Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread

[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.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Peyroteo94

Why doesn't Jonas ride Worlds or monuments then, like Rogla, Pogi and Remco do? If you argue he is more complete rider then i assume you meant Rogla and i guess Remco?

 

[Peyroteo94]

@Peyroteo94

Why doesn't Jonas ride Worlds or monuments then, like Rogla and Pogi do? If you argue he is more complete rider then i assume you mean Rogla.

More complete in GTs. Don't twist what I said.

 

[rafa92]

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.

wow finally you are talking some sense, so ability and not only palmares count!!! @Shortcut is absolutely right: You use arguments and twist your own logic however it suits you

 

[CyclistAbi]

More complete in GTs. Don't twist what I said.

Because he won two Tours? That makes him more complete GT rider then Rogla is? And outside of GT racing, who is in your opinion more complete rider, Rogla or Jonas?

 

[Shortcut]

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.

Just amazing how i agree with you on Tadej's takes but disagree with takes about Roglic. Literally everything what you wrote about Jonas could be said for Roglic too. And i do also think Tadej and Jonas are the best GC riders ever talent-wise, that is also reason why i think Roglic is just crazy unlucky to get so late into cycling and when he arrived-there were those two. And he still managed to get 5 GC victories, Olimpic gold medal, LBL and will probably reach 100 wins. If that's not legend i don't know what is.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Just amazing how i agree with you on Tadej's takes but disagree with takes about Roglic. Literally everything what you wrote about Jonas could be said for Roglic too. And i do also think Tadej and Jonas are the best GC riders ever talent-wise, that is also reason why i think Roglic is just crazy unlucky to get so late into cycling and when he arrived-there were those two. And he still managed to get 5 GC victories, Olimpic gold medal, LBL and will probably reach 100 wins. If that's not legend i don't know what is.

Lets not forget that if Rogla succeeds in Giro-Tour double attempt this season, then he sets back Pogi, Jonas and Remco careers for around half a decade.

 

[Peyroteo94]

wow finally you are talking some sense, so ability and not only palmares count!!! @Shortcut is absolutely right: You use arguments and twist your own logic however it suits you

You are not getting the point. I will write in caps lock, maybe you will understand. Vingegaard is not a legend (like I said previously) because to be a CYCLING LEGEND you need to have a LEGENDARY PALMARES (which is heavily influenced by ability). Both Roglic and Vingegaard have the ability to be cycling legends but they are not (until this moment). Roglic needs a Tour to be a cycling legend and win all 3 GTs, Vingegaard needs more GTs. Tour is not everything, if it was Bernal, Sastre, Pereiro would be cycling legends and they are not.
Both Roglic and Vingegaard are inside the top10 of GT riders (since Armstrong) and it is a shame Roglic never won a Tour because riders like Bernal won when stars aligned.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Just amazing how i agree with you on Tadej's takes but disagree with takes about Roglic. Literally everything what you wrote about Jonas could be said for Roglic too. And i do also think Tadej and Jonas are the best GC riders ever talent-wise, that is also reason why i think Roglic is just crazy unlucky to get so late into cycling and when he arrived-there were those two. And he still managed to get 5 GC victories, Olimpic gold medal, LBL and will probably reach 100 wins. If that's not legend i don't know what is.

Roglic can't be considered a complete rider when he crashes out 30%-40% of his GT career. The most important thing in cycling he can't do it regularly.
Edit: Now, it is really time to end with this discussion. Agree to disagree on Roglic.

 

[CyclistAbi]

I mean, you yourself acknowledge winning the Tour doesn't automatically make you a legend. Then you go on about lack of Rogličes palmares ... here you lost me. Rogla is packing and still going strong. That Tour title will be added too. People just have different priorities, relax.

Roglic can't be considered a complete rider when he crashes out 30%-40% of his GT career. The most important thing in cycling he can't do it regularly.

Quite on the contrary, that by itself made Rogla a cycling legend. You have to push the limits, to become a legend. And boy Rogla did.

 

[Shortcut]

You are not getting the point. I will write in caps lock, maybe you will understand. Vingegaard is not a legend (like I said previously) because to be a CYCLING LEGEND you need to have a LEGENDARY PALMARES (which is heavily influenced by ability). Both Roglic and Vingegaard have the ability to be cycling legends but they are not (until this moment). Roglic needs a Tour to be a cycling legend and win all 3 GTs, Vingegaard needs more GTs. Tour is not everything, if it was Bernal, Sastre, Pereiro would be cycling legends and they are not.
Both Roglic and Vingegaard are inside the top10 of GT riders (since Armstrong) and it is a shame Roglic never won a Tour because riders like Bernal won when stars aligned.

Vindegaard is legend because he won against GOAT(2X). This alone made him legend.Just those 2 wins are already comparable with Froome palmares. Nibali won all 3 GTs and now he is somehow legend and Roglic not? Yeah sure. Just imagine someone saying Mohoric is MSR legend and Pogacar not, even though he alone made MSR relevant again.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Just imagine someone saying Mohoric is MSR legend ...

That descend was legendary, doubt any of the mentioned riders will ever try that, pushing to such limit.

 

[Peyroteo94]

The meaning of legend is really undervalued by some people. No one with just 2 TdF should be a legend. The amount of riders with 2 TdF wins is gigantic and are those riders all legends? Of course not

 

[Netserk]

Vino is a legend.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Vino is a legend.

Charisma is very important. There is also a strong case around Pantani. Even Remco is somehow more unforgettable than Vingegaard or Roglic.
For me a legend is a rider we will talk about in 30 years when talking about monumens, WC or GTs
I'm pretty sure we will talk about Boonen, Cancellara or MVP when PR and RVV 2050 start.
No one talks about Roberto Heras unless to say he is Vuelta's record holder. Of course it is my opinion but it would be good to listen more people about this.
Meanwhile, Pogacar is almost finishing his second week of training at altitude. His shape is probably closed to his peak level already so we will have a good show in the Dauphine. I'm just wondering why he is alone there. Vingegaard has Kuss with him.

 

[Cycling111]

Vingegaard reminds me of Ocaña. Ocaña was far superior to Merckx in one Tour de France, but he lost it because he retired after a crash. He was more than 7 minutes ahead when that happened.
Ocaña would´ve retired with two TDFs.
But the superiority of Ocaña against Merckx was a exceptión. Merckx would once again be superior to Ocaña

Ocaña was a monster for the TDF but Merckx was a better cyclist, by far. Not only because he won more TDFs than Ocaña, but because he won more outside of the TDF.
As a complete cyclist, in classics, there was no possible comparison, like between Pogacar and Vingegaard

I think it's a good parallel.
Pogacar is Merckx, Vingegaard is Ocaña, and Roglic would be Poulidor. Although his career is more like Rominger's. It was to give an example of someone from that era.

 

[Red Rick]

Vino is a legend.

CN forum poll participations are greater honors than monuments, really

 

[Rou]

I'm curious which mountain doms will Pogi have in the Dauphine. Yates won't be there, Almeida also and it wouldn't be nice if his best climber is Soler.
I want him to make a statement there so he needs proper support.

 

[Peyroteo94]

I'm curious which mountain doms will Pogi have in the Dauphine. Yates won't be there, Almeida also and it wouldn't be nice if his best climber is Soler.
I want him to make a statement there so he needs proper support.

His team will be probably Narvaez, Soler, Sivakov, Wellens, Politt and other climber probably

 

[Peyroteo94]

Dauphine's route is a joke so a really good team is not important.

 

[Pogacsa]

In what sense it is a joke? Stage 7 is one that calls for a good climbing team for example

 

[Cycling111]

In what sense it is a joke? Stage 7 is one that calls for a good climbing team for example

That's why it's a joke, because only have one hard day.

 

[Rou]

That's why it's a joke, because only have one hard day.

Well, it's still the hardest stage of a one week race for the whole year. This stage is harder than all the mountain stages of the Giro for example.
It wouldn't be ideal for Tadej if Visma drop his whole team on the second HC climb.