Training to run or running to train? The observation sees both tendencies in group, although often, especially in recent weeks, the fact of not competing and preparing in retreat is the consequence of the races cancelled at the beginning of the season. However, if we are talking about top athletes who choose not to run before a goal, being able to ask to compete by changing the team's programs, then you start to wonder whether somewhere you really think you can find the winning form without running. Like Van Aert at the Strade Bianche and also Evenepoel, currently on Teide, who will start the season at the Giro d'Italia.
Andrea Morelli directs the cycling section of the Mapei Center and has a rather clear position.
«He says that whoever runs first is more experienced.Compared to the past, things have changed. You can no longer use races just for training, as Bettini once did, because now everyone goes there to win. But you can use them. And, in fact, it's worth using them. The intensity in the race is much higher than a few years ago, Then you have to choose the type of race where you can pace yourself without risking making a fool of yourself. Even though top-level athletes—I'm thinking of Evans, Valverde, and Contador—went to races to win anyway. And even if they weren't in the best shape, most of the time they finished in the top spot."
Why can't training replace racing?
Because the intensity you do in training is not that of running and the emotional part also makes the differenceManaging intensity is different. During a training camp, you can plan your work, include a climb, plan some engine-driven phases, and do race simulations to find motivation and work well. It makes me think of Aldo Sassi's work with Basso...
Right, work during the suspension?
Exactly, trying to reproduce real stage races. The time trial. The climb. The off-limits. But a job like this pays if you have great motivation and in any case it yields less than what you would do in a competition.
So, is it better to run before a race you're aiming for?
The fact of running first It allows you to arrive at the selection stage with greater freshnessThe load progression won't be optimal, but it's difficult to replicate in training. The downside is that you can't control the over-revving when running. But the race gives you the real pulse of your condition.
Training without running saves you from comparison…
I'm thinking of Nibali, who last year did the Tirreno before the Giro. He came from excellent training with excellent data, but in the race he found himself without any big peaks and At the Giro it was clear that he wasn't at his best as one might have thought during the retreatIf you go to a big race without any previous experience and have no competition, things get complicated. You are not performing.
Van der Poel wins on his UAE debut: an exception?
The champion defies the norm, they are athletes who have extraordinary skills. But let's not forget that the Belgian came from the cross season, in which he had certainly achieved maximum values, so it's also easy that he arrived at his debut in advance of the others' condition. And in any case He won his first race in a sprint, relying on a very specific talent of hisHe trained hard to win the Strade Bianche, but he was coming off two races in Belgium.
What do you mean by advance payment?
I think of the riders who made their debut in Australia in January. They didn't follow the same preparation as the others. Maybe they stopped training earlier and started training earlier. These are things that are forgotten, we only think about the result, but when they returned to Europe they were much more advanced than the others. If you come from a winter of work, whether you did cross or road, you have another step compared to those who perhaps only had one retreat in December.
After his victory in the UAE, Van der Poel returned home. He skipped Het Nieuwsblad, focusing instead on Kuurne and Le Samyn, where he attacked and made some serious overrevs…
It's an athlete who evidently knows himself wellSometimes you argue with the teams. There are three races in a row and you can't make them understand that maybe it's better to skip one to be more efficient in the other two. What he did, that He obviously knows that recovery is part of training..
It all makes sense. And Van Aert, who hadn't raced before, paid the price for Van der Poel's first attack.
Why You don't do certain intensities in training and you pay for them the first time you run. Also because he was almost back. In Piazza del Campo, after the first three, he arrived. A race of nearly 200 kilometers has more variables than a cross-country race. Van der Poel knows this and has raced before, while Van Aert chose not to.
Variables?
Tactics. Nutrition. A series of different aspects. And despite this, I'm surprised that Van der Poel arrived after such a busy day doing the one shot on the final wallAs if he had only done an hour of cross-country skiing before.
And what can we say about Evenepoel, who will make his debut at the Giro?
He probably won't come to aim for the Giro, as he said. He will use it as a work blockHe's young, and I'm curious to see how he'll perform over the three weeks. I see some pitfalls. The first week is a nerve-wracking one, where if you're just coming from training, you might pay the price. I would suggest him to do a stage race first.. Not the Romandie, which is too close to the Giro. If anything, the Tour of the Alps, I don't think a rider like that on that team would have any trouble finding a race to do.
He will use the Giro to aim for the Olympics.
He's doing a good amount of work, but it's not just any workout. I'd suggest an alternative program before the Giro, instead of spending the next two months training.
