Wout van Aert

Page 8 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
A couple of guys you mentioned specifically prepared for today and yet still lost to a sprinter/climber/classicomano/roleur/crosser so your sarcasm is a bit misplaced.
And a couple others specifically prepared and didn't got on the podium as they were aiming for (Dennis, Campenaerts). And others are building for Giro and did fine (Thomas). And some guys rode like crazy in the last week of the Tour (Asgreen, Cavagna with his solo effort just before the last ITT) and got 6th and 7th...And another guy left the Tour early to prepare for the ITT, and showed it was a good decision and the Tour was a good preparation (Kung, 3rd).

And as you have noticed already, 4 riders from the top 8 came out of the Tour. Time differences between 2-8th is 26 seconds.
Time difference between 1-2nd is 26 seconds. So obviously that second rider is not riding clean. The logic...

Again, whatever fits your narrative.
 
You're not seriously trying to defend this radioactive freak, are you?
ofcourse not. As a consequence, I'll gladly take down anyone beating him in a race or finishing within 2 minutes in the road race on Sunday.

Today, Ganna obviously didn't follow team orders to take the win with a small margin. He probably had to keep his legs turning at a super high cadence to impede the formation of blood clots. Boy he was supercharged!
 
Reactions: JosephK
A couple of guys you mentioned specifically prepared for today and yet still lost to a sprinter/climber/classicomano/roleur/crosser so your sarcasm is a bit misplaced.
So a couple of less-talented guys in TT lost against a more talented guy in TT.

But because WvA TTing well doesn't fit into your narrowly defined concept of his qualities as a rider, you call him a sprinter / climber / whatever.

Again: WvA is first of all a high FTP tester (I reckon the best within his team and within the top 3 in the peloton, already before the Tour), and has raced and trained for years to maximise that FTP over 1-hour CX races. So how strange is it that he competes with the best in TT with his high FTP...

Some here are still amazed that a rider with high FTP can also be explosive and win a sprint (because positioning is easier if you have a high FTP curve) and last longer uphill (because a high FTP curve takes you further up the mountain with the real climbers).

That seems so hard to understand for some, that the only logic conclusion is that he dopes.
 
Reactions: red_flanders
thats logical conclusion supported by (in my case) 25 years of following cycling, it happened in mid 90s, in 99, mid 2000s, 2012 and now again...and its always a new prodigy who can achieve same results previous generation could only achieve on PEDs, but because of various circumstances this new athlete is just that much better than everyone else on water and bread because he is more professional/better bikes/new chains/different cadence (thats an evergreen, makes it back into fashion every decade)/evolution/pillows/high altitude/ketones/virgin blood producing numbers and performances even Ferrari is like "whats-a-happening"

lance said "im sorry you dont believe in miracles" ...you wrote the same just in more words
 
Yeah, but the obvious anomaly is being top notch at everything...
He isn't a top sprinter like Bennett, Ackermann, Groenewegen, Gaviria, Ewan.

He is far from the best at climbing. Lasting for 2/3rds of a hard climb literally means you are 66% as good as the best. You simply cannot extrapolate the fact that WvA can follow with the very best up until 2/3rds, into thinking he could last the whole climb.

An example: a cat. 3 rider has this numbers on average:
290 watt FTP / 345 watt 15 minutes / 620 watt 1 minute / 1250 watt 5 seconds.

Pro riders have around these numbers:
420 watt FTP / 490 watt 15 minutes / 750 watt 1 minute / 1500 watt 5 seconds

Suppose there is a TdF stage, all flat (drafting, around 275 watt) with 1 climb of 3 minutes requiring 8.5 W/kg during the last 2 minutes of the climb.
The cat. 3 rider would last 2 minutes on that climb, before he gets dropped like a stone. A casual bystander would encourage the cat. 3 rider and say that the difference between him and the protour riders is just that 1 minute on the climb he has to grit his teeth.

In reality, the difference isn't a matter of lasting a minute more, it's a matter of pushing 290 watt FTP vs. 420 watt FTP. That is a huge difference.
 
So a couple of less-talented guys in TT lost against a more talented guy in TT.

But because WvA TTing well doesn't fit into your narrowly defined concept of his qualities as a rider, you call him a sprinter / climber / whatever.

Again: WvA is first of all a high FTP tester (I reckon the best within his team and within the top 3 in the peloton, already before the Tour), and has raced and trained for years to maximise that FTP over 1-hour CX races. So how strange is it that he competes with the best in TT with his high FTP...

Some here are still amazed that a rider with high FTP can also be explosive and win a sprint (because positioning is easier if you have a high FTP curve) and last longer uphill (because a high FTP curve takes you further up the mountain with the real climbers).

That seems so hard to understand for some, that the only logic conclusion is that he dopes.
It's not a narrowly defined concept to think that there are sprinters, climbers, time trialers, all-rounders in the peloton today.
Of the all-rounders I don't see anyone competing on his time trial-, sprint- and climbing level at the same time. Look at those who competed today. Who of them is anywhere near his sprint-level?
Who are the other riders with a high FTP who can do what he can do?

There is a base level in athletic performances, but at a certain point you usually train into one direction specifically and it will negatively affect your performances in another area. For van Aert this common knowledge does not seem to apply. Or he has not yet reached the point of specialization. In any case this is not what you normally see. It is something that makes your eyes pop.

And his sprint successes were not just due to good positioning.
I don't know how high his climbing level is exactly, but they said it was higher than George Bennett's, who's pretty much a pure climber (even if he was bad during the Tour, due to the crash maybe, but he was pretty good directly after the lockdown).

However it would help if we knew all the numbers exactly.
 
thats logical conclusion supported by (in my case) 25 years of following cycling, it happened in mid 90s, in 99, mid 2000s, 2012 and now again...and its always a new prodigy who can achieve same results previous generation could only achieve on PEDs, but because of various circumstances this new athlete is just that much better than everyone else on water and bread because he is more professional/better bikes/new chains/different cadence (thats an evergreen, makes it back into fashion every decade)/evolution/pillows/high altitude/ketones/virgin blood producing numbers and performances even Ferrari is like "whats-a-happening"

lance said "im sorry you dont believe in miracles" ...you wrote the same just in more words
Who are you talking about? Did WvA destroy the competition today, or in any other race? He won races with the combination of legs and tactics. But as far as I see, while he is very well-rounded and has chances on every terrain / in every discipline:
  • he doesn't win every single sprint;
  • he drops whenever a climb is longer than 15 minutes if said climb is raced properly (and not just tempo);
  • he doesn't win any WC ITT or any TT in a grand tour until now;
So first you try to suggest WvA does something extraordinary, while it's clear he is often on the limit and gets beaten fair and square (like today).
 
It's not a narrowly defined concept to think that there are sprinters, climbers, time trialers, all-rounders in the peloton today.
Of the all-rounders I don't see anyone competing on his time trial-, sprint- and climbing level at the same time. Look at those who competed today. Who of them is anywhere near his sprint-level?
Who are the other riders with a high FTP who can do what he can do?

There is a base level in athletic performances, but at a certain point you usually train into one direction specifically and it will negatively affect your performances in another area. For van Aert this common knowledge does not seem to apply. Or he has not yet reached the point of specialization. In any case this is not what you normally see. It is something that makes your eyes pop.

And his sprint successes were not just due to good positioning.
I don't know how high his climbing level is exactly, but they said it was higher than George Bennett's, who's pretty much a pure climber (even if he was bad during the Tour, due to the crash maybe, but he was pretty good directly after the lockdown).

However it would help if we knew all the numbers exactly.
I reckon Cavagna has a good sprint, but he clearly hasn't tried yet.
I can't imagine WvA climbs better than Bennett. Or better said: WvA will be better on short climbs, but should hit his ceiling once a climb takes longer than e.g. 10-15 minutes, compared to a lighter Bennet
Well, obviously you want to believe what you believe and are not interested in an open discussion.
Drawing parallels between LA and WvA is, at the moment, ridiculous. I am very much interested in an open discussion, but most non-believers state that certain things "are not possible", Without knowing the numbers, and with imagining a lot of patterns, e.g. deducting WvA is a top sprinter because he won 3 TdF sprints, of which 2 where in a reduced peloton and 1 was 70% luck the positioning worked out. I don't 'believe', I analyse / examine and evaluate if something is possible, taking the context into account. E.g. I'm a big fan of Pogacar, but if it turns out he did 6.9 W/kg on the Peyresourde, I find that very suspicious. Until now, I haven't found anything overly suspicious with WvA, and I haven't seen anyone here come with something else than their gut feeling.
My reactions aren't meant to defend his innocence, merely to point out the laughable arguments brought to the table to suspect WvA of doping. If he's caught red-handed tomorrow I won't loose a minute of sleep, but up until now he isn't doing out of the ordinary, in relation to his progress the last 5-6 years.
 
So a couple of less-talented guys in TT lost against a more talented guy in TT.

But because WvA TTing well doesn't fit into your narrowly defined concept of his qualities as a rider, you call him a sprinter / climber / whatever.

Again: WvA is first of all a high FTP tester (I reckon the best within his team and within the top 3 in the peloton, already before the Tour), and has raced and trained for years to maximise that FTP over 1-hour CX races. So how strange is it that he competes with the best in TT with his high FTP...

Some here are still amazed that a rider with high FTP can also be explosive and win a sprint (because positioning is easier if you have a high FTP curve) and last longer uphill (because a high FTP curve takes you further up the mountain with the real climbers).

That seems so hard to understand for some, that the only logic conclusion is that he dopes.
top 3 FTP because you say so? less talented because you say so?

riders with high FTP winning sprints against sprinters are, uh, um, err?

it's not a narrowly defined concept, it's the same improbable *** that Alaphilippe pulled off last year - winning a bunch sprint in Tirreno Adriatico, an ITT in the Tour and a top-10 climber in just about every mountain stage except the last one.
 
Reactions: SafeBet
So a couple of less-talented guys in TT lost against a more talented guy in TT.

But because WvA TTing well doesn't fit into your narrowly defined concept of his qualities as a rider, you call him a sprinter / climber / whatever.

Again: WvA is first of all a high FTP tester (I reckon the best within his team and within the top 3 in the peloton, already before the Tour), and has raced and trained for years to maximise that FTP over 1-hour CX races. So how strange is it that he competes with the best in TT with his high FTP...

Some here are still amazed that a rider with high FTP can also be explosive and win a sprint (because positioning is easier if you have a high FTP curve) and last longer uphill (because a high FTP curve takes you further up the mountain with the real climbers).

That seems so hard to understand for some, that the only logic conclusion is that he dopes.
100% on point for me, except for the last. For me it seems fairly obvious he's doping, but I can't fathom how anyone thinks they know a guy like this is more "radioactive" than anyone else. Some people are just better than others and he's been an obvious talent for a long time. A lot of riders are riding out of their heads right now, I wonder if it has anything to do with the lack of testing this year? Ganna sure seems to have taken a big step.
 
Last edited:
top 3 FTP because you say so? less talented because you say so?

riders with high FTP winning sprints against sprinters are, uh, um, err?

it's not a narrowly defined concept, it's the same improbable *** that Alaphilippe pulled off last year - winning a bunch sprint in Tirreno Adriatico, an ITT in the Tour and a top-10 climber in just about every mountain stage except the last one.
Ofcourse he is top 3 FTP. Didn't he show that today or during the whole Tour already? Or did you miss Paris-Roubaix last year?

And ofcourse the others are less talented, or do you really suggest all others in the top 8 finishing within 26 seconds (or in case of Ganna gaining 26 seconds) are riding clean?
 
And a couple others specifically prepared and didn't got on the podium as they were aiming for (Dennis, Campenaerts). And others are building for Giro and did fine (Thomas). And some guys rode like crazy in the last week of the Tour (Asgreen, Cavagna with his solo effort just before the last ITT) and got 6th and 7th...And another guy left the Tour early to prepare for the ITT, and showed it was a good decision and the Tour was a good preparation (Kung, 3rd).

And as you have noticed already, 4 riders from the top 8 came out of the Tour. Time differences between 2-8th is 26 seconds.
Time difference between 1-2nd is 26 seconds. So obviously that second rider is not riding clean. The logic...

Again, whatever fits your narrative.
I am not the one making claims without any proof here, so you can drop your tone.

Küng had targeted the Worlds, had 5 days of extra training and recovery and still lost. To a a rider who didn't specifically prepare.

But I get it, he is less talented, right?
 
Reactions: SafeBet
Bollocks

100% on point for me, except for the last. For me it seems fairly obvious he's doping, but I can't fathom how anyone thinks they know a guy like this is more "radioactive" than anyone else. Some people are just better than others and he's been an obvious talent for a long time. A lot of riders are riding out of their heads right now, I wonder if it has anything to do with the lack of testing this year? Ganna sure seems to have taken a big step.
Well it seems we more or less agree, but while you seem to suggest they all more-or-less battle with the same weapons (illegal ones), I would still be naive enough to think that e.g. ketons or other legal products could have a large enough effect, and one that is different for each rider.
The better I personally become as a cyclist, the less obvious are the effects of small changes I make to try to improve my riding. Same goes I think for most top riders: they don't react the same to training, supplements, nutrition, rest. Some just seem to come out better of training camps than others within the same team, and while some seem to perform very consistent, others have their big years and suddenly disappear.

I will already predict that WvA won't mix in mass sprints as much in the coming years, simply because he will:
  • either be crashing hard one day and refuse to take the risks anymore;
  • win big classics and he won't risk it anymore sprinting for those 'smaller' victories;
  • loose the right amount of top speed because he'll get older.
 
Reactions: red_flanders
Ofcourse he is top 3 FTP. Didn't he show that today or during the whole Tour already? Or did you miss Paris-Roubaix last year?

And ofcourse the others are less talented, or do you really suggest all others in the top 8 finishing within 26 seconds (or in case of Ganna gaining 26 seconds) are riding clean?
So nothing on the high FTP riders winning sprints.

Thought so.

Oh wait, it gets better. It's the divine talent that allows him to beat all those dopers without even specifically preparing,
 
Sep 22, 2020
9
1
35
WvA is in the clear for me after today, he was only 10 seconds behind Thomas as the timesplit, 25 behind Dennis - BUT, he is a much better bike handler than either of those, and as you could see by Dumoulin's slip on the Imola track, it was not the easiest handling after the brief rain shower earlier.

Dennis had a 15 sec advantage on Thomas at T1 but still finished 3 seconds behind. So he obviously just had a bad 2nd half, nothing really suspicious at all in this TT.

edit: oh and Thomas didn't have his garmin unit, so there's that too
 
Last edited:
And you know that how?
Looking at the results.

But to avoid going in circles and to say it blunt: Kung is too tall and too heavy. So he has more drag, needs more power to overcome that drag, and his power + size results in him being heavier than WvA and thus more complicated to win anything else than flat /undulating ITT. WvA is a good bike handler because of his CX background so he can aim for races where positioning is important, and he can more than survive a hilly parcours while Kung will be more limited with his size and thus weight disadvantage.
 
Well it seems we more or less agree, but while you seem to suggest they all more-or-less battle with the same weapons (illegal ones), I would still be naive enough to think that e.g. ketons or other legal products could have a large enough effect, and one that is different for each rider.
The better I personally become as a cyclist, the less obvious are the effects of small changes I make to try to improve my riding. Same goes I think for most top riders: they don't react the same to training, supplements, nutrition, rest. Some just seem to come out better of training camps than others within the same team, and while some seem to perform very consistent, others have their big years and suddenly disappear.

I will already predict that WvA won't mix in mass sprints as much in the coming years, simply because he will:
  • either be crashing hard one day and refuse to take the risks anymore;
  • win big classics and he won't risk it anymore sprinting for those 'smaller' victories;
  • loose the right amount of top speed because he'll get older.
I agree, of course all people react differently to any drug or supplement. I also have no idea how “Bollocks” got into my post. So weird. Certain not aimed at you BTW...
 
Reactions: Volderke

ASK THE COMMUNITY