85th Tour de Suisse (2.UWT) // June 12th - 19th 2022

[Riek s]

Ok, DK has been on an extended visit and I haven't been around much or posted in a long time but the narrative that Remco had a subpar TT, is in bad form, and would have beaten Kung by more got me to look up the actual results and post.

Here are the head to head TT results between Kung and Remco before Suisse:

• '22 Algarve, 32.2km - Remco 1st, Kung 2nd, Remco gains :58 total and 1.8 secs/km
• '21 Chrono des Nations , 44.5km - Kung 1st, Remco 5th, Kung gains 1:22 total and 1.84 secs/km
• '21 World Championships, 43.3 km - Remco 3rd, Kung 5th, Remco gains :23 total and .53 secs/km
• '21 European Championships, 22.4km - Kung 1st, Remco 3rd, Kung gains :15 total and .67 sec/km
• '21 Benelux Tour, 11.1km - Kung 3rd, Remco 18th Kung gains :19 total and 1.71 secs/km
• '21 Olympics, 44.2km - Kung 4th, Remco 9th, Kung gains 1:13 and 1.65 secs/km
• '20 Algarve, 20.3km - Remco 1st, Kung 3rd, Remco gains :19 and .94 secs/km
• '19 World Championships, 54km - Remco 2nd, Kung 10th, Remco gains 1:38 and 1.81 secs/km
• '19 European Championships, 22.4km - Remco 1st, Kung 4th, Remco gains :21 total and .94 secs/km
• '19 Romandie, 16.9km - Kung 6th, Remco 15th, Kung gains :31 total and 1.83 secs/km
• '19 Romandie prologue, 3.9 km - Kung 7th, Remco 57th, Kung gains :09 total and 2.31 secs/km

So before today, Kung had won head to head 6 times and in those races averaged 1.6 secs/km gained over Remco in his wins

Remco had won 5 and averaged 1.27 secs/km gained over Kung in those wins

And today:

• '22 Suisse, 25.6km, Remco 1st, Kung 3rd, Remco gains :11 total and .43 secs/km

So after today Remco has won 6 over Kung and has averaged 1.16 secs/km gained in his wins

Sure, you can go through and invalidate or make excuses for individual performances based on the point you want to prove but the narrative that Remco generally wins by more just doesn't seem to be based in reality. Certainly the idea that Remco wins by minutes and Kung wins by a few seconds thing isn't true since Remco has only won by more than a minute once and Kung actually puts more time per km into Remco in his wins on average.

Of course neither would have been super fresh after going 100% in the mountains so it doesn't surprise me that Thomas was right there with them given his pedigree. I think the most likely situation is just what Remco said - he just had an off day on stage 5 but his form is fine.

First, thanks for the effort, you had more patience then me on this!

I see the debate has gone off the rails by now. So just want to bring in the points on why i said it was a subpar TT for him, even though he and Kung have battle neck to neck in other TTs.

1st, was the parcour. slightly hilly/rolling with a headwind in 2nd part. Might be semantics, but if it was a tailwind i would have placed Kung closer for the win/tie.

2nd, Remco become a pro in 2019, came back from injury in 2021. So i'm more inclined to look at his latest results.

3rd, no based on Kung, but other riders. Mostly because the part that should suit him the best, he did the worst. Compared to guys like Martinez etc. A good Remco should have kept his trajectory compared to those riders (1.5 - 2s/km).

4th the way he was on his bike and the gear he pushed. he was really struggling in the 2nd part.


Important note: i don't think a super remco would have ridden this 1 minute faster. We (or at least I) were talking about 10-20 seconds. (albeit almost all in the second part tbh)

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Wasn't that exactly what you "claimed"? That somehow Pinot not finishing the 2019 TdF made Greipel the better GC rider?

OMFG. I was making fun of people who were including TT's where Evenepoel was sick or crashed.

 

[RedheadDane]

OMFG. I was making fun of people who were including TT's where Evenepoel was sick or crashed.

Yes... by applying a strange and twisted kind of logic... and of course Pinot's injury was significantly more public than those instances where Evenepoel was sick or crashed...

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Yes... by applying a strange and twisted kind of logic...

No. By pointing out their ridiculous logic by a counter example applied to that very same logic.
Their logic was twisted, not mine. I just used a different example to open their eyes.

 

[RedheadDane]

No. By pointing out their ridiculous logic by a counter example applied to that very same logic.

So we agree that it's a weird and twisted kind of logic?
And, as I pointed out in the edit that you might not have seen before you replied, people might simply not have known that Evenepoel were injured/sick during some of those ITTs, whereas everyone and their dog probably knew that Pinot got injured during the 2019 TdF, and thus that Greipel technically getting a better GC result isn't really relevant.

Pinot is by far a better GC rider than Greipel ever was.
Küng and Evenepoel are probably around equals when it comes to ITTs.

 

[Filippo_3467]

So we agree that it's a weird and twisted kind of logic?
And, as I pointed out in the edit that you might not have seen before you replied, people might simply not have known that Evenepoel were injured/sick during some of those ITTs, whereas everyone and their dog probably knew that Pinot got injured during the 2019 TdF, and thus that Greipel technically getting a better GC result isn't really relevant.

Pinot is by far a better GC rider than Greipel ever was.
Küng and Evenepoel are probably around equals when it comes to ITTs.

I respect your effort but with some guys it doesn't make any sense to discuss anything Remco related.

This is the easiest thing in the world. After three hard stages Remco beats one of the best TTers in the World who is in amazing shape. This is a success and a very good result. End of discussion.
Thanks for @jaylew for the overview and the amazing post but I think for some logic and objective view isn't possible.

 

[BigCoward]

Logic would be applied in both directions, I.e. you would have looked to establish whether the races where RE beat Kung, other factors impacted Kung's performance. As you didn't, it wasn't logic but typical RE fanboyism on your part.

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

Man this is some strong trolling. Assembling all of the head-to-head results and comparing performance is not "ridiculous logic." That is how you should approach analysis. Pretty standard approach would be:

Step 1. Start with a hypothesis. In this case, Remco Evenpoel should beat Kung by minutes, not seconds.
Step 2. Identify data needed to conduct the analysis. A reasonable starting point is head-to-head ITT performance.
Step 3. Aggregate data.
Step 4: Conduct high-level analysis to validate or invalidate the hypothesis. In this case, that's what jaylew did. The conclusion that Remco should put minutes into Kung is not valid based on the aggregated data. While imperfect, this is still more reliable than picking this individual result or that one. That's just an accepted mathematical rule. The sample size is, of course, too small to be of statistical significance, however.
Step 5: Double-click into data for explanatory insights, as you did with the assessment of each individual data point. In your case, you introduced a conditional statement to an amended hypothesis: If Remco is healthy, hasn't crashed recently, and is in top form, he should beat Kung by some amount less than minutes and more than seconds. What others are reacting to is:

1. You are handwaving away some results with, Well his form was variable so that one doesn't count, etc., when form is a subjective assessment and, by your definition, if Kung beats Remco, Remco's form must be off and that results should be excluded; ergo Kung cannot beat Remco when he is in form. Circular logic.
2. You are exclusively applying this assessment to Remco and assuming that Kung's form and health is good in each result, therefor introducing bias into the result.

In regard to the Pinot vs. Greipel, you're right, a fair step 4 conclusion would be that Pinot is no more likely to beat Greipel than finish behind him. And a step 5 would be, If Pinot finishes the race, he has a high probability of beating Greipel in full health. But pointing out this data set does not invalidate jaylew's approach, which was the logical first step of analysis.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Man this is some strong trolling. Assembling all of the head-to-head results and comparing performance is not "ridiculous logic." That is how you should approach analysis. Pretty standard approach would be:

Step 1. Start with a hypothesis. In this case, Remco Evenpoel should beat Kung by minutes, not seconds.
Step 2. Identify data needed to conduct the analysis. A reasonable starting point is head-to-head ITT performance.
Step 3. Aggregate data.
Step 4: Conduct high-level analysis to validate or invalidate the hypothesis. In this case, that's what jaylew did. The conclusion that Remco should put minutes into Kung is not valid based on the aggregated data. While imperfect, this is still more reliable than picking this individual result or that one. That's just an accepted mathematical rule. The sample size is, of course, too small to be of statistical significance, however.
Step 5: Double-click into data for explanatory insights, as you did with the assessment of each individual data point. In your case, you introduced a conditional statement to an amended hypothesis: If Remco is healthy, hasn't crashed recently, and is in top form, he should beat Kung by some amount less than minutes and more than seconds. What others are reacting to is:

1. You are handwaving away some results with, Well his form was variable so that one doesn't count, etc., when form is a subjective assessment and, by your definition, if Kung beats Remco, Remco's form must be off and that results should be excluded; ergo Kung cannot beat Remco when he is in form. Circular logic.
2. You are exclusively applying this assessment to Remco and assuming that Kung's form and health is good in each result, therefor introducing bias into the result.

In regard to the Pinot vs. Greipel, you're right, a fair step 4 conclusion would be that Pinot is no more likely to beat Greipel than finish behind him. And a step 5 would be, If Pinot finishes the race, he has a high probability of beating Greipel in full health. But pointing out this data set does not invalidate jaylew's approach, which was the logical first step of analysis.

Indeed, strong trolling.
You probably didn't read Jaylew's post closely enough. He pre-emptively shot down the contesting of results by calling them ''excuses''. This is why i posted the Pinot vs Greipel TDF head to head. If being sick or crashing just before the start of a TT is an excuse, if we can only look at the data provided void of context, then indeed Greipel is equally good as Pinot concerning TDF head to head GC results. Do i believe that is how the balance actually lies between them? Of course not, that's the whole point, but that's what the results tell us.

As i already posted earlier, my intial statement ''bad TT by Remco, only 10s faster than Küng'' was made in jest, and a reference to earlier posts and context (him having a bad week, him beating Küng in Algarve by a minute, etc). Some people got riled up so i pulled some legs with my seconds vs minutes remark. That doesn't mean i don't think Evenepoel is a superior TT rider compared to Küng. That said, I think they both did a mediocre TT for what they are capable of. Probably Küng lost some top end by focusing on his climbing and also lost an edge by digging deep all week. Evenepoel is simply not in top shape as evident by results the previous days. I think when both in top shape, they would both have been 1 and 2, the gap between them would have been larger, and the gap behind them larger still.

 

[Berflamand]

Irrespective of the other riders, Remco actually expected a faster time himself.

After the TT he said that he couldn't keep up with his pacing plan because of the heat which made him struggle so according to his (the team's) pacing plan he should have gone faster.

Then again, the heat was the same for everyone so other riders might have had the same problem.

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

Indeed, strong trolling.
You probably didn't read Jaylew's post closely enough. He pre-emptively shot down the contesting of results by calling them ''excuses''. This is why i posted the Pinot vs Greipel TDF head to head. If being sick or crashing just before the start of a TT is an excuse, if we can only look at the data provided void of context, then indeed Greipel is equally good as Pinot concerning TDF head to head GC results. Do i believe that is how the balance actually lies between them? Of course not, that's the whole point, but that's what the results tell us.

As i already posted earlier, my intial statement ''bad TT by Remco, only 10s faster than Küng'' was made in jest, and a reference to earlier posts and context (him having a bad week, him beating Küng in Algarve by a minute, etc). Some people got riled up so i pulled some legs with my seconds vs minutes remark. That doesn't mean i don't think Evenepoel is a superior TT rider compared to Küng. That said, I think they both did a mediocre TT for what they are capable of. Probably Küng lost some top end by focusing on his climbing and also lost an edge by digging deep all week. Evenepoel is simply not in top shape as evident by results the previous days. I think when both in top shape, they would both have been 1 and 2, the gap between them would have been larger, and the gap behind them larger still.

Well my response was still a good way to waste some time at work...

 

[BigCoward]

Well my response was still a good way to waste some time at work...

Despite everyone's differences on this board, this is a sentiment surely that everyone can get behind.

 

[Tonton]

Speaking about ITT and about Pinot: '14 TdF stage 20, 54 km ITT. Thibaut finished 12th, 1'49" ahead of Geraint Thomas. Conclusion: Thibaut Pinot is The New Merckx.

 

[staubsauger]

Speaking about ITT and about Pinot: '14 TdF stage 20, 54 km ITT. Thibaut finished 12th, 1'49" ahead of Geraint Thomas. Conclusion: Thibaut Pinot is The New Merckx.

I thought he's the new Luc LeBlanc!?