• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. 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!

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

Page 617 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Fair enough. But, as we've seen, it isn't easy to keep someone in a contract that they do not wish to honor these days. So they probably did some expected probability weighted value analysis and decided that, even if there is a chance that Roglic could go to Bora and beat Vingegaard in the Tour this year it still would make more sense to stand by Vingegaard. Letting Roglic go by no means indicates they "know" Roglic could never beat Vingegaard straight up.
The thing is you can't compare this to the Uijtdebroeks situation. When you want to get out of a contract, you need to buy out your contract. That's a bit more expensive when you earn 2 million a year, instead of 100k a year.
If Roglic told them he was leaving no matter what (and was willing to buy out his contract at full price), then obviously my assumption of Visma knowing what he's capable of and letting him go, can also go into the bin. But honestly, i think my assumption is the more likely, but it's still merely an assumption.
 
The thing is you can't compare this to the Uijtdebroeks situation. When you want to get out of a contract, you need to buy out your contract. That's a bit more expensive when you earn 2 million a year, instead of 100k a year.
If Roglic told them he was leaving no matter what (and was willing to buy out his contract at full price), then obviously my assumption of Visma knowing what he's capable of and letting him go, can also go into the bin. But honestly, i think my assumption is the more likely, but it's still merely an assumption.
I don't totally agree with a version that has Jumbo totally confident in what Roglic could do this year on the road. Primoz has been in some form of recovery training for several years so there is an unknown for a shunt-free performance. Jonas has a predictable and likely upward performance arc and is a safer bet if a choice had to be made.
What transpired at the Vuelta and Primoz's advancing age made him an expensive and potentially disruptive addition to the Tour team and JV management was to blame. Roglic's managers would be better suited to a long-term commitment from a solid, supportive team rather than a possibly negative season for results and publicity. If they are smart he and they are looking into retirement as part of performance and image-income planning. He'd probably suffer on both counts within a crowded JV star lineup and Bora's commitment made financial sense from a longer term perspective compared to what could have occurred in his last contract season (was this season his last committed year?)
 
The thing is you can't compare this to the Uijtdebroeks situation. When you want to get out of a contract, you need to buy out your contract. That's a bit more expensive when you earn 2 million a year, instead of 100k a year.
If Roglic told them he was leaving no matter what (and was willing to buy out his contract at full price), then obviously my assumption of Visma knowing what he's capable of and letting him go, can also go into the bin. But honestly, i think my assumption is the more likely, but it's still merely an assumption.
Another possibility is that Visma wants a team working together at the same goals. And was happy with not paying Roglas salary. So they let him go.
 
I think @CyclistAbi is inspired by a certain Slovenian reporter and columnist in their approach to use plenty of full stops instead of subclauses. Marcel is his name. @CyclistAbi, am I close?

My advice would be, before making a decision, listen to all sides involved. Marcel will for sure give you one. As for your question, hopefully i am unique, desire shared by many, but the reality likely being i am not. I came to terms with that.
 
Armstrong forgot two things of course. One, he's an idiot. Two, in this day and age everything is measured and teams know exactly what a rider is capable of. If Roglic had any chance of beating Vingegaard in a 1v1 (by which i mean assuming Vingegaard does not crash or get sick), then they would not have let him go. He was still under contract, and if they thought there was even a remote chance that he could win, knowing both riders capabilities, they would not have taken the risk. Vengeance does not magically unlock more watts that your body was otherwise unable to produce.

Still best if you watch the video yourself, i guess. As the question was never about vengeance. I even wrote on what the question was in my original post. It's just that somehow that never caught up. So now you are basically discussing an interpretation of someone and not necessarily on what was asked and answered. Enjoyment doesn't have to come from vengeance. Enjoyment can stand on it's own and can have other motives too, when it comes to fulfilling it.
 
I don't know. What is it. You don't understand? Read what I write. Aloud. Maybe you can hear. What you say. Does it get through? Shall we practice more. It can become a habit. To always write like this. When I answer you. At some point. You either cry. Or laugh. I hope the latter. First.

When even people who have you on ignore totally get you. The you know you must be doing something right.
 
All of this goes in the bin, because Roglic was still under contract. What you write is perfectly acceptable in case they needed to renew his contract or in case he was free to leave. But he wasn't. If they actually believed he could beat Vingegaard, then they would miss out on a lot more than whatever budget they sold him to Bora, in case he won the TDF for that team instead of theirs. So that simply doesn't make any sense. If that would mean keeping him unhappy for another year, then it would only make sense for them to hold him to his contract and send him to the Giro again.

And sure, form is fickle, training numbers are not competitive numbers etc. But please don't act as if Roglic is some enigma for Visma. They have made him what he is, and worked with him for the better part of a decade. They know what he is capable of in training AND in competition. In any circumstance.

 
As for the discussion itself. The root causes are much more technical, then sentimental. Money, as Visma couldn't afford it more. Both Rogla and Jonas deserved a higher salary and that would not be possible if both would stay. Racing style, Rogla and Jonas don't have the same racing style. Considering they were now both leaders at the same team, that would just not work any more. Rogla racing style would always be impaired artificiality, by his team. First of all Jonas wouldn't pull for Rogla any more and Rogla would always have to wait for Jonas to implode, before getting his chance. Raise of Sepp didn't help either. It's like if the team is pushing every member of your team ahead, then you know the team doesn't really care about your personal ambitions and leaderships any more. Then there is the sports side of it. Rogla wants to win all and Bora wants that too. Visma was instead rather OK with Rogla not winning the Tour. So it's a no brainier. From fan side of things obviously this is a big win-win.

P.S. As for remark, by some, on how Visma will pull so hard, for Jonas, that everything else will fall apart. That is rather short-sighted take on it. Considering Visma was doing exactly that for Rogla in years prior, and Rogla managed just fine. So pull Visma, hopefully.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
@CyclistAbi Are you talking to yourself? There are 8 posts of you alone underneath each other...

It's in my opinion about basic rules of bon ton. To respond to each person in it's own post. That shows you see some value in it. But i can tuck your quotes somewhere in the middle. If you prefer that.

P.S. Nah, never mind that. In the end i will decide on where it makes sense to respond individually and when there is really no additional value in doing that.
 
It's in my opinion about basic rules of bon ton. To respond to each person in it's own post. That shows you see some value in it. But i can tuck your quotes somewhere in the middle. If you prefer that.

P.S. Nah, never mind that. In the end i will decide on where it makes sense to respond individually and when there is really no additional value in doing that.
You have 3 posts underneath each other that is just you, and only quoting yourself. You can go ahead with that, it's your choice, just pointing out it's annoying to read, and will make me avoid this topic.
 
At this point so much posts from the same user are turning the thread into a monolog. As tiresome as reading the usual tantrums from the usual users that don't add nothing.

Sorry, but no. I will continue as i see it fit.

You have 3 posts underneath each other that is just you, and only quoting yourself. You can go ahead with that, it's your choice, just pointing out it's annoying to read, and will make me avoid this topic.

I have no problem with that.