• 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!

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

Page 961 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Should we change the thread title?


  • Total voters
    116
He had the intention to have in his room. Why he changed the plan?


"You earn back the expenses you make for Syncrosfera with such a room in your own house, so we have already thought about that," Evenepoel said.

"There are plans for it, but then the architect will have to visit again."
Question for the clinic but curious how the biological passport allows or doesn’t allow for HCT increases from artificial altitude systems.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Sandisfan
I would imagine it’s the same as regular altitude training, the buffer they allow probably has room for those type of fluctuations esp if an explanation is given? Does anyone know what the actual change is?
I hope that it doesn’t allow it. The allowance for actual altitude is necessary because some folks live, in real life, at altitude (Colombia, Boulder, Co.), which can be verified. The altitude tent or room is an artificial performance enhancer, which I don’t think should get that leeway. But it probably does.
 
I hope that it doesn’t allow it. The allowance for actual altitude is necessary because some folks live, in real life, at altitude (Colombia, Boulder, Co.), which can be verified. The altitude tent or room is an artificial performance enhancer, which I don’t think should get that leeway. But it probably does.
Weren't the tents banned by some country's federations at one time?
 
I hope that it doesn’t allow it. The allowance for actual altitude is necessary because some folks live, in real life, at altitude (Colombia, Boulder, Co.), which can be verified. The altitude tent or room is an artificial performance enhancer, which I don’t think should get that leeway. But it probably does.
So it would be ok to live or buy a house at altitude, simply for the benefits of breathing thin air in order to boost red blood cell count and getting a performance advantage, but it would not be ok to install a room for breathing thin air for the exact same reasons and getting the same advantage? Or do you mean it should be some kind of birthright, for only people who were born there? Either you put thin air on the list of illegal substances, or you don't.

It's a natural, physics and biological phenomenon, i see no reason why some people should be allowed to benefit from it, and others not. Maybe training to restrain your breathing should also be prohibited? Because it is basically the same thing.

PS: What might be worth considering, is to limit the allowed artificial altitude of a tent/room to the altitude that is realistic to live at in reality. Meaning no experimenting insane altitudes, like Ganna and Campenaerts have done. But i fear that would be very difficult to regulate and verify.
 
Last edited:
So it would be ok to live or buy a house at altitude, simply for the benefits of breathing thin air in order to boost red blood cell count and getting a performance advantage, but it would not be ok to install a room for breathing thin air for the exact same reasons and getting the same advantage? Or do you mean it should be some kind of birthright, for only people who were born there? Either you put thin air on the list of illegal substances, or you don't.

It's a natural, physics and biological phenomenon, i see no reason why some people should be allowed to benefit from it, and others not. Maybe training to restrain your breathing should also be prohibited? Because it is basically the same thing.
I see both sides. For the reasons you listed it wouldn’t make much sense to ban it, but it would be much better if altitude training weren’t required to get on level footing in the first place. There’s also $ considerations which is a barrier for riders and teams that can’t afford the best of everything, but I guess that’s kind of the whole reality of sport to begin with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andre and Sciatic
I see both sides. For the reasons you listed it wouldn’t make much sense to ban it, but it would be much better if altitude training weren’t required to get on level footing in the first place. There’s also $ considerations which is a barrier for riders and teams that can’t afford the best of everything, but I guess that’s kind of the whole reality of sport to begin with.
It's difficult to get a spot in the hotel on Teide, simply because Visma has most of the rooms booked through most of the year. Indeed money is a factor. Deny altitude rooms/tents and you are basically making things worse, because only the richest teams/riders can afford to sleep and train in the best circumstances. And going on altitude training is required to get on level footing, exactly because there are indeed riders who live there. The only other solution is to prohibit all professional riders to live, sleep, train at altitude. So there are no "both sides". You simply can't have it both ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sciatic
It's difficult to get a spot in the hotel on Teide, simply because Visma has most of the rooms booked through most of the year. Indeed money is a factor. Deny altitude rooms/tents and you are basically making things worse, because only the richest teams/riders can afford to sleep and train in the best circumstances. And going on altitude training is required to get on level footing, exactly because there are indeed riders who live there. The only other solution is to prohibit all professional riders to live, sleep, train at altitude. So there are no "both sides". You simply can't have it both ways.
I agree no great practical solution. In principle I’d be fine banning it for everyone but obviously that would be a mess and unfair to people who actually live at altitude. It’s just silly it’s a requisite of pro sport now to arbitrarily sleep in a low pressure room or travel thousands of miles for no reason at all other than to be in thin air for your sleeping hours, not even during the training itself. I get there’s lots that goes into being the best, but at least things like training, nutrition, equipment are directly related to the sport or the spirit of the sport.
 
I agree no great practical solution. In principle I’d be fine banning it for everyone but obviously that would be a mess and unfair to people who actually live at altitude. It’s just silly it’s a requisite of pro sport now to arbitrarily sleep in a low pressure room or travel thousands of miles for no reason at all other than to be in thin air for your sleeping hours, not even during the training itself. I get there’s lots that goes into being the best, but at least things like training, nutrition, equipment are directly related to the sport or the spirit of the sport.
It's not silly, it's just biology and physics but completely natural. Just like sugar, water, carbs etc have an impact on performance. Should we deny riders who don't live next to a spring to drink water? Or only eat foods that can be naturally grown/bred in that area/country? You live on a barren mountain, good for you, you get altitude training, but you are also stuck drinking goatmilk and can't eat anything but goat cheese and goat meat!

Weren't the tents banned by some country's federations at one time?
Yes, in Italy, that i know of.
 
I hope that it doesn’t allow it. The allowance for actual altitude is necessary because some folks live, in real life, at altitude (Colombia, Boulder, Co.), which can be verified. The altitude tent or room is an artificial performance enhancer, which I don’t think should get that leeway. But it probably does.
Pressurized rooms are legal as long as your HCT doesn't get above the cap where you're required to sit out and explain the circumstances. Presumably the biopassport gets examined for any anomalous blood increases that would relate to other means. It's not instant and results, like real altitude, rest with the individual's responsiveness. As we've discussed the practice usually requires sleep/rest adaptation and benefits come from training at sea level. Haven't most WC level cross country skiers in Northern Europe perfected this?
 
So it would be ok to live or buy a house at altitude, simply for the benefits of breathing thin air in order to boost red blood cell count and getting a performance advantage, but it would not be ok to install a room for breathing thin air for the exact same reasons and getting the same advantage? Or do you mean it should be some kind of birthright, for only people who were born there? Either you put thin air on the list of illegal substances, or you don't.

It's a natural, physics and biological phenomenon, i see no reason why some people should be allowed to benefit from it, and others not. Maybe training to restrain your breathing should also be prohibited? Because it is basically the same thing.

PS: What might be worth considering, is to limit the allowed artificial altitude of a tent/room to the altitude that is realistic to live at in reality. Meaning no experimenting insane altitudes, like Ganna and Campenaerts have done. But i fear that would be very difficult to regulate and verify.
I still see going to the mtns (though creating the inequalities for poorer teams), as less artificial. After all, grand tours are often won or lost on high alpine multi-pass stages, so it’s congruent with specific training for racing. But yeah, eventually the mountain altitude becomes artificial too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oldermanish
@DNP-Old thanks for changing the thread title back. You really did make the best thread title on the forum. Just like Eddy was the best rider.

I mean until Remco. Of course.
It wasn't something I was planning to keep long term, 't was a mere joke. Some people (the usual suspects, you know who) got livid, angry and furious elsewhere on the forum because of this current thread title and how we should take this very literally. Therefore, I decided to go even further.
 
He had the intention to have in his room. Why he changed the plan?


"You earn back the expenses you make for Syncrosfera with such a room in your own house, so we have already thought about that," Evenepoel said.

"There are plans for it, but then the architect will have to visit again."
Since then, he never went back to Syncrosfera and didn't build the altitude room. I guess he thought going to teide and livigno was enough.
 
I still see going to the mtns (though creating the inequalities for poorer teams), as less artificial. After all, grand tours are often won or lost on high alpine multi-pass stages, so it’s congruent with specific training for racing. But yeah, eventually the mountain altitude becomes artificial too.
Yes it is more artificial, just like drinking bottled water is more artificial than drinking water out of a creek in the mountains. But it is basically the same thing. And you simply can't prohibit breathing thin air.