Teams & Riders The "MVP" Mathieu Van der Poel Road Discussion Thread

Page 81 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I am not Dutch but we have a number of very close Dutch friends, and I appreciate their general good natured saltiness about life, but they don't speak Dutch to us, so maybe there's an unpleasant quirk to their nature of which I'm not aware.

I don't see how you could link AVVs and MvdP's mistakes, frankly. We all make mistakes, especially at the worst times...
 
So, what's next in his programme (assuming the crash didn't cause major injuries)? Any chance of trying the 3-peak and go to Val di Sole and Flanders in an attempt to hold 3 world championships at the same time? Or the focus will go solely to Flanders WCh and Roubaix?
It's going to be a return to the road, unfortunately, isn't it? The MTB Worlds at Val di Sole is a course he's won on, and the addition of the XCC race which suits him. I reckon that's it on the MTB for this season which is pretty disappointing.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
“Mathieu said: ‘Gosh everyone jumps there.’ I asked: ‘Won't you, then?’ He said, ‘No, I'll roll off that plank,’ Then I said that they had removed that board at the test event in 2019 for the competition.”

Changed my mind after I read this exact quote. This can indeed be easily misunderstood as "they did it then" without saying that it will be as well for the real competition. Then I don't understand, was there no formal information for the riders about the course? Was it just talk from one to the other?
I am not familiar with mountainbike, does that happen often, that there are planks that are removed later?
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
“Mathieu said: ‘Gosh everyone jumps there.’ I asked: ‘Won't you, then?’ He said, ‘No, I'll roll off that plank,’ Then I said that they had removed that board at the test event in 2019 for the competition.”

Changed my mind after I read this exact quote. This can indeed be easily misunderstood as "they did it then" without saying that it will be as well for the real competition. Then I don't understand, was there no formal information for the riders about the course? Was it just talk from one to the other?
I am not familiar with mountainbike, does that happen often, that there are planks that are removed later?
Yes. Installed for practice so riders who don’t read the course correctly have a safety backup, but going over without ramp is part of the degree of difficulty for competition.
 
Reactions: BlueRoads
Tbh I could blame the organisers because I just think there shold be no doubt about what is and isn't there during the race and the information should be crystal cut clear available to the riders.

That said, that doesn't absolve VdP from any blame. With all the information available the standard assumption should've been that it wouldn't be there and he should have simply acted accordingly.
 
More then a blame such things are a real shame. IMHO cycling deserves a bit more methodical approach. Where safety related incidents are constantly analysed and solutions preventing them are constantly implemented.

In the end we get most out of cycling if the best cyclists get to compete till the finish line. All other options are subpar compared to that.
 
Reactions: Fuente De
I assume it's the common practice to "secure" challenging parts of the course during the reconnaissance rides, meaning the riders are aware of the difference in relation to the racing situation.
Insights from someone who actually raced competitively would be useful.
 
Reactions: Ripper
I disagree. As someone said earlier in the thread, leaving the ramp could have been a safety problem if some riders jump over it and some don't.

In recon, if people are aware that it's fine, if some riders aren't going all out anyway.
Of course, but then the organisation had to leave the ramp before the exploration of the trail. So, everybody had to jump during training and reconn. Then there would have been no problem and no confusion
 
I assume it's the common practice to "secure" challenging parts of the course during the reconnaissance rides, meaning the riders are aware of the difference in relation to the racing situation.
Insights from someone who actually raced competitively would be useful.
What is the point of securing challenging parts of the course during reconnaissance, when riders even ride with no high speed. To be confronted during the race with a way more difficult and of course "not secured" technical passage or riscfull jump.
 
What is the point of securing challenging parts of the course during reconnaissance, when riders even ride with no high speed. To be confronted during the race with a way more difficult and of course "not secured" technical passage or riscfull jump.
The ramp is a safety during training, so riders can get familiar with a jump without having to go all in on early tries.
 
What is the point of securing challenging parts of the course during reconnaissance, when riders even ride with no high speed. To be confronted during the race with a way more difficult and of course "not secured" technical passage or riscfull jump.
Someone already mentioned and described possible risks few pages back.
Securing the course doesn't mean preventing the riders from exploiting it in its fullness. Just offering an option more for safety reasons.
 
The ramp is a safety during training, so riders can get familiar with a jump without having to go all in on early tries.
Then why not on other jumps or technical passages ? With next to every difficult passage, an easy passage. And next to each difficult climb, a stretch with an elevator. For reconn purposes. This "ramp" situation before and "no ramp" during the race is to stupid for words.
 
Then why not on other jumps or technical passages ? With next to every difficult passage, an easy passage. And next to each difficult climb, a stretch with an elevator. For reconn purposes. This "ramp" situation before and "no ramp" during the race is to stupid for words.
It's already been explained to you several times. However if you want a more general discussion of how XC courses are set up, I'd suggest making a thread in the mountain bike section of the forum since you're more likely to get what you consider to be productive answers. Lest we forget, this is the MvdP road thread in the road racing section.
 
Then why not on other jumps or technical passages ? With next to every difficult passage, an easy passage. And next to each difficult climb, a stretch with an elevator. For reconn purposes. This "ramp" situation before and "no ramp" during the race is to stupid for words.
Usually there is a "B line" in place in the most technical parts, which is considerably slower, for someone who has a mechanical for example.

This drop had a B line, to the left of the rock, which can't be completly seen in the live pictures, but if you watch the course preview video by Sergio Mantecón at the Test Event, it can be seen taped.
 
I am guessing (never riding off road myself) that a jump such as this probably is more dangerous done slowly than at speed (within limits, of course). Therefore I would guess that on recce runs, unless there is a very emphatic, and very visible "Increase speed now" sign before such a jump, the ramp is essential. And given that it is a safety precaution necessary only because of the slower speeds of a trial ride, it should be assumed that it will be absent in the race? Is that fair? Are these ramps routinely left below jumps in elite competition?
 
Last edited:
What is the point of securing challenging parts of the course during reconnaissance, when riders even ride with no high speed. To be confronted during the race with a way more difficult and of course "not secured" technical passage or riscfull jump.
The purpose of the ramp is exactly what you are asking yourself: without the ramp, that drop is dangerous at low speed.
At race speed, they don’t need the ramp and nobody will ever touch it. And to have a technical enough course, they expect the riders to go down without that ramp.

That is, unless someone (like MvdP) comes up with an alternative way to tackle that drop at speed, using the ramp to coast down the hill, rather than chose a (hard landing) jump.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
I guess the general position on this i.e. that MVDP is to blame is made possible only thanks to the fact that he was not seriously hurt. Just imagine another scenario, which was not entirely impossible, that he would get badly hurt. I think a lot more people would have then pointed out how risky this practice of changing the parcours was and demanded some additional precautions such as installing big banner next to the ramp saying "will be removed for the race" or some special colour coding of objects that are to be removed. Because in essence, that practice is inherently risky and inevitably bound to cause crashes like this one...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY