The latest issue of Cycle Sport has an article about a new Eddy Merckx book. In the article they list the training he did for the final week up to the 1969 Tour de France prologue. It goes like this:
Sunday: Belgian National Championships. 264 km
Monday: Did two races. A 110 KM criterium and an evening track meeting
Tuesday: Raced in a kermesse, but retired after 35 km because he’d been prevented from starting by people demanding his autograph
Wednesday: Training with his team. 180 km
Thursday: Training on his own. 270 km
Friday: Behind a Derny for 50 km. This should have been more, but torrential rain made it too dangerous
Saturday: Morning 40 km fast. Afternoon: 40 km easy. Evening: The prologue of the Tour de France.
And he won Paris - Nice, Flanders, San Remo, LBL before doing most of the Giro (before being kicked off for a failed drugs test). After that he did mostly (for him) nothing, but once the ban was overturned, he turned up his training and racing an insane amount (mostly in the week before TdF).
Do you think that Merckx was dirtier or cleaner than his peers?
Is it possible that he was (whether dirty of clean) just a phenomenal athlete who was better than his peers? Kind of like Dave Scott or Mark Allen or PNF or Chrissie Wellington?
Do you think that Merckx was dirtier or cleaner than his peers?
Is it possible that he was (whether dirty of clean) just a phenomenal athlete who was better than his peers? Kind of like Dave Scott or Mark Allen or PNF or Chrissie Wellington?
Because, as much as I love cycling, at this point it’s pretty much a joke in terms of historical cleanliness. And guys like you piling on about how great the old guys were is equally hilarious. Let’s all ignore that giant elephant in the room. Maybe it’ll just walk out. Enjoy sticking your head in the sand. Maybe it was Eddy who originally said “what am I on? I’m on my bike 6 hours a day. What are you on?”
Do you think that Merckx was dirtier or cleaner than his peers?
Is it possible that he was (whether dirty of clean) just a phenomenal athlete who was better than his peers? Kind of like Dave Scott or Mark Allen or PNF or Chrissie Wellington?
Because, as much as I love cycling, at this point it’s pretty much a joke in terms of historical cleanliness. And guys like you piling on about how great the old guys were is equally hilarious. Let’s all ignore that giant elephant in the room. Maybe it’ll just walk out. Enjoy sticking your head in the sand. Maybe it was Eddy who originally said “what am I on? I’m on my bike 6 hours a day. What are you on?”
I’m not burying my head in the sand. I’m well aware of the history of cycling. I just think that this group (Slowtwitch) in general, ignores the elephant in the room that’s wearing a tri suit and only sees the one wearing a cycling shorts and jersey.
And, to be clear, he wasn’t on the bike 6 hours a day. The article has this quote. “I often did rides of nine hours, all day on the bike”.
Do you think that Merckx was dirtier or cleaner than his peers?
Is it possible that he was (whether dirty of clean) just a phenomenal athlete who was better than his peers? Kind of like Dave Scott or Mark Allen or PNF or Chrissie Wellington?
Because, as much as I love cycling, at this point it’s pretty much a joke in terms of historical cleanliness. And guys like you piling on about how great the old guys were is equally hilarious. Let’s all ignore that giant elephant in the room. Maybe it’ll just walk out. Enjoy sticking your head in the sand. Maybe it was Eddy who originally said “what am I on? I’m on my bike 6 hours a day. What are you on?”
I’m not burying my head in the sand. I’m well aware of the history of cycling. I just think that this group (Slowtwitch) in general, ignores the elephant in the room that’s wearing a tri suit and only sees the one wearing a cycling shorts and jersey.
And, to be clear, he wasn’t on the bike 6 hours a day. The article has this quote. “I often did rides of nine hours, all day on the bike”.
I know nothing about the history of triathlon and whether or not drugs are a large part of that history. I know quite a bit more about the history of cycling and whether drugs are a part of that history. Furthermore, your original post wasn’t about the history of triathlon. It was about the history of cycling. So I responded. Because as I mentioned…I know something about the history of cycling. But then* you tried to change the conversation. Do I think Merckx was an amazing athlete? Of course. Do I think Merckx was a doper? Of course.
Maybe someone else will engage you about triathlon’s alleged dark past.
I don’t think anyone is saying that pre-Armstrong era of cycling was clean. Far from it. There are numerous quotes from the top cyclists of those eras which admitted they used drugs (usually speed or painkillers post WWII, cocaine in earlier eras), and enough recorded casualties from the use of those drugs.
The drugs from those eras were light years away from the drugs of the 80s onwards. T, EPO, blood doping, HGH vs painkillers, speed and alcohol. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
The discussion is about the a cyclists build up to the 1969 tour, and whether a contender would or would not do that in this decade.
But hey, if you want to make the thread about doping in cycling, knock yourself out. I doubt you’re going to bring anything new to the table.
Seriously, it would be interesting to see what somebody like Froome or Contador does in leading up to the Tour start for comparison.
Some of that diary may have been more for literary effect rather than Strava-grade accuracy.
I’d also be curious to now how “hard” some of the racing was back then relative to now. From some accounts a lot of the old-timey TdF racing had lengthy “unofficial” neutral segments. Average speed was apparently about 5m/hr slower back then which would correspond to a lot of average Watts (50-100?) if everything else were equal. But of course nothing else is equal, and it’s difficult to compare given the differences in equipment and teamwork, etc.
The 2015 equivalent (except in wins) would be Valverde. The dude races from like February-September and was a threat just about every time. Obviously not the “closer” Merckx was. But then again Valverde didn’t get a month off for doping this year (sorry to bring it up, but it is valid because Merckx was officially suspended from racing for the time period just prior to what you’re talking about which would have an effect on his “freshness” just prior to the TdF).
In my “literary” effect evidence, I have the 1969 Belgium National Road Race taking place on June 28th. (Also here.)
The prologue of the 1969 Tour de France was definitely on June 28th.
Maybe he rode the course of the Belgium National Championships the week before the actual race as training. But my best Google-fu indicates he did not actually race it in 1969. But it would have been some next-level shit to do a national road championship in the AM and the TdF prologue in the PM.
Edit: !! I just realized that the guy I linked to in the 2nd link above, Roger De Vlaeminck, did exactly my next-level shit! He won the Belgium National RR then placed 16th in the TdF prologue on the same day! And went on to be a factor in about 10 stages. Epic.
P.P.S. And I also, suspiciously, notice that Paris-Roubaix was 264km in 1969. The exact distance given for the Merckx’ Sunday mileage. I think we have a little more literary license in effect there.
Not directly related, but a funny story re: Merckx and how you can see your idols fall before your very eyes…
About 15 years ago, I wandering the halls of Eurobike and in one of those silly little hallways / connector things between different sections of the show.
Eddy comes wheeling around a corner, big as a fookin’ house (pre-stomach surgery days), with one finger jammed up his schnozz, buried to the second knuckle.
No woods can describe how quickly my youthful images were crushed…
In my “literary” effect evidence, I have the 1969 Belgium National Road Race taking place on June 28th. (Also here.)
The prologue of the 1969 Tour de France was definitely on June 28th.
Maybe he rode the course of the Belgium National Championships the week before the actual race as training. But my best Google-fu indicates he did not actually race it in 1969. But it would have been some next-level shit to do a national road championship in the AM and the TdF prologue in the PM.
Edit: !! I just realized that the guy I linked to in the 2nd link above, Roger De Vlaeminck, did exactly my next-level shit! He won the Belgium National RR then placed 16th in the TdF prologue on the same day! And went on to be a factor in about 10 stages. Epic.
P.P.S. And I also, suspiciously, notice that Paris-Roubaix was 264km in 1969. The exact distance given for the Merckx’ Sunday mileage. I think we have a little more literary license in effect there.
That is really weird. I was only 8 in 1969 and obviously not a cycling fan then, but from the beginning of my knowledge of the sport (1984) the European nations ALWAYS held their road race championship a week before the start of the Tour. It seems insane to schedule it on the same day that the Tour de France starts. I can only imagine that those links you post are mistaken, but that’s pretty slim. Weird.
Actually, his first post wasn’t about the “history of cycling.” It was about how one specific person rode a shit-ton over the course of a week, and won a big race right after that. It was a counterpoint to the title of his thread, which mentioned tapering – which triathletes typically interpret as “rest the week before your big race.”
So your reading comprehension and use of context clues is absolute shit. That’s the best case scenario. The worst case is that you’re just a moron looking for a fight.
Read the last sentence of the OP. Mentions Froome and Contador, not triathlete tapers. If your view of the topic is totally myopic, maybe you don’t think about the doping history of cycling when you read about Merckx doing (allegedly) 9 hours a day leading into a stage race, but I do. It’s called context, as you mentioned.
To summarize my reply, see below:
…your reading comprehension and use of context clues is absolute shit. That’s the best case scenario. The worst case is that you’re just a moron looking for a fight.
You seem angry. Maybe rub one out or something. Jesus.
