Teams & Riders Everybody needs a little bit of Roglstomp in their lives

Page 171 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Like Rackham I'm also Kind of sceptical towards this pure win count number game, it leaves out so much. Roglic and pogacar look and race like on another level to all the other mortals, something e.g. Nibali seldom had (Which makes his achievements All the more remarkable in some sense). A froome Tour like 2013 seemed otherworldly, so did pogs 2021 - cant say that of wiggins, bernals or nibalis. This one for one doesnt add up for me.
Not making any statement about the pecking order that follows from this, just my 2 cents.
 
According to my system Roglic now has 4 big career wins (+OTT gold, which is a bonus).
He's nowhere near Nibali, Contador or Froome, all of whom have 7. Perhaps closer to Lemond or Saronni.
He's beneath them too. Lemond has 3 Tours and 2 Worlds, that's huge. Saronni is also ahead, with 2 Giro's, Worlds, MSR and Lombardia, plus many other wins (he has around 140 total). That's well ahead Roglic, for now. But as someone said, he's building his own legacy, and when he hang up his wheels, I guess it will be couple of more big ones in his trophy cabinet.
 
Reactions: JosefK
Sastre is even more jarring, i.e. he'd get clobbered by most top riders now (just look at the watts these guys output in most races).
Between the 2005 Vuelta and the 2009 Giro Sastre had a run of

2-3-4-3-2-1-3-2

in GTs when riding for GC

If a rider like that gets clobbered by most top riders now, then it says a lot more about the current riders than it does about Sastre
 
Last edited:
The Vuelta itself has gone through some serious changes & is now way more professional & difficult than it used to be (hence why comparisons to Rominger aren't totally accurate). Winning the Vuelta in 2021 is way closer to a Tour de France winning performance than back when someone like Laurent Jalabert won it in the 1990's, for example.
Strange that no Tour winner in 95 or after up to about Sastre (that man again) in 2008 tried winning the Vuelta if it was so easy.
 
Strange that no Tour winner in 95 or after up to about Sastre (that man again) in 2008 tried winning the Vuelta if it was so easy.
Cycling was much more Tour centric then, and Giro and Vuelta were more often than not dominated by their local riders. For a long while the Vuelta was more or less a grand tour in name and length only. Guys like Nibali and Froome really have helped lift its prestige I feel. Contador too, but he tended to race the Vuelta by circumstances rather than by choice (despite being Spanish).
 
It's not the time yet to discuss his place among the all time greats. Still lacks big wins, but the best for Rogla is yet to come.
I agree 100%. Primoz is special and is making a legacy which may stand up to the test of time. We have to wait a few more years and see what he adds to his palmares.

To say his legacy Right Now is better than LeMond or Nibali is farcical IMO. And I'm a Big Primoz fan in case no one noticed :).
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
If we're talking strictly about road cycling, then it's not debatable.
It's Roglic.
Yes.

And that brings me full circle back to the Eurosport article which started this debate, i.e. Primoz Roglic: Where does Vuelta a Espana champion rank among the greats after third win? - Eurosport

Not to denigrate a race that is loved by so many, but one Tour de France is worth… I don’t know how many Vueltas. More than three, anyway.
Even if everything stopped right now & he never rode again, I don't see how or why Roglic would be viewed as having had a lesser career than Thomas, Wiggins, Evans, Sastre or Pereiro. Which is what Eurosport's article basically says via placing an arbitrary "Tour de France win or fail" Damocles sword over his head.

I disagree with that entirely. And I'm not even taking into account the fact Roglic is nowhere near done yet.
 
Yes.

And that brings me full circle back to the Eurosport article which started this debate, i.e. Primoz Roglic: Where does Vuelta a Espana champion rank among the greats after third win? - Eurosport



Even if everything stopped right now & he never rode again, I don't see how or why Roglic would be viewed as having had a lesser career than Thomas, Wiggins, Evans, Sastre or Pereiro. Which is what Eurosport's article basically says via placing an arbitrary "Tour de France win or fail" Damocles sword over his head.

I disagree with that entirely. And I'm not even taking into account the fact Roglic is nowhere near done yet.
The special sort of dumb you get when you blend July tardiness with ridiculous amounts of UK bias
 
Between the 2005 Vuelta and the 2009 Giro Sastre had a run of

2-3-4-3-2-1-3-2

in GTs when riding for GC

If a rider like that gets clobbered by most top riders now, then it says a lot more about the current riders than it does about Sastre
The thing with Sastre is that it was a period marked by several bans heavily affecting the fields (and "official" results, per 2005). Heras, Basso, Ullrich, Vinokourov, Rasmussen, Contador, Leipheimer, (Armstrong only in case he hadn't retired the first time), Mancebo (arguably) were all better GT riders than Sastre. So I'd say he would be clobbered by most top riders back then as well.
 
There is not a single tread in this forum that doesn't turn into comparing riders to Sastre or Evans.
I can't speak for others but for me it's not about them per se (or any other former Tour winner), but about the Tour itself. And the fact it has an overbearing importance on the calendar & how riders who've won it are considered better whilst who haven't are viewed as lesser. I say this considering what it really is in physical terms: neither particularly harder nor easier than the other GT's on the modern world tour season except perhaps in terms of pressure dripping down from the sponsors & DS, because in terms of the power on the pedals to win it... it's no different (& sometimes it's even easier than its Spanish & Italian GT siblings).

For example Evans was a really tenacious "tough b*stard", i.e. that's how I remember him. But I didn't suddenly think he was a great because he won the Tour de France in 2011. It was great for him obviously, but as a cyclist he didn't go from so-so to wow at the age of 34. Just as I'll remember Roglic as a spectacular climber/puncheur with an awesome TT & one of the best mentalities I've ever seen (all sports included).

A Tour win would be amazing (especially for him), but in isolation it wouldn't change the bigger picture for me. And just to bring this back to this current season, after the Tour I had one concern only: his health (I didn't want another Pinot). But once he showed he had the legs again, all was good.

I mean he could have lost the Vuelta at any point (echelon, fall, whatever), but as long as he was performing as the Primoz Roglic we all know (win or lose), my view wouldn't change.
 
Cycling was much more Tour centric then, and Giro and Vuelta were more often than not dominated by their local riders. For a long while the Vuelta was more or less a grand tour in name and length only. Guys like Nibali and Froome really have helped lift its prestige I feel. Contador too, but he tended to race the Vuelta by circumstances rather than by choice (despite being Spanish).
In 1995 Zülle, Riis, Jalabert, Virenque and Pantani entered the Vuelta. Oh, and Mari as well. So 4 out of the top 6 in the Tour. Admittedly not all arrived in the best of form and I think Festina were sort of a Spanish team even though they changed registration around that time, and ONCE obviously were Spanish.

Point is that the prestige was sufficient enough for all of them to turn up.

Zülle won 2 Vueltas, but around that time also finished 2nd in the Tour twice to people who originally won 12 Tours between them. And those were the only 2 occasions when he had a trouble-free Tour between 1995 and 1999. He also put a fight vs Pantani in the 98 Giro. Point is, Vuelta was generally not won by hacks in the 90's unlike the lazy narrative of 'oh, Jalabert won, it must have been an easy race'.

Also, I have seen every Vuelta in the last 25 years, so I am not sure why it seems like you trying to teach me something about events that I have seen.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
The thing with Sastre is that it was a period marked by several bans heavily affecting the fields (and "official" results, per 2005). Heras, Basso, Ullrich, Vinokourov, Rasmussen, Contador, Leipheimer, (Armstrong only in case he hadn't retired the first time), Mancebo (arguably) were all better GT riders than Sastre. So I'd say he would be clobbered by most top riders back then as well.
QED with the list of people who could 'clobber' Sastre.
 
The thing with Sastre is that it was a period marked by several bans heavily affecting the fields (and "official" results, per 2005). Heras, Basso, Ullrich, Vinokourov, Rasmussen, Contador, Leipheimer, (Armstrong only in case he hadn't retired the first time), Mancebo (arguably) were all better GT riders than Sastre. So I'd say he would be clobbered by most top riders back then as well.
Can you ~ 30 riders after 2000 that would clobber Sastre?
 
If Roglič will be able to keep this level for the next 3 years. Or likely to add a bit to it. I am sure that he will be regarded as being better then Nibali, Contador and Froome before the end of his pro cycling career. One or two Tour titles will for sure help in this regard. But i don't in general feel Tour has such weight over everything else. As in that case Bernal would already be considered to be ahead of Roglič and i don't feel that is the case.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
If Roglič will be able to keep this level for the next 3 years. Or likely to add a bit to it. I am sure that he will be regarded as being better then Nibali, Contador and Froome before the end of his pro cycling career. One or two Tour titles will for sure help in this regard. But i don't in general feel Tour has such weight over everything else. As in that case Bernal would already be considered to be ahead of Roglič and i don't feel that is the case.
As much as I like Roglic, Contador and Froome's palmares are out of reach for someone of his age and especially with someone like Pogacar being around.
 
And to echo what someone mentioned a page or so back - Roglic will forge his own unique palmares. For example, if he was able to win a worlds title (which seems plausible, although by no means certain), that - along with his Olympic gold and monument - would give his palmares a different look compared to the likes of Contador and Froome. I agree with Rackham that it's also about the way the wins are achieved. For example, I think people will remember Froome's Giro above all his Tour wins, despite the fact that he was almost certainly weaker in that Giro.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Professional Road Racing 18

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS