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

[AmRacer]

But not everything

He did

 

[KoopaCycling]

Nope

Ah, so Pidcock did win?

 

[yaco]

As he failed to win when he had the potential to do so, he obviously did not.

Is it possible Pidcock was not good enough? After all, Pogacar did the majority of the riding in the group.

 

[AmRacer]

Ah, so Pidcock did win?

No, he come second

 

[KoopaCycling]

No, he come second

Then he got it wrong. Unless Pidcock never had a chance. Which i really don't agree with.

 

[YavorD]

But not everything

Yes. He messed up the final sprint. He rode the race perfectly though.

 

[AmRacer]

The he got it wrong. Unless Pidcock never had a chance. Which i really don't agree with.

Nope, it was the correct tactic. He gave himself the best possible shot to win.

 

[Salvarani]

Every rider that doesnt win has used the wrong tactics is what we can conclude.

 

[KoopaCycling]

If it's that close, yes

 

[KoopaCycling]

Not even sure why Pogacar fans are reacting this way. Not like his rivals actually used the right tactics to beat him. Instead they failed to capitalise & Pogacar (aside from being the strongest rider in the race) thus managed the win.

 

[YavorD]

If it's that close, yes

I wonder, would you do the same argument for Pogacar having to pull less if he didn't win the race?
I think no.
So you're obviously biased and this is clouding your judgement.

 

[AmRacer]

Not even sure why Pogacar fans are re-acting this way. Not like his rivals actually used the right tactics to beat him. Instead they failed to capitalise & Pogacar (aside from being the strongest rider in the race) thus managed the win.

Not sure why you are acting this way. Pidcock used the correct tactic.

 

[HashRouge]

Not even sure why Pogacar fans are re-acting this way. Not like his rivals actually used the right tactics to beat him. Instead they failed to capitalise & Pogacar (aside from being the strongest rider in the race) thus managed the win.

It's not just Pogacar fans though, is it? It's everyone.

I admire your dedication to this argument though.

 

[Salvarani]

It's not just Pogacar fans though, is it? It's everyone.

I admire your dedication to this argument though.

He kind of told us why he has been dedicated with that post.

 

[canina82]

Not even sure why Pogacar fans are re-acting this way. Not like his rivals actually used the right tactics to beat him. Instead they failed to capitalise & Pogacar (aside from being the strongest rider in the race) thus managed the win.

The question is: are just Pogacar fans who have this opinion? I already read 5 or 6 people saying Pidcock rode perfectly (or close to) but I didn't see anyone supporting your opinion.
I will tell one thing, if the "world" is saying one thing and you are alone defending the opposite, probably it means you are wrong.
But for me it's over. Keep having your bold opinions.

 

[KoopaCycling]

I wonder, would you do the same argument for Pogacar having to pull less if he didn't win the race?
I think no.
So you're obviously biased and this is clouding your judgement.

Hmm, that's slightly different. The onus is on Pogacar more. He is the 'goat' after all. the one trying to go solo and break his rivals. Whilst the others are trying to hang on. After what we've seen last couple of years it would take Remco or MVDP madness to pull more than Pogacar. Clearly a 'weaker' rider like Pidcock needs to play it more tactically.

I mean Pogacar is the one who went on the Cipressa and Poggio. Only natural he carries the race given that he is also not incapable of winning the sprint in a small group.

Ofcourse if i'm playing devil's advocate and i am pogacar and I manage to trick my opponents into riding for me so i can do less and save my legs all the power to him. that's just good tactics. And he actually succeeded in doing that yesterday. If memory serves, but need to rewatch he kinda managed to do the same in Amstel gold last year, Using Remco's hubris. But could be wrong, would need to rewatch. What matters is, does pogacar believe he can make the others do enough to stay ahead of the peloton? if the answer is yes, then he should work less. if the answer is no. He does not feel the others are strong enough to stay out of the peloton's clutches, then he can't afford to do less.

Hence why i can understand the view that if you believe the peloton comes back if pidcock does not work, him working with Pogacar makes sense. But if you like me believe the peloton never comes back once past the Poggio, then him working with Pogacar does not make sense.

 

[canina82]

It's not just Pogacar fans though, is it? It's everyone.

I admire your dedication to this argument though.

It's natural bias, read the Clinic and you can understand that. It's him and the other belgian who said Pogacar wins most of his races by sheer luck. At least we have entertainment.

 

[KoopaCycling]

The question is: are just Pogacar fans who have this opinion? I already read 5 or 6 people saying Pidcock rode perfectly (or close to) but I didn't see anyone supporting your opinion.
I will tell one thing, if the "world" is saying one thing and you are alone defending the opposite, probably it means you are wrong.
But for me it's over. Keep having your bold opinions.

Not quite true actually. the entire world could easily have it wrong.

 

[AmRacer]

Hmm, that's slightly different. The onus is on Pogacar more. He is the 'goat' after all. the one trying to go solo and break his rivals. Whilst the others are trying to hang on. After what we've seen last couple of years it would take Remco or MVDP madness to pull more than Pogacar. Clearly a weaker rider like Pidcock needs to play it more tactically.

I mean Pogacar is the one who went on the Cipressa and Poggio. Only natural he carries the race given that he is also not incapable of winning the sprint in a small group.

Ofcourse if i'm playing devil's advocate and i am pogacar and I manage enough to trick my opponents into riding for me so i can do less and save my legs all the power to him. that's just good tactics. And he actually succeeded in doing that yesterday. If memory serves, but need to rewatch he kinda managed to do the same in Amstel gold last year, Using Remco's hubris. But could be wrong, would need to rewatch. What matters is, does pogacar believe he can make the others do enough to stay ahead of the peloton? if the answer is yes, then he should work less. if the answer is no. He does not feel the others are strong enough to stay out of the peloton's clutches, then he can't afford to do less.

Hence why i can understand the view that if you believe the peloton comes back if pidcock does not work, him working with Pogacar makes sense. But if you like me believe the peloton never comes back once past the Poggio, then him working with Pogacar does not make sense.

If you believe something, then it makes sense for you.
I don't believe, I know Pidcock used the correct tactic.

 

[AmRacer]

Not quite true actually

It is though.

 

[KoopaCycling]

If you believe something, then it makes sense for you.
I don't believe, I know Pidcock used the correct tactic.

yes this i can agree with. You believe in your tactics (even if that failed to secure him the win), and i believe mine have more merit.

 

[AmRacer]

yes this i can agree with. You believe in your tactics (even if that failed to secure him the win), and i believe mine have more merit.

I don't believe, I know. You believe. Your tacit has zero merit.

 

[KoopaCycling]

I don't believe, I know. You believe. Your tacit has zero merit.

That's clearly just an assumption on your part, proven further by the result we got.
Just as I assume my tactics would have been better.

 

[YavorD]

Hmm, that's slightly different. The onus is on Pogacar more. He is the 'goat' after all. the one trying to go solo and break his rivals. Whilst the others are trying to hang on. After what we've seen last couple of years it would take Remco or MVDP madness to pull more than Pogacar. Clearly a weaker rider like Pidcock needs to play it more tactically.

I mean Pogacar is the one who went on the Cipressa and Poggio. Only natural he carries the race given that he is also not incapable of winning the sprint in a small group.

Ofcourse if i'm playing devil's advocate and i am pogacar and I manage enough to trick my opponents into riding for me so i can do less and save my legs all the power to him. that's just good tactics. And he actually succeeded in doing that yesterday. If memory serves, but need to rewatch he kinda managed to do the same in Amstel gold last year, Using Remco's hubris. But could be wrong, would need to rewatch. What matters is, does pogacar believe he can make the others do enough to stay ahead of the peloton? if the answer is yes, then he should work less. if the answer is no. He does not feel the others are strong enough to stay out of the peloton's clutches, then he can't afford to do less.

Hence why i can understand the view that if you believe the peloton comes back if pidcock does not work, him working with Pogacar makes sense. But if you like me believe the peloton never comes back once past the Poggio, then him working with Pogacar does not make sense.

No, it's not mostly on Pogacar.
Pidcock never won a monument, never had a better shot of winning one. It's far from a guaranteed that he'll ever have a better shot.
You don't waste your best shot by playing silly games. Especially not if you're the strongest sprinter (since you yourself claimed that you think he is better than Van Der Poel).

 

[KoopaCycling]

No, it's not mostly on Pogacar.
Pidcock never won a monument, never had a better shot of winning one. It's far from a guaranteed that he'll ever have a better shot.
You don't waste your best shot by playing silly games. Especially not if you're the strongest sprinter (since you yourself claimed that you think he is better than Van Der Poel).

It really is. Comes with the territory of being the best