Comprehensive Climbers Ranking

[Krzysztof_O]

We have already speculated about Ventoux (and longer climbs in general) erlier in the thread. The w/kg differences also do not specifically refer to fresh efforts, where the gap between the two should be slightly smaller on average anyway. Possible reason for smaller differences on Ventoux:

-Roglic had his best day of the year, better than Peyragudes in my Index
-Pogacar did not go as fast as possible (irregular pacing) and probably had an average day
-Gaps on long climbs seem to be smaller in general (%-wise), especially on Ventoux where the first 10 minutes are always in a bunch. This already reduces the potential gaps at the end.
- Pogacar may be relatively worse on long climbs, while 20 minute efforts are his bread and butter

Edit: And if you just took the time from Vingegaard's attack, it would a 68 second gap on a ~23 minute effort.

I intentionally took those two performances by Roglic: due to his terrible preparation he was closest to his best on uni-puerto fresh efforts. He was like a 5-10 km running specialist: capable of superb single efforts ranging between anaerobic threshold and VO2max but missing a bit in ultra-marathon distances (flat uphill track bully by @Red Rick )

Relative differences are smaller on long climbs usually due to weak pacing in the first half. PdB 2024 was an incredible outlier. On Ventoux'25 about 35-40 minutes of the climb were paced by Vingo's teammates or by Vingo himself so the pacing was good by this climb's standards. Obviously we can't take 68 seconds in just a 23 minute effort as the pace had been good for some time before (and fatigue was cumulating).

All in all I think Pogacar was good but maybe not at his best and OTOH Roglic (and Lipo as well) was helped by the rest day after the Pyrenees (Peyreguades killed guys due to monster efforts on Hautacam stage).

 

[Red Rick]

Pogacar and Vingegaard in my opinion were both getting tired through the Tour more so than in the 2024 Tour. Perhaps it's due to different weather, or a crash in Pogacar's case, or due to the Dauphine also being in their schedule. It had a little bit of Giro 2023 vibes with maybe some sickness going through the peloton.

 

[Netserk]

i dont think vingegaard got worse

but unlike 24 , only the first two mountain stages were full full . if pogi had gotten a gap on la plagne with his first attack , i think that would have been a strong performance too

it got tactical to various degree since superbagneres

 

[Krzysztof_O]

i dont think vingegaard got worse

but unlike 24 , only the first two mountain stages were full full . if pogi had gotten a gap on la plagne with his first attack , i think that would have been a strong performance too

it got tactical to various degree since superbagneres

Vingegaard reached his best level in Peyreguades and Ventoux while in the Alps he was mediocre (but even more so was Pogacar, whose form clearly declined). I tend to think Pogacar was getting worse after the Pyrenees while Vingo was fluctuating (with disappointing beginning and very end as well).

My form perception (relative to one's capabilities)
Hautacam: Pogacar 10/10, Vingegaard 7/10
Peyreguades: both 10/10
Ventoux: Vingegaard 10/10, Pogacar 8.5/10 (the only stage where I think Vingo was a bit stronger than Pog)
Alps: Vingegaard 8/10, Pogacar 7/10

 

[Netserk]

Vingegaard reached his best level in Peyreguades and Ventoux while in the Alps he was mediocre (but even more so was Pogacar, whose form clearly declined). I tend to think Pogacar was getting worse after the Pyrenees while Vingo was fluctuating (with disappointing beginning and very end as well).

My form perception (relative to one's capabilities)
Hautacam: Pogacar 10/10, Vingegaard 7/10
Peyreguades: both 10/10
Ventoux: Vingegaard 10/10, Pogacar 8.5/10 (the only stage where I think Vingo was a bit stronger than Pog)
Alps: Vingegaard 8/10, Pogacar 7/10

la plagne didnt test his capacity , he only cared about the stage win

and the way the stage to loze was raced also makes it hard to infer what the riders could have done if it instead had been a standard shootout on a steep mtf

 

[Krzysztof_O]

la plagne didnt test his capacity , he only cared about the stage win

and the way the stage to loze was raced also makes it hard to infer what the riders could have done if it instead had been a standard shootout on a steep mtf

I mean on La Plagne stage Pog couldn't catch Arensman for many kilometers (despite being very close behind), come on. OTOH Vingo didn't even try to attack Pogacar's moderate pace until the very end. If Vingo sensed he could've done more he would've tried dropping Pogacar: even gaining 10-20 seconds would be some mental boost for the future. That's why I think both were in poor form on that stage.

 

[Netserk]

I mean on La Plagne stage Pog couldn't catch Arensman for many kilometers (despite being very close behind), come on. OTOH Vingo didn't even try to attack Pogacar's moderate pace until the very end. If Vingo sensed he could've done more he would've tried dropping Pogacar: even gaining 10-20 seconds would be some mental boost for the future. That's why I think both were in poor form on that stage.

with the gradient and headwind , neither could probably drop the other and for both of them a sprint was the best way to win the stage

i dont believe pogi tried his hardest to catch arensman ( only to serve the stage win to his rival ) , he wanted to lure vingegaard away from his wheel

 

[Krzysztof_O]

with the gradient and headwind , neither could probably drop the other and for both of them a sprint was the best way to win the stage

i dont believe pogi tried his hardest to catch arensman , he wanted to lure vingegaard away from his wheel

I think both wanted to win the stage and both failed. Pogacar because his pace wasn't enough to catch Arensman and Vingegaard because he didn't think he could win the stage without sticking to Pog's wheel all the time. To me the fact that Vingo didn't try to gap Pog is very telling (despite saving energy on Pogacar's not too hot wheel).

 

[Red Rick]

Madeleine all things considered was somewhat mid wasn't it? But I guess that's because you can't drop Jorgenson

 

[Netserk]

shates and kuss pace for 6'07" , after that it takes vingegaard 1'42" to get up to the wheel of jorgenson

couldnt pace from the bottom or too hard over a longer time before the attack to not catch jorgenson too soon
couldnt go faster than jorgensons pace afterwards to keep him with you

they had a modest uae pace from the bottom before van aert , benoot and campenaerts took over

in the 7'49" attack , they closed a gap of 1'15" to jorge . it was a fairly strong attack ( just watch lipo ) , but the botched execution didnt even allow for an all out effort to the top

 

[canina82]

This is more of a perception driven narrative than a data driven one, but my impression is that Pogacar already showed a clearly stronger climbing level in the 2023 Tour than in 2022. That was partly masked by his preparation, and by the fact that Vingegaard was also exceptionally strong in that race. Pogacar seemed to carry that higher level into early 2024, improve slightly perhaps, and then by the 2024 Tour several riders appeared to be climbing at record strong levels.

I also suspect that Roglic’s apparent lack of “fatigue resistance” may be explained, at least in part, by his positioning difficulties in the bunch. On longer, harder, and more complex stages, that can plausibly contribute to his relatively weaker performances. It may not be primarily a physical limitation. In that area, both Pogacar and Vingegaard are excellent. So while some, like Politt, say Vingegaard is nervous, I do not think that is the right reading. Just about always makes the right split and wheel.

Addition: I also see many riders make a noticeable improvement when they reach 25-26 y.o. This is true lower down the results sheet also. I feel it is perhaps an incorrect assumption that we should expect improvement to be linear and marginal. For me, people appear at a new level, stagnate or hold consistent for a few years, then make another noticable step. Most often, the "big leap" comes around mid twenties. Last few years it's been riders born in 97-98-99. Now I think it will be 99-00-01.

I really believe Pogacar would have won the 2023 TdF without his crash. He was significantly better compared to 2022.
If we exclude the TTT in PN, Pogacar won 12 races (10 classics/stages + 2 GC) in 17 races (before LBL). This is a win rate of 71%.

 

[Rou]

I really believe Pogacar would have won the 2023 TdF without his crash. He was significantly better compared to 2022.
If we exclude the TTT in PN, Pogacar won 12 races (10 classics/stages + 2 GC) in 17 races (before LBL). This is a win rate of 71%.

This is pure speculation. Pogacar in 2023 may have been slightly stronger than 2022 (maybe on pure watts on fresh efforts and unipuertos). His endurance on queen mountain stages was still inferior to Vingegaard.
He also lost Giro d'ell Emilia to Rogla and did a mediocre climb of Passo di Ganda in Lombardia.

 

[canina82]

This is pure speculation. Pogacar in 2023 may have been slightly stronger than 2022 (maybe on pure watts on fresh efforts and unipuertos). His endurance on queen mountain stages was still inferior to Vingegaard.
He also lost Giro d'ell Emilia to Rogla and did a mediocre climb of Passo di Ganda in Lombardia.

He rushed his comeback in order to compete in the TdF. He was completely dead after the Tour.
He almost cracked Vingegaard on Col de Joux Plane for example. A decisive moment of the 2023 TdF is when Vingegaard gains a lot of time in a climb that suits Pogacar (stage 5). This changed everything in the race. A well prepared Pogacar doesn't lose time there and Vingegaard would probably be the chaser and not the chased after the first week.

 

[Pozzovivo]

Are there any thoughtful articles or opinion pieces on the recent increase in climbing speeds that any of you are aware of? Would love to learn more about it.

 

[Red Rick]

Are there any thoughtful articles or opinion pieces on the recent increase in climbing speeds that any of you are aware of? Would love to learn more about it.

There's an elephant in the room and everyone is extremely busy writing about anything else.

 

[Red Rick]

shates and kuss pace for 6'07" , after that it takes vingegaard 1'42" to get up to the wheel of jorgenson

couldnt pace from the bottom or too hard over a longer time before the attack to not catch jorgenson too soon
couldnt go faster than jorgensons pace afterwards to keep him with you

they had a modest uae pace from the bottom before van aert , benoot and campenaerts took over

in the 7'49" attack , they closed a gap of 1'15" to jorge . it was a fairly strong attack ( just watch lipo ) , but the botched execution didnt even allow for an all out effort to the top

That's why Glandon should not be there in stages like that.

 

[Netserk]

That's why Glandon should not be there in stages like that.

like the stage to hautacam ?

 

[Red Rick]

like the stage to hautacam ?

Was Hautacam a penultimate climb with hope of action before the final?

The generic problem with these behemoths as penultimate climbs is they make it very difficult for domestiques to survive, especially when there's significant climbing just before said climb, especially on a rather short stage.

Just look at the gap Roglic got in the break on Col du Pré, and look at the profiles of stages where UAE could not control the breakaway.

 

[Peyresourde]

This is pure speculation. Pogacar in 2023 may have been slightly stronger than 2022 (maybe on pure watts on fresh efforts and unipuertos). His endurance on queen mountain stages was still inferior to Vingegaard.
He also lost Giro d'ell Emilia to Rogla and did a mediocre climb of Passo di Ganda in Lombardia.

Of course it is speculation, but talk about endurance is also. First of all, there were no real hard queen stages except maybe the Loze stage in 2023 where Pogacar would have collapsed on an easier stage as well. Pogacar's important timelosses in 22+23:

-Granon: Medium hard stage, Vingegaard slightly better, Pogacar expended more effort before last climb than Vingegaard, maybe heat and hunger bonk
-Hautacam: Medium hard stage, Vingegaard slightly better, Pogacar expended more effort before last climb than Vingegaard and crashed

Marie Blanque: Easier stage, Pogacar not on his best day
Combloux TT: Vingegaard great + Equipment and handling advantage, Pogacar bad day
Loze: Hard stage, but Pogacar collapsed already before final climb, possible physical problem

He rushed his comeback in order to compete in the TdF. He was completely dead after the Tour.
He almost cracked Vingegaard on Col de Joux Plane for example. A decisive moment of the 2023 TdF is when Vingegaard gains a lot of time in a climb that suits Pogacar (stage 5). This changed everything in the race. A well prepared Pogacar doesn't lose time there and Vingegaard would probably be the chaser and not the chased after the first week.

It is possible, no one knows how much better he could have been with a different preparation. Though maybe his crash changed his prior (suboptimal) training process, which may have started his improvement in the first place.

As long as we take Vingegaard's TT as fixed, it would have always been very difficult for Pogacar to win that Tour. He would have lost 30+ seconds even on a great day mainly due to equipment. The only way would have been to win basically via bonus seconds (not completely impossible, but very unlikely).

Are there any thoughtful articles or opinion pieces on the recent increase in climbing speeds that any of you are aware of? Would love to learn more about it.

I don't know any. Basically just some articles comparing equipment to the 90s. Some say the difference is not much while some claim it is minutes faster now due to new equipment. But I doubt the improvement between 2023 and 2024 was big (if any).

If you do not want to go with Red Rick's explanation, which is also not that easy to implement, then some of my thoughts:

- the general improvement in climbing speed since the 2010s may 'only' be ~0.2 w/kg, even less if we assume that equipment has improved more than most calculations consider (mainly tires).
- the rest of the improvement is driven by 2 historic supertalents
- if we relativize the climbing speeds of the 2024 Tour (outlier race), the general improvement has been somewhat steady even since the late 2010s (of course in steps and not totally linear)
- Change in nutrition should really be the main factor for the improvements
- There is much more money in the sport, much more pros train professionally for the whole year
- better domestiques then also lead to faster climbing times
- different, more agressive racing mentality
- great talents and rivalries can push the whole sport forward

 

[Red Rick]

If you do not want to go with Red Rick's explanation, which is also not that easy to implement, then some of my thoughts:

- the general improvement in climbing speed since the 2010s may 'only' be ~0.2 w/kg, even less if we assume that equipment has improved more than most calculations consider (mainly tires).
- the rest of the improvement is driven by 2 historic supertalents
- if we relativize the climbing speeds of the 2024 Tour (outlier race), the general improvement has been somewhat steady even since the late 2010s (of course in steps and not totally linear)
- Change in nutrition should really be the main factor for the improvements
- There is much more money in the sport, much more pros train professionally for the whole year
- better domestiques then also lead to faster climbing times
- great talents and rivalries can push the whole sport forward

It's really not only 2 guys that are way ahead of the 2010s, it's largely the entire top 10 if not more. Fatigue resistance has increased more than fresh W/kg, but the fresh W/kg have gone through the roof for the top guys as well.

Looking at peak performances in the 2010s gets especially flattering because they're largely on easy stages and but when you look at power outputs on hard stages they are so bad. Nibali doing 5.5-5.6 on Lombarde for an hour may look reasonable after a hard stage, but then you look at his data file and they did Bonette at like 4 W/kg whereas in 2024 in the Tour they did Bonette at the pace Nibali dropped everyone with at the Lombarde, and in the Tour it was basically 15 guys in the peloton plus a breakaway ahead.

And the huge problem with arguments like nutrition, more money, better domestiques, is not that they aren't true, but it's that they were also happening in a time when climbing times went through the floor. So even if better gear can explain why things are 0.1-0.2 W/kg better than the 90s now, it wouldn't explain why it should be 0.5 W/kg better now than only 10 years ago.

Everyone in cycling is acting like eating high carbs was discovered in the 2020s, but scientists were studying that stuff in in the early 2000s if not before already

 

[Netserk]

Of course it is speculation, but talk about endurance is also. First of all, there were no real hard queen stages except maybe the Loze stage in 2023 where Pogacar would have collapsed on an easier stage as well. Pogacar's important timelosses in 22+23:

-Granon: Medium hard stage, Vingegaard slightly better, Pogacar expended more effort before last climb than Vingegaard, maybe heat and hunger bonk
-Hautacam: Medium hard stage, Vingegaard slightly better, Pogacar expended more effort before last climb than Vingegaard and crashed

Marie Blanque: Easier stage, Pogacar not on his best day
Combloux TT: Vingegaard great + Equipment and handling advantage, Pogacar bad day
Loze: Hard stage, but Pogacar collapsed already before final climb, possible physical problem

loze was the fifth gc stage in a row with all five trending the same way

in 2022 vingegaard was simply better , but it also helped that he saved more energy after granon . just compare the two tts in the race

 

[Peyresourde]

loze was the fifth gc stage in a row with all five trending the same way

in 2022 vingegaard was simply better , but it also helped that he saved more energy after granon . just compare the two tts in the race

Yes, in 2022 Vingegaard was better, but probably only 0.05-0.1 w/kg on average. the tactics and race situation increased the gaps. In my opinion, Hautacam may have even been Pogacar's strongest day, so it was not a recovery problem for him. Pogacar's cornering on the TT-Bike was also really bad from 2021-2023, while Vingegaard was extremely good at that.
In 2023 it may have indeed been a recovery problem for Pogacar. What I meant to say was that it was not a problem of long/hard stages. Loze was the only one of those and he collapsed early there.

It's really not only 2 guys that are way ahead of the 2010s, it's largely the entire top 10 if not more. Fatigue resistance has increased more than fresh W/kg, but the fresh W/kg have gone through the roof for the top guys as well.

Looking at peak performances in the 2010s gets especially flattering because they're largely on easy stages and but when you look at power outputs on hard stages they are so bad. Nibali doing 5.5-5.6 on Lombarde for an hour may look reasonable after a hard stage, but then you look at his data file and they did Bonette at like 4 W/kg whereas in 2024 in the Tour they did Bonette at the pace Nibali dropped everyone with at the Lombarde, and in the Tour it was basically 15 guys in the peloton plus a breakaway ahead.

And the huge problem with arguments like nutrition, more money, better domestiques, is not that they aren't true, but it's that they were also happening in a time when climbing times went through the floor. So even if better gear can explain why things are 0.1-0.2 W/kg better than the 90s now, it wouldn't explain why it should be 0.5 W/kg better now than only 10 years ago.

Everyone in cycling is acting like eating high carbs was discovered in the 2020s, but scientists were studying that stuff in in the early 2000s if not before already

I think we can all agree that it is a combination of different factors.
The major point about nutrition is that riders can now go hard for much longer. Riders in the 2010s were literally afraid to waste one extra pedal stroke.
Just because scientists studied something already does not mean it was implemented in cycling already.

If performances continue to increase and don't start plateauing now, something is definitely up. I am convinced that the riders themselves and their coaches had no idea that they were capable of the Plateau de Beille performance even the morning before. These are not all geniuses. If you imply that it was all planned, you probably give them more credit than they deserve.

 

[Netserk]

Yes, in 2022 Vingegaard was better, but probably only 0.05-0.1 w/kg on average. the tactics and race situation increased the gaps. In my opinion, Hautacam may have even been Pogacar's strongest day, so it was not a recovery problem for him. Pogacar's cornering on the TT-Bike was also really bad from 2021-2023, while Vingegaard was extremely good at that.
In 2023 it may have indeed been a recovery problem for Pogacar. What I meant to say was that it was not a problem of long/hard stages. Loze was the only one of those and he collapsed early there.

he bonked on granon and then didnt commit until the hautacam stage afterwards . best is setting a steady hard pace on mende

so of course his biggest performance was on hautacam . itd make no sense for alpe dhuez or peyragudes to have high values

the cornering on the tt bike mattered more in the first tt than the second

I think we can all agree that it is a combination of different factors.
The major point about nutrition is that riders can now go hard for much longer. Riders in the 2010s were literally afraid to waste one extra pedal stroke.
Just because scientists studied something already does not mean it was implemented in cycling already.

If performances continue to increase and don't start plateauing now, something is definitely up. I am convinced that the riders themselves and their coaches had no idea that they were capable of the Plateau de Beille performance even the morning before. These are not all geniuses. If you imply that it was all planned, you probably give them more credit than they deserve.

the only other time the peloton had a similar speed up it literally had a singular explanation

sure money also increased then and teams got more professional . same was the case when speeds decreased

 

[Peyresourde]

he bonked on granon and then didnt commit until the hautacam stage afterwards . best is setting a steady hard pace on mende

so of course his biggest performance was on hautacam . itd make no sense for alpe dhuez or peyragudes to have high values

the cornering on the tt bike mattered more in the first tt than the second

Are we are arguing right now or do we actually have the same opinion?
We agree that Vingegaard was better in weeks 2 and 3. His form in the first week was not that great according to his own words.
Pogacar was definitely very close to / on the limit on Pegueres and Peyragudes, even though the pace was not high. I even think the Peyragudes stage might have been the lowest point of Pogacar's career. (His team finally did a good job, but he was then not even strong enough to attack and only won because Vingegaard did not bother to attack himself)

 

[mikks]

It's really not only 2 guys that are way ahead of the 2010s, it's largely the entire top 10 if not more. Fatigue resistance has increased more than fresh W/kg, but the fresh W/kg have gone through the roof for the top guys as well.

Looking at peak performances in the 2010s gets especially flattering because they're largely on easy stages and but when you look at power outputs on hard stages they are so bad. Nibali doing 5.5-5.6 on Lombarde for an hour may look reasonable after a hard stage, but then you look at his data file and they did Bonette at like 4 W/kg whereas in 2024 in the Tour they did Bonette at the pace Nibali dropped everyone with at the Lombarde, and in the Tour it was basically 15 guys in the peloton plus a breakaway ahead.

And the huge problem with arguments like nutrition, more money, better domestiques, is not that they aren't true, but it's that they were also happening in a time when climbing times went through the floor. So even if better gear can explain why things are 0.1-0.2 W/kg better than the 90s now, it wouldn't explain why it should be 0.5 W/kg better now than only 10 years ago.

Everyone in cycling is acting like eating high carbs was discovered in the 2020s, but scientists were studying that stuff in in the early 2000s if not before already

I do not want to talk about the elephant, as it is not allowed in this part of the forum, but also, personally, I do not think there is an elephant in the room. Maybe a tiny little pony, but not an elephant.

I do think there is a reasonable chance that you overestimate what kind of knowledge or scientific understanding existed inside the pro peloton in the past. I remember once talking to Rein Taaramäe, and he said something like it was his third pro year when he was able to do aero testing for the first time in his career. Okay, it was Cofidis and whatnot, but still, Taaramäe already had 3rd place at Romandie and 8th place at Suisse under his belt.

Today, even mediocre CT-level teams — basically amateurs — are regularly using wind tunnels and other aero tools.

Sure, this is purely anecdotal, but based on my own conversations with some WT-level pro riders over the years, and listening to coaches now compared to 15 or 20 years ago, I have a feeling that today there is much better and deeper knowledge.

Again, I am just speculating and these are my personal observations, but that’s my impression.