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

Page 173 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I don't want to do this constant downgrading, because Roglic is such an impressive cyclist. It's just that I think his fans sometimes tend to get carried away a bit. For some reasons Pogacar just doesn't have the same number of fans around here, but that's not due to Roglic's superior achievements.
Sure. But my own bias is the product of the entire bigger picture.

For me Pogacar is a child prodigy produced & packaged by a well oiled system which was designed to deliver champions. He just happens to be an extremely talented version of something we've seen before (child bike riders who've been nurtured into becoming a champion), although his precociousness is a bit new. And the fact he's Slovenian isn't anything unusual either, not in this Europe, i.e. they've had an infrastructure there for a while now.

Primoz Roglic meanwhile... he was a junior ski jumper who threw himself off a ramp & almost killed himself. A man who worked as a janitor. A guy who sold his motorbike to pay for a road bike.

He spammed emails to all the people in the pro cycling scene in Slovenia to be given a chance. I've read stories about his wild crashes (because he didn't know how to ride in the peloton at first, although he did manage well in TT's because he could choose his own trajectory). Lotto Jumbo didn't even have a budget for a rider when they took him to the Netherlands for tests, but they found out he was a (their quote) "Ferrari". In one of his first major results, he finished second to Tom Dumoulin in a TT (Frans Maassen himself said neither Roglic nor Jumbo knew how to properly do TT at the time!).

I could go on & on. Bottom line, this is a self made guy who learned the hard way to maximize his own athletic potential in a sport he was foreign to. So from my point of view, Roglic's exploits (such as recently climbing the Lagos de Covadonga like he's possessed by Marco Pantani's spirit) mean way more than Pogacar's.
 
It was a strong performance still the filed was not the strongest. Lets not forget Carapaz and Vingegaard came to this race as domestiques. Both losing their leaders. I can't rate TDF 2021 win higher then Vuelta 2021 win. It's around the same for me. Giro 2021 win was solid to.
Carapaz was a co-leader who had just won the Tour de Suisse. Yes, Vingegaard was supposed to help Roglic but by that time it was obvious that he would ride for himself. Both showed good form in the Tour (albeit in warmer weather) but it was clear that they couldn't deliver enough power on that cold, rainy day (Pog could and that was very impressive).
 
There is another thing Jumbo Visma is forgetting. When they came back as Lotto Jumbo, they were nowhere. No talent for winning GTs or stage races. It was Primož Roglič that put them on the map and forced them to start thinking about building a GT team. It was Primož Roglič, that gave them so many wins, so they could get more sponsors and later on be interesting to other good riders. It's Primož Roglič that keeps JV as a top team in every race he enters (and Wout now also). If anyone, Primož Roglič deserved 100% support of JV team.

And i don't have a feeling he's getting it. I watched this years "Plan B" movie by Jumbo Visma. Not impressed as it came out as Roglič crashing is no big deal at all. Like winning TdF wasn't on their radar anyway. If Roglič would be from Netherlands/Belgium, he would be a national hero with total control in this team. But he's just a humble Slovenian happy to ride his bike. Despite that...one of the best.
 
No to the first question. TIf they had the same number of big wins I would give Pog the edge but it's not the case.

Second question: both are kind of minor achievements, compared to their big wins. I would rate Rogla's gold higher, but only in case of a tie break.
Rominger (3 vuelta, 1 giro, 2 lombardia) versus Lemond (3 tdf, 2 wrr)?
 
Carapaz was a co-leader who had just won the Tour de Suisse. Yes, Vingegaard was supposed to help Roglic but by that time it was obvious that he would ride for himself. Both showed good form in the Tour (albeit in warmer weather) but it was clear that they couldn't deliver enough power on that cold, rainy day (Pog could and that was very impressive).
Pogacar's destruction of Carapaz in that Tour stage was the most brutal clobbering I've seen in a while.

Impressive stuff. And on his current trajectory, Pogacar is in Merckx mode. But I couldn't ever be a fan of such a rider. It's like being a Michael Schumacher or Lewis Hamilton fan. I mean who gets excited for this sort of performance? Yeah it's athletically amazing so respect is due, but on an emotional or human level... nope.

Maybe that will come later once Pogacar has had a few bad moments which make him appear human.

There is another thing Jumbo Visma is forgetting. When they came back as Lotto Jumbo, they were nowhere. No talent for winning GTs or stage races. It was Primož Roglič that put them on the map and forced them to start thinking about building a GT team. It was Primož Roglič, that gave them so many wins, so they could get more sponsors and later on be interesting to other good riders. It's Primož Roglič that keeps JV as a top team in every race he enters (and Wout now also). If anyone, Primož Roglič deserved 100% support of JV team.

And i don't have a feeling he's getting it. I watched this years "Plan B" movie by Jumbo Visma. Not impressed as it came out as Roglič crashing is no big deal at all. Like winning TdF wasn't on their radar anyway. If Roglič would be from Netherlands/Belgium, he would be a national hero with total control in this team. But he's just a humble Slovenian happy to ride his bike. Despite that...one of the best.
Agreed.

I hated that Plan B documentary. The lack of self-awareness was extraordinary & the treatment of Primoz was borderline tone deaf (i.e. just shrugging his disaster off with a "oh well, Jonas is the man now"). They acted like he was an afterthought. The only chance JV had of winning the Tour was with Roglic. The only chance they had of having a successful Tour was with Roglic.

Any team can assemble good riders & go stage hunting (or even target auxiliary rewards like a green jersey), but going for yellow requires one of the top 3 GT riders in the world & they have that with Primoz Roglic. But there were a few moments (beneath the sanitized presentation) which hinted at certain issues, like Grischa Niermann getting really uncomfortable in the car during the stage in which Roglic cracked just before the Alps (when he said something like "we hurt them today, but we hurt our Primoz too"). And the guy sitting next to him in the car telling him to make the call to back Jonas at that point. I mean at least it looked like a hard decision.

On a similar topic, I enjoyed this insta post by Nathan van Hooydonck after the Vuelta:

http://instagr.am/p/CTelFlesjQK/ View: https://www.instagram.com/p/CTelFlesjQK/


If they want to win the Tour, they need the same commitment. Not half way with split objectives, no, full focus.
 
Lemond for me.
Lemond has some obvious extras in his favor, like his recovery from his injuries + the fact his TT aero bars revolutionized the sport.

That Tour win over Fignon is one of the all time highlights of the sport (probably top 10 in most lists), something Rominger wouldn't even match had he won a Tour himself against Indurain (unless the circumstances had been similarly memorable).
 
Rominger (3 vuelta, 1 giro, 2 lombardia) versus Lemond (3 tdf, 2 wrr)?
This is obviously very debatable. People giving the Tour a much higher value than other GTs would always pick Lemond's palmares.
Personally I don't think the Tour should count more than other big wins in the grand scheme of things. But even if you believe it should, how much more should it count? If it's something like 1,2 : 1 then Rominger's palmares is still superior. If you bump it to 1,5:1 then Lemond's is better.
Lemond's career also has legendary traits due to unmeasurable factors, so I guess this is a case where a pure number system like mine should probably be dismissed.
 
Carapaz was a co-leader who had just won the Tour de Suisse. Yes, Vingegaard was supposed to help Roglic but by that time it was obvious that he would ride for himself. Both showed good form in the Tour (albeit in warmer weather) but it was clear that they couldn't deliver enough power on that cold, rainy day (Pog could and that was very impressive).
Vingegaard crashed and hurt his shoulder just before Romme.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
If you have a couple years more of racing ahead and already have 58 wins, Olympic medal, WC medal, GT hat-trick, monument, prestigious wins on stages, one day and week races. No way is that out of reach.
I was thinking in terms of 7+ GTs. I just don't think that's likely. But, as I mentioned in my followup post, I don't necessarily think he needs that to have a unique and well remembered palmares.
 
Reactions: Carols
This is obviously very debatable. People giving the Tour a much higher value than other GTs would always pick Lemond's palmares.
Those 2 Rainbows make a Big Difference also!

According to UCI points (Tour 1000, Giro 850, Vuelta 850) 3 Vueltas = 2.55 Tours. Add in 2 WCRRs and its not even a competion.

Plus the comeback from being shot to win the Tour by 8 seconds and the LeMond Legend Grows.

Roglic has a bit of work to do yet to be mentioned in the same breath as LeMond. Personally I think he has the physical and mental capabilities to do it. I'll enjoy watching him try.
 
Lemond has some obvious extras in his favor, like his recovery from his injuries + the fact his TT aero bars revolutionized the sport.

That Tour win over Fignon is one of the all time highlights of the sport (probably top 10 in most lists), something Rominger wouldn't even match had he won a Tour himself against Indurain (unless the circumstances had been similarly memorable).
Lemond also won races with weak team support or, in one Tour instance, a teammate fighting to divide the squad in an attempt to beat him. Not too many current day riders could win in that scenario.
 
Apr 14, 2021
253
398
1,230
And the number of times Roglic beat Pogacar is 3. And in 2 of them Pogacar was U21.

What is weird is to think that there is less progression possible in a rider who is 9 years younger and is finishing his 3rd WT year.
We have plenty of evidence of riders not progressing the way they were expected to given their young age. I could probably make a case that more often than not prodigies disappoint and do not meet the standards set by the initial hype. I’m not going to do that because it’s irrelevant to our specific case. I’ll just say that I don’t think there is less progression possible in rider that is 9 years younger but it’s definitely not weird if one doesn’t just assume that a younger rider will progress significantly. Especially if his level is already as high as Pogacar’s...
 
What makes you think Roglic is inferior to Pogacar?
Agreed with the take that evidence is minimal that Pogacar is better than Roglic. He has been clearly better than Roglic in, what, 1 stage (2020 Tour ITT) out of all their battles? With Roglic better in others, albeit to a lesser degree, and some ambiguous cases where Roglic might have let Pogacar ride away.

On the flipside, hid monster performances are definitely a leading indicator that we might get more evidence of his superiority as they continue to battle one another.

All things considered, I see them as 1a (Pogacar) and 1b (Roglic) in the hierarchy and think luck, team, crashes, echelons, etc. will likely decide. Both are exceptional and well-rounded.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
If you ignore the "what if?" questions regarding Pogacar's performance in the Alps in the Tour (namely "could Roglic have followed?"), then the only real area where Pogacar has demonstrated he has a small advantage in direct confrontations over the past year is in his timing of uphill sprints.

I don't even think he's more explosive, I just think he's pretty equal & beat Roglic tactically on a few occasions more than physically (like in an uphill sprint in Itzulia Basque Country this year or the Grand Colombier stage in last year's Tour).
 
Reactions: Eeslliw
If you ignore the "what if?" questions regarding Pogacar's performance in the Alps in the Tour (namely "could Roglic have followed?"), then the only real area where Pogacar has demonstrated he has a small advantage in direct confrontations over the past year is in his timing of uphill sprints.

I don't even think he's more explosive, I just think he's pretty equal & beat Roglic tactically on a few occasions more than physically (like in an uphill sprint in Itzulia Basque Country this year or the Grand Colombier stage in last year's Tour).
Pogacar also beats Roglic convincingly in staying on the bike, arguably the most important aspect of cycling.
 
Pogacar also beats Roglic convincingly in staying on the bike, arguably the most important aspect of cycling.
Not many people noticed, but Pogacar did crash in the Tour this year (stage 3, same as Roglic but less severe consequences obviously). People who follow him on social media also know he can crash in training as well (he did so earlier this year). So I know there's some banter out there (or even some pretty harsh criticism) about Roglic crashing a lot, but in cycling sooner or later everyone hits the deck.

Roglic just happens to have some famous crashes & losses.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Professional Road Racing 18

ASK THE COMMUNITY