Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread

[mikks]

Not waiting for teammates, solo closing the gap to the group in front when they're clearly waiting. A lot of leaving a small gap on the cobbles. General cornering on the cobbles. Just being less aerodynamic than he could be with his body size. I also saw him move to the front in the wind by himself at like 180km to go

He does this not only in Roubaix. He quite often rides too close to the front, taking the wind and so on. Maybe he wants better positioning, is afraid of sudden incidents or whatever, but he is not very economical.

 

[Rou]

Tour is the most important, no doubts but you were talking about the Vuelta (which is << Tour). I dont get your point as Pogacar rides the Tour every year and is aiming for the record.

I'm saying that Grand Tours are the most elite prizes in cycling.
I love Paris -Roubaix and the 2021 edition was the most fascinating one but Grand Tours (even boring) are something else.

 

[canina82]

clearly you don't know the history of cycling, WC has always been something special, for all the riders but also for the cycling world in general. Vuelta is nowhere close to WC in terms of prestige. After the Tour, WC is the most prestigious race a cyclist can win, this is what the history of cycling says. In the past the Giro was more prestigious, I am talking 40-50 years ago, but over the decades it has lost quite a lot. So right now WC is ahead also of the Giro.
"while in WCs, we can have a random rider win them": what exactly do you mean by that? to win a wc you have to do something special, clearly it can happen that in some years there is a less strong rider winning a WC but that's true also for the Vuelta (just look at the winners in the two races in the last decades)

You have a lot of top riders to skip WC races. Vingegaard, Contador, Froome, Indurain, Armstrong.

All of them were recognized (except Vingegaard) as the best cyclist for a period of time. Excluding Armstrong, all of them targeted the Vuelta multiple times and never the WCRR.
Armstrong won this race when he wasn't a GT rider. So no, GTs are more important than the WC.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

I'm saying that Grand Tours are the most elite prizes in cycling.
I love Paris -Roubaix and the 2021 edition was the most fascinating one but Grand Tours (even boring) are something else.

Vuelta is the least prestigious GT while PR is one of most prestigious classics and would mean a lot in Pogacars resume in his context. His focus on Tour (by far the most important GT) plus classics is the right way for an all round phenom like him.

 

[canina82]

Let me remind you that Pogacar has his current aura exactly because of his high climbs in July.
In 2023 he was also considered the most complete rider but Vingegaard made him look like a muppet in July.
If Pog wins 4 Monuments this year + World's but Vingegaard mops him in July it would have a sour feeling.
Don't you think so?

I love your confidence in Vingegaard, last year happened the same. You hyped him so much but eventually your opinion went out the window when Combloux happened.

 

[Rou]

You have a lot of top riders to skip WC races. Vingegaard, Contador, Froome, Indurain, Armstrong.

All of them were recognized (except Vingegaard) as the best cyclist for a period of time. Excluding Armstrong, all of them targeted the Vuelta multiple times and never the WCRR.
Armstrong won this race when he wasn't a GT rider. So no, GTs are more important than the WC.

I agree with you. I know why people try to discredit the Vuelta. It's because Pogacar hasn't gone to it for the past years and they try to twist it like Pogacar doesn't care about it.
In 2023 he was fried after the broken wrist injury.
In 2024 tired after the Double.
In 2025 injured and fried after the Tour.
When he finally goes all of them will change their words.
The reality is that he wasn't physically capable of doing it these years.
The TDF-VUELTA double is a super hard feat.

 

[Berniece]

Do enlighten me how Merckx, cooked from mechanicals and chasing, would beat a guy who pulls a lot less than him, has almost 15kgs extra and has a far superior sprint

He wouldn't be cooked, obviously

 

[hayneplane]

San Remo is the best example of that. Even when criticized for being a boring race, it never lost its prestige.
Did the San Remo race lose its prestige in the 90s and 00s because fans called it a boring race?
The fact that you like the Vuelta more now doesn't imply that it has greater historical prestige than the Giro.

Nobody prioritizes the Vuelta; it's a race for those who lose the Tour or DNF. The Vuelta hasn't gained prestige; it's simply a way to salvage the season. It's the end-of-year makeup exam.

Much of the prestige of San Remo comes from its position as the opening monument of the season meaning it benefits from the anticipation of the off season and being the first massive race of the year.

Swap it with Lombardia in the calendar and it would see a much diminished interest level. People would be far less willing to overlook the dullness of the first 75% of the race.

 

[BahamontesPhantom]

Do enlighten me how Merckx, cooked from mechanicals and chasing, would beat a guy who pulls a lot less than him, has almost 15kgs extra and has a far superior sprint

Unless that was sarcasm which a missed

Well Merckx was a bigger man than Teddy, so he likely wouldn’t have that kg deficit, that’s true.
Merckx was a better sprinter though, better than Teddy and Van Aert so that’s how he would have won.
Merckx dominated the grand tours like Poggi despite being heavier and with a long term injury. I’m a fan of Pogi but always felt it was premature to cal him better than Merckx.

Merckx seem to have better tactical nouse as well, Pog doesn’t ride the cobbles as well, is more vulnerable in a sprint, can use too much energy when he shouldn’t, and so forth

 

[rafa92]

You have a lot of top riders to skip WC races. Vingegaard, Contador, Froome, Indurain, Armstrong.

All of them were recognized (except Vingegaard) as the best cyclist for a period of time. Excluding Armstrong, all of them targeted the Vuelta multiple times and never the WCRR.
Armstrong won this race when he wasn't a GT rider. So no, GTs are more important than the WC.

You have a lot of top riders to skip WC races: Yes because they can't win it. Let me tell you something, if vingegaard thought he could beat pogacar at the WC or if froome had any chance of winning it in his years they would go for it with all they've got. But unfortunately for them they are awful one day riders. It's like saying Van der Poel, Cancellara and Boonen never went for the GC at the tour, guess what, they don't go for gc because they have no chance of winning it.
Again as I told you before, if you know the history of cycling you would know how special and prestigious the WC is for the entire system in cycling, especially compared to the vuelta. Clearly the tour is a different story and it is the most prestigious race in cycling

 

[canina82]

You have a lot of top riders to skip WC races: Yes because they can't win it. Let me tell you something, if vingegaard thought he could beat pogacar at the WC or if froome had any chance of winning it in his years they would go for it with all they've got. But unfortunately for them they are awful one day riders. It's like saying Van der Poel, Cancellara and Boonen never went for the GC at the tour, guess what, they don't go for gc because they have no chance of winning it.
Again as I told you before, if you know the history of cycling you would know how special and prestigious the WC is for the entire system in cycling, especially compared to the vuelta. Clearly the tour is a different story and it is the most prestigious race in cycling

The same way a lot of riders who target the WC would target the Vuelta if they were able to contest it.

 

[fox]

The Vuelta is more important than the WC.
GTs are the essence of this sport, not classics.
Many riders target GTs and not the WC. And it's easier to have an upset in a WC than in a GT. In GTs, (almost) only world class riders (or close to world class) can win them while in WCs, we can have a random rider win them.

Nope. There are hundreds of one day races every year. Saying that only 3 races on the calendar are important is rediculous. You know nothing about cycling if you really believe that to be true.

 

[elguapo]

Classics/ Monuments vs. World Tour. Let's just simplify it, WTs always feature stages that are even harder than the monuments. Except Pogacar, most winners of monuments do not perform well in these hard stages of the WT.

 

[topcat]

You have a lot of top riders to skip WC races. Vingegaard, Contador, Froome, Indurain, Armstrong.

All of them were recognized (except Vingegaard) as the best cyclist for a period of time. Excluding Armstrong, all of them targeted the Vuelta multiple times and never the WCRR.
Armstrong won this race when he wasn't a GT rider. So no, GTs are more important than the WC.

*Indurain: 2 silvers and a bronze in wcrr

 

[canina82]

*Indurain: 2 silvers and a bronze in wcrr

Right. 8 Vueltas though.

 

[fox]

Classics/ Monuments vs. World Tour. Let's just simplify it, WTs always feature stages that are even harder than the monuments. Except Pogacar, most winners of monuments do not perform well in these hard stages of the WT.

If you are saying that the only important thing in cycling is the abilty to climb long cols than you are right, but it is not.

That is also why Tom Boonen, Marc Cavendish, Philippe Gilbert, and Mario Chipollini stand above Contador and Froome in the all time cycling ranking

Who is the best rider of alltime?

The ProCyclingStats alltime ranking is led by Eddy Merckx with 3859.8 points, before Sean Kelly (2171.1 points) and Francesco Moser (2129.2 points). Considering the enormous gap between Merckx and Kelly (3859.8) we can conclude that Merckx is the best rider of all time.

www.procyclingstats.com

 

[rafa92]

The same way a lot of riders who target the WC would target the Vuelta if they were able to contest it.

maybe you don't realise that you are the one who was making this stupid argument. Vingegaard, Froome, Contador don't target WC because they can't/couldn't win it, just like VDP and Boonen don't target GTs because they can't win it. But this doesn't tell you anything about the prestige of these races, which is the stupid argument you were trying to make.

 

[rafa92]

Nope. There are hundreds of one day races every year. Saying that only 3 races on the calendar are important is rediculous. You know nothing about cycling if you really believe that to be true.

"you know nothing about cycling", yes it's clearly the case, especially when you say vuelta is above wc

 

[rafa92]

If you are saying that the only important thing in cycling is the abilty to climb long cols than you are right, but it is not.

That is also why Tom Boonen, Marc Cavendish, Philippe Gilbert, and Mario Chipollini stand above Contador and Froome in the all time cycling ranking

Who is the best rider of alltime?

The ProCyclingStats alltime ranking is led by Eddy Merckx with 3859.8 points, before Sean Kelly (2171.1 points) and Francesco Moser (2129.2 points). Considering the enormous gap between Merckx and Kelly (3859.8) we can conclude that Merckx is the best rider of all time.

www.procyclingstats.com

your point is valid but I would not use the PCS ranking as an argument, it gives too much credit to certain minor results and placements. Imo a much better list is Prestigelisten, it is much more well thought, it is much better in assigning points to the relevant results and it also takes into account the evolution of cycling over history and how certain races change in terms of their relevance over the years

 

[canina82]

maybe you don't realise that you are the one who was making this stupid argument. Vingegaard, Froome, Contador don't target WC because they can't/couldn't win it, just like VDP and Boonen don't target GTs because they can't win it. But this doesn't tell you anything about the prestige of these races, which is the stupid argument you were trying to make.

My point is not all riders care about the WC. Vingegaard doesn't even lose time to prepare a WC conveniently. He could give an opportunity to see how he behaves there. But no, he prefers to race the Vuelta. So no, not all riders prefer the WC to the Vuelta.
Other thing is how much money and audience WCs have compared to the Vuelta. This should tell us what we (cycling fans) prefer to see.
For example comparing a queen stage to a WC edition.

 

[fox]

your point is valid but I would not use the PCS ranking as an argument, it gives too much credit to certain minor results and placements. Imo a much better list is Prestigelisten, it is much more well thought, it is much better in assigning points to the relevant results and it also takes into account the evolution of cycling over history and how certain races change in terms of their relevance over the years

The point is that for example WVA is much better cyclist than Chris Froome. WVA wins mountain stages, wins cobbled classics, wins sprints an ITT's, while Chris Froome only could ride up a mountain real fast at the end of a mountain stage. But if you say that cycling is only about that specific aspect of the sport, you are missing the real essence of the sport.

You would think that Pogacar would open up some eyes because he shows that there is more to cycling than just watts/kg at the end of a mountain stage.

 

[canina82]

The point is that for example WVA is much better cyclist than Chris Froome. WVA wins mountain stages, wins cobbled classics, wins sprints an ITT's, while Chris Froome only could ride up a mountain real fast at the end of a mountain stage. But if you say that cycling is only about that specific aspect of the sport, you are missing the real essence of the sport.

You would think that Pogacar would open up some eyes because he shows that there is more to cycling than just watts/kg at the end of a mountain stage.

Who is gonna be remembered more in the future?
Froome or MVP? I'm pretty sure Froome stands way above MVP if I had to make an all time greats list. Is Anquetil behind Rik van Looy?

Pogacar definitely needs a Vuelta, if not there is a big hole in his palmares. A rider like him can't have a palmares without the Vuelta.

 

[fox]

Who is gonna be remembered more in the future?
Froome or MVP? I'm pretty sure Froome stands way above MVP if I had to make an all time greats list. Is Anquetil behind Rik van Looy?

Pogacar definitely needs a Vuelta, if not there is a big hole in his palmares. A rider like him can't have a palmares without the Vuelta.

MVDP and it's not even close.

 

[canina82]

"Maybe not next year" - Tadej Pogacar may skip Paris-Roubaix; Gianetti assures return is ineevitable and congratulates Van Aert

UAE Team Emirates - XRG helped Tadej Pogacar to victory on the first two monuments of the season but couldn't pull it off at Paris-Roubaix. The Hell of the North is a race that usually throws riders'...

cyclinguptodate.com

 

[Coppi-Bartali]

Who is gonna be remembered more in the future?
Froome or MVP? I'm pretty sure Froome stands way above MVP if I had to make an all time greats list. Is Anquetil behind Rik van Looy?

Pogacar definitely needs a Vuelta, if not there is a big hole in his palmares. A rider like him can't have a palmares without the Vuelta.

Indurain or Froome? Indurain .

Indurain. He doesn't have the Vuelta, Froome yes.

Indurain or Hinault? Hinault.

If Hinault is considered better than Indurain, it's not because of the number of GTs, but because, having the same number of Tour de France, everything he achieved in classics adds value, making him a more complete rider.