Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread

[Zoef-Lightning]

or, the most likely scenario is he suffered a borderline heat stroke due to the helmet choice and took a couple of days to recover

Sometimes, the obvious answer is the right answer. NO need to go into mindless speculation

He seems to have learned his lesson

But many competition days and too little rest in between is an objective fact. In addition, he is only 22 years old. So, not just my opinion, but a fact. Any rider would have ridden a lesser Tour of Switzerland in those circumstances. My point is that he and his team don't learn from mistakes. After Switzerland, Evenepoel is again only taking a week off. I already know what the consequences will be for the second half of the Vuelta and the Worlds.

 

[Zoef-Lightning]

7 extra kg make more of an impact for a lighter rider than it does for a heavier rider. If a 100kg dude climbs as fast as his 10 year old son under normal circumstances, who will climb faster with a 12kg backpack? For the 100kg dude this is only a 12% weight gain, so for the huge watts he already has to push, the difference will be minimal. But the 10 year old kid who weighs 25kg himself, now has to drag an extra 50% of weight with the limited watts he needed to push his 25kg uphill.


Your muscles don't know whether they are doing a flat TT or a climb at a certain pace at certain watts. If he would climb the way he TT's, his muscle fibers would be none the wiser. But please don't tell them.

I think him focussing on gaining muscle in order to be more explosive/punchy is a mistake. He will never be as punchy as Roglic or Pogacar, so why does it matter if he loses 5 seconds at the finish or 2 seconds? Especially with the risk of him putting less focus (as evident this year) on longer climbs. Chances are by doing so, he won't even make it to the finish with those guys in order to sprint to begin with. He was a superb endurance athlete and now they are trying to turn him into a puncheur.

I agree.

 

[postmanhat]

But many competition days and too little rest in between is an objective fact. In addition, he is only 22 years old. So, not just my opinion, but a fact. Any rider would have ridden a lesser Tour of Switzerland in those circumstances. My point is that he and his team don't learn from mistakes. After Switzerland, Evenepoel is again only taking a week off. I already know what the consequences will be for the second half of the Vuelta and the Worlds.

All he has on his schedule now are the Nationals, possibly the Euros(?), and San Sebastian. Five days of racing at most before the Vuelta starts in two months. Doesn't seem too strenuous?

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

All he has on his schedule now are the Nationals, possibly the Euros(?), and San Sebastian. Five days of racing at most before the Vuelta starts in two months. Doesn't seem too strenuous?

Nationals and San Sebastian. No Euro, no Burgos.
That's what he said in an interview yesterday.

 

[Eddy Evenepoel]

But many competition days and too little rest in between is an objective fact. In addition, he is only 22 years old. So, not just my opinion, but a fact. Any rider would have ridden a lesser Tour of Switzerland in those circumstances. My point is that he and his team don't learn from mistakes. After Switzerland, Evenepoel is again only taking a week off. I already know what the consequences will be for the second half of the Vuelta and the Worlds.

Unless you have access to the detailed training plan it's kind of meaningless to discuss around "only taking a week off", because "a week off" can mean countless of different things.

A week is a long time for professional athletes today. If it's a week completely off the bike it could even be a too long period. If it's a week with quite a bit of training but it's all just at low intensity it might be too short period.

In the end, as long as the information we have is vague like "a week off" it's impossible for us to have useful discussions around it.

 

[Extinction]

7 extra kg make more of an impact for a lighter rider than it does for a heavier rider. If a 100kg dude climbs as fast as his 10 year old son under normal circumstances, who will climb faster with a 12kg backpack? For the 100kg dude this is only a 12% weight gain, so for the huge watts he already has to push, the difference will be minimal. But the 10 year old kid who weighs 25kg himself, now has to drag an extra 50% of weight with the limited watts he needed to push his 25kg uphill.

I get it, however, what about 2 adults? In any case, there is further the non quantifiable element and it is called drive (that is, ability to suffer and pain threashold). And being lighter or heavier doesn't matter, just being a bad a** mother fu **er!

 

[Extinction]

Unless you have access to the detailed training plan it's kind of meaningless to discuss around "only taking a week off", because "a week off" can mean countless of different things.

A week is a long time for professional athletes today. If it's a week completely off the bike it could even be a too long period. If it's a week with quite a bit of training but it's all just at low intensity it might be too short period.

In the end, as long as the information we have is vague like "a week off" it's impossible for us to have useful discussions around it.

But it's not rocket science, when you are tired just ease off until the umph returns. After the TdS a week of low intensity, short rides should fill his tank again and then he should be Flying for 3 weeks!

 

[wheresmybrakes]

I just thought he got a little bit more out of breath than the opposition going up the hill. Obviously more technical than I thought. Now I know why I go down hill faster and uphill slower than the skinnies, the extra 3 stone I'm carrying. No need for any extreme maths for me.

 

[Riek s]

Obviously the heavier rider needs more watts but I'm saying that from two riders generating the same w/kg the heavier will be faster (therefore pure w/kg is not the only thing that matters uphill). That's why super strong climbers are often around 65 kg instead of 55 kg. Bike mass changes things. A 65-kilo guy generating 390 w will be faster uphill than a 60-kilo guy generating 360 watts (both have 6 w/kg).

Completely logical, and yet something we easily overlook indeed. When we talk about W/kg we indeed don't take the weight of the bike into account, thus leading to incorrect numbers. And you are correct, while the bike weight is identical for everyone (6.7kg right?) it changes the weight relation for riders who don't weight the same.

Trying to convert it into a watt number:

So when remco did the 6.5w/kg in Norway on the mountain, it was really 5.88W/kg including the bike. (63kg + 6.7kg)

Which for a guy of 70kg (7kg heavier) it would require 6.44W/kg (5.88W * 76.7/70 to get the bike weight out of it).

The bigger guy has to push 24W less than the lighter guy to compensate for the weight of the bike (70kg vs 63kg). Interesting but also irrelevant since its unchangeable and the same for every other rider around that weight .

 

[Ripper]

I think if boyo struggles in his target races for the rest of the year, then a change needs to happen with his coaching team. He nailed LBL, but his stage racing capacities seem to have fallen off.

For me the alarm bells always go off when a rider says they need to put on muscle/gain weight. Other than very few exceptions, that pretty much is never the case.

 

[Eddy Evenepoel]

But it's not rocket science, when you are tired just ease off until the umph returns. After the TdS a week of low intensity, short rides should fill his tank again and then he should be Flying for 3 weeks!

It’s not rocket science, but to “ease off” can mean thousand different things and riders can react to it in many different ways. Sometimes a rider need 2 easy days when he is tired, other times he needs 20 easy days. It’s impossible for us in a meaningful way discuss it and claim that they are doing the right of wrong thing if we don’t know details.

 

[Extinction]

It’s not rocket science, but to “ease off” can mean thousand different things and riders can react to it in many different ways. Sometimes a rider need 2 easy days when he is tired, other times he needs 20 easy days. It’s impossible for us in a meaningful way discuss it and claim that they are doing the right of wrong thing if we don’t know details.

In fact, but from my experience when pedaling 30,000 km per year and racing, a few days just spinning and enjoying the view was all it took to recharge the bateries.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

I think if boyo struggles in his target races for the rest of the year, then a change needs to happen with his coaching team. He nailed LBL, but his stage racing capacities seem to have fallen off.

For me the alarm bells always go off when a rider says they need to put on muscle/gain weight. Other than very few exceptions, that pretty much is never the case.

Exactly.

The explanations for putting on more weight were: 1/ he became a man all of a sudden 2/ they attributed his failing in the Giro to being too skinny 3/ working on punch/short efforts made him gain muscle weight and helps with TT's.

Becoming more punchy serves the purpose in classics, but i doubt it will make up what he loses on longer efforts by focusing so much on it, for GC goals. Having a better uphill sprint is useless when you get dropped halfway.

Being 60kg for 1m71 is certainly not heavy but i think it's far from ''too skinny'' for his height, on top of ignoring the elephant in the room, his preparation towards the Giro being downright crap. I can't believe they are actually insinuating his weight was the issue there.

With modern GT's having barely 30k of ITT, him being heavier might help him gain 30 seconds at best that way. Now imagine how much he could lose in the mountains. He can push more watts at the same w/kg, supposedly. How about his energy management? Pushing more watts and dragging more weight into mountain stages over 3 weeks is bound to burn more energy. And let his issues so far this season be: ''not having the legs'' or ''feeling tired''. So could this be down to nutrition? Is he burning more energy by dragging more weight and pushing bigger watts, while still eating as much as he did when he weighed 60? Being able to climb well in Norway, but no longer in Suisse, to me could point to this very issue.

 

[Ripper]

Exactly.

The explanations for putting on more weight were: 1/ he became a man all of a sudden 2/ they attributed his failing in the Giro to being too skinny 3/ working on punch/short efforts made him gain muscle weight and helps with TT's.

Becoming more punchy serves the purpose in classics, but i doubt it will make up what he loses on longer efforts by focusing so much on it, for GC goals. Having a better uphill sprint is useless when you get dropped halfway.

Being 60kg for 1m71 is certainly not heavy but i think it's far from ''too skinny'' for his height, on top of ignoring the elephant in the room, his preparation towards the Giro being downright crap. I can't believe they are actually insinuating his weight was the issue there.

With modern GT's having barely 30k of ITT, him being heavier might help him gain 30 seconds at best that way. Now imagine how much he could lose in the mountains. He can push more watts at the same w/kg, supposedly. How about his energy management? Pushing more watts and dragging more weight into mountain stages over 3 weeks is bound to burn more energy. And let his issues so far this season be: ''not having the legs'' or ''feeling tired''. So could this be down to nutrition? Is he burning more energy by dragging more weight and pushing bigger watts, while still eating as much as he did when he weighed 60? Being able to climb well in Norway, but no longer in Suisse, to me could point to this very issue.

Regarding the bolded, the funny part is, it does not even make much sense from a scientific training methodology (which is why it always had me shaking my head). I've raced with folks who did some more strength work in their off-season, and I myself have done some heavy lifting to improve power/punch years ago; done properly, there was no added weight. It was either weight neutral or lost weight. So unless his goal is bodybuilding, I don't know what this whole need to gain weight silliness was. As for early 20's weight gain because he is simply growing, ummmm, OK Team Quickstep, but please pick a reason and quit changing stories.

I enjoy watching Evenepoel race, but I remain to be convinced that Quickstep know how to support stage racing glory

 

[Red Rick]

Regarding the bolded, the funny part is, it does not even make much sense from a scientific training methodology (which is why it always had me shaking my head). I've raced with folks who did some more strength work in their off-season, and I myself have done some heavy lifting to improve power/punch years ago; done properly, there was no added weight. It was either weight neutral or lost weight. So unless his goal is bodybuilding, I don't know what this whole need to gain weight silliness was. As for early 20's weight gain because he is simply growing, ummmm, OK Team Quickstep, but please pick a reason and quit changing stories.

I enjoy watching Evenepoel race, but I remain to be convinced that Quickstep know how to support stage racing glory

They had Mas, Dan Martin, Almeida, Bob Jungels, and Uran Hell they got Alaphilippe to top 5 in the Tour.

I feel like "team can't train GT riders" is an equally magical explanation for Evenepoel not performing up to expectations.

The only thing I can think of is they overestimated his talent and are now experimenting way too much because they can't deliver on what they promised.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

They had Mas, Dan Martin, Almeida, Bob Jungels, and Uran Hell they got Alaphilippe to top 5 in the Tour.

I feel like "team can't train GT riders" is an equally magical explanation for Evenepoel not performing up to expectations.

The only thing I can think of is they overestimated his talent and are now experimenting way too much because they can't deliver on what they promised.

We're not even remotely talking about winning a GT at this point. Not getting dropped by 2nd tier climbers in a WT mountainstage would be a huge step forward from what he's shown so far this season. Unless you're suggesting he's a less talented version of Jungels. There's simply too much evidence pointing to the opposite.

 

[Red Rick]

We're not even remotely talking about winning a GT at this point. Not getting dropped by 2nd tier climbers in a WT mountainstage would be a huge step forward from what he's shown so far this season. Unless you're suggesting he's a less talented version of Jungels. There's simply too much evidence pointing to the opposite.

He's not a less talented version of Jungels. He doesn't have many similar riders in fact. I also don't think he should be "can't top 10 GTs" levels of climbing.

But the gap between Unipuerto stages and repeated big climbs is really big right now.

 

[kingjr]

How many watts did Jesus need to generate to enable him to walk on water?

I don't know if it's relevant, but Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water.

 

[The fridge in the blue trees]

But many competition days and too little rest in between is an objective fact. In addition, he is only 22 years old. So, not just my opinion, but a fact. Any rider would have ridden a lesser Tour of Switzerland in those circumstances. My point is that he and his team don't learn from mistakes. After Switzerland, Evenepoel is again only taking a week off. I already know what the consequences will be for the second half of the Vuelta and the Worlds.

According to PCS 40 days, which isn't out of this world. 1 month no races after Liège. 2 weeks between Norway and the TdS.

 

[Mayomaniac]

Nationals and San Sebastian. No Euro, no Burgos.
That's what he said in an interview yesterday.

Honestly, that doesn't sound that great too me, maybe racing Burgos to get used to the Spanish weather wouldn't be the worst idea.
Sounds to me a bit like they want to keep the media pressure/hype down by not having him race any stage races before the Vuelta, but is that actually the best way to approach things from a performance perspective? I do have some doubts about how Quickstep are handling his development as a gc rider.

 

[peterfin]

So could this be down to nutrition? Is he burning more energy by dragging more weight and pushing bigger watts, while still eating as much as he did when he weighed 60? Being able to climb well in Norway, but no longer in Suisse, to me could point to this very issue.

If he keeps eating as much as he did when he weighted 60 kg then he will be back at 60 kg soon and apparantly that is not the plan. I can't imagine they put him on a diet when he needs the calories simply to fill his energy tank. Frankly, after the numerous errors in that 5th TdS stage I start to wonder if they actually watch over him at all? Clothing, supplies, use of ice, etc is apparantly all up to the rider's choice. Other teams basically count the grams each rider takes prior to each stage but at QST it looks like there is no plan and if there is a plan it's not executed in detail. Experience obviously helps in doing the right things but I assume they know that their leader has the least experience of all!

I start to believe that the only thing the team really cares about at the moment are the classics. That's why you train somebody getting a better punch. In the mean time they let him play in stage races of 1 week to get "experience" but without the same support. Maybe they do it differently in the Vuelta? I am not that sure. Stage wins could be the real goal here. They know he can succeed in both hilly stages and the TT.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

If he keeps eating as much as he did when he weighted 60 kg then he will be back at 60 kg soon and apparantly that is not the plan.

I meant during the race / on race days.

 

[Ripper]

If he keeps eating as much as he did when he weighted 60 kg then he will be back at 60 kg soon and apparantly that is not the plan. I can't imagine they put him on a diet when he needs the calories simply to fill his energy tank. Frankly, after the numerous errors in that 5th TdS stage I start to wonder if they actually watch over him at all? Clothing, supplies, use of ice, etc is apparantly all up to the rider's choice. Other teams basically count the grams each rider takes prior to each stage but at QST it looks like there is no plan and if there is a plan it's not executed in detail. Experience obviously helps in doing the right things but I assume they know that their leader has the least experience of all!

I start to believe that the only thing the team really cares about at the moment are the classics. That's why you train somebody getting a better punch. In the mean time they let him play in stage races of 1 week to get "experience" but without the same support. Maybe they do it differently in the Vuelta? I am not that sure. Stage wins could be the real goal here. They know he can succeed in both hilly stages and the TT.

And you can train that 'punch' without gaining much (or any) weight.

 

[Zoef-Lightning]

Unless you have access to the detailed training plan it's kind of meaningless to discuss around "only taking a week off", because "a week off" can mean countless of different things.

A week is a long time for professional athletes today. If it's a week completely off the bike it could even be a too long period. If it's a week with quite a bit of training but it's all just at low intensity it might be too short period.

In the end, as long as the information we have is vague like "a week off" it's impossible for us to have useful discussions around it.

In the context of (to) many competition days and always little rest in between, and the disappointing result in Switzerland (not fresh anymore), is only a week of rest after Switzerland very relevant. Too little rest!

A top rider who wants results and peaks twice or thrice during the season must take at least two longer rest periods. During the season. This is not about someone acting as a domestique. Or Thomas Degendt who does races the season round, so that he rarely achieves results (not in proportion to his qualities ).
An altitude trainingcamp may be less grueling than competitions, and certainly than stage races. But if Evenepoel doesn't start it well rested, he will also start groping in his reserves. Canceling Burgos won't change that much




.

 

[Zoef-Lightning]

According to PCS 40 days, which isn't out of this world. 1 month no races after Liège. 2 weeks between Norway and the TdS.

41 race days after Switzerland. 43 after the NC. That's a lot at this moment of the season, for a youngster that still wants to peak in August and September. No races after Liège and 2 weeks after Norway does not have much influence, because he was then fully training. Not resting.
The number of race days is one aspect. But not resting enough (so training again) is an important negative aspect.