Mathieu Van der Poel

Page 12 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Again. A normalised power of 5.1w/kg over a 186km race.

And he still finished it with a 1300W sprint.
Indeed. And what of the expected trade off one would see ... with the increased ability to sustain these massive workloads to take it to the finish from a far way out (including Amstel), but to still throw in highly nuclear attacks on that (it's not like he was sitting on the wheels, as you've noted with the NP). Physiologically, when improvements are seen at the elite level across capacities, it is not suggestive of normal adaptations.

I think in one of the MTB races from 2019 the strategy attempted was to make it a super fast pace from the start to try to prevent MVDP from attacking as effectively, but I think the outcome was he also sustained that pace, then completely dusted NS shortly before the finish, basically making him look like a novice with the amount of time taken by one attack,
 
"I leave that possibility open."
Sure, anything is possible and kudos for thinking that this guy might be clean. It's fun to pretend.
I'm genuinely surprised that after everything doping-related in the sport has come to light -- e.g. who, what, why, where, when -- people want to revert back to the notion that riders like MVDP are clean as a whistle. That notion defies credulity.
Seriously, what makes anyone think a rider who made superhuman efforts not too long ago aren't doing it now? What changed? I find it really interesting that people refer to watts and everything else I have no clue about. I could be completely wrong, but throwing out numbers as a way to say someone is clean doesn't really add up. As a self-identified ignoramus, I wonder how the cleans argument based on wattage, etc. would be told back in the days starting from the inaugural TDF to the time Lance Armstrong was exorcised from the sport.
What else are we supposed to do though, when there's absolutely nothing to go on really to even speculate about?

Of course the sudden arrival of the Slovenians is strange, the CXers, Alaphillipe trying to win the Tour, Fuglsang suddenly becoming a champ at age 35, the Jumbo murder-train etc. but there's barely even the vaguest hint of any concrete abnormalities other than numbers.

I don't think people in this forum are naive, but when there's nothing to say but point a finger at someone and say "that's suspicious", it gets repetitive quickly.
 
Reactions: Cookster15
What else are we supposed to do though, when there's absolutely nothing to go on really to even speculate about?

Of course the sudden arrival of the Slovenians is strange, the CXers, Alaphillipe trying to win the Tour, Fuglsang suddenly becoming a champ at age 35, the Jumbo murder-train etc. but there's barely even the vaguest hint of any concrete abnormalities other than numbers.

I don't think people in this forum are naive, but when there's nothing to say but point a finger at someone and say "that's suspicious", it gets repetitive quickly.
I totally agree; it seems all the doors have effectively been closed. Which in turn introduces the potential for exhaustion -- i.e. "Yeah, yeah, we get it already. Can't we just move on and enjoy the race?" I get that idea to a certain extent, but only until one comes across someone saying MVDP basically represents the platonic ideal of what a cyclist is. That's where questions about the sports' history comes in. It's hard to talk about one thing without mentioning the other. Cycling created that situation, not me.
Also, I'm genuinely curious about how we came to this new reality about how we talk (or don't talk) about doping.
Cycling seems to have caught up to sports like the NFL where the topic isn't mentioned. When you think of it in that sense, the sport has come a long way in a relatively short period of time.
Let's face it: Doping in one form or another in the NFL is rampant. It's undeniable, yet the subject never gets raised, unless it's in reference to opiate addiction.
 
he's been racing since 5 year old. With cyclocross as basis. Which is basically doing high pace + insane accelerations after every corner.
Since age 5... with Adri vd Poel as father and the daughter of Poulidor as mother.

Is it really that unfeasible to think that somebody with that background and starting cycling at age 5 can evolve this way?
With... Adrie van der Poel as a father, who... ehm.
Well, no accusations here, but van der Poel senior had no problem with doping.
 
I don't think people in this forum are naive, but when there's nothing to say but point a finger at someone and say "that's suspicious", it gets repetitive quickly.
The Clinic has been this way forever but this is just a reflection of many fans of the sport. If your rider beats my rider then your rider must be doping. Everyone is born with the same natural ability and all pros are naturally within a few percent of each other. Except they are not just like the rest of humanity. Outliers always exist.

And if MvDP is doping to achieve these results there has been no speculation what he might be on. Just that its not normal. Okay so now explain how this abnormal ability now shown on multiple occasions was achieved?

Personally I am not convinced he has an unfair advantage other than his genes and ability. I don't find it incredulous that a rider might be able to unleash an uphill burst of power after maintaining 400 watts for 90 minutes. Different energy systems. I am not Dutch, I am just calling it as I see it.
 
The Clinic has been this way forever but this is just a reflection of many fans of the sport. If your rider beats my rider then your rider must be doping. Everyone is born with the same natural ability and all pros are naturally within a few percent of each other. Except they are not just like the rest of humanity. Outliers always exist.

And if MvDP is doping to achieve these results there has been no speculation what he might be on. Just that its not normal. Okay so now explain how this abnormal ability now shown on multiple occasions was achieved?

Personally I am not convinced he has an unfair advantage other than his genes and ability. I don't find it incredulous that a rider might be able to unleash an uphill burst of power after maintaining 400 watts for 90 minutes. Different energy systems. I am not Dutch, I am just calling it as I see it.
If you're just calling it as you see it, what makes you assume others aren't doing the same?
You're the one who introduced the notion that people are chuffed because their rider didn't win. What makes you think so?
I'm sure I'm not the only one here who doesn't place bets on the sport and or is a "fanboy." We'll leave that to the teenagers and gamblers.
I'm not saying you're wrong in your assessment, I'm just curious why you would strongly suggest that reactions are based on fandom. The only time I ever saw this here is when some folks would cling to their claim when faced with overwhelming evidence that, for example, someone like LA was on the gear. Otherwise, the majority of posters (many of whom are long gone) did not take that viewpoint at all. Like you, they just called it as they saw it.
 
If you're just calling it as you see it, what makes you assume others aren't doing the same?
You're the one who introduced the notion that people are chuffed because their rider didn't win. What makes you think so?
I'm sure I'm not the only one here who doesn't place bets on the sport and or is a "fanboy." We'll leave that to the teenagers and gamblers.
I'm not saying you're wrong in your assessment, I'm just curious why you would strongly suggest that reactions are based on fandom. The only time I ever saw this here is when some folks would cling to their claim when faced with overwhelming evidence that, for example, someone like LA was on the gear. Otherwise, the majority of posters (many of whom are long gone) did not take that viewpoint at all. Like you, they just called it as they saw it.
I am just calling things as I see it and challenging explanations based upon logic, reason and science. Everyone has their own reasons for their opinions. Fandom is part of this but not all. Fandom is very common here. So is groupthink.
 
I am just calling things as I see it and challenging explanations based upon logic, reason and science. Everyone has their own reasons for their opinions. Fandom is part of this but not all. Fandom is very common here. So is groupthink.
I don't mean to belabour the point, but in the interest of interacting in good faith, please give me an example of how "fandom is very common here." Reason I ask is I don't see it, but I could be wrong.
In the absence of providing evidence that arguments are fundamentally based on fandom, one could possibly be led to believe that your fandom argument has nothing to do with science or reason. In fact, it's not out of the realm of possibility to think that maybe it's a way to distract from the fundamental issue at hand. But maybe that's just me.
Groupthink exists everywhere and in every context. I totally agree that groupthink might be an issue here, but that's up to the majority to decide.
 
I don't mean to belabour the point, but in the interest of interacting in good faith, please give me an example of how "fandom is very common here." Reason I ask is I don't see it, but I could be wrong.
In the absence of providing evidence that arguments are fundamentally based on fandom, one could possibly be led to believe that your fandom argument has nothing to do with science or reason. In fact, it's not out of the realm of possibility to think that maybe it's a way to distract from the fundamental issue at hand. But maybe that's just me.
Groupthink exists everywhere and in every context. I totally agree that groupthink might be an issue here, but that's up to the majority to decide.
I can’t answer your question except to say fandom is the rule rather than exception in fans of virtually all sports. I am surprised you ask it seems very obvious I should not need to spend time quoting specific examples.

At the end of the day I am not a great fan of MvDP but I think there might be explanations other than doping for his performances. The default position of the clinic is anyone who excels must be doping. Yes that’s groupthink but I think that detracts from this forum.
 
Reactions: yaco
The Clinic has been this way forever but this is just a reflection of many fans of the sport. If your rider beats my rider then your rider must be doping. Everyone is born with the same natural ability and all pros are naturally within a few percent of each other. Except they are not just like the rest of humanity. Outliers always exist.

And if MvDP is doping to achieve these results there has been no speculation what he might be on. Just that its not normal. Okay so now explain how this abnormal ability now shown on multiple occasions was achieved?

Personally I am not convinced he has an unfair advantage other than his genes and ability. I don't find it incredulous that a rider might be able to unleash an uphill burst of power after maintaining 400 watts for 90 minutes. Different energy systems. I am not Dutch, I am just calling it as I see it.
Ah, the old "you're just upset your rider didn't win".

I LIKE MVDP. But I have no illusions about this sport, and haven't for years. We're well overdue our next Puerto/Festina/USPS, and when it comes a lot of riders a lot of people like will get roped in.

Is what it is, enjoy the spectacle.
 
no! clinic default position....is to ask question and discuss....

i cheered on MVP when he went thermonuclear at strade......but i am only too aware that it
looks suspicious.....this is backed up by power numbers

but MVP is blessed with wonderful genes.....which kinda skipped his brother..

it was pointed out he got them from his father.......which was answered eloquently by another member....'but his father had no problem with doping....'

Mark L
This^^^

You can appreciate a "full ret@rd" attack, like the rider who did it, yet still not be naive about how they did it.
 
I can’t answer your question except to say fandom is the rule rather than exception in fans of virtually all sports. I am surprised you ask it seems very obvious I should not need to spend time quoting specific examples.

At the end of the day I am not a great fan of MvDP but I think there might be explanations other than doping for his performances. The default position of the clinic is anyone who excels must be doping. Yes that’s groupthink but I think that detracts from this forum.
because most of the clinic has been watching cycling since 1890s and everyone who ever exceled (and not just in cycling) was doping in one way or another, depends whether it was legal or illegal at that time (so technically they didnt because there were no rules against it), whether it be drugs,blood (wasnt there one runner in like 60s who was accused of drinking blood or something crazy)...anyway the point is people are cheaters even when money is not involved

so its safe to say when you see someone excel constantly, month after month without loss of form when not that far ago proven dopers were literally minmaxing their doping protocols so they would have a peak form for a precise short period of time, how can that not raise the questions?

and the most outrageous thing is when i read in the article that MVDP can "keep this form for a month" and im like "hol up buddy,pal,guy you have been in top form for months and months already", he wasnt doing CX as a pastime, he was smashing the competition week after week and if he wasnt the other guy who seemingly is in top form all the time and apparently he is also one of the best sprinters,climbers,punchers,TTists all in one was and i swear to god if on top of that evenepoel starts beating ganna by a minute i will stop being such a nice guy

with all that being said, i still like to watch, but after 25 years of watching cycling i can hardly be like "oh yeah, NOW its different"

cycling is one of the few areas where "guilty untill proven innocent" should apply because of all the baggage its carrying since people invented beating another guy for a sport, the problem is not the clinic is too cynical, the problem is you are not cynical enough
 
Reactions: Publiuszam
I can’t answer your question except to say fandom is the rule rather than exception in fans of virtually all sports. I am surprised you ask it seems very obvious I should not need to spend time quoting specific examples.

At the end of the day I am not a great fan of MvDP but I think there might be explanations other than doping for his performances. The default position of the clinic is anyone who excels must be doping. Yes that’s groupthink but I think that detracts from this forum.
I agree that fandom rules; I'm not disputing that. I'm disputing the way you frame fandom in terms of doping.
Let me give you a quick example. I am a huge fan of the Toronto Blue Jays. Years ago they picked up a journeyman off the waiver wires for virtually nothing. Within four months or so, this guy went from a career middling hitter to the home run king. The transformation was astounding. His excuse: He tweaked his swing. This life-long baseball player in his late 20's who was basically given one last chance to prove himself and make millions upon millions of dollars "tweaked" his swing and started hitting home runs at will.
As a fan, I was loving it. I was excited to go to the ball-park thinking that the player was going to launch another bomb into the seats. But as soon as saying this sudden transformation was highly suspect -- especially given the history of drug use in the sport -- I was met with a barrage of hateful messages from the fan base. Suggestions for the duration of days it should take for me to kill myself ranged from right now to ten days of slow torture.
Point being is it's the fans with blinders on who tend to get uppity when someone suggests their hero is taking PED's. I do not see a shred of evidence that it comes from anyone else. And even if it did, that should have nothing to do with the veracity of the argument.
I would like to "like" several messages above, but am afraid you will misinterpret the definition of the term "groupthink" and apply it to me.
 
Last edited:
because most of the clinic has been watching cycling since 1890s and everyone who ever exceled (and not just in cycling) was doping in one way or another, depends whether it was legal or illegal at that time (so technically they didnt because there were no rules against it), whether it be drugs,blood (wasnt there one runner in like 60s who was accused of drinking blood or something crazy)...anyway the point is people are cheaters even when money is not involved

so its safe to say when you see someone excel constantly, month after month without loss of form when not that far ago proven dopers were literally minmaxing their doping protocols so they would have a peak form for a precise short period of time, how can that not raise the questions?

and the most outrageous thing is when i read in the article that MVDP can "keep this form for a month" and im like "hol up buddy,pal,guy you have been in top form for months and months already", he wasnt doing CX as a pastime, he was smashing the competition week after week and if he wasnt the other guy who seemingly is in top form all the time and apparently he is also one of the best sprinters,climbers,punchers,TTists all in one was and i swear to god if on top of that evenepoel starts beating ganna by a minute i will stop being such a nice guy

with all that being said, i still like to watch, but after 25 years of watching cycling i can hardly be like "oh yeah, NOW its different"

cycling is one of the few areas where "guilty until proven innocent" should apply because of all the baggage its carrying since people invented beating another guy for a sport, the problem is not the clinic is too cynical, the problem is you are not cynical enough
Well I've been following European road racing closely since 1992 and less closely since when Phil Anderson was riding top 10 on the TdF so I have been around a while too. Naturally I am acutely aware of the sport's history on doping. But I am also aware that not all humans are born with the same ability. Sometimes there has been excellent debate and exchange in the Clinic. But mostly it resorts to Groupthink. Nothing for MvDP stands out to me (yet).
 
Ah, the old "you're just upset your rider didn't win".

I LIKE MVDP. But I have no illusions about this sport, and haven't for years. We're well overdue our next Puerto/Festina/USPS, and when it comes a lot of riders a lot of people like will get roped in.

Is what it is, enjoy the spectacle.
That's not my point. Based upon your posting history that I recall, I suspect I've been following this sport longer than you. You accuse me of being roped in? No, I like to think I am swayed by science, facts, logic and reason. But not accepted norms which is what you are relying upon (no illusions....). Why would MvDP be the next Puerto/Festina/USPS ? Dutch conspiracy? Now there is a subject worthy of debate. ;).

I leave open the possibility that he has a doping advantage. But I also leave open the possibility that MvDPs watts for that duration is within the realm of physiological possibility. It might be a very small proportion of pros but that is why not all pros win dope or no dope. Outliers.
 
no! clinic default position....is to ask question and discuss....

i cheered on MVP when he went thermonuclear at strade......but i am only too aware that it
looks suspicious.....this is backed up by power numbers

but MVP is blessed with wonderful genes.....which kinda skipped his brother..

it was pointed out he got them from his father.......which was answered eloquently by another member....'but his father had no problem with doping....'

Mark L
Sorry but that is not the default clinic position. This place more often than not is less credible than PRR. Been here long enough to know.

It would not matter if MvDPs father was ex East Germany sports system. Deal with facts and let the facts decide the truth. The debate on MvDP would be better served looking for explanations of his power readings. For example, is he oxygen vector doping to preserve his ATP power as displayed at 2019 Amstel and Strade Bianchi or is he using something new? etc.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: kingjr
Sorry but that is not the default clinic position. This place more often than not is less credible than PRR. Been here long enough to know.

It would not matter if MvDPs father was ex East Germany sports system. Deal with facts and let the facts decide the truth. The debate on MvDP would be better served looking for explanations of his power readings. For example, is he oxygen vector doping to preserve his ATP power as displayed at 2019 Amstel and Strade Bianchi or is he using something new? etc.
Your position has always been that..even on wigans..when he was ripping it up. iirc. And imho your opinion on the clinic is wrong ...I think..of course there were few..very few.. posters who just scream "bloody murder" at great rides. I have been here long enough too..as zam_olyas. And the whole sky thing left the clinic with less credibility because back then there were some posters who just came to the clinic because they don't like them..and it was ridiculous.
NOI
 
this is the place to discuss..........no-ones opinion is more valid than any others...

i went back to watch that strade attack each time it looks more 'alien'.....MVDP
rounds ala going hard to get ahead .....ala knows exactly whats coming ..then BOOM
MVDP is 'GONE'

you will notice i have NEVER shouted 'doping' ...i have just posted as i see things knowing
that MVDP could well be 100% honest...

Mark L

He just wanted it more + missing his girlfriend's birthday
 
Sorry but that is not the default clinic position. This place more often than not is less credible than PRR. Been here long enough to know.

It would not matter if MvDPs father was ex East Germany sports system. Deal with facts and let the facts decide the truth. The debate on MvDP would be better served looking for explanations of his power readings. For example, is he oxygen vector doping to preserve his ATP power as displayed at 2019 Amstel and Strade Bianchi or is he using something new? etc.
"This place is more often than not less credible than PRR."
I guess you can come to that conclusion when you suspend disbelief and forget about the fact that the allowable scope of discussion in PRR is very limited.
 
"This place is more often than not less credible than PRR."
I guess you can come to that conclusion when you suspend disbelief and forget about the fact that the allowable scope of discussion in PRR is very limited.
Of course the allowable scope of PRR is limited by discussion of doping being banned, But that doesn't mean the clinic more credible. There has been much raised here of high quality but sadly this is let down by the groupthink, innuendo and as you call it "fandom". Often it will depend upon who happens to be posting.

But we are wasting our time. I laid the bait and nobody bit - please explain what MvDP is doing that the other pros are not? Nobody has come up with any suggestion.

So much for "clinic default position....is to ask question and discuss".... . The true Clinic position is to automatically suspect any rider who excels except if they are your favourite rider or one of the clinic's favorites in which case we won't discuss or ignore.

Who is asking questions and discussing what MvDP was on to win 2019 Amstel and 2021 Strade Bianchi except to claim oh those watts are impossible. Really, prove it?
 
Of course the allowable scope of PRR is limited by discussion of doping being banned, But that doesn't mean the clinic more credible. There has been much raised here of high quality but sadly this is let down by the groupthink, innuendo and as you call it "fandom". Often it will depend upon who happens to be posting.

But we are wasting our time. I laid the bait and nobody bit - please explain what MvDP is doing that the other pros are not? Nobody has come up with any suggestion.

So much for "clinic default position....is to ask question and discuss".... . The true Clinic position is to automatically suspect any rider who excels except if they are your favourite rider or one of the clinic's favorites in which case we won't discuss or ignore.

Who is asking questions and discussing what MvDP was on to win 2019 Amstel and 2021 Strade Bianchi except to claim oh those watts are impossible. Really, prove it?
No one said the Clinic is more credible. You're the one who made that claim.
Unless someone followed every single step of MVDP, on a daily basis, neither you nor I can say he is or isn't doping.
At risk of becoming even more redundant, the Clinic allows for a broader discussion that includes the history of doping in cycling in particular and doping in general. Dismissing that part of the equation fundamentally negates the overall question. It's like it isn't happening at all. There's no point talking about doping if the historical part is left out.
To paraphrase Spalco,: What's the point if we don't have evidence? I totally understand that perspective and explained why earlier.
Also, you keep using the word "groupthink" but not in the proper perspective. Unless you agree that groupthink applies in the PRR section, then you are not talking in good faith. And even if you agreed, then the notion of groupthink is moot. The fundamental premise of the notion is that people essentially ignore their own thoughts or beliefs in order to go along with the crowd. I don't see that happening here.
As for your conclusions of the role "fandom" plays, there is no point in repeating what has already been said. Go back a page or two, just in case you missed points that have already been made.
I acknowledge and respect the fact you are leaps and bounds ahead of me when it comes to talk about modern technology relating to watts, etc. I immediately dismiss myself from that part of the conversation because I have no idea what you're talking about. You might be right when saying power data strongly suggests the rider is cleans. I have no clue. But I would pose a question to someone like you if it's possible to imagine how the wattage argument would be put forward if those stats existed, say, 20 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Actually it was what ebandit implied .....



So again to this forum I ask what is MVDP doping with which explains 2019 Amstel and 2021 Strade Bianche ? Plus how did he get away with it ?
I dunno. How did Lance get away with it? How did Luc Leblanc get away with it? How did George Hincapie get away with it? How did Michael Barry get away with it? How did Dave Zabriskie get away with it?
Surely you get my point. We could spend hours examining the list of riders who took the start at the TDF who were never caught doping and ask how they got away with it.
We all know that ebandit is a character on these forms. Mark L infuses the form with takes based on his experience and knowledge. He's also here to add an amusing take that could be interpreted to mean he is making fun of both sides.
With all due respect to ebandit, he is not reciting a dissertation. He's just being funny, and I mean that in the most respectful way,
 
So let’s get back to the subject of the thread - MvDP. In my opinion, until I see convincing argument to the contrary, I suspect this could be possible not just a doping advantage.

Massive power but relatively short duration. I think it might be possible an outlier can hold huge watts then launch a 1300 watt uphill sprint. This is what we should be debating in this thread.
 
So let’s get back to the subject of the thread - MvDP. In my opinion, until I see convincing argument to the contrary, I suspect this could be possible not just a doping advantage.

Massive power but relatively short duration. I think it might be possible an outlier can hold huge watts then launch a 1300 watt uphill sprint. This is what we should be debating in this thread.
IMHO Pantani was probably one of the the biggest outliers cycling history, even without the doping. Van der Poel is obviously similarly talented, and has a huge family pedigree, but doing what he does so consistently, to the greatest riders in the peloton right now....
 
Reactions: Cookster15

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts