• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Are we psychologically ready for Merckx to ever not be the greatest?

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Yes, yes, I know it can’t have been bikes because Naichaca said so…

Then explain 5-8% jump of performance vs best climbs of last year's Tour (and 10-15% jump vs 2018-2019 performances). I'm not even talking about Naichaca's estimates (which seem 0.1-0.2 w/kg too high) but about absurd vertical speed: nearly 1900 m/h of VAM on a 40-minute climb (which is less than 8% avg) at the end of super hard stage or 1800 m/h of VAM on a long, not-steep (7%) climb topping at 2000 m. Those 7-8% climbs are not even really good for high VAMs. And yet those values haven't been seen before in case of 40-minute climbs (except the most brutal walls like Angliru or Mortirolo, where almost the whole power is converted into VAM, due to low horizontal speed).

Those examples can't be explained by bikes development. Then again, I'm not denying that some part of speed progression (vs 90s) can be explained by bikes technology, I'm just pointing out that a large part of it can't.
 
Last edited:
Then explain 5-8% jump of performance vs best climbs of last year's Tour (and 10-15% jump vs 2018-2019 performances). I'm not even talking about Naichaca's estimates (which seem 0.1-0.2 w/kg too high) but about absurd vertical speed: nearly 1900 m/h of VAM on a 40-minute climb (which is less than 8% avg) at the end of super hard stage or 1800 m/h of VAM on a long, not-steep (7%) climb topping at 2000 m. Those 7-8% climbs are not even really good for high VAMs. And yet those values haven't been seen before in case of 40-minute climbs (except the most brutal walls like Angliru or Mortirolo, where almost the whole power is converted into VAM, due to low horizontal speed).

Those examples can't be explained by bikes development. Then again, I'm not denying that some part of speed progression (vs 90s) can be explained by bikes technology, I'm just pointing out that a large part of it can't.
Obviously, we are talking about Plateau de Beille so regarding that specific performance - I'd say that was the perfect storm in terms of tactics for achieving best possible VAM. Can you imagine a scenario, better than the one where first you get a superdomestique leading the way through first third of the climb and then get Jonas f** Vingegaard to get you through the second third doing his maximum effort while giving you a draft at 25 km/h plus speed? PdB was maximum speed from bottom to top, no dicking around, basically just three men TTT, with some of the best riders of our generation doing their best time trialling efforts one after another. Can you give me an example of something like that? I can't think of one...

That's one of the reasons. Wind could be another. As you very well know, tailwind (as well as draft) has a much bigger effect at higher speeds (lower gradients) and on a climb like that could play a decisive role. I don't even know what the wind was but if you add just 10km/h of tailwind, you get what, 0.3 W/kg lower values in the end?

So naturally, Plateau de Beille is an outlier that was probably down to many other factors than just tech progression. My comment earlier in this thread was just pointing out that tech progression while usually being laughed at on this chat board will in fact probably bring riders anywhere between 5-10 % when compared to the Pantani times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jono and Berniece
Obviously, we are talking about Plateau de Beille so regarding that specific performance - I'd say that was the perfect storm in terms of tactics for achieving best possible VAM. Can you imagine a scenario, better than the one where first you get a superdomestique leading the way through first third of the climb and then get Jonas f** Vingegaard to get you through the second third doing his maximum effort while giving you a draft at 25 km/h plus speed? PdB was maximum speed from bottom to top, no dicking around, basically just three men TTT, with some of the best riders of our generation doing their best time trialling efforts one after another. Can you give me an example of something like that? I can't think of one...

That's one of the reasons. Wind could be another. As you very well know, tailwind (as well as draft) has a much bigger effect at higher speeds (lower gradients) and on a climb like that could play a decisive role. I don't even know what the wind was but if you add just 10km/h of tailwind, you get what, 0.3 W/kg lower values in the end?

So naturally, Plateau de Beille is an outlier that was probably down to many other factors than just tech progression. My comment earlier in this thread was just pointing out that tech progression while usually being laughed at on this chat board will in fact probably bring riders anywhere between 5-10 % when compared to the Pantani times.

Obviously I spoke also about Isola. Another outlier? I dont believe in two outliers anymore. Even in PdB Vingo didnt have draft advantage and still had ridiculous effort (neither had Pog for more than half of Isola)

Bikes explain some part of progress vs 90s but not sharp progress vs last year or 2018-2019.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: gregrowlerson
Obviously I spoke also about Isola. Another outlier? I dont believe in two outliers anymore. Even in PdB Vingo didnt have draft advantage and still had ridiculous effort.

Bikes explain some part of progress vs 90s but not sharp progress vs last year or 2018-2019.
Agreed. I was only referring to the 90s.

About Isola, I have no comment yet as I have not studied the stage in any way. In fact, I didn't realise it was another outlier performance until now as I was watch those stages live and didn't read social media at the time...
 

Rou

Mar 20, 2024
81
208
580
Agreed. I was only referring to the 90s.

About Isola, I have no comment yet as I have not studied the stage in any way. In fact, I didn't realise it was another outlier performance until now as I was watch those stages live and didn't read social media at the time...
Pla D'edet another outlier? Col de la Couiloille another outlier? All the final climbs from stage 14 onwards were all outliers? Or maybe in 2022 when they did Alphe d'Huez and Hautacam they were riding bikes from Merckx' era?
2022 Alphe d'Huez was 2:22 slower than Pantani.
2022 Hautacam was 1:56 slower than Riis.
In two years the bikes evolved, not the riders. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: xo 1
Pla D'edet another outlier? Col de la Couiloille another outlier? All the final climbs from stage 14 onwards were all outliers? Or maybe in 2022 when they did Alphe d'Huez and Hautacam they were riding bikes from Merckx' era?
2022 Alphe d'Huez was 2:22 slower than Pantani.
2022 Hautacam was 1:56 slower than Riis.
In two years the bikes evolved, not the riders. :D
Of course Col de la Couillole will be ridden faster in 2024 TdF than 2017 Paris-Nice (previous record). You can't compare results from March and July. Not to mention the climb was almost completely resurfaced this year... Similar story for Pla d'Adet. If you want to compare efforts, you need context and samples... Climbs used this year were rarely used during TdF in the past and if they were, the context was completely different (not all out GC battle like this year). The two examples you provided (Hautacam and Alp d'Huez) only confirm that assumption - as soon as we get to the climbs where we have samples and context, records are not that easily broken by current generation as was proved in 2022 and, I assume, would be proved even in 2024.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jono

Rou

Mar 20, 2024
81
208
580
Of course Col de la Couillole will be ridden faster in 2024 TdF than 2017 Paris-Nice (previous record). You can't compare results from March and July. Not to mention the climb was almost completely resurfaced this year... Similar story for Pla d'Adet. If you want to compare efforts, you need context and samples... Climbs used this year were rarely used during TdF in the past and if they were, the context was completely different (not all out GC battle like this year). The two examples you provided (Hautacam and Alp d'Huez) only confirm that assumption - as soon as we get to the climbs where we have samples and context, records are not that easily broken by current generation as was proved in 2022 and, I assume, would be proved even in 2024.
What Hautacam and Alpe d'Huez show is the wattage of the TDF 22 is very low compared to TDF 24. Even last year's Joux Plane is a joke compared to this year's race. And this has nothing to do with new resurfacing, new tyres and new bikes. Oh and if they did Hautacam and Alpe d'Huez this year the records would be broken by at least a minute.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snipeheem
What Hautacam and Alpe d'Huez show is the wattage of the TDF 22 is very low compared to TDF 24. Even last year's Joux Plane is a joke compared to this year's race. And this has nothing to do with new resurfacing, new tyres and new bikes. Oh and if they did Hautacam and Alpe d'Huez this year the records would be broken by at least a minute.
No they don't. They only show that either wattage in TDF 22 was way lower than in the 90s or that those stages in 22 were ridden in suboptimal conditions. 22-24 TDF performance comparisons are "deduced" from some obscure records being broken in TDF 2024 mixed with Naichacas "calculations".
 
  • Like
Reactions: jono and xo 1

Rou

Mar 20, 2024
81
208
580
No they don't. They only show that either wattage in TDF 22 was way lower than in the 90s or that those stages in 22 were ridden in suboptimal conditions. 22-24 TDF performance comparisons are "deduced" from some obscure records being broken in TDF 2024 mixed with Naichacas "calculations".
The wattage in TDF 22 was lower than the 90s and much lower than 24. Now Stage 14, Stage 15, Stage 19 and Stage 20 of this year's TDF were all ridden in NOT OPTIMAL CONDITIONS and still provided extreme power outputs. OPTIMAL CONDITIONS were in the Tour de Suisse this year with shorter stages and lower fatigue. I started replying to you because you exaggerated the importance of bike tech and technology. Of course it matters but it is not the main reason for what we witnessed this July.
The main reasons should be discussed in the Clinic Section. I won't say anything more.
 
The wattage in TDF 22 was lower than the 90s and much lower than 24. Now Stage 14, Stage 15, Stage 19 and Stage 20 of this year's TDF were all ridden in NOT OPTIMAL CONDITIONS and still provided extreme power outputs. OPTIMAL CONDITIONS were in the Tour de Suisse this year with shorter stages and lower fatigue. I started replying to you because you exaggerated the importance of bike tech and technology. Of course it matters but it is not the main reason for what we witnessed this July.
The main reasons should be discussed in the Clinic Section. I won't say anything more.
And my initial intent was to remind everyone that even though tech is basically being ridiculed here, it actually is quite important, definitely more important than it usually gets credit for in this place. I’m not saying it’s the only factor but it shouldn’t be neglected to the extent it is in my opinion. I wouldn’t be shocked to learn that Naichaca & co. use the same bike model for calculating Riis’s output as they do when they calculate Pog’s.

I’m basically having issues with the lack of critical thinking when everyone jumps on numbers provided by some dudes on the internet as if they were some kind of fact. When I know for a fact that once you change the model/variables only slightly, you will get a vastly different results.
 
Last edited:
And my initial intent was to remind everyone that even though tech is basically being ridiculed here, it actually is quite important, definitely more important than it usually gets credit for in this place. I’m not saying it’s the only factor but it shouldn’t be neglected to the extent it is in my opinion. I wouldn’t be shocked to learn that Naichaca & co. use the same bike model for calculating Riis’s output as they do when they calculate Pog’s.

I’m basically having issues with the lack of critical thinking when everyone jumps on numbers provided by some dudes on the internet as if they were some kind of fact. When I know for a fact that once you change the model/variables only slightly, you will get a vastly different results.
One point could be power transfer. Modern frames and wheels are much more effective at converting muscle power into forward momentum. So equal power meter readings wouldn't equal the same speed.
 
Pogacar comparisons to Merckx, will come and go, but I think when you look at the overall race wins, Tadej will not come close. Its a different era completely. Maybe only the 5 x Tour de France's and 5 x Giros he'll match ? But after that, I don't think Pogacar will win 3 x Paris Roubaix's ? 7 x Milan San-Remo's ? 5 x Liege Bastogne Liege's ? 3 x Fleche Wallonne's ? and 3 x Ghent-Wevlegem's ? C'mon really in this day and age with such a competitive peloton ? I think not.
 
Pogacar comparisons to Merckx, will come and go, but I think when you look at the overall race wins, Tadej will not come close. Its a different era completely. Maybe only the 5 x Tour de France's and 5 x Giros he'll match ? But after that, I don't think Pogacar will win 3 x Paris Roubaix's ? 7 x Milan San-Remo's ? 5 x Liege Bastogne Liege's ? 3 x Fleche Wallonne's ? and 3 x Ghent-Wevlegem's ? C'mon really in this day and age with such a competitive peloton ? I think not.

It's better to analyse overall numbers: 11 GTs and 20 monuments (WC included) and many other wins by Merckx.

Pogacar has 4 GTs and 6 monuments so far. I think realistically he can get to 7-8 GTs and 12-14 monuments (assuming he's more or less in the middle of his prime) making him the second most accomplished rider ever (and the greatest since Merckx).
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHAD0W93
Pogacar comparisons to Merckx, will come and go, but I think when you look at the overall race wins, Tadej will not come close. Its a different era completely. Maybe only the 5 x Tour de France's and 5 x Giros he'll match ? But after that, I don't think Pogacar will win 3 x Paris Roubaix's ? 7 x Milan San-Remo's ? 5 x Liege Bastogne Liege's ? 3 x Fleche Wallonne's ? and 3 x Ghent-Wevlegem's ? C'mon really in this day and age with such a competitive peloton ? I think not.
Obviously he will never come close or achieve that status, but he entered top 10 this year.
 
Pogacar comparisons to Merckx, will come and go, but I think when you look at the overall race wins, Tadej will not come close. Its a different era completely. Maybe only the 5 x Tour de France's and 5 x Giros he'll match ? But after that, I don't think Pogacar will win 3 x Paris Roubaix's ? 7 x Milan San-Remo's ? 5 x Liege Bastogne Liege's ? 3 x Fleche Wallonne's ? and 3 x Ghent-Wevlegem's ? C'mon really in this day and age with such a competitive peloton ? I think not.
That's why it's not necessary IMO for Pog to match Metrckx's stats in order to be rightfully compared to him. It's just other set of criteria today than it was in the 70s. Once Pog achieves a certain proportion of Merckx's stats (while remaining free of any scandals), he could be considered Merckx equal by many (not @Froome, apparently) even if he doesn't break his records...
 
Pogacar comparisons to Merckx, will come and go, but I think when you look at the overall race wins, Tadej will not come close. Its a different era completely. Maybe only the 5 x Tour de France's and 5 x Giros he'll match ? But after that, I don't think Pogacar will win 3 x Paris Roubaix's ? 7 x Milan San-Remo's ? 5 x Liege Bastogne Liege's ? 3 x Fleche Wallonne's ? and 3 x Ghent-Wevlegem's ? C'mon really in this day and age with such a competitive peloton ? I think not.
Yes, if you look at the overall race wins, he won't come close. But exactly because it's a different era, he doesn't need to beat the numbers to have a chance to be regarded as the greatest ever. 6 TdF including 1 triple, would make him a strong candidate on GTs, even if the overall number of GT wins stays lower than Merckx'. More Tours than Eddy, 1 triple, that would be a big bonus. On classics, he's obviously not going to win 7 Milano Sanremos. But 1.. can be. Needs it really, unless he just wins Flanders-Liège-Lombardia the next 5 years. A Roubaix should be there too. And then if he stacks up on Lombardias, Lièges, and maybe another Flanders. So around 15, could be enough, depending on what else. Strade Bianche, more Flèches, Amstels, an E3 here, a Québc there, etc. Add more 1 week races. Even if the numbers are behind Merckx, considering that it is a different era, that could be enough to make him the GOAT.

But yes, he's far from it right now, he just got the bragging rights to being the best cyclist of the 21st century this season IMO, but it seems possible that he could be regarded as the goat once he retires. That already is amazing, if then in 10 years the majority says Pogacar was great, but no Merckx, he still had an amazing career.
 
Here is a kicker, and for the most part I am sympathetic to the Teddy will be the GOAT argument, but…

Merckx was basically washed up before he turned 30 years. Let’s say Tadej hits the major milestones by the time he’s 30 years old, but still pales in comparison to Merckx’s overall palmares. At age 30, Tadej still has Valverde-esque gas in the tank and though never wins another GT, is able to compile enough wins in major 1 day races (not necessarily monuments) to eclipse Merckx’s win total, would that make him the GOAT or a serial compiler?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHAD0W93
Yes, if you look at the overall race wins, he won't come close. But exactly because it's a different era, he doesn't need to beat the numbers to have a chance to be regarded as the greatest ever. 6 TdF including 1 triple, would make him a strong candidate on GTs, even if the overall number of GT wins stays lower than Merckx'. More Tours than Eddy, 1 triple, that would be a big bonus. On classics, he's obviously not going to win 7 Milano Sanremos. But 1.. can be. Needs it really, unless he just wins Flanders-Liège-Lombardia the next 5 years. A Roubaix should be there too. And then if he stacks up on Lombardias, Lièges, and maybe another Flanders. So around 15, could be enough, depending on what else. Strade Bianche, more Flèches, Amstels, an E3 here, a Québc there, etc. Add more 1 week races. Even if the numbers are behind Merckx, considering that it is a different era, that could be enough to make him the GOAT.

But yes, he's far from it right now, he just got the bragging rights to being the best cyclist of the 21st century this season IMO, but it seems possible that he could be regarded as the goat once he retires. That already is amazing, if then in 10 years the majority says Pogacar was great, but no Merckx, he still had an amazing career.
Of course he needs to beat those records.

We can't rewrite story. There is pros and cons in every year, so overall the palmares says everything.

Nevertheless i get it. We live in a era of social media where there is a lot of propaganda and hype when starts to win something.

There is also the fact Pogacar is from a small country who never had any successful sportsman in his history as Pogacar and doncic in the last years, so i understand those fans from his country enter into some exaggerated euphoria.
It's something that also happened in my country some years ago, it's quite normal.
 
Last edited:
Yes, if you look at the overall race wins, he won't come close. But exactly because it's a different era, he doesn't need to beat the numbers to have a chance to be regarded as the greatest ever. 6 TdF including 1 triple, would make him a strong candidate on GTs, even if the overall number of GT wins stays lower than Merckx'. More Tours than Eddy, 1 triple, that would be a big bonus. On classics, he's obviously not going to win 7 Milano Sanremos. But 1.. can be. Needs it really, unless he just wins Flanders-Liège-Lombardia the next 5 years. A Roubaix should be there too. And then if he stacks up on Lombardias, Lièges, and maybe another Flanders. So around 15, could be enough, depending on what else. Strade Bianche, more Flèches, Amstels, an E3 here, a Québc there, etc. Add more 1 week races. Even if the numbers are behind Merckx, considering that it is a different era, that could be enough to make him the GOAT.

But yes, he's far from it right now, he just got the bragging rights to being the best cyclist of the 21st century this season IMO, but it seems possible that he could be regarded as the goat once he retires. That already is amazing, if then in 10 years the majority says Pogacar was great, but no Merckx, he still had an amazing career.
Exaclty. The mere fact that Pogacar is even mentioned in the same sentence as Merckx in a serious context is an achievement in itself. And even if being considered as good/great as Merckx might seem an unlikely achievement right now, I think there's a pretty good chance he might surpass everyone else. Again, crazy stuff...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Krzysztof_O
Of course he needs to beat those records.

We can't rewrite story. There is pros and cons in every year, so overall the palmares says everything.

Nevertheless i get it. We live in a era of social media where there is a lot of propaganda and hype when starts to win something.

There is also the fact Pogacar is from a small country who never had any relevant sportsman in his history except for Pogacar and doncic in the last years, so i understand those fans from his country enter into some exaggerated euphoria.
It's something that also happened in my country some years ago, it's quite normal.
While it's a nice try to paint it as a euphoric illusion of his compatriots, there's a serious evidence the question is being entertained by many foreigners as well. A lot of current and previous cycling professionals and pundits. The following is just one of the many examples:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PrsDAkGhb4


Now the title is a bit misleading and they are admitting to be a bit trigger happy while proclaiming GOATs. Yet there it is - a comparison between him and Merckx, done by the British....

And he definitely doesn't need to break Merckx records to be considered as equal/better than Merckx. Him being the greatest or not is a matter of public perception and while it would help if the records were broken, it is far from required. Just as it might even be that he breaks the records and is not considered GOAT my the majority. You can't command public perception.
 
While it's a nice try to paint it as a euphoric illusion of his compatriots, there's a serious evidence the question is being entertained by many foreigners as well. A lot of current and previous cycling professionals and pundits. The following is just one of the many examples:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PrsDAkGhb4


Now the title is a bit misleading and they are admitting to be a bit trigger happy while proclaiming GOATs. Yet there it is - a comparison between him and Merckx, done by the British....

And he definitely doesn't need to break Merckx records to be considered as equal/better than Merckx. Him being the greatest or not is a matter of public perception and while it would help if the records were broken, it is far from required. Just as it might even be that he breaks the records and is not considered GOAT my the majority. You can't command public perception.
As you said people are just being trigger happy at the moment, because it sells. If he is as dominant as this season for multiple more, than sure
 
  • Like
Reactions: glassmoon