Riders to reach 100 pro wins

[shalgo]

97 for Demare.

 

[Wyndbrook]

97 for Demare.

Tortoise and hare maybe, but Arnie is getting close.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Odds of him finishing on 99: increasing or decreasing?


Of the original list, is it now fair to say that everyone expects Evenepoel and Pogacar (barring catastrophic injury) to reach the hundred, and that of the others, only Demare and Roglic might?

I'm not sure that I have heard of Roglic's plans beyond next year: is he likely to continue into 2026 (and beyond?) If not, he would need three more wins than he has achieved this year, and odds are against.

So I guess Demare is now the most marginal as to whether he makes it or not.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Roglic will not win 100 races. I already said this and some people laughed. Next year is probably his last year in peak shape. It is very usual to see riders fading after 36 years old

 

[Peyroteo94]

I believe Pogacar will reach 100 before Demare.

 

[Peyroteo94]

97 wins for Demare and only 20 are WT. Pogacar has more this season...
And we should count 19 after MSR's disgrace

 

[Red Rick]

Roglic will not win 100 races. I already said this and some people laughed. Next year is probably is last year in peak shape. It is very usual to see riders fading after 36 years old

He won 8 times in a season in which he crashed out of 2 stage races and mysteriously underperformed in another.

The chance of him making it to 100 went way up this year, and basically he has to fall off a cliff or promptly retire next year. And typically decline in the absence of illness or major injury doesn't go that quickly.

The amount he wins is very dependent on his schedule and who he races against as well. And typically he doesn't race against Pogacar outside of the GTs and he does a really good job farming in the races where the other mutants aren't there.

Like the biggest reason to assume he'll win less next year is that it's fairly likely one of Vingegaard and Pogacar will show up at the Vuelta.

 

[Red Rick]

Anyone wanna take an over/under on Pogacar's career victories?

I'll go 231.5

 

[Berniece]

Anyone wanna take an over/under on Pogacar's career victories?

I'll go 231.5

Under, I find it difficult to see that he stays this motivated to have a season like this year, every year

 

[Peyroteo94]

He won 8 times in a season in which he crashed out of 2 stage races and mysteriously underperformed in another.

The chance of him making it to 100 went way up this year, and basically he has to fall off a cliff or promptly retire next year. And typically decline in the absence of illness or major injury doesn't go that quickly.

The amount he wins is very dependent on his schedule and who he races against as well. And typically he doesn't race against Pogacar outside of the GTs and he does a really good job farming in the races where the other mutants aren't there.

Like the biggest reason to assume he'll win less next year is that it's fairly likely one of Vingegaard and Pogacar will show up at the Vuelta.

I can't see him winning more than 6 races if he follows his usual schedule.
Probably Andalucia or Algarve (don't know)
Paris Nice
Pais Vasco
LBL
Dauphiné
Tour
Vuelta
WC
Lombardia
Pogacar's schedule will change next year and Vingegaard will follow the same boring program every single year. So it is very possible to see Vingegaard clashing with Roglic in Pais Vasco, Dauphine, Tour and Vuelta. Maybe Paris Nice too (I think he will avoid Pogacar).
Pogacar will probably race TA or Paris Nice, LBL, Dauphiné, Tour, Vuelta, WC and Lombardia.
I can't see Roglic beating these 2 a lot so I seriously doubt he will get more than 6 races.

 

[SHAD0W93]

If Roglic rides another 2-3 seasons he should pick up 100. He’s a threat on the punchy climbs and if out of GC to all breakaways. The end to this year was a big help to getting closer.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

Roglic has 75 pro wins in 7 seasons, almost 60 of which are at WT level (and we are not done with the 7th season yet)

If there are no major injuries or massive issues with motivation that curtail his career, he is easily getting to 100. With his current win rate he could do it next year.

Even if he slows down a bit, if he targets some alternate races he's gonna win plenty.

I made a mistake not voting for him when the poll was created

 

[Devil's Elbow]

If Roglic rides another 2-3 seasons he should pick up 100. He’s a threat on the punchy climbs and if out of GC to all breakaways. The end to this year was a big help to getting closer.

Even assuming he keeps going for a while, it's not a certainty, mainly because wins tend to drop much faster than placements when decline starts to kick in. He needs another 12 wins, starting at age 35. If we look at some similar-ish rider types who were still really good at 34:

• Evans won his Tour at 34, then got 9 wins in three-and-a-bit seasons after turning 35
• Purito won his final Lombardia at 34, then got 6 wins in 2.5 seasons after turning 35
• Thomas has won Suisse and podiumed 3 GTs in 3.5 seasons since turning 35, still only 2 wins total
• Porte did his sole GT podium at 35 and won Dauphiné at 36, and still the latter was his only career win in almost 3 seasons after turning 35

Now, Roglic is better than all of the above, but there's a reason that I can't think of any remotely recent climber/puncher types but Valverde who won a double-digit amount of races after their 35th birthday. Decline is imminent unless he's the new Valverde, and if it starts in earnest next year you'd think he drops to perhaps 5 wins for the season and then getting those final 7 before retirement is a big question mark.

For the record, I do think he's odds-on to fall over the line, but it really shouldn't be a shock if he doesn't.

 

[Anderis]

Roglic will not win 100 races. I already said this and some people laughed. Next year is probably his last year in peak shape. It is very usual to see riders fading after 36 years old

Valverde got over 30 wins after the age of 36.

If you have such a peak level like Roglic, even if you decline, you can still take a lot of wins with a right calendar.

And Roglic is a late starter. Such riders often decline a bit slower towards their late thirties.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Valverde got over 30 wins after the age of 36.

If you have such a peak level like Roglic, even if you decline, you can still take a lot of wins with a right calendar.

And Roglic is a late starter. Such riders often decline a bit slower towards their late thirties.

People can't ever take Valverde as an example. Valverde was an unique outlier and went completely off the pattern.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Better question would be Rogla over or under or at 90 wins by the end of the season?

 

[Cookster15]

And Roglic is a late starter. Such riders often decline a bit slower towards their late thirties.

Only late compared to the recent trend. Roglic started on the road in 2012 aged 23. By comparison Cadel Evans was 24 when he switched to the road from MTB. Evans declined almost immediately after his Tour win when he was aged 34. Roglic is now 34. Valverde is an obvious outlier.

 

[Anderis]

Only late compared to the recent trend. Roglic started on the road in 2012 aged 23. By comparison Cadel Evans was 24 when he switched to the road from MTB. Evans declined almost immediately after his Tour win when he was aged 34. Roglic is now 34. Valverde is an obvious outlier.

Cadel Evans took 26% of his career wins after he had turned 35.

If Roglic did the same, he would end up with about 120 professional wins.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Count cyclocross and MTB (they are on bikes and getting paid) and Van Aert and VDP are already there.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Count cyclocross and MTB (they are on bikes and getting paid) and Van Aert and VDP are already there.

They still started earlier than Pogacar and have less 40 wins

 

[Red Rick]

Even assuming he keeps going for a while, it's not a certainty, mainly because wins tend to drop much faster than placements when decline starts to kick in. He needs another 12 wins, starting at age 35. If we look at some similar-ish rider types who were still really good at 34:

• Evans won his Tour at 34, then got 9 wins in three-and-a-bit seasons after turning 35
• Purito won his final Lombardia at 34, then got 6 wins in 2.5 seasons after turning 35
• Thomas has won Suisse and podiumed 3 GTs in 3.5 seasons since turning 35, still only 2 wins total
• Porte did his sole GT podium at 35 and won Dauphiné at 36, and still the latter was his only career win in almost 3 seasons after turning 35

Now, Roglic is better than all of the above, but there's a reason that I can't think of any remotely recent climber/puncher types but Valverde who won a double-digit amount of races after their 35th birthday. Decline is imminent unless he's the new Valverde, and if it starts in earnest next year you'd think he drops to perhaps 5 wins for the season and then getting those final 7 before retirement is a big question mark.

For the record, I do think he's odds-on to fall over the line, but it really shouldn't be a shock if he doesn't.

The best comparisons for a rider on his way to 100 wins are a bunch of guys who won between 25 and 50?

I think it's wildly wrong to compare his current level to the level of these guys. He's much better, the only thing is there's 2 riders who are better stage racers still. Then he's pretty much breakeven vs Evenepoel in stage races and he clobbers everyone else for fun still.

For however much people say 'don't compare anyone with Valverde', Roglic is easily better than Valverde at 35 he just happens to have to compete with better opposition in GTs.

 

[Peyroteo94]

The best comparisons for a rider on his way to 100 wins are a bunch of guys who won between 25 and 50?

I think it's wildly wrong to compare his current level to the level of these guys. He's much better, the only thing is there's 2 riders who are better stage racers still. Then he's pretty much breakeven vs Evenepoel in stage races and he clobbers everyone else for fun still.

For however much people say 'don't compare anyone with Valverde', Roglic is easily better than Valverde at 35 he just happens to have to compete with better opposition in GTs.

No, he is not better than Valverde in one day races. In stage races, of course he is.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

The best comparisons for a rider on his way to 100 wins are a bunch of guys who won between 25 and 50?

I think it's wildly wrong to compare his current level to the level of these guys. He's much better, the only thing is there's 2 riders who are better stage racers still. Then he's pretty much breakeven vs Evenepoel in stage races and he clobbers everyone else for fun still.

For however much people say 'don't compare anyone with Valverde', Roglic is easily better than Valverde at 35 he just happens to have to compete with better opposition in GTs.

Van Vleuten won 59 victories after she turned 35.

 

[Hugh Januss]

They still started earlier than Pogacar and have less 40 wins

Foul, non sequitur!

 

[Devil's Elbow]

The best comparisons for a rider on his way to 100 wins are a bunch of guys who won between 25 and 50?

I think it's wildly wrong to compare his current level to the level of these guys. He's much better, the only thing is there's 2 riders who are better stage racers still. Then he's pretty much breakeven vs Evenepoel in stage races and he clobbers everyone else for fun still.

For however much people say 'don't compare anyone with Valverde', Roglic is easily better than Valverde at 35 he just happens to have to compete with better opposition in GTs.

If you want to compare to riders of his calibre - Contador won 8 in 2.5 years after his final Giro win, Nibali won 3 in almost 5 years after his Sanremo win, Jalabert (who will remain miles ahead of Roglic) dwindled to 3 and 5 wins for the year in his final two seasons. Valverde is a crazy outlier in all respects, there is a strong case to be made that he hadn't peaked yet at 35.

And fwiw, Valverde was also better in the classics and racing a win-friendlier schedule in his mid-30s compared to current Roglic.