• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Remco Evenepoel

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
LaFlorecita said:
You could argue that that's what happened to his father. To me, it seems like a pretty big coincidence that the next Eddy Merckx just happens to be the son of a mediocre ex-pro who was up against and beaten by dopers, and this son just picked up a bike one day, never having shown interest in it before, and immediately seemed to be a world beater. Of course, it could be a coincidence. Could also not be a coincidence, and if that's the case, it will be so obvious in hindsight.
Could it be possible that his dad was also an incredible natural talent, who made it to pro level (relatively) clean in the massive free-for-all doping era? In which case, although he was only a mediocre ex-pro he might have still had the best genetics in the peloton. Maybe he even discouraged, or at least failed to enourage, his son from cycling at a young age because he knew what the game was like.

Perhaps a bit far fetched and unlikely, but no more than the idea he might have a motor control in his Garmin.

I'm not even going to touch the "Motor" thing, but even before there was EPO his dad was a pretty average amateur getting beaten by guys who didn't make good pros.

Not that I think how good your parents were is the be all end all.
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
LaFlorecita said:
You could argue that that's what happened to his father. To me, it seems like a pretty big coincidence that the next Eddy Merckx just happens to be the son of a mediocre ex-pro who was up against and beaten by dopers, and this son just picked up a bike one day, never having shown interest in it before, and immediately seemed to be a world beater. Of course, it could be a coincidence. Could also not be a coincidence, and if that's the case, it will be so obvious in hindsight.
Could it be possible that his dad was also an incredible natural talent, who made it to pro level (relatively) clean in the massive free-for-all doping era? In which case, although he was only a mediocre ex-pro he might have still had the best genetics in the peloton. Maybe he even discouraged, or at least failed to enourage, his son from cycling at a young age because he knew what the game was like.

Perhaps a bit far fetched and unlikely, but no more than the idea he might have a motor control in his Garmin.

Incidentally, re. the Garmin, I think its realistic that being able to knowing your watts on a longish climb, and possibly even having maps on there so you can nail the descent, is more than just a marginal gain, and worth spending a few seconds to wait for.

If i remember correctly, there is a link between endurance and mitochondrial DNA, so probably most of Remcos talent came from the mother's side.
 
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
This stood out to me as well. I am still on the fence about him and feel he deserves the benefit of the doubt but it wouldn't surprise me if this is a Van den Driessche situation. Wasn't her father a mediocre (semi-) pro as well?

No, as I said, Patrick Evenepoel was a very talented amateur rider who could drop Michele Bartoli uphill as an amateur. He won Seraing-Aachen-Seraing and came 2nd to Serge Baguet in the Tryptique ardennais, two major references in the amateur circuit back then. Then was just robbed by dopers as a pro. He only managed to win the GP Wallonia in 1993 in great style but could only remain a pro for 3 years. Cardiologist Pr. Peter Brugada advised him to retire in 1994 at age 26. So hard he had to train to keep up with dopers !!! So many Belgian riders had been screwed by EPO riders in those days and had to retire from pro cycling before age 30. Patrick Evenepoel was most probably one of them just like Edwig Van Hooydonck, Sammie Moreels or Peter De Clercq. Durig the live coverage of the junior race, Wuyts and De Cauwer referred to his story. :)
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Echoes said:
LaFlorecita said:
This stood out to me as well. I am still on the fence about him and feel he deserves the benefit of the doubt but it wouldn't surprise me if this is a Van den Driessche situation. Wasn't her father a mediocre (semi-) pro as well?

No, as I said, Patrick Evenepoel was a very talented amateur rider who could drop Michele Bartoli uphill as an amateur. He won Seraing-Aachen-Seraing and came 2nd to Serge Baguet in the Tryptique ardennais, two major references in the amateur circuit back then. Then was just robbed by dopers as a pro. He only managed to win the GP Wallonia in 1993 in great style but could only remain a pro for 3 years. Cardiologist Pr. Peter Brugada advised him to retire in 1994 at age 26. So hard he had to train to keep up with dopers !!! So many Belgian riders had been screwed by EPO riders in those days and had to retire from pro cycling before age 30. Patrick Evenepoel was most probably one of them just like Edwig Van Hooydonck, Sammie Moreels or Peter De Clercq. Durig the live coverage of the junior race, Wuyts and De Cauwer referred to his story. :)

If this is the case, then the word from Patrick should be, Remco you will have to dope or stay amateur and enjoy your racing as nothing has changed since i had my ass handed to me by dopers.
 
Well in all recent interviews I've read of Edwig Van Hooydonck, he truly believes that things have changed (rightly or wrongly so, though well things certainly changed, even if doping still exists we do not have the celerities we had in the early nineties anymore) and consequently, his son was and his nephew is competing. Probably Patrick Evenepoel thinks the same. Besides, I guess, he cannot decide for his son who is an adult now...
 
Many clinic poster seem to consider he is on a good program right now and will achieve little after becoming a pro. Either because others will catch up doping-wise or the testing is more rigorous. So if he fails to become a top tier pro, it will be seen as confirmation of his junior doping. But shouldn't we also consider the other side? What if he is really that one guy we get every 50 years maybe in terms of talent? And what if his talent is enough to become a pro clean but than he suddenly lacks the special results? What i want to say is - we won't find evidence in his results alone. They can be used for both lines of argumentation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GuntherL
Re:

ppanther92 said:
Many clinic poster seem to consider he is on a good program right now and will achieve little after becoming a pro. Either because others will catch up doping-wise or the testing is more rigorous. So if he fails to become a top tier pro, it will be seen as confirmation of his junior doping. But shouldn't we also consider the other side? What if he is really that one guy we get every 50 years maybe in terms of talent? And what if his talent is enough to become a pro clean but than he suddenly lacks the special results? What i want to say is - we won't find evidence in his results alone. They can be used for both lines of argumentation.
If we assume he's clean now, we have to assume his competition is also clean. And that assumption would be backed up by no doping positives in junior categories. But there are.
 
Re:

DNP-Old said:
Remco's won 36 races this year, one with a bigger advantage than the other, but this right here, this is his biggest achievement to date: a clinic thread at the age of 18.
Ah come on, some healthy suspicion won't hurt anyone. And it's not like starting with doping from a young age is anything new.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
ppanther92 said:
Many clinic poster seem to consider he is on a good program right now and will achieve little after becoming a pro. Either because others will catch up doping-wise or the testing is more rigorous. So if he fails to become a top tier pro, it will be seen as confirmation of his junior doping. But shouldn't we also consider the other side? What if he is really that one guy we get every 50 years maybe in terms of talent? And what if his talent is enough to become a pro clean but than he suddenly lacks the special results? What i want to say is - we won't find evidence in his results alone. They can be used for both lines of argumentation.
If we assume he's clean now, we have to assume his competition is also clean. And that assumption would be backed up by no doping positives in junior categories. But there are.

Not so sure about this logic....by the time you get to Pro/World Tour level, i think its fair to say that every rider is extremely talented and trained to be at least close to their genetic potential. At this point doping can be/obviously is a huge differentiator.

But at Junior level, you've still got a real mixed bag of talent. Young kids perhaps lacking the natural talent to make it to the very top in desperation trying to bridge that gap through doping. Problem is no matter how good the programme, its not going to turn an average rider in terms of genetics into a world beater.

So i do think its still possible for a high and rarely talented Junior to be winning races clean against a minority of doped competition.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
Red Rick said:
ppanther92 said:
Many clinic poster seem to consider he is on a good program right now and will achieve little after becoming a pro. Either because others will catch up doping-wise or the testing is more rigorous. So if he fails to become a top tier pro, it will be seen as confirmation of his junior doping. But shouldn't we also consider the other side? What if he is really that one guy we get every 50 years maybe in terms of talent? And what if his talent is enough to become a pro clean but than he suddenly lacks the special results? What i want to say is - we won't find evidence in his results alone. They can be used for both lines of argumentation.
If we assume he's clean now, we have to assume his competition is also clean. And that assumption would be backed up by no doping positives in junior categories. But there are.

Not so sure about this logic....by the time you get to Pro/World Tour level, i think its fair to say that every rider is extremely talented and trained to be at least close to their genetic potential. At this point doping can be/obviously is a huge differentiator.

But at Junior level, you've still got a real mixed bag of talent. Young kids perhaps lacking the natural talent to make it to the very top in desperation trying to bridge that gap through doping. Problem is no matter how good the programme, its not going to turn an average rider in terms of genetics into a world beater.

So i do think its still possible for a high and rarely talented Junior to be winning races clean against a minority of doped competition.

The idea that young atheltes dont dope has been long disproven as hogwash.

Plenty of young riders won a lot at young ages only to fail miserably at higher levels. Some put it down to advance aging of the athlete and then not progressing after maturing, others put it down to doping.

We wont know Remco's 'story' till he reaches 28 and if he is still competing.

The programme can turn Wiggins, Froome and Thomas, all grupetto fodder into GT winners. The programme turned a good 1 day race into a 7 time TdF winner. The programme turned big Mig into a climber crushing little mountain men.

The programmes work and boy do they work well. Ask a 38 year old world champion.
 
Echoes said:
Well in all recent interviews I've read of Edwig Van Hooydonck, he truly believes that things have changed (rightly or wrongly so, though well things certainly changed, even if doping still exists we do not have the celerities we had in the early nineties anymore) and consequently, his son was and his nephew is competing. Probably Patrick Evenepoel thinks the same. Besides, I guess, he cannot decide for his son who is an adult now...
Doping has changed a lot since the early 90s. I fully believe a clean rider can have a good career in this era of cycling. Not Grand Tour podium type good, but respectable peloton fodder that gets to the business end of the odd big race type good. In my opinion, that wasn't possible in the era of 60% when Remco's dad was riding. Totally different ball game to what's currently going on.

Anyway, Remco kicking the behinds of a bunch of teenagers, most of whom will never even make it at Pro Conti level, does not indicate doping. The difference in natural talent between the top and the bottom of the junior peloton is enormous compared to the pro ranks, and there is also the fact that there can be a vast difference in physical maturity that makes the gaps even larger. Remco could just be a rider with above average talent that is mature far beyond his years. Basically a Wayne Rooney situation. An incredible footballer that made it to the top freakishly early because he was practically a fully grown man with ridiculous physical attributes at the age of 16, but despite his early promise and undeniable legacy as a player he was never quite up there with the very best of all-time or even his generation.
 
rghysens said:
King Boonen said:
Red Rick said:
MartinGT said:
So whenever a new talent wins a race now we're going to have a new thread?
He's a ridiculous outlier. If we can't be suspicious of outliers then we might as well stop pretending we care.

Is he? I don't follow junior riding at all but I wouldn't be surprised to see other junior riders at least coming close to his level, the distribution at that age is more likely to be larger.

The difference between him and nr. 2 was bigger than that between nr. 2 and nr.13, while he eased off in the final straight. He won the european chamionships with a solo from the 3rd of 11 laps and won with almost 10 minutes. In addition to that he has about 30 other victories, often with minutes in front. That's what I call an outlier.

But, there was an interesting article with Thomas de Gendt yesterday in a Belgian newspaper, who said that he won 20 times a year in the novices category, often with minutes, but he didn't turn into the next Merckx (although he has his day from time to time). Of course novices ain't juniors, but juniors ain't pros either.
For now, I'm in doubt.
Haha great post. I think you made a good argument for why, if any junior were to get a clinic thread, he would be on the list
 
Fun thread (in a comical way). I just discovered this gem. Someone is suspicious because his dad wasn't a hugely talented rider. Hmm. Why was Axel Merckx such a letdown? Speaking of which, how many times did Eddy's dad win the TDF? Does anybody know how the fathers of Bernal, Froome, Dumoulin... performed in competitive sports? Which sport did they dominate? Because apparently them being super talents is a requirement now.

The Garmin. Right. He waited an additional 40 seconds, because this Garmin was hacked so he could control his motor. The possibillity he needed to know his heartbeat, his output, his speed, etc to basically have all the needed information not to blow himself up in a 70K chase with still a lot of climbing ahead, seems too farfetched probably.

The fact that he was leagues ahead of his teammates at Anderlecht and PSV regarding stamina/endurance throughout the youth divisions also probably means he was the only one doping in his teams, age 12, even though football is a sport where stamina is of less importance compared to technical ability and vision.

Also, the fact that he has been training with the same professional trainer since he was still playing football might have something to do with it? A trainer, a former pro marathon runner, known as a "training animal" that gets inspiration from many other sports besides cycling. He makes Remco train twice a day (unlike other juniors), because -according to him- Remco is able to cope with this workload and improve, whereas other kids would overtrain.

Remco's birthday is in january, this means he's up to 11 months older than other kids from 2000. This might also have something to do with it? Or not.

Considering his past, his natural atributes (he's small and therefor light, on top of having far above average stamina), his month of birth, his trainer and the way he trains, my bet is firmly placed on him being a huge talent, a few months older than his nearest competitors, who has been training more professionally than the competition. That would mean the advantage concerning the age difference will disappear the coming years, as well as the advantage from his way of training. Which leaves him with his godgiven talent. We'll see soon enough how big that is, and whether it's enough to give him an edge over the competition in a few years.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
godgiven talent.....hahahahaha.......just like multiple tested positive doper Merckx.

Remco is clean because he trains twice a day! :lol:

Remco is clean becuase his trainer is not from cycling! :lol:

:rolleyes:
 
Benotti69 said:
godgiven talent.....hahahahaha.......just like multiple tested positive doper Merckx.

Remco is clean because he trains twice a day! :lol:

Remco is clean becuase his trainer is not from cycling! :lol:

:rolleyes:

Hahaha, wow. You actually think you're making good arguments. You don't have any arguments, just your suspicion. Thats. It. :lol:

I never said he couldn't be doping, just that if i had to guess/bet, i wouldn't think so based on arguments given.
I never said he isn't doping because his trainer doesn't come from cycling. No idea where you got that from.
I never said he isn't doping because he is training twice a day. It merely is a part of a possible explanation.

He's the oldest of the contenders from his birthyear which can make quite a difference at that age.
He's been a standout athlete in terms of stamina ever since he started playing football long before he started cycling.
He's small & light.
He trains more than other juniors and has a personal pro trainer.

These are all FACTS. Does it mean he can't be doping? Nope. Could it explain his dominance? Yup. If you are willing to acknowledge that he simply is very talented as well.

I also believe (but this is entirely subjective) that you would have to be a complete idiot to win high profile races with 10 minutes advance if you're doping. I also fail to see the appeal in doping during your junior ranks. What do these guys earn by winning? I doubt it's very much and that there is little incentive there. To get a nice contract at a pro team? If you trick a team into signing you based on cheating, i'm guessing you're liable and the team could sue you.
 
Logic-is-your-friend said:
Benotti69 said:
godgiven talent.....hahahahaha.......just like multiple tested positive doper Merckx.

Remco is clean because he trains twice a day! :lol:

Remco is clean becuase his trainer is not from cycling! :lol:

:rolleyes:

Hahaha, wow. You actually think you're making good arguments. You don't have any arguments, just your suspicion. Thats. It. :lol:

I never said he couldn't be doping, just that if i had to guess/bet, i wouldn't think so based on arguments given.
I never said he isn't doping because his trainer doesn't come from cycling. No idea where you got that from.
I never said he isn't doping because he is training twice a day. It merely is a part of a possible explanation.

He's the oldest of the contenders from his birthyear which can make quite a difference at that age.
He's been a standout athlete in terms of stamina ever since he started playing football long before he started cycling.
He's small & light.
He trains more than other juniors and has a personal pro trainer.

These are all FACTS. Does it mean he can't be doping? Nope. Could it explain his dominance? Yup. If you are willing to acknowledge that he simply is very talented as well.

I also believe (but this is entirely subjective) that you would have to be a complete idiot to win high profile races with 10 minutes advance if you're doping. I also fail to see the appeal in doping during your junior ranks. What do these guys earn by winning? I doubt it's very much and that there is little incentive there. To get a nice contract at a pro team? If you trick a team into signing you based on cheating, i'm guessing you're liable and the team could sue you.

is Jamie Burrows not allegedly the exemplar in these cases...he dominated U23s and then struggled as a pro as he had in effect aldready popped his cork.....pro teams need you to have somewhere to go......if he as mired in doping as some on here think then he knows that, his trainer knows that, his dad knows that and all the teams that want to sign him know that......
 
gillan1969 said:
Logic-is-your-friend said:
Benotti69 said:
godgiven talent.....hahahahaha.......just like multiple tested positive doper Merckx.

Remco is clean because he trains twice a day! :lol:

Remco is clean becuase his trainer is not from cycling! :lol:

:rolleyes:

Hahaha, wow. You actually think you're making good arguments. You don't have any arguments, just your suspicion. Thats. It. :lol:

I never said he couldn't be doping, just that if i had to guess/bet, i wouldn't think so based on arguments given.
I never said he isn't doping because his trainer doesn't come from cycling. No idea where you got that from.
I never said he isn't doping because he is training twice a day. It merely is a part of a possible explanation.

He's the oldest of the contenders from his birthyear which can make quite a difference at that age.
He's been a standout athlete in terms of stamina ever since he started playing football long before he started cycling.
He's small & light.
He trains more than other juniors and has a personal pro trainer.

These are all FACTS. Does it mean he can't be doping? Nope. Could it explain his dominance? Yup. If you are willing to acknowledge that he simply is very talented as well.

I also believe (but this is entirely subjective) that you would have to be a complete idiot to win high profile races with 10 minutes advance if you're doping. I also fail to see the appeal in doping during your junior ranks. What do these guys earn by winning? I doubt it's very much and that there is little incentive there. To get a nice contract at a pro team? If you trick a team into signing you based on cheating, i'm guessing you're liable and the team could sue you.

is Jamie Burrows not allegedly the exemplar in these cases...he dominated U23s and then struggled as a pro as he had in effect aldready popped his cork.....pro teams need you to have somewhere to go......if he as mired in doping as some on here think then he knows that, his trainer knows that, his dad knows that and all the teams that want to sign him know that......

So Froome was doing it right all along? ;)
 
Re:

Logic-is-your-friend said:
Does anybody know how the fathers of Bernal, Froome, Dumoulin... performed in competitive sports? Which sport did they dominate? Because apparently them being super talents is a requirement now.

Practicing other sports? Then they are better examples. If only in Belgium, most talented riders come from cycling families. That's why I was very surprised when I read LaFlo's post. André Boonen, Ronald Van Avermaet, Leo Wellens or Gino Van Hooydonck were all less talented riders than Patrick Evenepoel. Though of course, Tim Wellens and Nathan Van Hooydonck had talented uncles. I haven't followed Remco's performances as closely as you have but the reason I'm interested is that he reminds me of his father whom I remember very well though I was aged 11 when he retired. His name sounded funny to me as a kid and sounded a bit like Van der Poel. Oddly enough there are again two Van der Poel's and one Evenepoel in the peloton today. I can't say whether Remco is clean or not or has motor but the fact that Patrick Evenepoel has been robbed by dopers in the 90's and that we don't know what his full potential should have been is something I am 100% convinced of. He raced for Collstrop and at Collstrop at that time, they had no doctor to advise them on how to use EPO properly. But then also at that time the gap between the richer teams and the poorer ones was huge. So Mapei had one heart-rate monitor for every rider, Lotto had just one for the whole team and Collstrop had none. As I saw in this show in Dutch from 1995 (interview of Jo Planckaert at 0.30, then racing for Collstrop). This is just confirmation that Patrick Evenepoel could not show his full potential. I'm not suggesting that he could have been a multiple classic winner but he could certainly have a better career than he actually had and perhaps have avoided heart issues that eventually made him retire way too soon...

Remco playing football as first choice is logical. He was raised in Brussels. I'm in Brussels and can safely say that here kids are not interested in cycling a bit! It's either football or hockey. Remco was born in Schepdael, I don't where he was raised but that is very close to Anderlecht, so football should have been an obvious choice. Greg Van Avermaet who is from Hamme (deep down in Flanders, where my own father is from :)) also started out playing football as a goal keeper for Lokeren.
 
wansteadimp said:
gillan1969 said:
Logic-is-your-friend said:
Benotti69 said:
godgiven talent.....hahahahaha.......just like multiple tested positive doper Merckx.

Remco is clean because he trains twice a day! :lol:

Remco is clean becuase his trainer is not from cycling! :lol:

:rolleyes:

Hahaha, wow. You actually think you're making good arguments. You don't have any arguments, just your suspicion. Thats. It. :lol:

I never said he couldn't be doping, just that if i had to guess/bet, i wouldn't think so based on arguments given.
I never said he isn't doping because his trainer doesn't come from cycling. No idea where you got that from.
I never said he isn't doping because he is training twice a day. It merely is a part of a possible explanation.

He's the oldest of the contenders from his birthyear which can make quite a difference at that age.
He's been a standout athlete in terms of stamina ever since he started playing football long before he started cycling.
He's small & light.
He trains more than other juniors and has a personal pro trainer.

These are all FACTS. Does it mean he can't be doping? Nope. Could it explain his dominance? Yup. If you are willing to acknowledge that he simply is very talented as well.

I also believe (but this is entirely subjective) that you would have to be a complete idiot to win high profile races with 10 minutes advance if you're doping. I also fail to see the appeal in doping during your junior ranks. What do these guys earn by winning? I doubt it's very much and that there is little incentive there. To get a nice contract at a pro team? If you trick a team into signing you based on cheating, i'm guessing you're liable and the team could sue you.

is Jamie Burrows not allegedly the exemplar in these cases...he dominated U23s and then struggled as a pro as he had in effect aldready popped his cork.....pro teams need you to have somewhere to go......if he as mired in doping as some on here think then he knows that, his trainer knows that, his dad knows that and all the teams that want to sign him know that......

So Froome was doing it right all along? ;)

Jokes aside, this was accepted practice in the spanish ranks of the late 90s, early 2000s.

The guys with the best results weren't picked up by the best pro teams, they would turn pro with small teams and never amount to anything. This is because the pro teams knew what each was on and knew the results weren't all about talent. What did amateur "stars" like Jose Manuel Vasquez and Francisco Gutierrez achieve as pros? Bupkiss.

Meanwhile the ONCE, Banesto and Kelme (yes, really!) amateur squads were known for being on much lower levels and having no trouble even accepting if a rider didn't want to take anything at all.

This is why Contador, Plaza and Valverde were seen as incredible talents. They won quite a lot despite being on those teams. Saiz was rumoured to be particularly keen on his amateurs riding clean.

However, occasionally a non spanish team that wasn't aware of this would swoop in, sign one of the guys with top results and regret it. I can think of an australian biathlete converted to cyclist who was the butt of jokes in the spanish amateur ranks precisely because he was on "high octane" fuel that no other amateur could afford, paid for by his winnings from biathlon. Festina signed him. He sucked as a pro. Because he had nowhere to "step up" to.

edit: triathlon, not biathlon, what was I thinking
 
GuyIncognito said:
However, occasionally a non spanish team that wasn't aware of this would swoop in, sign one of the guys with top results and regret it. I can think of an australian biathlete converted to cyclist who was the butt of jokes in the spanish amateur ranks precisely because he was on "high octane" fuel that no other amateur could afford, paid for by his winnings from biathlon. Festina signed him. He sucked as a pro. Because he had nowhere to "step up" to.

edit: triathlon, not biathlon, what was I thinking
Because the rider in question did a lot of duathlon, which is a two-sport variation on the theme of triathlon (cycling + running; quite popular with cyclists who were ex-triathletes or duathletes pre-cycling career. Emma Pooley is a notable example) before specialising solely in cycling. Because of conflation with triathlon, it sometimes erroneously gets called biathlon, but as far as I know there's only one ex-biathlete in the pro ranks (at least that got to the international competition level in ski-shooting) and that's Benjamí Prades, who rides in Japan and is the older brother of Edu Prades who just signed for Movistar.
 

TRENDING THREADS