Stybar- CX World Champion

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Benotti69 said:
Is it not a UCI run sport?

Not to go off topic, but maybe Compton needs her own thread. The woman, and I use that term very loosely and likely figuratively, has all the obvious signs of steroid use.

Much easier for woman to dope, particularly testosterone use since so little is already in their system. When it clears, the effects are very prominent and lasting. And seeing how we have no clue and real information regarding testing of woman, or cross for that matter OOC even...yeah, ridiculous.
 
happychappy said:
Means absolutely nothing in a scientific sense, powermeters are a useful training tool, nothing more. "Genetically gifted" individuals will evidence themselves in results.
You're just another bitter wannabe who's trying to convince a forum full of people you "COULDA MADE IT" if it wasn't for the evil doperz.

Get over yourself.
I didn't have ambition to be paid or sports, but do feel cheated, because I have been, as have many others who trained much harder or it. There's bound to have been riders with less talent who beat me thanks to doping. When I was actively racing, I didn't expect the advantage to be had as great as I now know it to be. Who would dope or a measly 10W power increase and then consider it worth the risk and karma?
I took part in pro racing to fight it out with those arrogant punks. Pure willpower sometimes got me beating some, but when they wanted to win, in a blink of an eye they'd be gone.
Since it was not my dream to be a famous pro, I've not been stolen such. Heck, if I were less lazy in training (and nutrition research) I may well have earned myself some doping allegations of my own. But prizes in the big league against those nuclear guys? No chance. I think staying consistently on the same lap was about as far as I would make it, in part due to my clumsy build (6'4", not skinny, all legs). I'm like Lars boom but longer legs and more kgs.
In WC MTB the downhills would have caught me ought, certainly as 29" wheels were allowed too late for me, that took away so much of my technical disadvantage, while offering others a smaller extra advantage. With 29" I found myself competing technically, consistently. Just in a straight line, I didn't have the power to shove around all that air.

Bitter? No.
Angry and insulted? Yes.
Because I was not the only one losing out due to dope. I've seen really talented riders, who did train hard, overdo it in an attempt to compensate.
And yeah, dopers did steal my prize money and starting rights. It's not about the fame to me, but fair recognition would have been OK. I am lucky to have been lazy, else I'd be really, really bitter right now. And rightfully so.
 
Cloxxki said:
Spoiler!!!! I hadn't watched the recording yet...

In my time I rubbed elbows with these guys, at the start and when lapped. Nys, Vervecken, etc.
Made it to Gazette van Antwerpen and Superprestige races.

I used to think I was just 4 categories slower than them. Until I learned about the effect doping can offer (from reading, obviously).
It's absolutely outrageous the kind of power they output, with as short as recovery they get. I can hold my own on a bike, 506W VO2max even before I hit my prime, and that was in my off-season, later known as cross season. I would have needed about 650W to stand a chance in global cross. Just insane.

One time I managed to go into another lap before leader Nys came by. I took 2 turns at his speed (40kph rather than my 30-35kph), and then after a little bottleneck he was already long out of sight. Like a disappearance trick.
I would win a local race on the Saturday, and on Sunday hold on to Nys' wheel for about 1 minute, sometimes slightly longer. And those would by far be the fastest seconds on a bike.
I will not discount their technical ability. Doing it yourself is so much different than following at a safe 5m. But hard core drugging for sure is part of that game.
Very interesting perspective cloxxki..thanx for posting this. Yes I have always found the x guys fairly unbelievable what they do at the level of power they seem to have.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
zigmeister said:
Not to go off topic, but maybe Compton needs her own thread. The woman, and I use that term very loosely and likely figuratively, has all the obvious signs of steroid use.
Nonsense. Absolute nonsense
 
Cloxxki said:
I didn't have ambition to be paid or sports, but do feel cheated, because I have been, as have many others who trained much harder or it. There's bound to have been riders with less talent who beat me thanks to doping. When I was actively racing, I didn't expect the advantage to be had as great as I now know it to be. Who would dope or a measly 10W power increase and then consider it worth the risk and karma?
I took part in pro racing to fight it out with those arrogant punks. Pure willpower sometimes got me beating some, but when they wanted to win, in a blink of an eye they'd be gone.
Since it was not my dream to be a famous pro, I've not been stolen such. Heck, if I were less lazy in training (and nutrition research) I may well have earned myself some doping allegations of my own. But prizes in the big league against those nuclear guys? No chance. I think staying consistently on the same lap was about as far as I would make it, in part due to my clumsy build (6'4", not skinny, all legs). I'm like Lars boom but longer legs and more kgs.
In WC MTB the downhills would have caught me ought, certainly as 29" wheels were allowed too late for me, that took away so much of my technical disadvantage, while offering others a smaller extra advantage. With 29" I found myself competing technically, consistently. Just in a straight line, I didn't have the power to shove around all that air.

Bitter? No.
Angry and insulted? Yes.
Because I was not the only one losing out due to dope. I've seen really talented riders, who did train hard, overdo it in an attempt to compensate.
And yeah, dopers did steal my prize money and starting rights. It's not about the fame to me, but fair recognition would have been OK. I am lucky to have been lazy, else I'd be really, really bitter right now. And rightfully so.
Despite what hanging around the clinic might have you believing, dopers did not keep you out of the pro ranks.

If you were "4 categories slower" than the leaders, dopers may well have outclassed you, but so did a hell of a lot of clean riders.

Talent comes through, regardless.
 
Jan 20, 2013
897
0
0
Cloxxki said:
I took part in pro racing to fight it out with those arrogant punks. Pure willpower sometimes got me beating some, but when they wanted to win, in a blink of an eye they'd be gone.
Since it was not my dream to be a famous pro, I've not been stolen such. Heck, if I were less lazy in training (and nutrition research) I may well have earned myself some doping allegations of my own. But prizes in the big league against those nuclear guys? No chance.
Bitter? No.
Angry and insulted? Yes.
Because I was not the only one losing out due to dope.
How discombobulating it is in the land of Martyrdom.
 
Lanark said:
Yeah, we know nobody would ever dope for a u23 CX world championship. Just ask those polish dudes.
You missed my point. The guys I mentioned immediately mixed it up with the big boys in their first race when they were 18/19 years old. Those polish dudes? Not so much ;) so either Cloxxki is talking bs or those two kids are on a big doping program. I would go with the former.

Although I'm not claiming that I know they are completely clean of course. Just that they are very talented.
 
Sep 2, 2012
36
0
0
Flamin said:
:rolleyes::rolleyes:

And Nys makes much more money than Boom ;)

Btw, your story is touching. Guys like Van Aert and Van der Poel must be hardcore dopers at age 18/19 as well then.
Nys makes more but Boom may keep more.

Van Aert is trained by his partner's father ex cyclist Roger de Bie. A famous surname in cyclo-x but I'm not sure of any direct link to Danny or Rudy. Roger was active in 80s 90s.
Van der Poel rings a bell too......the letters P D & M spring to mind.

Hardcore dopers? naaa can't be, cycling is clean now.

Didn't Papa VDP race twelve months a year? Track, cross, classics and tours?
Doubt that has any influence on either of his sons.
 
pancakes said:
Nys makes more but Boom may keep more.

Van Aert is trained by his partner's father ex cyclist Roger de Bie. A famous surname in cyclo-x but I'm not sure of any direct link to Danny or Rudy. Roger was active in 80s 90s.
Van der Poel rings a bell too......the letters P D & M spring to mind.

Hardcore dopers? naaa can't be, cycling is clean now.

Didn't Papa VDP race twelve months a year? Track, cross, classics and tours?
Doubt that has any influence on either of his sons.
Read my previous post...
 
andy1234 said:
Despite what hanging around the clinic might have you believing, dopers did not keep you out of the pro ranks.

If you were "4 categories slower" than the leaders, dopers may well have outclassed you, but so did a hell of a lot of clean riders.

Talent comes through, regardless.
Perhaps not me, but with most of the post high on dope, and those right behind it mostly clean (best way I can describe the huge performance GAP I experienced), not all pro's would have stuck there. And more amateurs would have made the big league.
Or the other way around, if I'd gone full genius 90's doper, boosting my blood levels the way we've seen of the great champions, I have little doubt in my mind my body would have just gotten me there. As pack fill, surely. But there.
But I prefer to focus on the abnormal performances at the pointy end rather than what I culd have done had I bitten the forbidden apple. Because I don't want it.
If a so-so GC talent like Armstrong can be a 7-time consecutive TdF winner, can you be sure the most talented always make it?
 
andy1234 said:
Despite what hanging around the clinic might have you believing, dopers did not keep you out of the pro ranks.

If you were "4 categories slower" than the leaders, dopers may well have outclassed you, but so did a hell of a lot of clean riders.

Talent comes through, regardless.
This kind of reduction just enables the doping.

Is the fact Armstrong appears to have been a super-responder to EPO "talent?" How about riders that did not see super-benefits from oxygen vector doping? Are they "talentless?"

How about Edwig van Hooydonck? Talentless?

What about the riders that died from EPO-induced heart attacks? Clearly talentless because they didn't podium elite races. Right?
 
Cloxxki said:
Perhaps not me, but with most of the post high on dope, and those right behind it mostly clean (best way I can describe the huge performance GAP I experienced), not all pro's would have stuck there. And more amateurs would have made the big league.
Or the other way around, if I'd gone full genius 90's doper, boosting my blood levels the way we've seen of the great champions, I have little doubt in my mind my body would have just gotten me there. As pack fill, surely. But there.
But I prefer to focus on the abnormal performances at the pointy end rather than what I culd have done had I bitten the forbidden apple. Because I don't want it.
If a so-so GC talent like Armstrong can be a 7-time consecutive TdF winner, can you be sure the most talented always make it?
Categorically, if a clean rider puts the required work in, and still can't get anywhere near the pointy end of national standard race, they do not have the ability to ride as a professional. The performance between doped up talent, and clean talent is undeniable, but it's not in a different league.

An elite level rider, will typically perform at the upper end of an amateur field, regardless.
 
DirtyWorks said:
This kind of reduction just enables the doping.

Is the fact Armstrong appears to have been a super-responder to EPO "talent?" How about riders that did not see super-benefits from oxygen vector doping? Are they "talentless?"

How about Edwig van Hooydonck? Talentless?

What about the riders that died from EPO-induced heart attacks? Clearly talentless because they didn't podium elite races. Right?
You are talking about riders who have already reached the pro ranks.
They have proven an inherent ability, just by getting there.

Van Hooydonk was never "4 categories" below the standard of the leaders as an amateur, so it kind of proves my point. By definition, his talent came through.

Doping may stop the talented from reaching their potential, but it doesn't stop them knocking on the door, at an amateur level.

I'm not sure why you are rambling about EPO induced heart attacks and the like.
Clearly you didn't read the OPs post that I was replying to.
 
Sep 2, 2012
36
0
0
andy1234 said:
You are talking about riders who have already reached the pro ranks.
They have proven an inherent ability, just by getting there.

Van Hooydonk was never "4 categories" below the standard of the leaders as an amateur, so it kind of proves my point. By definition, his talent came through.

Doping may stop the talented from reaching their potential, but it doesn't stop them knocking on the door, at an amateur level.

I'm not sure why you are rambling about EPO induced heart attacks and the like.
Clearly you didn't read the OPs post that I was replying to.
No.
Van Hooydonk retired 'early' for exactly the reason that you say he would have been immune to because of his talent.

His was probably the last era that the saying "you can't make a race horse from a donkey" with regards to doping rang true. Suddenly he found his best condition was barely enough to stay in the wheels.

In an interview last year he said he would be too fearful for his (and his family's) safety when asked about telling all he knew. Crazy.

'Knocking on the door' or 'being in at the sharp end' in Euro Elite amateur racing counts for nothing. Only winning counts.

The days of starting to dope when you made it to the pro's finished decades ago.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Good post. Delicious user name.

They were blood doping at the US olympics (where people often were amateur before heading to the pros). Plenty of stories of juniors being injected in the 90s. Not difficult to expect similar things are happening at a similar age now.
 
pancakes said:
No.
Van Hooydonk retired 'early' for exactly the reason that you say he would have been immune to because of his talent.

His was probably the last era that the saying "you can't make a race horse from a donkey" with regards to doping rang true. Suddenly he found his best condition was barely enough to stay in the wheels.

In an interview last year he said he would be too fearful for his (and his family's) safety when asked about telling all he knew. Crazy.

'Knocking on the door' or 'being in at the sharp end' in Euro Elite amateur racing counts for nothing. Only winning counts.

The days of starting to dope when you made it to the pro's finished decades ago.
Good post.

In a clean world there will still always be marginal riders who only just make it or don't. If riders further down the pecking order than them start to use PEDs then they may surpass the marginal riders who will then be squeezed out to remain in amateurland. If you're one of the best pros in clean land then it's unlikely you will become marginal by a few dopers here and there, or even everyone doping if you're good enough.
 
pancakes said:
No.
Van Hooydonk retired 'early' for exactly the reason that you say he would have been immune to because of his talent.

His was probably the last era that the saying "you can't make a race horse from a donkey" with regards to doping rang true. Suddenly he found his best condition was barely enough to stay in the wheels.

In an interview last year he said he would be too fearful for his (and his family's) safety when asked about telling all he knew. Crazy.

'Knocking on the door' or 'being in at the sharp end' in Euro Elite amateur racing counts for nothing. Only winning counts.

The days of starting to dope when you made it to the pro's finished decades ago.
Go back and read the conversation between myself and the OP.
It's nothing to do with talent overcoming doping as a professional.

It's to do with the gap between clean, elite level amateurs, and the riders he was discussing. Being lapped, and riding at 4 levels below the leaders, is not where a clean rider, with the attributes to become a professional, would be placed.

The difference is simply not that great.
While doping may deny a talented amateur a place in a pro team, it doesn't demote them to the level of road furniture for the leaders.
That is the only point I was making.

A move up into the pro ranks would require a step up again, performance wise, and that same talent certainly wouldn't guarantee any success at that level.
 
pancakes said:
No.
Van Hooydonk retired 'early' for exactly the reason that you say he would have been immune to because of his talent.

His was probably the last era that the saying "you can't make a race horse from a donkey" with regards to doping rang true. Suddenly he found his best condition was barely enough to stay in the wheels.
Just before he retired, Van Hooydonck was still 2nd at the Flèche brabançonne. But he raced for the win and that was no longer possible.

So Andy is right.

Jordbaer said:
But Stybar coming from the road and completely overpowering everyone means that the training/doping is different. What are the differences?
I have to repeat like a parrot.

His coming from the road was not an obstacle but it was in his favour !!

He raced 6 crosses before, while the others could race up to 40 crosses.


In 1986, Pascal Richard became World Champion doing a Stybar, right. Some 10 crosses to get trained and bingo.

Roland Liboton hated those roadies who came to cyclocross "to annoy us. We were tired and they were fresh." He thinks that there must be a minimum amount of crosses to race before the Worlds.

Adrie van der Poel and Eric Vanderaerden also did that, acording to Liboton (the latter did it at the Belgium Nats).


All this to point out that Stybar's performance s not the most impressive one. Nys' is more mpressive.

Cloxxki said:
Because I was not the only one losing out due to dope. I've seen really talented riders, who did train hard, overdo it in an attempt to compensate.

And yeah, dopers did steal my prize money and starting rights. It's not about the fame to me, but fair recognition would have been OK. I am lucky to have been lazy, else I'd be really, really bitter right now. And rightfully so.
Interesting to read your story. It seems that Arnaud Jouffroy came to the same conclusionas you, though he does not dare to say it explicitly

http://www.directvelo.com/actualite/30061-la-grande-interview-arnaud-jouffroy-partie-1.html#.UmKhfBBvknB
http://www.directvelo.com/actualite/30067-jouffroy-on-ne-ma-jamais-donne-ma-chance-partie-2.html#.UmKikhBvknB

http://www.velo101.com/cyclo-cross/article/interview-darnaud-jouffroy--8711

I translated his interview on the Cyclocross section of this forum.

DV: After 4 years in a French team and on the Belgian cyclocross circuit, how can you compare it to the French standard?
AJ: The Belgian standard is crazy ! I had to sacrifice a lot there in order to compete with the best. It was morally hard to see that I wasn't able to get results despite the huge workload I imposed on myself in training. I really doubted. As U23 1 I won almost every Sunday and now nothing anymore !

DV: Why have you "tightened the motor", as we say?
AJ: I mostly think I had trouble to handle the number of races. In France I raced 20 cross a season. With Telenet-Fidea I had to race twice as many. Taking cartridges for 40 races is hard to digest. I manage to do well on about one cross a month. It's true I see guys performing on every race every 2 or 3 day. I don't know how they do it, it's impressive. Being as consistent as the Belgians is impossible. They have something more.

DV: Have you moved to Belgium in order to get closer to their level of performance?
AJ: Exactly but I was fooled. I quickly realized that the best Belgians were not even training in their country at all. They are all going to the sun: Southern France or Spain for training and get back to Belgium only to race. I was feeling really stupid then... Anyway I never managed to become acclimatized to life conditions there. I never felt at home. That is why I decided to get back to the South. I've now settled around Montpellier, since early September and I am already feeling a lot better than when I was living in Belgium.

DV:Your Belgian experience is coming to an end. What will you remember of it?
AJ: It's another planet in cross, a very high standard with a very rich calendar. With that experience I know what I am able to do. I don't feel I've wasted time, quite on the contrary. It wasn't easy at the beginning. The Flemings are not easily opening themselves to others but I made my place.
 
Sep 2, 2012
36
0
0
andy1234 said:
Go back and read the conversation between myself and the OP.
It's nothing to do with talent overcoming doping as a professional.

It's to do with the gap between clean, elite level amateurs, and the riders he was discussing. Being lapped, and riding at 4 levels below the leaders, is not where a clean rider, with the attributes to become a professional, would be placed.

The difference is simply not that great.
While doping may deny a talented amateur a place in a pro team, it doesn't demote them to the level of road furniture for the leaders.
That is the only point I was making.

A move up into the pro ranks would require a step up again, performance wise, and that same talent certainly wouldn't guarantee any success at that level.
Hi Andy, I've read your conversation with Cloxxki and I do see your train of thought.
Your 'Talent comes through regardless' is a something I would politely disagree with. Yes if nobody doped at all then those physically and tactically more able (more talented I suppose) would absolutely rise to the top, I agree.
But that is not how cycling works, sadly.

Cloxxki was talking about GVA and Superprestige cross races which would have had a mix of Elite MC (pro) and Elite ZC (am) riders. Because of my own personal experiences living and racing in Europe I would be totally amazed if those particular races had 100% clean fields (excuse the cross pun).

Your theory of being able to challenge as a clean talent rich amateur works to a point.
If a couple of riders are doping then it would of course be realistic to make the podium.
If seven or eight riders are doping then you could realistically hope/aim to make the top ten.
What happens if 30+ riders are doping? Suddenly you are fighting to scrape a top twenty or thirty. Your 28th place in the newspaper the next day won't include a (c) for clean after your name. Everyone will look and think 'Pffff only 28th, rubbish!'

National Level races may not be as clean as you think.

It's great that Cloxxki wrote about his experiences and I applaud his honesty!
I know how it feels.

I haven't joined in here to pick fights or start slanging matches but it's somewhere I can share what I know and experienced.
So please don't think I am attacking you when I ask did you race and where and what sort of era?
 
Sep 2, 2012
36
0
0
Echoes said:
Just before he retired, Van Hooydonck was still 2nd at the Flèche brabançonne. But he raced for the win and that was no longer possible.

So Andy is right.



I have to repeat like a parrot.

His coming from the road was not an obstacle but it was in his favour !!

He raced 6 crosses before, while the others could race up to 40 crosses.


In 1986, Pascal Richard became World Champion doing a Stybar, right. Some 10 crosses to get trained and bingo.

Roland Liboton hated those roadies who came to cyclocross "to annoy us. We were tired and they were fresh." He thinks that there must be a minimum amount of crosses to race before the Worlds.

Adrie van der Poel and Eric Vanderaerden also did that, acording to Liboton (the latter did it at the Belgium Nats).


All this to point out that Stybar's performance s not the most impressive one. Nys' is more mpressive.



Interesting to read your story. It seems that Arnaud Jouffroy came to the same conclusionas you, though he does not dare to say it explicitly

http://www.directvelo.com/actualite/30061-la-grande-interview-arnaud-jouffroy-partie-1.html#.UmKhfBBvknB
http://www.directvelo.com/actualite/30067-jouffroy-on-ne-ma-jamais-donne-ma-chance-partie-2.html#.UmKikhBvknB

http://www.velo101.com/cyclo-cross/article/interview-darnaud-jouffroy--8711

I translated his interview on the Cyclocross section of this forum.

DV: After 4 years in a French team and on the Belgian cyclocross circuit, how can you compare it to the French standard?
AJ: The Belgian standard is crazy ! I had to sacrifice a lot there in order to compete with the best. It was morally hard to see that I wasn't able to get results despite the huge workload I imposed on myself in training. I really doubted. As U23 1 I won almost every Sunday and now nothing anymore !

DV: Why have you "tightened the motor", as we say?
AJ: I mostly think I had trouble to handle the number of races. In France I raced 20 cross a season. With Telenet-Fidea I had to race twice as many. Taking cartridges for 40 races is hard to digest. I manage to do well on about one cross a month. It's true I see guys performing on every race every 2 or 3 day. I don't know how they do it, it's impressive. Being as consistent as the Belgians is impossible. They have something more.

DV: Have you moved to Belgium in order to get closer to their level of performance?
AJ: Exactly but I was fooled. I quickly realized that the best Belgians were not even training in their country at all. They are all going to the sun: Southern France or Spain for training and get back to Belgium only to race. I was feeling really stupid then... Anyway I never managed to become acclimatized to life conditions there. I never felt at home. That is why I decided to get back to the South. I've now settled around Montpellier, since early September and I am already feeling a lot better than when I was living in Belgium.

DV:Your Belgian experience is coming to an end. What will you remember of it?
AJ: It's another planet in cross, a very high standard with a very rich calendar. With that experience I know what I am able to do. I don't feel I've wasted time, quite on the contrary. It wasn't easy at the beginning. The Flemings are not easily opening themselves to others but I made my place.
Hi Echoes, I based my EVH comments on things I have read and listened to attributed to EVH himself.
2de at Brabantse Pijl is of course not a poor result, far from it.
But I do remember him being quite adamant that things had suddenly changed and he couldn't explain why.

I'm not here for right or wrong stuff.

If you think Andy is right and that I am wrong cool.
Cheers.
 
Why do you take it so personally, Pancakes?

I don't take it a stance in the whole debate, I haven't really followed the discussion but Edwig was a hero of mine and when I read about him, I feel like I have to reply. I know much about his story.

I think you misunderstood the fact I was referring to the extent to which he was relegated behind dopers. I've studied his results carefully in his later years and concluded that despite the context in which he was riding, he's never been reduced to a 4th-tier rider. That's very much over the top. (while in 1996, the UCI hadn't yet installed their blood test, and EPO was not detectable yet). His talent enabled him to still make performances that many untalented dopers could ever dream of. But I was racing for the win, and that was no longer possible.

All that doesn't change the fact that "things had suddenly changed and he couldn't explain why", as you said.

Edit: I should be noted that Edwig was simply the best Belgian rider of his generation. No less...
 
Sep 2, 2012
36
0
0
Echoes said:
Why do you take it so personally, Pancakes?

I don't take it a stance in the whole debate, I haven't really followed the discussion but Edwig was a hero of mine and when I read about him, I feel like I have to reply. I know much about his story.

I think you misunderstood the fact I was referring to the extent to which he was relegated behind dopers. I've studied his results carefully in his later years and concluded that despite the context in which he was riding, he's never been reduced to a 4th-tier rider. That's very much over the top. (while in 1996, the UCI hadn't yet installed their blood test, and EPO was not detectable yet). His talent enabled him to still make performances that many untalented dopers could ever dream of. But I was racing for the win, and that was no longer possible.

All that doesn't change the fact that "things had suddenly changed and he couldn't explain why", as you said.

Edit: I should be noted that Edwig was simply the best Belgian rider of his generation. No less...
Sorry my post did look a bit grumpy!
Of course 'Eddy Bosberg' was a huge talent and as you say probably the best of his generation. Probably unfair to say he struggled in the wheels but I'm sure he said that himself.
Not topic I know, but there was an amazing interview with him last year on BRT/Sporza (I think). He was kind of hinting that it would be too dangerous for him and his family if he were to tell all he knew!!!!
Doesn't a son of his race by the juniors now? It will be very interesting to see how far his dad will let him progress.
 
I haven't seen that interview but read comments about it in the book "Wuyts & Smeets". Wuyts quoting him saying it could be dangerous because his son is racing and could compete against Museeuw's son. Smeets added that Maassen - who followed Edwig's steps - also refused to discuss doping in public. "That's not for the people."

Dante raced his second year as junior last year. He's good but not as good as his cousin, Nathan (Gino's son), I think.

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/article/detail.aspx?articleid=BLNVE_20110628_005

Crazy how they both look like their fathers !
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
the delgados The Clinic 19

ASK THE COMMUNITY