Pogacar v Merckx

[Charlyghoul]

Hi forum,

I found this place six months (the Mou stuff) and I find it amazing. The different characters you guys have and the insights on racing.

I created an account especially for this, because I believe there is a clearcut top 3 ever, also in a clear order, and I must admit I am not too convinced by the arguments trying to show there are others cracking in. Also, I am talking about the more or less televised era, so since mid-1960s, not the Miroir des Sports / radio type of transmission.

It's, Merckx, Hinault then Pogacar. The bloodline between the three is clear and really shines red above any other.

I find it strange that Hinault seems often overlooked, or at least not discussed, especially given the pure strength and fear he conveyed to the opponents in his best years. He was basically a brutal leader and as agressive as his big brother and their incenstuous son. His feats are mythical: he won NBN 1980, and the following year Roubaix sprinting against De Vlaeminck and Moser (with the World's jersey); being first and foremost: a 10/10 GT-hit man. His last tours with LeMond are so dramatic and full of veinous will to win; much like Anquetil he was hated by the French and never was quite the national hero, mostly because he was so blatantly sans faiblesse riding. Obviously he wasn't as good as Pogacar in one-day racing; still, he won five monuments in a competitive era.

Now, it's very clear also that Pogacar, in my time of watching cycling, is comparable to no one. He transforms the sport the way Jokic transforms basketball. I believe next year he could already overtake Hinault if he wins Roubaix and a Vuelta. What really stands out, much like with Merckx, is his winning rate in Monuments (9/19). By the end of his career, I hope he can be called Merckx's equal.

About the comparing eras: to me, you have to compare three factors (I don't buy too much into the weaker era stuff, although the larger pool is potentially a thing). The palmares, the feeling of the peloton, and the feeling among viewers. Reading a few biographies and recounts of pre-1990s time (which is less visually documented), it's striking that Hinault and Merckx were lords in the peloton, that everybody looked at like gods amongst children. Although Hinault did not have the same feeling of inevitability for viewers in one-day racing, he was still a clear top 5 rider (!) in his generation. And most importantly, he won and lost very big in dramatic conditions, which enhances the gut feeling of peloton/viewers, like with Poggie. I don't think people can seriously say Anquetil, Coppi or Bartali are as strong: they simply lack racing days and/or classics and GT achievements compared to Merckx and Hinault.

So I think right now Hinault is still a bit over Poggie; potentially by the end of next year Teddy will have overtaken him due to Classics success and completing the Grand Tour treble.

Good points on Hinault
The classics riders in his era were very strong indeed, we must allow for some lesser monuments from him.
Coppi can have so many more victories without the war.
Look at his 1949. Post war, past prime, and does the double, San remo, Lombardy and national champs.
Remember it’s after some years as a prisoner and he can’t even ride a bike. Another 4 years later he’s world champion!
Amazing

 

[saunaking]

Merckx and Teddy are both in the top tier. Nobody else is. At this point debating which is 'better' or has more 'talent' is pointless and boring. If teddy can match or exceed eddy's palmares then there will be no doubt

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Eddy is closing the gap to Teddy but he may pay for it: his age takes its toll.

 

[Oldman]

We all lose.

He wins for creating responses to questions no one should even ask. But it's a new thing. Are all of these threads essentially the same invitation to have an opinion...? I trust your evaluation and can avoid future self abuse.

 

[Potomac]

Merckx....the name looks cooler, and sounds cooler.

[bangs gavel] Adjudicated!

 

[Charlyghoul]

Merckx....the name looks cooler, and sounds cooler.

[bangs gavel] Adjudicated!

Yes, it is one of the cooler Belgian names, ‘evenopoel’ for instance doesn’t evoke danger, or coolness, without doing the rider himself dirty of course.
‘Merckx’ is somewhat devilish, you can tell this is a rider that doesn’t mess about. ‘Fausto Coppi’ exudes coolness and charisma, the epitome of Italian ‘sprezzatura’

This is another reason why Pogacar needs a cool nickname. May I suggest ‘the Osprey of Ljubljana’ as a possible candidate.
Pogacar needs a bad ass nickname to be a real great.

 

[Vinther1991]

Merckx, easily. Based on palmares, which is the only thing that counts. Speculation about "strength of era" is just that, speculation. If cycling was so much "weaker" in the past and it was so much easier to be dominant, why did nobody else than Merckx manage to do it to an extend that is even close to Merckx?

So based on palmares it is:
Merckx v. Pogacar
MSR: 7-0
ToF: 2-2
PR: 3-0
LBL: 5-3
GdL: 2-4
Monuments total: 19-9

WC 3-1

Giro: 5-1
Tour: 5-4
Vuelta: 1-0
GT total: 11-5

7 major one-week stage race wins 7-5
Other top classics, Amstel, Fleche, E3, Gent-Wevelgem (plus Merckx-era Paris-Brussels, Paris-Tours. Pogacar-era: Strade, San Sebastian): 9-6

Pogacar lose in every single statistic, except Lombardia (plus tie in ToF). There just isn't an argument. The only way of seeing it that would put Pogacar at the top, is who had the most dominant single season? I would say Pogacar's 2024 is the most dominant season ever, but 2-7 is probably Merckx 1969-1974.
Pogacar is on a good trajectory, and might surpass Merckx, but he is not there yet. He is close with Coppi and Hinault though, I still think I will rank those two above him too, but I have no doubt he will surpass them.

 

[Carols]

Merckx
500 wins
I stopped counting at 20 Monuments
11 GTs
3 Worlds RR
At least Pogi is young and might make 25% of Merckx palmares.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Merckx
500 wins
I stopped counting at 20 Monuments
11 GTs
3 Worlds RR
At least Pogi is young and might make 25% of Merckx palmares.

500 wins, this myth... Unless criteriums count.
25%? Of course... 5/11 GTs
9/19 monuments
25%...
PTSD of PDBF?

 

[AmRacer]

500 wins, this myth... Unless criteriums count.
25%? Of course... 9/19 GTs
9/19 monuments
25%...
PTSD of PDBF?

You could change the GT ratio

 

[Charlyghoul]

Any professional win should count, I think. Whether 500 is Merckx real number including criteriums…well I assume that number is based on something?

 

[Peyroteo94]

You could change the GT ratio

Done. Thanks!

 

[Berniece]

Pogacar is on a good trajectory, and might surpass Merckx, but he is not there yet. He is close with Coppi and Hinault though, I still think I will rank those two above him too, but I have no doubt he will surpass them.

Never understood why people have such a problem with this. They want him to be better now already when that’s clearly just not the case yet.

 

[Charlyghoul]

Less than 50% in monuments, tours and worlds still leaves one to question why Pogacar is winning the poll.
The above poster makes a good point , why did nobody else dominate like Merckx did if it was easier?
I sometimes wonder if everyone thought it was impossible to dominate both monuments and gts in the modern era is simply because no one strong enough outside of maybe Nibali has actually tried.
Could Armstrong have won a few monuments if he wanted to? Probably. He did win a worlds. Nibali was successful in both he just wasn’t as strong as Pogacar.

 

[Carols]

Any professional win should count, I think. Whether 500 is Merckx real number including criteriums…well I assume that number is based on something?

I've always heard it was was 500. But Eddy said it was 525. I'm pretty sure that included amatuer. I'm not at all sure which book I read it in.

This source says 525.

List of career achievements by Eddy Merckx - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Carols]

Less than 50% in monuments, tours and worlds still leaves one to question why Pogacar is winning the poll.

Because most are to young to have seen Eddy ride. That and recency.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Less than 50% in monuments, tours and worlds still leaves one to question why Pogacar is winning the poll.
The above poster makes a good point , why did nobody else dominate like Merckx did if it was easier?
I sometimes wonder if everyone thought it was impossible to dominate both monuments and gts in the modern era is simply because no one strong enough outside of maybe Nibali has actually tried.
Could Armstrong have won a few monuments if he wanted to? Probably. He did win a worlds. Nibali was successful in both he just wasn’t as strong as Pogacar.

Because your poll was about talent. End of discussion.

Winning 525 races when 250 are amateur races... it's still impressive but 279 wins is his number and I doubt any rider will even reach the 200 mark.

 

[Cookster15]

Because most are to young to have seen Eddy ride. That and recency.

There is ignorance and recency bias. But there is also that many believe the level of the peloton today is much higher than in 1974.

 

[Copperberg]

I do wonder why noone bothers to write down the Huge reason why Merckx is ahead.
Merckx - Pogacar 3 - 0
'
I so understand the problems for Cycling to get away from its dark history when fans defend the 3.

 

[Peyroteo94]

There is ignorance and recency bias. But there is also that many believe the level of the peloton today is much higher than in 1974.

From both sides.
At the beginning, this thread was about talent. This is why many of us voted for Pogacar.
Then saying Pogacar will be lucky to end his career with 25% of Merckx's palmares screams "Taunting" to me, specially when Pogacar has already 40-50% of Merckx's palmares (when we talk about important wins).

 

[Charlyghoul]

From both sides.
At the beginning, this thread was about talent. This is why many of us voted for Pogacar.
Then saying Pogacar will be lucky to end his career with 25% of Merckx's palmares screams "Taunting" to me, specially when Pogacar has already 40-50% of Merckx's palmares (when we talk about important wins).

The thread is ‘who is better’ talent is not mentioned

 

[Peyroteo94]

The thread is ‘who is better’ talent is not mentioned

In what thread do you talk about top10? I thought it was this one. Sorry.
But I still think people were looking to talent and singularity (no one did something close to what Pogacar is doing in the last 30 years - modern era)

 

[Charlyghoul]

Pog in the big races for me is much ahead of 25% of Merckx. The question is to be better how much of Merckx palmares does he need?
I would count the criteriums of Merckx as wins but don’t count that against Pogacar.
Mostly we should look at the big races, grand tours and monuments and worlds. Merckx also has a couple of gp des nations and an hour record.
I’d put the nations wins as pretty close to a worlds tt win, depending how you value one of those, and the hour record is above any one day win, barring perhaps a worlds road race.

 

[peterfin]

There is ignorance and recency bias. But there is also that many believe the level of the peloton today is much higher than in 1974.

The level of the peloton is higher today but studies show that this is mainly due to nutrion, technology and training. The physiology of a rider hasn't changed. Human evolution needs thousands of years not a few decades. So swap riders from today to the 70's and vice versa and on average they would perform similar. Check this article for more context: https://pezcyclingnews.com/toolbox/comparing-cycling-gerations/

You could argue that there is wider reach so a higher likelyhood to find an exceptional outlier. In reality, international growth has been weak, as demonstrated by the continuing dominance of legacy cycling nations such as Belgium, France, Spain etc.

I would actually argue that finding a truly generational super talent such as Merckx has reduced due to the arrival of super teams. The competitive advantage that these teams have in technology, training, nutrition and - as we have seen in the past - stuff that belongs in the clinic allows outstanding talents to shine above the level they would have in the 70's. This peleton "at two speeds" shrinks our chances to discover a new Merckx.

 

[hayneplane]

Pog in the big races for me is much ahead of 25% of Merckx. The question is to be better how much of Merckx palmares does he need?
I would count the criteriums of Merckx as wins but don’t count that against Pogacar.
Mostly we should look at the big races, grand tours and monuments and worlds. Merckx also has a couple of gp des nations and an hour record.
I’d put the nations wins as pretty close to a worlds tt win, depending how you value one of those, and the hour record is above any one day win, barring perhaps a worlds road race.

I think you are massively overvaluing the Hour Record. For me it’s a nice to have but below even a worlds TT win let alone being anything close to a monument.

Were the criteriums in the 60s and 70s real races or like the 21st century where they are meet the stars events with fixed results and setup?