Remco Evenepoel

[Extinction]

Definitely not infallible. The problem is there is doping there too. Starting doping in your teens shouldn't make you more entitled to it as a pro.

I know, unfortunately sport has been exasperated for decades now.

 

[Pirazziattacks]

I think it does. Even in an era of doping, we want those with the talent to win and not some random praying mantis on a bike.

Road cycling is odd in that physical capacity means so much more than technique and various other factors. It's much easier for the average person or athlete coming from another sport to produce competitive or even pro level power numbers in cycling than it is to say become an elite or sub elite distance runner. If anything that should make it less likely that a rider or riders would be so outlandishly far ahead of the competition in just about every category.

Bike handling, tactics, nutrition, positioning and so on all matter too, but they're still secondary. In this day and age when access to advanced training methods and metrics, and advanced equipment is so widespread I have a hard time believing there isn't something very strange going on for not one but two riders to suddenly appear in the "next Merckx" category.

If you want to believe in miracles in cycling again, go ahead I guess. Cheer for the Belgian guy and leave the odd formerly "talented" South American to be quietly shuffled off into the too dodgy for the world tour category.

 

[Netserk]

I think it does. Even in an era of doping, we want those with the talent to win and not some random praying mantis on a bike.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1648060549174001665

View: https://twitter.com/omarali50/status/1648060549174001665

 

[Blobs]

Road cycling is odd in that physical capacity means so much more than technique and various other factors. It's much easier for the average person or athlete coming from another sport to produce competitive or even pro level power numbers in cycling than it is to say become an elite or sub elite distance runner. If anything that should make it less likely that a rider or riders would be so outlandishly far ahead of the competition in just about every category.

Why do you believe that? I would think it would be easier to go into running, since that's almost purely physical, while there's much more technique and tactics in cycling.

 

[topt]

the thing is, this guy was winning with 10 minutes advantage over his peers when he just quit playing football and stepped on a bike. He might be one of the only ones believable with this level since he was so much ahead of the curve in his youth.

And I know u20 racing usually says nothing, but winning with 10+ minutes does.

probably cause he was doping since than, if anybody knows the good stuff its footballers

 

[topt]

This, you want someone with real talent, not a super responder on an advanced program without real pedigree, winning.

could you give us some names of the super responder on an advanced program without real pedigree ? thanks

 

[topt]

I'd say how good one was from the junior ranks gives an indication, although it's not infallible.

right, cause there is no doping in junior

 

[Panda Claws]

could you give us some names of the super responder on an advanced program without real pedigree ? thanks

I mean it's obviously Chris Froome who was 26 years old when he rode Vuelta a España 2011 and in his fifth year as a pro. His best GC result in a WT Stage race was 15th (Tour de Romandie 2011).
Yet, he ended up winning that Vuelta along with 6 more GT's and heaps of other quality stage races.
Potentially Jonas Vingegaard as well since he did not show all that much beforehand.

I really fail to see how giving a list of names will further this discussion? What would that show?

The problem is that finding 'super responders' requires there to be a vast disparity between results at point A and results at point B. Otherwise you are just hollowing out the concept of 'super responder'.
For example, in the case of a massive talent like Evenepoel it is expected that he will go on to do great things. You cannot just say that it was all about them being a 'super responder' without calling into question the validity of his pedigree.

It seems a bit easy to call someone a 'super responder' when they have never shown anything but a high level. Either you then go all-in and turn 'super responder' into a synonym for 'world beater' or you show that a cyclists' talent was not real to begin with.

Did Evenepoel benefit from more widespread doping practices as a footballer? Did he have connections through his father that made sure that he never rode a race without being already fully doped up?

If the stance is that all juniors are doped up to begin with and it is the 'super responders' that win then on what grounds could Evenepoel be singled out? Again then that would bring us to it becoming a synonym for 'World Beater'.

I don't doubt that Evenepoel has the same weaponry at his disposal as his rivals but I also think it's likely that there is actual raw talent there. I wouldn't know how you could tell that he is more of a super responder than his rivals are.

 

[Ripper]

the thing is, this guy was winning with 10 minutes advantage over his peers when he just quit playing football and stepped on a bike. He might be one of the only ones believable with this level since he was so much ahead of the curve in his youth.

And I know u20 racing usually says nothing, but winning with 10+ minutes does.

The Giro will be interesting! Will it be super tailwinds up all the climbs? Time will tell

 

[Extinction]

right, cause there is no doping in junior

Doubtless there is, but how sophisticated is the question.

 

[Extinction]

could you give us some names of the super responder on an advanced program without real pedigree ? thanks

Lance and Chris. You're welcome.

 

[Tricycle Rider]

Why do you believe that? I would think it would be easier to go into running, since that's almost purely physical, while there's much more technique and tactics in cycling.

I would have to argue that running (especially professional running) is not as simple as the naked eye would presume. There is a lot of technique and jockeying for position going on (elbows may be involved) - especially on the track when you have to do the turns where every millisecond counts. And then you have to have a perfect start for the sprints because, again, every millisecond counts. And then god help you if you drop the baton during a relay...

I'm not saying one sport is cleaner than the other (because they clearly aren't), but just to write off running like there is no technique or tactics involved I do take issue with.

 

[Extinction]

probably cause he was doping since than, if anybody knows the good stuff its footballers

Lance would know as a triathlete, but that didn't translate into much but a damp, cold Worlds.

 

[Extinction]

I would have to argue that running (especially professional running) is not as simple as the naked eye would presume. There is a lot of technique and jockeying for position going on (elbows may be involved) - especially on the track when you have to do the turns where every millisecond counts. And then you have to have a perfect start for the sprints because, again, every millisecond counts. And then god help you if you drop the baton during a relay...

I'm not saying one sport is cleaner than the other (because they clearly aren't), but just to write off running like there is no technique or tactics involved I do take issue with.

There is no comparison with cycling race craft, for which you often have to ride on machines elbow to elbow for hours at 3 times the speed, or descend mountains at 70-80 kph, sometimes on wet tarmac, or navigate chicanes in a pack in full flight to be ideally positioned for a sprint, at times in the pouring rain. Running is far more straightforward and decidedly less perilous. And cycling races can last for 7 hours.

 

[Tricycle Rider]

There is no comparison with cycling race craft, for which you often have to ride on machines elbow to elbow for hours at 3 times the speed, or descend mountains at 70-80 kph, sometimes on wet tarmac, or navigate chicanes in a pack to be ideally positioned for a sprint, at times in the pouring rain. Running is far more straightforward and decidedly less perilous.

Running is definitely less dangerous in that sense, about the only thing runners can complain about as far as their equipment is concerned are their shoes and the state of the running surface itself. I won't argue that at all.

 

[Extinction]

Running is definitely less dangerous in that sense, about the only thing runners can complain about as far as their equipment is concerned are their shoes and the state of the running surface itself. I won't argue that at all.

The point is doping alone is only part of the equation in cycling, as you have to also be a phenomenal bike handler. The junior ranks in Europe are a good school for this, doping and bike handling.

 

[Tricycle Rider]

The point is doping alone is only part of the equation in cycling, as you have to also be a phenomenal bike handler. The junior ranks in Europe are a good school for this, doping and bike handling.

Again, I'm not arguing with you, I just have an issue with what Blob had posted about running and its apparent lack of technique and tactics.

 

[Extinction]

Again, I'm not arguing with you, I just have an issue with what Blob had posted about running and its apparent lack of technique and tactics.

I got that, by cycling is incomparably more difficult craftwise.

 

[Tricycle Rider]

I got that, by cycling is incomparably more difficult craftwise.

Craftwise - absolutely! Jeeeesus, do you check/work on your own bike (and all its 1000+ components) and make sure everything is just right before you ever hit the road? (Takes me about an hour and several cups of coffee before I ever get around to making sure my bike is okay enough to ride.)

 

[meat puppet]

At the same time, running performance does have a more pronounced biomechanical component to it. Call it the effect of technique, skill, body proportions, etc. Moreover this component is more trainable. While gross efficiency varies within a rather small range in elite cyclists, it is actually a key determinant in running.

On the other hand, the metabolic demands of cycling are something else entirely. Different sports as they say.

 

[Tricycle Rider]

At the same time, running performance does have a more pronounced biomechanical component to it. Call it the effect of technique, skill, body proportions, etc. Moreover this component is more trainable. While gross efficiency varies within a rather small range in elite cyclists, it is actually a key determinant in running.

On the other hand, the metabolic demands of cycling are something else entirely. Different sports as they say.

Just one more mention about running before we can go back to Remco's doping...

Many very young, talented runners get ruined by coaches who simply do not know how to train them. And that is how some of them end up on a bicycle.

 

[Extinction]

Craftwise - absolutely! Jeeeesus, do you check/work on your own bike (and all its 1000+ components) and make sure everything is just right before you ever hit the road? (Takes me about an hour and several cups of coffee before I ever get around to making sure my bike is okay enough to ride.)

No, I rarely took much care of my bike, that's what the mechanic was for.

 

[Pirazziattacks]

At the same time, running performance does have a more pronounced biomechanical component to it. Call it the effect of technique, skill, body proportions, etc. Moreover this component is more trainable. While gross efficiency varies within a rather small range in elite cyclists, it is actually a key determinant in running.

On the other hand, the metabolic demands of cycling are something else entirely. Different sports as they say.

That's what I was getting at with the technique involved in the activity itself. People with sufficiently developed aerobic/anaerobic and musculature systems can brute force their way to certain performance benchmarks in cycling without years of training and specialised coaching in a way that's close to impossible in running.

 

[Extinction]

That's what I was getting at with the technique involved in the activity itself. People with sufficiently developed aerobic/anaerobic and musculature systems can brute force their way to certain performance benchmarks in cycling without years of training and specialised coaching in a way that's close to impossible in running.

Not really, if you can't negoziate the pack or descend mountains at lightning speed, in cycling you are F-ucked.

 

[Pirazziattacks]

Not really, if you can't negoziate the pack or descend mountains at lightning speed, in cycling you are F-ucked.

I'd call that skill rather than technique, and it's completely separate from the point I was making about pure physical capacity.