Milan San Remo, March 21, 2026, 298 km monument

[KoopaCycling]

When's "the last couple of years" for you?

I fail to see the point you are trying to make. WVA won sprints from a full peloton in the tour. and he was not slow by 2021. but definitely he has not been quite same since his crash in 24.

 

[kingjr]

I fail to see the point you are trying to make. WVA won sprints from a full peloton in the tour. and he was not slow by 2021. but definitely he has not been quite same since his crash in 24.

Pogacar beat him convincingly in 2022

 

[KoopaCycling]

I contradicted myself? WTH? You are a lost cause, bye.

You honestly believe he would have sit up and not ridden had MVDP and Pidcock chosen to work less. Allowed a chasing peloton to come back and nullify all the effort on the climbs?

The all flat section between Cipressa and Poggio? Of course not

If others didn't cooperate at all, Pogacar wouldn't pull them all the way between Cipressa and Poggio (specially on a headwind). They would have been caught.

Thank you for making clear your contradiction

 

[canina82]

You honestly believe he would have sit up and not ridden had MVDP and Pidcock chosen to work less. Allowed a chasing peloton to come back and nullify all the effort on the climbs?






Thank you for making clear your contradiction

Where is the contradiction? Lol

 

[KoopaCycling]

Pogacar beat him convincingly in 2022

Again are you saying WVA was slow during his faster sprint years? I made clear why i posted, what i posted about Pidcock sprint speed. It's what i believe. It's not even close to a hill i'm willing to die over, it's just what i believe that pidcock a sprint sleeper and his top speed would surprise people. clearly you discovered he was well and truly fast before i came to that conclusion. I felt/feel Pidcock could/probably has the fastest top speed of the 3. hence why i believe he is intrinsically the fastest sprinter of the 3. But again, it's not a hill i'd die on. it's just a minor assumption on my part.

 

[KoopaCycling]

Where is the contradiction? Lol

First you say yes, then you say no to the same question. it's why i asked you to clarify it to me. Come now, it's all on thread a few pages back.

 

[canina82]

First you say yes, then you say no to the same question. it's why i asked you to clarify it to me. Come now, it's all on thread a few pages back.

I recommend you to read again. Maybe you will understand in any moment I changed my opinion. Lack of arguments does this and eventually a very bold brain, as most us here can read from your posts.

 

[KoopaCycling]

First you say yes, then you say no to the same question. it's why i asked you to clarify it to me. Come now, it's all on thread a few pages back.

You laugh but the quotes are clear

and now you say you changed your opinion. No doubt you did.

This is not me saying you can not change your opinion on something.
But again, the quotes are clear enough.

 

[kingjr]

Again are you saying WVA was slow during his faster sprint years? I made clear why i posted, what i posted about Pidcock sprint speed. It's what i believe. It's not even close to a hill i'm willing to die over, it's just what i believe that pidcock a sprint sleeper and his top speed would surprise people. clearly you discovered he was well and truly fast before i came to that condlusion.

It's very clear what I've said. If you choose not to understand it, that's fine. But I'm glad you concede your assumption may be wrong.

 

[canina82]

You laugh but the quotes are clear

Show me where did I say no and then yes.

 

[KoopaCycling]

You honestly believe he would have sit up and not ridden had MVDP and Pidcock chosen to work less. Allowed a chasing peloton to come back and nullify all the effort on the climbs?

The all flat section between Cipressa and Poggio? Of course not

If others didn't cooperate at all, Pogacar wouldn't pull them all the way between Cipressa and Poggio (specially on a headwind). They would have been caught.

 

[KoopaCycling]

It's very clear what I've said. If you choose not to understand it, that's fine. But I'm glad you concede your assumption may be wrong.

No please feel free to make it clear. I assume you mean my hypothesis on pidcock sprint speed holds little merit.

 

[canina82]

You honestly believe he would have sit up and not ridden had MVDP and Pidcock chosen to work less. Allowed a chasing peloton to come back and nullify all the effort on the climbs?






Thank you for making clear your contradiction

Dude, again. If they didn't cooperate, they would have been caught because Pogacar wouldn't drag those 2 (pulling close to his limit).
What happened is Pogacar worked significantly more since his attack on Cipressa but needed the other 2 to take some pulls, if not the break was doomed. Those 2 rode the perfect race, MVP already did this last year and was successful, unfortunately this year he wasn't good enough.
Pidcock maximized his own chance of winning by taking less pulls (maintaing the gap to the peloton and preserve some energy) and rely on his sprint against Pogacar. He wasn't good enough in the sprint. What you don't get it?
Jesus.

 

[KoopaCycling]

Dude, again. If they didn't cooperate, they would have been caught because Pogacar wouldn't drag those 2 (pulling close to his limit).
What happened is Pogacar worked significantly more since his attack on Cipressa but needed the other 2 to take some pulls, if not the break was doomed. Those 2 rode the perfect race, MVP already did this last year and was successful, unfortunately this year he wasn't good enough.
Pidcock maximized his own chance of winning by taking less pulls (maintaing the gap to the peloton and preserve some energy) and rely on his sprint against Pogacar. He wasn't good enough in the sprint. What you don't get it?
Jesus.

Sure that's what you say now and believe now.
I got it. people can change their opinion and all that. All good, i understand.

 

[AmRacer]

Sure that's what you say now and believe now.
I got it. people can change their opinion and all that. All good, i understand.

You believe, we know.

 

[canina82]

Sure that's what you say now and believe now.
I got it. people can change their opinion and all that. All good, i understand.

I didn't change anything, mate. I said this multiple times, maybe I should write in caps lock.

 

[Pantani_lives]

do we know MVDP's times for Cipressa and Poggio compared to last year?

Cipressa 2024
Peloton 9:26

Cipressa 2025
Pogacar, Van der Poel, Ganna 8:55
Peloton 9:35

Cipressa 2026
Pogacar 8:47
Pidcock, Van der Poel 8:55

Poggio 2024
Pogacar, Van der Poel 5:38
Group Philipsen 5:41

Poggio 2025
Pogacar, Van der Poel 5:55
Ganna 6:03

Poggio 2026
Pogacar, Pidcock 5:44
Van der Poel 5:57
Group Pedersen 5:55

Subiendo como una moto

www.climbing-records.com

 

[mikks]

Sure that's what you say now and believe now.
I got it. people can change their opinion and all that. All good, i understand.

I’m sorry, KoopaCycling—you seem like a reasonable guy, but over the last few pages, you seem to have a weird obsession.
It’s actually quite simple: both MVDP and Pidcock rode correctly. You have a better chance of getting a strong result, or possibly winning, from a group of three (and later two) than from a group of 40. All these retrospective 'ifs and buts' might be interesting, but in the end, both acted rationally.
Even if MVDP later says he felt weaker than last year, he definitely didn't feel that much weaker—he and Pidcock were the only ones able to follow Pogačar on the Cipressa. He obviously believed in his chances and wanted to push on. Of course, we know now that he was dropped on the Poggio, but he wasn't totally cooked; the peloton still couldn't catch him, meaning he was still strong. At that point in the race, he couldn't have known exactly what was ahead.
This is even truer for Pidcock, who, by your own admission, is the better sprinter and made a rational decision to carry on. It’s not like they were pulling like madmen and going into red the whole time. They managed their efforts and held something back—the fact that the peloton was closing proves they weren't going over the top. They raced logically, making decisions based on the information they had at the moment rather than in retrospect

 

[KoopaCycling]

I’m sorry, KoopaCycling—you seem like a reasonable guy, but over the last few pages, you seem to have a weird obsession.
It’s actually quite simple: both MVDP and Pidcock rode correctly. You have a better chance of getting a strong result, or possibly winning, from a group of three (and later two) than from a group of 40. All these retrospective 'ifs and buts' might be interesting, but in the end, both acted rationally.
Even if MVDP later says he felt weaker than last year, he definitely didn't feel that much weaker—he and Pidcock were the only ones able to follow Pogačar on the Cipressa. He obviously believed in his chances and wanted to push on. Of course, we know now that he was dropped on the Poggio, but he wasn't totally cooked; the peloton still couldn't catch him, meaning he was still strong. At that point in the race, he couldn't have known exactly what was ahead.
This is even truer for Pidcock, who, by your own admission, is the better sprinter and made a rational decision to carry on. It’s not like they were pulling like madmen and going into red the whole time. They managed their efforts and held something back—the fact that the peloton was closing proves they weren't going over the top. They raced logically, making decisions based on the information they had at the moment rather than in retrospect

It's not a weird obsession, and i have no problem with your assesment. In a few days i'll have already forgotten about this thread till someone reminds me.

I just stated what i believe to be true during the actual race, and what i still believe after the race.
If no one else agrees that's fine. I still think my tactics would have served Pidcock more.
Everyone else is fine to believe Pidcock rode it perfectly and think me a bit daft for thinking otherwise.

I just don't appreciate the manner of some people here, so i see no need to be kind in return to them, and prefer to just answer them in a similar fashion. i long learned that turning the other cheek only goes so far.

 

[Oldman]

Not every crash is the same. Pogacar slid away. That’s not the same as suddenly a bike being thrown at you, falling hard, your nail being perforated and barely being able to hold your bike

TP described the crash as you said: slide out; no big impact. MvP sounded like his hand took a beating. That could seriously mess with braking on either killer descent.

 

[red_flanders]

The descent off the Poggio stood out a lot for me too. He clearly knows that descent like the back of his hand - he seemed to be pushing Pidcock pretty hard, and he's probably the best descender in the peloton.

All this. Also Pidcock was tired. And Pogacar is a really good bike handler.

 

[mikks]

It's not a weird obsession, and i have no problem with your assesment. In a few days i'll have already forgotten about this thread till someone reminds me.

I just stated what i believe to be true during the actual race, and what i still believe after the race.
If no one else agrees that's fine. I still think my tactics would have served Pidcock more.
Everyone else is fine to believe Pidcock rode it perfectly and think me a bit daft for thinking otherwise.

I just don't appreciate the manner of some people here, so i see no need to be kind in return to them, and prefer to just answer them in a similar fashion. i long learned that turning the other cheek only

It seems to me that you are arguing that Pidcock, Van der Poel, and everyone else have to invest heavily in G2 syndrome—accepting that someone else is not just better, but so massively better that they are always racing for second place.
Maybe you are right; maybe this attitude brings better results from time to time (Valverde would approve), and maybe they can get another Amstel or something. But, I can guarantee that if Van der Poel or Pidcock follow your advice, they will ultimately win less.
G2 syndrome is not easy to manage; you cannot just switch it on or off when it suits you. If you accept that G2 syndrome is your best chance—for instance, in RVV 2022, MVDP dropping Pogacar’s wheel immediately and thinking, "I cannot follow Pogacar; I hope Van Baarle brings me back"—it might work occasionally. But I guarantee that if Mvdp or Pidcock accept that mindset, their palmares will ultimately be smaller

 

[aphronesis]

As to the TP/MVdP crash: functional injury is also going to divert more energy than a body blow.

 

[Sciatic]

Pogacar beat him convincingly in 2022

Not sure where this discussion is going, but Wout outsprinted Pogacar and MVDP at E3 in 2023

 

[KoopaCycling]

It seems to me that you are arguing that Pidcock, Van der Poel, and everyone else have to invest heavily in G2 syndrome—accepting that someone else is not just better, but so massively better that they are always racing for second place.
Maybe you are right; maybe this attitude brings better results from time to time (Valverde would approve), and maybe they can get another Amstel or something. But, I can guarantee that if Van der Poel or Pidcock follow your advice, they will ultimately win less.
G2 syndrome is not easy to manage; you cannot just switch it on or off when it suits you. If you accept that G2 syndrome is your best chance—for instance, in RVV 2022, MVDP dropping Pogacar’s wheel immediately and thinking, "I cannot follow Pogacar; I hope Van Baarle brings me back"—it might work occasionally. But I guarantee that if Mvdp or Pidcock accept that mindset, their palmares will ultimately be smaller

Not really. I decide in my mind what i believe would be the best tactics from race to race that i watch. Every race is different. And so too what tactics i would employ if i was the one deciding. It is not a fixed mindset in how i would approach every race. Ofcourse im not the one doing it and feeling the legs. But neither do the people in the car. Im also always thinking of the win. Not about getting a good podium. Unless its a stage race and riding a certain way could get you the overall. Im still thinking about the win. But the overall win. Not the stage win. Stage wins are not important to me in a gc. Just a nice bonus. I will say that if you are the 'weaker' rider you would try and find ways to nullify the difference or find ways to turn the situation in your favour so you end up strongest/ winning. Visma in the giro of last year did a wonderful job of turning the GT in their favour. Whilst UAE failed to get the win when they probably had the best rider in the race.