Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread

[RunningRouleur]

Let's put this theory into practice, because it's rarely happened in the Ineos period of domination at the TDF - I have been calling on teams for two or three years to back in their GC leaders by riding select stages hard to win stages and bonuses - I will add to achieve this, you need to select balanced teams which means not having too many climber support riders - Have strong rouleurs along with two top notch climbing domestiques is what you need.

It comes down to fitness. The team can ride hard all day and have Froome (now Bernal) beat their leader on the final climb— was that worth it?

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Let's put this theory into practice, because it's rarely happened in the Ineos period of domination at the TDF - I have been calling on teams for two or three years to back in their GC leaders by riding select stages hard to win stages and bonuses - I will add to achieve this, you need to select balanced teams which means not having too many climber support riders - Have strong rouleurs along with two top notch climbing domestiques is what you need.

That may be so, but that wasn't the point, and neither is it impossible. There can be a number of reasons why teams of GC riders might not have taken control of the race. Maybe their guy didn't benefit from the stage finish. Maybe he was too far ahead/behind the guy in front or behind him that the 10s didn't make any real difference. Maybe their guy wasn't feeling well and would suffer from the high tempo leading up to the MTF. Maybe their team was indeed too weak and they wouldn't risk burning their matches to win 15 seconds when they might end up losing minutes later on because of it. But again, it doesn't change the fact that they can, it they want and are able to.

 

[Red Rick]

Traditionally Ineos target the first mountain stage to put the hammer down to make time and possibly grab the yellow jersey - And if there is an early ITT this even strengthens their position - It's a simple equation - You are a team that wants bonus seconds, then you ride hard to ensure the breakaway doesn't take the bonus seconds, and that means you don't allow Ineos ' To Play the Piano' for most of the stage before you get to the final.

Hammer down on first mountain stage is only when they know they're in great form and the stage suits their leaders. Bernal who normally is their best bet isn't all that suited to those punchy finishes. Thomas could be good there, Froome is an unkown to anyone, but Ineos doesn't have the rofldominance anymore to decide a Tour on the first mountain stage.

They could well have the strongest team and rider, but it shouldn't be by such a crazy margin anymore. They can't really expect to win minutes in the ITTs and are even a slight underdog in them vs Roglic and Dumoulin.

I do think they're likely to have the best climber between the 2 teams, and I think Ineos should basically be able to mostly ignore any shenanigans Kruijswijk pulls cause he's never winning while Jumbo would be pretty dumb to let Froome go anywhere. Jumbo could have the problem that Roglic could easily be the best rider in the race in the first 2 weeks before fading in the 3rd, in which case he could be *** in the ITT as well and Dumoulin could easily be 2/3 minutes better than Roglic in the Alps + ITT alone.

 

[CyclistAbi]

If there won't be any accidents and things like that i wouldn't count on Roglič fading in the third week. As for Pogačar, he just seems to have a winner mentality and although i feel he is still a bit too young, he likely will go after the win on the Tour.

P.S. Hopefully he will have some team support, doing that.

 

[yaco]

It comes down to fitness. The team can ride hard all day and have Froome (now Bernal) beat their leader on the final climb— was that worth it?

But it means Ineos probably has less of a train on the climbs - As much as I rate Luke Rowe as a rider, you have to wonder when he can lead the peleton up a cat 1 climb.

 

[yaco]

Hammer down on first mountain stage is only when they know they're in great form and the stage suits their leaders. Bernal who normally is their best bet isn't all that suited to those punchy finishes. Thomas could be good there, Froome is an unkown to anyone, but Ineos doesn't have the rofldominance anymore to decide a Tour on the first mountain stage.

They could well have the strongest team and rider, but it shouldn't be by such a crazy margin anymore. They can't really expect to win minutes in the ITTs and are even a slight underdog in them vs Roglic and Dumoulin.

I do think they're likely to have the best climber between the 2 teams, and I think Ineos should basically be able to mostly ignore any shenanigans Kruijswijk pulls cause he's never winning while Jumbo would be pretty dumb to let Froome go anywhere. Jumbo could have the problem that Roglic could easily be the best rider in the race in the first 2 weeks before fading in the 3rd, in which case he could be *** in the ITT as well and Dumoulin could easily be 2/3 minutes better than Roglic in the Alps + ITT alone.

Your analysis is very accurate - Ineos weren't as dominant in 2019 in controlling the peleton which made for a better race - It's undetermined whether this was a one off or part of a shifting in the peleton - Time will tell - But ultimately teams need to back their GC leaders and ride accordingly, instead of being passive followers.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

According to GCN (sourcing a tweet from Dig Deep Coaching), he rode 422 watts during the 18 & half minute final climb of stage 4 in Valencia resulting in 6.45w/kg.

 

[Rollthedice]

According to GCN (sourcing a tweet from Dig Deep Coaching), he rode 422 watts during the 18 & half minute final climb of stage 4 in Valencia resulting in 6.45w/kg.

Los Machucos Vuelta level in February.

 

[zenoiz]

According to GCN (sourcing a tweet from Dig Deep Coaching), he rode 422 watts during the 18 & half minute final climb of stage 4 in Valencia resulting in 6.45w/kg.

You can check for yourself on his Strava: https://www.strava.com/activities/3083051458/overview, power measured with a Stages device (note for his earlier stage 2 victory it was off for some reason). 423 W for the final climb, which is indeed about 6.45 W/kg for 65.5kg. Not bad, but it is only for a 20ish minute effort after what I assume was a relatively easy, sheltered ride before. And for comparison, both Jack Haig and Moscon were at 6.3 W/kg on that climb (assuming their Wikipedia weights and power meters are correct)...

 

[del1962]

Before gettimg to hyped Quintana put 40 seconds into the field on a climb in this race in 2017

 

[RunningRouleur]

You can check for yourself on his Strava: https://www.strava.com/activities/3083051458/overview, power measured with a Stages device (note for his earlier stage 2 victory it was off for some reason). 423 W for the final climb, which is indeed about 6.45 W/kg for 65.5kg. Not bad, but it is only for a 20ish minute effort after what I assume was a relatively easy, sheltered ride before. And for comparison, both Jack Haig and Moscon were at 6.3 W/kg on that climb (assuming their Wikipedia weights and power meters are correct)...

It wasn’t easy beforehand. Check the full stage analysis.

 

[zenoiz]

It wasn’t easy beforehand. Check the full stage analysis.

From what I could gather (cyclingnews stage summary), it looked pretty standard stuff though - break (with GVA etc) up on the road, a few small and medium size climbs, pace picking up leading into the final climb. His average power on the stage minus the final climb was 264W (normalized power would be better to look at but hard to get from Strava for a partial track), so that all sounds pretty 'easy'.
Point is that for an in-form GT podium finisher, 6.5 W/kg isn't all that exceptional or 'incredible' (as per GCN) on a shortish, steep climb. Heck, even Phil Gaimon in retirement does about 7 W/kg for 10-15 minute efforts when fresh... I guess the surprising thing here may be that he is in such good form so early in the season, but the upcoming UAE tour may be the culprit for that...

 

[Red Rick]

The real thing is that the VAM looks crazy because the climb was crazy steep

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Point is that for an in-form GT podium finisher, 6.5 W/kg isn't all that exceptional or 'incredible' (as per GCN) on a shortish, steep climb. Heck, even Phil Gaimon in retirement does about 7 W/kg for 10-15 minute efforts when fresh... I guess the surprising thing here may be that he is in such good form so early in the season, but the upcoming UAE tour may be the culprit for that...

I'm not really into these things, but in the Evenepoel topic some people were asking for references. So i looked some stuff up and 430 is about what Froome did as AnT in a testlab. That's (as you probably know) over 20 minutes. Froome pushed 6.4w/kg in the 2015 TDF.
Dumoulin pushed 420 watts over 25 minutes in the Vuelta on Ermita de Alba, but he weighed 70kg.

Assuming not every GT contender pushes the same numbers as Froome (or else he wouldn't have won so easily many times), i would say that those numbers are quite extraordinary. It would seem that both Pogacar and Evenepoel are pushing comparable numbers at a young ages as the big GT guys, but both weigh considerably less (Evenepoel even 5kgs less than Pogacar) and not even in peak form.

 

[RunningRouleur]

264 in very uneven doses (normalized well over 300) for four hours isn't easy for a 65kg climber. Sure the big rouleurs would laugh at it, but this is nearly 5w/kg for Pogacar.
The point about Gaimon is true, though the numbers are a bit exaggerated. He would come pretty close to the top GC riders in a one-off MTT. What separates GT contenders from Gaimon is their endurance and ability to repeat 10-30 minute efforts, as is necessary on a 200k mountain stage in a Grand Tour.
6.5 for 20 isn't crazy, but the point is he wasn't fresh, and it's February. If he and his coaches are getting it right, that number should be 6.7 or 6.8 in July.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

It will be interesting to see if and how these numbers translate to real life conditions. If lab test A = lab test B. Etc.

 

[zenoiz]

264 in very uneven doses (normalized well over 300) for four hours isn't easy for a 65kg climber. Sure the big rouleurs would laugh at it, but this is nearly 5w/kg for Pogacar.
The point about Gaimon is true, though the numbers are a bit exaggerated. He would come pretty close to the top GC riders in a one-off MTT. What separates GT contenders from Gaimon is their endurance and ability to repeat 10-30 minute efforts, as is necessary on a 200k mountain stage in a Grand Tour.
6.5 for 20 isn't crazy, but the point is he wasn't fresh, and it's February. If he and his coaches are getting it right, that number should be 6.7 or 6.8 in July.

Gaimon's data would only be exaggerated if he underreported his weight on Strava, or his power meter would be off (I took the number from his KOM effort on Old La Honda road, my local hill) - I don't have any reason to think either of this is the case. And of course I know he was never a GT contender, probably exactly for the reasons you are pointing out. The point here is, this is Valencia, day 4, on a stage that as far as I can tell was uneventful (for Pogacar) up to the final climb. I still argue he must have been pretty fresh before that final climb (unless he or his team did something really wrong), and in that case, the numbers he put down, though impressive, are not extraordinary...

 

[Red Rick]

You can also take the field for a reference. None of the guys at 6 seconds behind him, less than 1% on a climb like this, have done top 5 in a GT.

Now if I remember correctly, Pog's power output didn't even look all that great when he made his great Vuelta solo, but the thing was he did it when everyone was compeltely dead. That's where you make the big differences.

 

[zenoiz]

I'm not really into these things, but in the Evenepoel topic some people were asking for references. So i looked some stuff up and 430 is about what Froome did as AeT in a testlab. That's (as you probably know) over 20 minutes. Froome pushed 6.4w/kg in the 2015 TDF.
Dumoulin pushed 420 watts over 25 minutes in the Vuelta on Ermita de Alba, but he weighed 70kg.

Assuming not every GT contender pushes the same numbers as Froome (or else he wouldn't have won so easily many times), i would say that those numbers are quite extraordinary. It would seem that both Pogacar and Evenepoel are pushing comparable numbers at a young ages as the big GT guys, but both weigh considerably less (Evenepoel even 5kgs less than Pogacar) and not even in peak form.

The numbers never mean much without context. I think probably many current pros would beat Froome's 20min wattage/kg in a lab test (assuming 66kg as Froome's weight, 430W amounts to 6.5 W/kg... but then Froome's real weight is as elusive as the recipe for Coca Cola). I think Phil Gaimon would beat Froome in a 20min lab test.

But cranking out 6.4 W/kg after two weeks of hard racing, at the pointy end of a long, hot, tough mountain stage, is something very few can do. Recovery and endurance matter more here than lab performance. What is extraordinary about Pogacar is that he seems to be able to crank out these numbers, or something fairly close to it, in a GT, day after day, at that tender age. Less extraordinary is an isolated result on a single climb in that Valencia race.

Wrt Evenepoel, I haven't looked much at power data (earlier on in his career he did post some power data, but he stopped doing so some time mid-2018), but it is clear he must have a truly extraordinary power/cdA ratio, and probably also an extraordinary power/weight ratio, when fresh (e.g. TT context). The unknown element is whether and how he can replicate that in a GT context, but I think his potential is even bigger - we will find out soon I guess. In his case, I'm actually more worried about how he will survive the craziness of a GT peloton...

 

[RunningRouleur]

Froome climbed the Madone at 459 watts in 2013. That’s about 6.8, for 30 minutes. No one else in the world could’ve done that then. We will see Pogacar’s data this July. I expect the numbers will be very impressive considering the firepower Jumbo and INEOS are bringing.

 

[Juan Pelota]

Froome climbed the Madone at 459 watts in 2013. That’s about 6.8, for 30 minutes. No one else in the world could’ve done that then. We will see Pogacar’s data this July. I expect the numbers will be very impressive considering the firepower Jumbo and INEOS are bringing.

Is that the Madone record now?

 

[zenoiz]

Froome climbed the Madone at 459 watts in 2013. That’s about 6.8, for 30 minutes. No one else in the world could’ve done that then. We will see Pogacar’s data this July. I expect the numbers will be very impressive considering the firepower Jumbo and INEOS are bringing.

I don't intend to bring up Gaimon at nauseam, but using the link below you can see his OLH data from 2017 (click the 'Watts/kg' button)
https://www.strava.com/activities/983343009/power-curve, 6.95 W/kg for 13min10sec. A 30min effort is a different beast, and I don't know too much about physiology and the expected drop-off with duration, but I would find it hard to place that isolated Madone effort: exceptionally good for sure, but 'no one else in the world able to do it' caliber? (il Cobra Ricco may disagree )

Looking forward to Pogacar's data indeed (hope he keeps posting).

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

I don't intend to bring up Gaimon at nauseam, but using the link below you can see his OLH data from 2017 (click the 'Watts/kg' button)
https://www.strava.com/activities/983343009/power-curve, 6.95 W/kg for 13min10sec. A 30min effort is a different beast, and I don't know too much about physiology and the expected drop-off with duration, but I would find it hard to place that isolated Madone effort: exceptionally good for sure, but 'no one else in the world able to do it' caliber? (il Cobra Ricco may disagree )

Looking forward to Pogacar's data indeed (hope he keeps posting).

From what i have read, if you have an AnT of 420 W (20 minute effort), then your FTP would/should be roughly equal to 400 W (one hour) since it is usually 95% of the 20 minute effort. I do not remember where exactly i read this, but i posted it somewhere in the Evenepoel topic last month or so. However, i have no idea how 13 minutes relate to 30 minutes.

Edit: see

 

[zenoiz]

From what i have read, if you have an AnT of 420 W (20 minute effort), then your FTP would/should be roughly equal to 400 W (one hour) since it is usually 95% of the 20 minute effort. I do not remember where exactly i read this, but i posted it somewhere in the Evenepoel topic last month or so. However, i have no idea how 13 minutes relate to 30 minutes.

Edit: see

Yes, the 20min to 60min (FTP) extrapolation, with a 5% drop-off, is used a lot (e.g. Allen and Coggan, TrainerRoad 20min FTP test etc ), it is basically an empirical rule-of-thumb. For less-than-20min efforts, you probably have a significant anaerobic component and more variability from rider to rider. There are quite a few power-duration models around, and I have fitted some to my own data (thousands of power files) - if I get around to it I can see what a 13min >30min extrapolation would look like but it probably won't be very applicable to other riders (you'd need their max power-duration curve and you would of course know for sure)...

Edit: drop-off 13min>30min is about 8-9%, using my data. Applying this to Gaimon's OLH numbers, that would put him at about 6.38 W/kg for a virtual Madone ride... quite a bit below what Froome reportedly did indeed.

 

[RunningRouleur]

Yes 13–>30 minute power drop is for sure a big one. That Gaimon wouldn’t be able to hold near Froome’s power-to-weight for such a time is no surprise. Froome was riding away from the field at all in the 2013 TdF (and all season in fact). It makes sense that his numbers would be so high that year.
They’ve been slowly dropping ever since, though because Froome is so incredible, he’s still been able to win many races without being on top form.