his performance that year than Floyd's. It was truly impressive how he was able to ride above himself to support Floyd on the following stage(s) in that particular Tour. Axel had turned into a regularly George Hincapie-style billy goat.

the previous mountain stages had shown that from Landis's teammates, only Axel Merckx was somewhat able to stay with Landis and help him

But, this is 'The Clinic' and the first post on this thread was about doping. So, I was just wondering if someone was referring to this list from Wikipedia:

Athletes associated with Michele Ferrari:
All of Team Gewiss that took the entire podium in the 1994 edition of La Flèche Wallonne: Moreno Argentin, Giorgio Furlan and Eugeni Berzin
Lance Armstrong
Paolo Savoldelli
Mario Cipollini
Gianni Bugno
Giorgio Furlan
Pavel Tonkov
Tony Rominger
Abraham Olano
Ivan Gotti
Claudio Chiappucci
Filippo Simeoni: admitted to doping
Patrik Sinkewitz: suspended for positive out-of-competition test while preparing for 2007 Tour de France; admitted to doping
Eddy Mazzoleni
Levi Leipheimer
Floyd Landis: suspended for positive doping test at 2006 Tour de France; admitted to doping
George Hincapie
Axel Merckx
Alexandre Vinokourov: suspended for positive doping test at 2007 Tour de France
Michael Rogers

Dave.

 

[JPM London]

As Bobbins says it's no news that Cav is a poor tester - and it can easily make sense.

As far Museeuw the Feb edition of Cycle Sports Magazine has a list of the "50 most winning riders" where Museeuw appears as number 49 (63 wins) followoed by some text ending in "His Legacy was damaged by a confession he had used EPO in the last year of his career". So, unless that is incorrect or a lie, a lot of Museeuw's achievements were clean - not juiced...

 

[the student]

all a sprinter needs is some hefty muscle to do the last bits, so he could have done very bad in testing and still be a really good finisher. Come on he doesnt really need top racer stamina... he just sits around in the peloton dropping back at the mountains... his racing wins are more like: sitting in the peloton and waiting for a sprint, and dont forget the team doing all the leadout for him... hes pretty spoiled

 

[Frosty]

What sort of tests would we have done badly on? Would they be simple threshold tests or ability to recover in between sprints, or the ability to cycle along all day at a sheltered in the pack type intensity and then sprint at your maximum for 500 metres?

Does anyone know what the best Cav has done in a long TT? Best i can think of is 48th in the Vuelta last year, losing 3.16 to Cancellara in 46km. Difficult to know how much effort people around him were putting in - Frank Schleck would have been going for it i guess but scalping him in a TT isnt much to write home about, even considering the later starts were apparently boosted by a change in wind that allowed Velits to take the stage.

http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=19358

 

[shouldawouldacoulda]

I don't think they are all on drugs. Typically, it is a lot easier to talk about doping when there is actual evidence of it. This particular forum differs from most that I have participated on as posters here are allowed to discuss their suspicions. But, I am barely at 300 posts here and am just getting used to the new rules.
...

Fair enough. That's Axel, and I agree with your opinion of Axel - he very likely has skeletons in his closet.

But what about Cavendish?

I took Merckx's comments at face value. Cavendish tests like crap but there is something in him that makes him a wicked competitor. I didn't read any doping innuendo into Merckx's comments.

I took it more the way I did this tweet http://twitter.com/#!/Pinnerg/status/1208175703 from a guy I trust as clean and seems to have a similar opinion about test data. Funny enough he lives in the same province as Merckx... maybe its a BC thing?

 

[D-Queued]

Fair enough. That's Axel, and I agree with your opinion of Axel - he very likely has skeletons in his closet.

But what about Cavendish?

I took Merckx's comments at face value. Cavendish tests like crap but there is something in him that makes him a wicked competitor. I didn't read any doping innuendo into Merckx's comments.

I took it more the way I did this tweet http://twitter.com/#!/Pinnerg/status/1208175703 from a guy I trust as clean and seems to have a similar opinion about test data. Funny enough he lives in the same province as Merckx... maybe its a BC thing?

Was involved in a sport that tested all the time. The coaches had this to say: These tests may not be the best measure of an athlete, but a good (athlete in this sport) should be able to achieve a good result.

So, what about Cavendish?

Little guy, low score, low wind resistance. He can hide better in the pack, and doesn't have to waste as much energy?

But, really good jump. How/why? This has to be testable and explainable. His pure acceleration - and he appears to have very good pure acceleration - does not come from 'race experience'.

Even staying in the pack when it is winding up is aided by higher capacity (better awareness, better reaction time, more room to pop, etc.)

As for knowing someone is clean, what is the basis of your trust?

If you ran a statistical regression to assess whether an athlete is statistically separate from a well-trained population how do you think it would turn out?

Dave.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I wouldn't go so far as to say Cav is 100% clean, but I don't think his lack of lab power is that unusual. In my years, I saw this similar thing on a few occasions. Especially with sprinters and especially with guys who race out of their heads. I would bet if they tricked his mind into thinking it was actually sprinting for the line in the tour, his numbers would be much different.

ok well you have me convinced. I am more concerned for this guys chick-lets. They are off the hook.

 

[petethedrummer]

and dont forget the team doing all the leadout for him... hes pretty spoiled

He has won numerous times without a leadout.

 

[BroDeal]

Fair enough. That's Axel, and I agree with your opinion of Axel - he very likely has skeletons in his closet.

Axel was a client of Dr. Ferrari. His father introduced Armstrong to Ferrari.

 

[Big Doopie]

axel's performances dropped off substantially once ferrari went exclusive too.

 

[shouldawouldacoulda]

Was involved in a sport that tested all the time. The coaches had this to say: These tests may not be the best measure of an athlete, but a good (athlete in this sport) should be able to achieve a good result.

So, what about Cavendish?

Little guy, low score, low wind resistance. He can hide better in the pack, and doesn't have to waste as much energy?

But, really good jump. How/why? This has to be testable and explainable. His pure acceleration - and he appears to have very good pure acceleration - does not come from 'race experience'.

Even staying in the pack when it is winding up is aided by higher capacity (better awareness, better reaction time, more room to pop, etc.)

As for knowing someone is clean, what is the basis of your trust?

If you ran a statistical regression to assess whether an athlete is statistically separate from a well-trained population how do you think it would turn out?

Dave.

I think when we hear about Cavendish's test data it is for aerobic strength/potential. He tests poorly relative to his peers. But how does he test compared to a typical cat 1 or cat 3 even?

I bet if we heard about his anaerobic/sprint tests they would be very good.

If I say I trust a guy to be clean. It is because I know them personally.

Otherwise they are guys who I simply hope are clean, and until I see something very suspicious I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt. Cavendish has that - I think he's clean, until I see something very suspicious. I don't find bad test suspicious. I don't find Merckx's comments about Cavendish suspicious. I don't suspect guys simply because they win races. But, if Cavendish wins a race like Liege--I'd be suspicious.

 

[shouldawouldacoulda]

Axel was a client of Dr. Ferrari. His father introduced Armstrong to Ferrari.

That's a pretty big skeleton

 

[D-Queued]

...

If I say I trust a guy to be clean. It is because I know them personally.

...

Hope you are right.

Not trying to be obtuse, but I know some dopers personally myself.

Just saying.

Dave.

 

[Granville57]

I have a few thoughts on Cav's abilities, but I'll throw this one out first.
I think in some ways, what we're talking about here in terms of comparing test scores to real-world results, he could be a bit similar to Wayne Gretzky.

They didn't call Gretzky "The Great One" for no reason. His accomplishments hardly bear repeating, but he also tested very low (lowest on his team, in fact) when it came to strength and other easily measurable qualities. Gretzky himself spoke of this in his autobiography. Here's SI's take on it:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1005677/index.htm

Gretzky's physical tools were seemingly ordinary. He was lean, almost gangly at 6 feet, 170 pounds, and he used to finish last in the Edmonton Oiler strength tests. His speed was better than average but not great. His shot? Same story. With a puck on his stick, though, no one was ever better. And his genius for the game...well, it was as if he could think his way past defenders.

Obviously, we're talking about a different sport with a different skill set. But I believe many of the points are worth considering.

Of course there are some differences between Cav and The Great One:

Well-spoken and unfailingly polite, always respectful of the men whose records he eclipsed, Gretzky has been a treasure to his often-troubled sport.

 

[Granville57]

To the other points I alluded to in my previous post...

I read a very interesting article in the July 2009 issue of Cycle Sport America by Chris Sidwells entitled The Science of Cav.
http://www.worldcycling.com/CYCLE-SPORT-JULY-2009/productinfo/CS%2DJUL09/
I’ve searched in vain to find a reprint online; maybe someone else can dig it up. Nonetheless, it’s a great article with some fascinating insights. Sidwells interviewed Cav’s first coach and mentor, Rod Ellingworth. I’ve included some of what I felt were the key points. Unless someone can find a link, you’ll just have to trust me on the quotes. I took great care to be accurate.


First Impressions
“There are a lot of reasons why Mark is special, some of them are down to the facts, figures and natural ability, and some of them are down to who Mark is.”

When Cav was 17 he took part in an intensive training session, put on by British Cycling, with other Junior and U23 riders. As told by Elllingworth,
"I deliberately tried to make it difficult, I tried to take away the protective coaching they were used to and to put them into situations where they were stressed. After it was all over Mark was the only one who came up to me and thanked me for the day. That took me by surprise."

Heightened Awareness
“His judgement of speed and distance is near uncanny. When we would talk about a sprint, Mark would say things like, ‘I moved one meter this way or half a meter that.’ Or he’d say something happened 75 meters from the line. And when you played back the video, it was what Mark had said, exactly.”

“Mark says that for him a sprint happens in slow motion. It’s like he can slow down what’s happening around him and run it inside his brain at half speed. It gives him the time to make good decisions.”

Cutting the drag
“Mark’s frontal area is tiny when compared to the likes of Boonen or Petacchi. That means he creates less drag, so where Cav is producing 1,400 to 1,500 watts to go 75kph, Boonen needs 1,700 watts and still goes slightly slower. The key to his speed is the watts he puts out per square meter of his frontal area.”

Natural speed
The article also goes into great detail about his positioning on the bike, with diagrams comparing him to other sprinters and pointing out the advantages he has. Another sidebar offers these stats on his power:

"Five-second peak power is a measure that coaches use to establish sprint potential. Cavendish’s current peak power [as of 2009] is 1,680 watts, which divided by his weight, 69kg, gives 24.35 watts per kilogram of peak power. That’s off the charts of the peak power tables that coaches use, and it’s the reason for Cavendish’s lightning acceleration."

Using the track
In this sidebar, Cav’s coach spoke of the benefit of motor-pacing on the track at high speeds, for extended periods, to acclimate himself to that environment.
“Because of all the track work he’s done he’s dead comfortable at 50kph, it isn’t a problem because he’s used to periods at 55kph. Just sitting in the peloton takes very little out of Mark.”

Here's a link I was able to find to another great article that offers a look inside the mind of Cavendish.
http://www.cyclesportmag.com/features/mark-cavendish-interview/

 

[ultimobici]

all a sprinter needs is some hefty muscle to do the last bits, so he could have done very bad in testing and still be a really good finisher. Come on he doesnt really need top racer stamina... he just sits around in the peloton dropping back at the mountains... his racing wins are more like: sitting in the peloton and waiting for a sprint, and dont forget the team doing all the leadout for him... hes pretty spoiled

Please tell me you're taking the micky!

While we only see Cavendish, or any other sprinter for that matter, in the final kilometre or three of a race he still has to ride the same distance as everyone else. 300km in the bunch is still a big ask of anyone, to produce a race winning sprint at the end of it is amazing. The stage to Bordeaux was 198km of pancake flat terrain, so on the face of it easy peasy. But it was after 174km in the Pyrenees with 2 Cat 1 climbs as well as the HC finish on the Tourmalet. Sure Cav & the other sprinters in the Autobus finished over 30 minutes down, but they still averaged 32kmh compared to Andy Schleck's 34kmh. Not really that cosseted IMO.

 

[shouldawouldacoulda]

Hope you are right.

Not trying to be obtuse, but I know some dopers personally myself.

Just saying.

Dave.

You know Kirk Obee. So did I. But I never trusted him to be clean. Nor did anyone in North America - that I know anyway.