Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread

[rafa92]

Froome before his crash was better than Roglic also.

impossible to say, but if I have to take a guess I would say the contrary. Froome w/kg numbers have proven to be mediocre compared to modern riders, and it's also possible that the crash did not have such big effects as it seems looking at froome results. It might simply be that froome has not been able to step up his level to compete with a much stronger generation of riders. Look at bernal, he has said numerous times he is now doing better numbers than when he won the TDF and now he can't even compete for a top 10

 

[Peyroteo94]

impossible to say, but if I have to take a guess I would say the contrary. Froome w/kg numbers have proven to be mediocre compared to modern riders, and it's also possible that the crash did not have such big effects as it seems looking at froome results. It might simply be that froome has not been able to step up his level to compete with a much stronger generation of riders. Look at bernal, he has said numerous times he is now doing better numbers than when he won the TDF and now he can't even compete for a top 10

Not impossible.
Froome was stronger than Roglic in the Tour 2018 after doing the Giro.
In 2019, Roglic was struggling to beat Nibali and Carapaz. There is no chance Froome wasn't better than Roglic and I think most of us agree he would win the Tour 2019 without that terrible crash in the TT recon.

 

[rafa92]

Not impossible.
Froome was stronger than Roglic in the Tour 2018 after doing the Giro.
In 2019, Roglic was struggling to beat Nibali and Carapaz. There is no chance Froome wasn't better than Roglic and I think most of us agree he would win the Tour 2019 without that terrible crash in the TT recon.

you forget one thing, roglic has done his best numbers after 2018 (by that point zero GT podiums), which is strange considering his age (it can be explained by his late arrival to cycling). The point is that roglic has proven he can be competitive in this era where riders are doing much better performances than during froome era. I believe you don't realize how bad froome or bernal 2019 numbers were compared to today and to roglic best performances. If you don't trust estimates made by different sources on this matter, just listen to what bernal himself or even bardet who competed against peak froome have to say on what numbers top riders are doing now compared to froome

 

[Peyroteo94]

you forget one thing, roglic has done his best numbers after 2018 (by that point zero GT podiums), which is strange considering his age (it can be explained by his late arrival to cycling). The point is that roglic has proven he can be competitive in this era where riders are doing much better performances than during froome era. I believe you don't realize how bad froome or bernal 2019 numbers were compared to today and to roglic best performances. If you don't trust estimates made by different sources on this matter, just listen to what bernal himself or even bardet who competed against peak froome have to say on what numbers top riders are doing now compared to froome

The "numbers argument" is silly. They are improving year after year. If Landa produced in the Tour 2017 the numbers he produced last year in the Tour, he would have won the Tour 2017.

 

[rafa92]

The "numbers argument" is silly. They are improving year after year. If Landa produced in the Tour 2017 the numbers he produced last year in the Tour, he would have won the Tour 2017.

The "numbers argument" is silly: here you totally lose me. It's (almost) all about numbers, the higher the level of the competition in terms of numbers the more difficult it is to win. Guess who did not improve and could not adapt when the level of the peloton increased: FROOME ( there's an interview of his own team manager saying that after a certain point he could not use the crash excuse to justify how bad he is). I tell you once again: with froome's competition (quintana, rodriguez, uran, valverde, bardet who were on the podium in the TDF he won) roglic would have 4 TDF, and with roglic's competition (pog, vingegaard, evenepoel) froome would have ZERO

 

[hayneplane]

Roglic is not a legend of this sport. Other 2 are

I think he is. Not on the same tier but if cycling had a hall of fame like NFL then Roglic would be a lock to get in with 5 Grand Tours and 1 monument along with likely topping 100 professional wins.

 

[Peyroteo94]

The "numbers argument" is silly: here you totally lose me. It's (almost) all about numbers, the higher the level of the competition in terms of numbers the more difficult it is to win. Guess who did not improve and could not adapt when the level of the peloton increased: FROOME ( there's an interview of his own team manager saying that after a certain point he could not use the crash excuse to justify how bad he is). I tell you once again: with froome's competition (quintana, rodriguez, uran, valverde, bardet who were on the podium in the TDF he won) roglic would have 4 TDF, and with roglic's competition (pog, vingegaard, evenepoel) froome would have ZERO

It is silly when you are comparing eras. In what universe is Bardet a better than Froome or Contador? What I know is Roglic was getting beaten by Nibali and Carapaz in 2019 and lost to Froome in 2018. Froome was clearly affected by his crash, specially on his mental side.

 

[rafa92]

It is silly when you are comparing eras. In what universe is Bardet a better than Froome or Contador? What I know is Roglic was getting beaten by Nibali and Carapaz in 2019 and lost to Froome in 2018. Froome was clearly affected by his crash, specially on his mental side.

Stop with the 2018/2019 example, roglic was not the rider he has been since then in terms of performance.
"It is silly when you are comparing eras". No it's not, especially considering we are talking about 6-7 years ago, not 50. There are simply eras in which the competition is stronger. Consider the 100m example. The Bolt era was much stronger in terms of performance than what came after, and to win in that era was much more difficult. I just ask you one question and then let's stop this discussion. How many TDF would have froome won if he had to compete with pog, vingegaard and remco, and how many TDF would have roglic won if he had as biggest opponents bardet, quintana, uran, purito and valverde?

 

[Peyroteo94]

Florian Vermeersch over overstap naar ploeg van 'heel relaxte' Tadej Pogacar: "Een van mijn beste beslissingen"

Florian Vermeersch is sinds dit jaar ploeggenoot van Tadej Pogacar. De Belg verruilde afgelopen winter Lotto Dstny voor UAE Emirates XRG. “Dat is een van de beste beslissingen geweest in mijn carrière”, zei hij over die overstap tijdens het Marly Grav Café Live, een speciale aflevering van de...

www.wielerflits.nl

 

[Peyroteo94]

Stop with the 2018/2019 example, roglic was not the rider he has been since then in terms of performance.
"It is silly when you are comparing eras". No it's not, especially considering we are talking about 6-7 years ago, not 50. There are simply eras in which the competition is stronger. Consider the 100m example. The Bolt era was much stronger in terms of performance than what came after, and to win in that era was much more difficult. I just ask you one question and then let's stop this discussion. How many TDF would have froome won if he had to compete with pog, vingegaard and remco, and how many TDF would have roglic won if he had as biggest opponents bardet, quintana, uran, purito and valverde?

Roglic is not the same rider is a cheap argument

 

[Peyroteo94]

Stop with the 2018/2019 example, roglic was not the rider he has been since then in terms of performance.
"It is silly when you are comparing eras". No it's not, especially considering we are talking about 6-7 years ago, not 50. There are simply eras in which the competition is stronger. Consider the 100m example. The Bolt era was much stronger in terms of performance than what came after, and to win in that era was much more difficult. I just ask you one question and then let's stop this discussion. How many TDF would have froome won if he had to compete with pog, vingegaard and remco, and how many TDF would have roglic won if he had as biggest opponents bardet, quintana, uran, purito and valverde?

Every rider is better now than his old self in 2018. Bardet has better numbers now too.

 

[rafa92]

Every rider is better now than his old self in 2018. Bardet has better numbers now too.

dude you don't know how to argue, this answer has nothing to do with my comment, answer the question I asked you directly

 

[Peyroteo94]

dude you don't know how to argue, this answer has nothing to do with my comment, answer the question I asked you directly

Roglic lost a Giro to Carapaz and Nibali. Wasn't Nibali a rider from the same generation of Froome? Is Carapaz better than Quintana? Hum...
For your silly argument, Boonen is not a legend of this sport because he wouldn't have won PR and RVV if he raced against MVP.
Roglic is not a legend unless he wins a Tour. Is he the best rider ever to never win the Tour? Maybe. But he is not a cycling legend.

 

[rafa92]

Roglic lost a Giro to Carapaz and Nibali. Wasn't Nibali a rider from the same generation of Froome? Is Carapaz better than Quintana? Hum...
For your silly argument, Boonen is not a legend of this sport because he wouldn't have won PR and RVV if he raced against MVP.
Roglic is not a legend unless he wins a Tour. Is he the best rider ever to never win the Tour? Maybe. But he is not a cycling legend.

you are not answering the question man, and if you answer it you know you would have to agree with me. You simply can not accept the fact that the competition you face during your career can significantly impact your results.
"Roglic is not a legend unless he wins a Tour". It's clear that not only you can't do a simple analysis that goes beyond just pure stats, but you are also not a true fan of cycling. Cycling is much bigger than the Tdf anyway

 

[rafa92]

I didn't want to do this to the poor chris because I have nothing against him, but since you are continuing to focus on a single giro, I will remind you of froome results in his first 2 giros. In the first he came 32nd, in the second he was disqualified because he was so bad he had to hold on to a motorbike on a climb. Now one might say that's a silly argument because that froome was a different rider, but you said before that this can't be used as a justification

 

[Peyroteo94]

you are not answering the question man, and if you answer it you know you would have to agree with me. You simply can not accept the fact that the competition you face during your career can significantly impact your results.
"Roglic is not a legend unless he wins a Tour". It's clear that not only you can't do a simple analysis that goes beyond just pure stats, but you are also not a true fan of cycling. Cycling is much bigger than the Tdf anyway

First of all, I don't answer stupid questions specially when they hide important informations. Why did you mention Valverde, Purito, etc and didn't mention Nibali? Very smart since he beat Roglic. Then you don't mention Contador too.
"Cycling is much bigger than the TdF". Yes it is however for a GT specialist (with only a LBL win to show. Sorry, cycling fans in general don't rate TTs very highly, even worlds or olympics), not winning the Tour is a massive hole. Roglic is not Boonen who won 4 PR and 3 RVV.
Roglic has 4 Vueltas and 1 Giro to show. Tell me a cycling legend (those who fight for the GC) who didn't win the Tour?
His racing style is not the most impressive one. What the hell is remarkable/legendary about Roglic? Even Vingegaard is not a legend and he is probably the second best GT rider (in ability) of all times IMHO. Palmares is very important to gove the status of legend to riders.

 

[CyclistAbi]

TBH the ski-jumper is the finest example of a flying cyclist. He sometimes can't help himself and flies during races. That's why Teddy and Vinnie won some races.

What a flying legend!

 

[Peyroteo94]

I didn't want to do this to the poor chris because I have nothing against him, but since you are continuing to focus on a single giro, I will remind you of froome results in his first 2 giros. In the first he came 32nd, in the second he was disqualified because he was so bad he had to hold on to a motorbike on a climb. Now one might say that's a silly argument because that froome was a different rider, but you said before that this can't be used as a justification

I will not waste my time anymore.
Cheers mate.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Some context has to be added that he has never ridden Tour-Vuelta back to back riding all 21 stages in both races.

2020 was the closest with an 18 stage slightly shortened Vuelta due to the Covid imposed loss of the foreign start. To be fair that Vuelta was probably peak Roglic with 4 stage wins and 3 2nd places as well.

The other Tour-Vuelta doubles were all after crashing out of TDF (2021,2022,2024) and the others were Giro-Vuelta doubles (2019,2023) but on neither occasion did he win both races.

His Grand Tour record is very impressive and bears comparison with Contador and Froome as GT GC specific 21st Century greats.

That said I don’t think you can say his recovery is on a par with Pogacar.

So how many times did a GT DNF result in an injury and after to still win another GT in the same season? Did Pogi or Jonas ever won a GT riding injured? Rogla did, multiple times, to me that details falls in the realms of supreme recovery.

 

[rafa92]

First of all, I don't answer stupid questions specially when they hide important informations. Why did you mention Valverde, Purito, etc and didn't mention Nibali? Very smart since he beat Roglic. Then you don't mention Contador too. You know why I didn't mention them? because ,contrary to what one might think (because Nibali and Contador have been clearly better riders than those I mentioned), during the 4 tdf froome won contador and nibali were never even remotely competitive. I mentioned all the riders that shared the podium with froome during those TDF. Those were the toughest competitors he had to face during those TDF, it's just a fact, I'm not hiding anything

 

[CyclistAbi]

Now, put a professional trying to follow him at 28-30 kph in a 6% climb at altitude (2200m). Very few can!

Exactly, so that amateur story was fake news or Pogi was ill.

 

[rafa92]

I will not waste my time anymore.
Cheers mate.

I'm happy you agree with me on the fact that the "different rider argument" is absolutely valid and not silly as you said before

 

[Shortcut]

First of all, I don't answer stupid questions specially when they hide important informations. Why did you mention Valverde, Purito, etc and didn't mention Nibali? Very smart since he beat Roglic. Then you don't mention Contador too.
"Cycling is much bigger than the TdF". Yes it is however for a GT specialist (with only a LBL win to show. Sorry, cycling fans in general don't rate TTs very highly, even worlds or olympics), not winning the Tour is a massive hole. Roglic is not Boonen who won 4 PR and 3 RVV.
Roglic has 4 Vueltas and 1 Giro to show. Tell me a cycling legend (those who fight for the GC) who didn't win the Tour?
His racing style is not the most impressive one. What the hell is remarkable/legendary about Roglic? Even Vingegaard is not a legend and it is probably the second best GT rider (in ability) of all times IMHO. Palmares is very important to gove the status of legend to riders.

I can’t believe you write such contradictory comments. You constantly mention defeats against Nibali and Froome, even though that was when Roglič had just started his real cycling career. And even in that Giro, he crashed and got sick in the middle of it. That’s like comparing Pogačar’s loss at the Vuelta to Roglič and then using that, if the latter had ended his career right after, as a lifelong argument that Tadej isn’t the GOAT because he lost to Roglič?
You mention Jonas as probably the second-best GC rider of all time—based on what exactly? Because he competes in the era of the best? And if he’s second based on that logic, then Roglič must be the third-best GC rider of all time. Or do you think that this statement (“that Jonas is probably the second-best GC rider of all time”) is proven by numbers? You use arguments and twist your own logic however it suits you.
Roglič is definitely a cycling legend, who would have had incredible achievements if he had started cycling from the beginning. In the Froome generation and others, he very likely would be sitting on 10+ GC wins by now.

 

[rafa92]

I can’t believe you write such contradictory comments. You constantly mention defeats against Nibali and Froome, even though that was when Roglič had just started his real cycling career. And even in that Giro, he crashed and got sick in the middle of it. That’s like comparing Pogačar’s loss at the Vuelta to Roglič and then using that, if the latter had ended his career right after, as a lifelong argument that Tadej isn’t the GOAT because he lost to Roglič?
You mention Jonas as probably the second-best GC rider of all time—based on what exactly? Because he competes in the era of the best? And if he’s second based on that logic, then Roglič must be the third-best GC rider of all time. Or do you think that this statement (“that Jonas is probably the second-best GC rider of all time”) is proven by numbers? You use arguments and twist your own logic however it suits you.
Roglič is definitely a cycling legend, who would have had incredible achievements if he had started cycling from the beginning. In the Froome generation and others, he very likely would be sitting on 10+ GC wins by now.

Finally someone with common sense came to the rescue

 

[Peyroteo94]

I can’t believe you write such contradictory comments. You constantly mention defeats against Nibali and Froome, even though that was when Roglič had just started his real cycling career. And even in that Giro, he crashed and got sick in the middle of it. That’s like comparing Pogačar’s loss at the Vuelta to Roglič and then using that, if the latter had ended his career right after, as a lifelong argument that Tadej isn’t the GOAT because he lost to Roglič?
You mention Jonas as probably the second-best GC rider of all time—based on what exactly? Because he competes in the era of the best? And if he’s second based on that logic, then Roglič must be the third-best GC rider of all time. Or do you think that this statement (“that Jonas is probably the second-best GC rider of all time”) is proven by numbers? You use arguments and twist your own logic however it suits you.
Roglič is definitely a cycling legend, who would have had incredible achievements if he had started cycling from the beginning. In the Froome generation and others, he very likely would be sitting on 10+ GC wins by now.

I said "IMHO". My perception indicates Vingegaard is the second best GT rider ever. His climbing ability, his recovery, his TT, his ability to ride on flat roads (very underrated), his explosiveness, his descending ability (before his crash). Very very complete! I didn't twist anything but it's okay.
Not gonna argue with you too. Take a read again, of course Vingegaard is not the second best GT rider ever, his palmares is far from other cycling legends. But his ability is way superior to Roglic or even Froome.
Cheers.