How might top US riders have fared at Gravel Worlds?

by Alex Hunt 11.10.2024 Photography by
Cor Vos and Life Time Events More from Alex +

Mathieu van der Poel recently claimed the UCI gravel world title in Leuven after arriving as one of the pre-race favourites. But amongst the lineup that included the two previous winners of the title, there was a void: The nation that arguably invented the discipline was sorely underrepresented at the front of the race. The first rider from the US, Cobe Freeburn, came home in 53rd position, 14:32 down on Van der Poel.  

There were two broad reasons for that, namely that of the big US names you would expect at the Gravel World Championships, many were absent. In fact, none of the riders in the top 10 of the Life Time Grand Prix series standings for both the male and female categories took the start in Belgium. But if they had, how would they have fared? That’s an impossible question to answer convincingly, but in comparing ride data across events we can get some sense of how things might have gone – with, of course, several caveats.

Caveat 1: horses for courses

American gravel racer and former WorldTour pro Ted King explains that the course in Leuven was “gravel in the loose sense,” he told Escape Collective, adding that organizers are necessarily constricted in course design by wherever the race is hosted. “That contrasts pretty abruptly with something like the majority of racing in the midwest of North America which is big, long races that are purely an attritional thing. Like, who has fitness after eight hours?” 

When asked what a perfect Gravel World Championship course would look like, King said it’s simple: “​​I want the course to be hard enough that it’s mandatory to race with knobby tires.” 

Drawing on his experience in the WorldTour, King sees the current format used at the Gravel World Championships more akin to a Spring Classic like the Tour of Flanders than quintessentially American gravel, which underlines the biggest difference between gravel races in the US and the recent World Champs in Belgium. “It was much more explosive, and that also unfolded the way I anticipated,” he said. Although races are full on in the Life Time Grand Prix, King believes that they are more steady-state efforts rather than the continuous high-power accelerations that dictated the race in Leuven. 

But there are comparisons to be had, including from the California round of the Belgian Waffle Ride series, a course that is more like Gravel Worlds than most other American gravel races. Still, differences emerge, which are evident in the power files from riders at the pointy end of both races. Although the delta between average power and normalised is fairly consistent between the two events with normalised power hovering around 110% of average power, the way this is achieved differs massively. That gap highlights the difference in physiological loads even to a US gravel race with a similar parcours to Leuven.

Comparison 1: Gravel Worlds vs BWR California

Fourth on the day at BWR California was former WorldTour pro Peter Stetina, who averaged 268 watts (4.2 W/kg) for five and a half hours with a normalised power of 300 watts (4.7 W/kg), or 111.3% of average power. This is a comparable relative effort to Connor Swift at the Gravel World Championships, who averaged 330 watts (4.4 W/kg) with a normalised power of 377 watts (5 W/kg), or 113.3% of average power. The difference comes when you dig into the time spent in each zone for both riders. 

This total time in zones confirms what King explained. Stetina spent more time at intensities under his threshold than Swift, as well as more time at threshold and just above it in the VO2 zone. This comes from the longer climbs on the course that allow a rider to sit at a steady-state tempo. Swift, on the other hand, has a far more polarised power profile. Compared to Stetina’s 21% of time spent above zone 4, Swift spent 31% of the race above zone 4. Swift also spent nearly four times as much of his race in zone 7, right at the upper limit of his power profile. This is likely a result of all of the accelerations out of corners and fighting for position before the next narrow gravel sector. 

The repetitive punchy nature seen at Gravel Worlds is something that isn’t common in a US gravel race, partly due to course geography. The countless corners and fights for position before narrow gravel sections all lead to very aggressive racing at the World Championships. With American gravel normally a more open affair, the courses don’t produce this style of racing. 

Comparison 2: Gravel Worlds vs The Rad Dirt Fest

Another race comparable to this year’s Gravel World Championships was The Rad Dirt Fest in southern Colorado. At 180 km, it was the same distance as Worlds, albeit at higher altitude; the race starts around 1,800 meters above sea level and climbed to a peak altitude of 2,700 m. It took the winner, Grand Prix overall leader Keegan Swenson, five hours and one second to complete. Stetina finished second, 1:23 down.

The story is largely the same at The Rad Dirt Fest as at BWR California. The delta between average and normalised power sits at 111% – almost identical to BWR, however partly due to altitude the zone distribution is even more pronounced, and Stetina’s race correlates broadly to Brendan Johnston’s. The story looks to be consistent: in the longer US gravel races riders spend very little time at intensities above threshold. Arguably, this style of racing is the most efficient as riders are not burning unnecessary matches surging at higher intensities. 

The altitude of this race does mean that any efforts that put riders over their limit and into the red are far more costly. This could contribute to the total duration spent above threshold hovering around 10%. The general trend of longer gravel races in the US is that riders get into groups and roll through and off at the highest sustainable pace for the duration of the race. Swift’s efforts at Gravel Worlds are a stark contrast, with 31% of the race spent above zone 4 from the constant attacking and explosive nature of the race.

Comparison 3: Gravel Worlds vs Chequamegon

Looking to find a Life Time race that fits the power zone distribution of Gravel Worlds I settled on Chequamegon MTB Festival. Although it is far shorter in length and distance (Swenson, the winner, took just two hours to finish), it aligns well with the distribution of effort seen at Gravel Worlds. Payson McElveen fought out the small-group sprint to finish fourth. With the total race time under half the duration of Gravel Worlds, that produced a much more aggressive race than in the longer events in the Life Time Grand Prix. This race saw McElveen’s normalised power of 342 watts (5 W/kg) sit at 116.8% of his 287-watt (4.25 W/kg) average.

The power numbers from the races, when calculated both across zones and relative to Swift’s and McElveen’s weights, are amazingly close. Both riders achieved an identical normalised power-to-weight ratio – the elephant in the room for this example is that Swift held this power for an extra two hours and 45 minutes. 

WorldTour riders can handle dirt with the best

There is often the argument made that a more technical course with some more challenging gravel terrain would be a leveller taking away some of the advantages of WorldTour riders. King sees this differently. “If you can navigate your course in Amstel, Paris-Roubaix, or any of the Spring Classics,” you can handle dirt, he said. WorldTour riders are just on a different level, he said.

“Having lived that life, the courses are technical enough. There’s enough road furniture. You’ve got to be dodging here, there, and everywhere. And then if they’re racing for five, six, seven hours, then they’re ready for a 180 km race. They think that’s short. It’s not as though a cyclocross or mountain bike background is any real advantage.” At Unbound, former WorldTour pros routinely fight for the win and make up a third or more of the top-10 finishers in each of the last five editions.

Changes in course design might affect that by bringing the average winning speed down, making group aerodynamics less extreme. At over 38 km/h the average winning pace Van der Poel held at Gravel Worlds put a big stress on aerodynamics with riders able to save considerable energy hiding in the wheels before making an attack for victory. The more technical and rough the course gets, the resistive force of the terrain makes up a bigger percentage of total energy expenditure for any given speed. This means that even in a bunch the energy expended by someone in the wheels is closer to that of a rider in the wind. But speeds in US gravel events are not far off Van der Poel’s pace: at The Rad, BWR California, and even Unbound, which is 142 km longer than Gravel Worlds, the winner’s speed topped 35 km/h.

Caveat 2: Calendar conflicts and start grids

Clearly, US riders – in particular the ex-WorldTour riders who are routinely top-five in US events – are capable of competing at Worlds. So why didn’t they go? King has two observations. First, Worlds conflicted with the Grand Prix calendar, and the biggest prize purse in the Grand Prix isn’t for individual events, but the overall series standings. “UCI Gravel Worlds took place one week after [The Rad] and two weeks before [series finale Big Sugar],” King noted. For riders who are competing in this series, the travel commitments associated with a trip across the pond – paired with the lack of financial support from USAC for national team riders at the race – made attendance far less attractive for those at the top of the Grand Prix standings.

Second, there is how the UCI handled start grids at Gravel Worlds. This year’s course featured a very narrow 180-degree turn just 1 km into the race. The consequence of this affected the race for anyone more than a few rows back, and the elite men’s field at Worlds featured almost 300 riders. As the race entered the turn there was a bunching up that led to many riders coming to a complete standstill all whilst the front runners had already exited the section and were ploughing on at full gas. 

The first 10 minutes of the race were the most explosive and the first hour saw riders record their highest power of the day. With narrow sections on course, passing riders was a slow and arduous process for anyone caught out by the dead turn. King said of his race that, “On such a narrow course, anytime you went to an opening, anytime you went to a normal paved road and have the chance to move up, everybody that you’re around is doing the exact same thing.”

The issue for any US riders entering the UCI Gravel World Championships is that unless they had entered UCI-rated road, mountain, or gravel races, they had almost no UCI points, which is how the UCI set the start grid. With provisions for top-ranked road riders to qualify based on points in that discipline, riders from the WorldTour started well ahead of riders who dedicate the bulk of their season to non-UCI events like the Life Time races. Even Swenson – fifth at Worlds last year – would have found himself starting at the back of a 290-strong field. “Unless your name is Mathieu van der Poel, there’s not a chance in the world that you’re going to start last and finish first,” King said.

So, how would premier US riders fared in Leuven?

This is a question that can’t be definitively answered; firstly anything can happen come race day and secondly under the current rules dictating start positions any rider at the back has an almost hopeless task, in particular due to the 180-degree turn right after the start. But if we evaluate how they would have done from a hypothetical standpoint based on comparable race data alone we can get close to an answer. 

With no data available for Keegan – the most dominant male rider on the US gravel circuit – it is hard to dig into just how well he would have fared at this year’s World Championships. Last year’s fifth-place finish in Italy came after a mid-pack start, more than six minutes adrift of winner Matej Mohorič. Conversely, Mohorič raced Unbound this year and hung with the lead group for more than 100 miles before multiple flats and a broken wheel ultimately ended his day. Swenson finished 14th.

This wasn’t Swenson’s only foray into the world of UCI World Championships. Back in 2022, he took to the start in Wollongong, Australia at the World Championships Road Race representing the USA. In this edition of the race, Swenson came home in 73rd position, 6:20 down on winner Remco Evenepoel. With these serving as Swenson’s only attendances in mixing it with WorldTour professionals it is hard to see a North American Armada upsetting the result in Leuven. 

But as the power files from some of the premier gravel races and Life Time events this year show, gravel races in the US are less punchy than this year’s World Championships. Given a change of course to something that better suits the likes of Swenson, McElveen and Stetina, it’s very likely they would find themselves vying for a rainbow jersey. Attritional races on tougher gravel that force riders into a more steady-state riding style could turn the tables. 

The 2025 World Championships is set for Nice, France the weekend of October 17-18, with much more potential for climbs and technical terrain than the flat and more densely populated terrain around Leuven, which is just 30 km east of Brussels, Belgium’s capital city. But even if the course is more amenable to American riders, the calendar isn’t: Worlds is the same weekend as Big Sugar, the final race in Life Time’s recently announced 2025 Grand Prix calendar.

Did we do a good job with this story?

👍Yep 👎Nope

Read Comments

escapecollectiveGravelLifetime Grand PrixpaywallPerformancePower analysis