Van Riel responds with a statement following Jan Frodeno's comment
📨 Join the TN community
Receive daily news, analysis, and content.
exclusively for improving in triathlon.
The controversy of T100 Dubai 2025 It continues to grow after the words of Jan Frodeno And now, with the official statement from Marten Van Riel, who provides his full version of the chaos experienced in the race.
Frodeno fuels the T100 Dubai controversy and Van Riel publishes his official statement: this is how the lap chaos really unfolded
The storm of T100 Dubai 2025 He continues to struggle to find peace. After the mistake in the cycling segment that took him out of contention... Marten Van Riel, Hayden Wilde y Mathis MargierThe debate over who should assume responsibility in a professional race—the organization or the triathletes—has divided the international community.
The trigger for the controversy on social media was a comment by Jan Frodeno On Instagram, she responded directly to Van Riel with a phrase that instantly went viral:
“¿Ironman Does it teach you to count to eight?”, accompanied by a wink.
The message sparked a real firestorm. Many interpreted it as an unnecessary joke, while others argued that lap control should be part of the athlete's responsibility. Frodeno, aware of the impact, clarified shortly afterward that he wasn't trying to be ironic, but rather to emphasize the importance of “Know where you stand in the race and take responsibility for your part.".
Van Riel responds and publishes his official statement: his version of the chaos
Hours later, Marten Van Riel He went a step further: he published a lengthy statement detailing, point by point, how he experienced the incident.
The Belgian begins by stating that he has always supported the project. PTO/T100 and that his disappointment stems precisely from the value he places on these races. He states that he is proud to have been T100 world champion in 2024, but what happened in Dubai has left him “extremely frustrated”.
See this post on Instagram
“There was no bell, no lap counter, no instructions”: this is how Van Riel recounts what happened
In his explanation, Van Riel describes a completely chaotic end to the cycling race:
- There was no last-lap bell..
- The lap counter didn't work.
- His Garmin was showing 76 km upon reaching the transition zone.
- No one directed them to the entrance of T2.
- The motorcyclists who opened the race they continued onwardTherefore, he, Wilde, and Margirier assumed that another lap was needed.
He even points out that, when signaling to people near the transition, several shouted at him that he had “one more lapThat's why he decided to continue.
Van Riel points out that, during that last extra lap, No one made any attempt to stop them or correct the mistake, even though they were far ahead and there was enough time to react.
He acknowledges his share of the blame, but demands more control in a professional career.
An important part of the statement is their admission of responsibility:
“I know that the responsibility to know the route is mine, and I accept that part of the blame is mine.”
But he adds a key nuance:
“On a technical eight-lap circuit, with important prizes and a title at stake, the organization must provide clear signals and adequate guidance.”
According to him, none of the basic control conditions were present that day.
Van Riel denounces inconsistency between decisions made while cycling and while running.
The Belgian also focuses on another situation that occurred on the same day:
In the running race, almost all the athletes did seven laps instead of eight.
In that case, the PTO brought all participants together to decide collectively what to do about the classification.
In contrast, in the cycling incident There was no meeting, and the organization simply applied the regulations.
Van Riel considers this difference of opinion a serious error:
“Either you involve the athletes in both cases, or you apply the rules in both. What doesn't make sense is to act in completely different ways.”
He says he would have preferred a joint meeting to resolve the cycling situation as well, just like what happened with the running race.
The constant calendar changes also affected his season
Van Riel uses his statement to emphasize that the situation is not only frustrating because of Dubai.
He says he signed a contract to compete 7 or 8 racesBut the constant changes of dates and venues left him with only 5 shares.
Without a "discard" race available, the Dubai result ended up ruining his chances of a T100 overall podium finish.
“If I had known the calendar "If it had been at the beginning of the year, I probably wouldn't have signed the contract."
Shared responsibility and a desire to improve
The statement concludes with a conciliatory tone:
- Van Riel insists that There were mistakes on both sides.athletes and organization.
- He says his intention in speaking is to bring clarity and transparency.
- And she trusts that sharing her experience will help. help improve the sport.
Close the message with a very meaningful sentence:
“I could have kept quiet, but I believe in honesty and the value of genuine emotions. I hope this helps us continue learning together.”
A controversy that transcends Dubai
With Frodeno's comment and Van Riel's statement on the table, the debate is no longer just about sports.
Now, discussions are underway regarding the level of professionalization of the circuit, internal communication during races, incident management, consistency in decision-making, and the impact on athletes in a circuit considered a world benchmark for middle-distance running.
