Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread

[Extinction]

The emphasis on Tour is a marketing gimmick thanks to Armstrong and the French media who pushed narratives like Lemond/Fignon or Poulidor. Lussari was a much better story but Giro doesn't have the pull. Regarding sponsorship it depends on the market, Giro is more watched than Tour in Italy https://www.cyclingopinions.com/wp-...TV-Viewing-Professional-Road-Cycling-2019.pdf

The 80% mark is ridiculous and nowhere near truth. A lot of people have heard about TdF as the competition but very few actually watch it or even know the competitors. Most people just see some news with the winner and move on, similar to rugby Six Nations for example. Unless you are the actual winner, a Giro win is more valuable than 2nd in Tour. Look at Vinge this year, who tf gave a *** about him getting 2nd.

I've laughed a lot about people introducing Pog as some mainstream star but actually he's nowhere near someone like Doncic despite not winning anything big so far. Cycling is far from mainstream, TdF being something that casuals watch is one of the biggest marketing lies. That's mostly true in France and the 80% figure is only relevant to French teams.

Roglic would never trade what he gained for 1 Tour, nobody sane rates Evans/Wiggins/Thomas above him all-time. Not even worth comparing to no-names like Sastre/Pereiro. Rominger, Poulidor or Binda have no Tours but people will still see them as TdF winners worthy.

You neglect a fundamental thing, however, apart from your analysis being highly debatable: the Tour has much more prestige, otherwise a Frenchman would have won it in the past 40 years. The emphasis on the Tour isn't a gimmick, as the event has held higher prestige long before the Armstrong narrative. It's a sporting and economic fact. Sponsorship at the World Tour level needs the Tour, end of story. Maybe the Tour is something casuals watch in the US, but not in Europe. Yet even casuals watching in America is by far more than any other race, if it's broadcast at all. Lemond knew the Tour was something else and it's been that way from the beginning. Coppi became il Campionissimo only after winning the Tour. Indurain never won the Vuelta, but who remembers Heras? In Italy, while they think their race offers more spectacular terrain, nobody would question the superiority of the Tour in terms of prestige. As a Belgian, without a home GT, Remco will certainly ride the Tour for many years to come. And it doesn't matter that Roglic may be a better cyclist than those you mentioned, but his failure to win the Tour will be more memorable than anything else in 20 years. We can image alternative universes, but that doesn't make them real.

 

[FroomeWagon]

The emphasis on Tour is a marketing gimmick thanks to Armstrong and the French media who pushed narratives like Lemond/Fignon or Poulidor. Lussari was a much better story but Giro doesn't have the pull. Regarding sponsorship it depends on the market, Giro is more watched than Tour in Italy https://www.cyclingopinions.com/wp-...TV-Viewing-Professional-Road-Cycling-2019.pdf

The 80% mark is ridiculous and nowhere near truth. A lot of people have heard about TdF as the competition but very few actually watch it or even know the competitors. Most people just see some news with the winner and move on, similar to rugby Six Nations for example. Unless you are the actual winner, a Giro win is more valuable than 2nd in Tour. Look at Vinge this year, who tf gave a *** about him getting 2nd.

I've laughed a lot about people introducing Pog as some mainstream star but actually he's nowhere near someone like Doncic despite not winning anything big so far. Cycling is far from mainstream, TdF being something that casuals watch is one of the biggest marketing lies. That's mostly true in France and the 80% figure is only relevant to French teams.

Roglic would never trade what he gained for 1 Tour, nobody sane rates Evans/Wiggins/Thomas above him all-time. Not even worth comparing to no-names like Sastre/Pereiro. Rominger, Poulidor or Binda have no Tours but people will still see them as TdF winners worthy.

Thanks for the link. That was very informative.

It appears that the TDF has approximately 5X the viewership in the key 8 European countries (Spain, Italy, France, Sweden, Denmark, Flanders, Netherlands, Wallonia) and 8X globally than the other grand tours have. But viewership is not the only mark of prestige. I would also look at who was also on the podium and in the top 10.

Let's not even begin to say that the competition in the Giro or Vuelta is remotely close to that of the Tour. Nice win for Roglic this year in the Vuelta, great that he could overcome Ben O'Conner. Likewise, I will always be happy for Sepp Kuss and his Vuelta win from last year. Awesome that a super domestic gets a shot at a grand tour win (as did Hindley in the 2022 Giro).

Furthermore, nice win by Pogi in this years Giro, 10 minutes over Danny Martinez, probably could have been 20 minutes had Pogi wanted. Pretty darn good considering he treated the Giro as a training bloc.

Winning any grand tour is an amazing feat, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking the Giro or Vuelta come any where close to the prestige of winning the Tour. Remco knows that, and so does every other rider in the pro peloton. That is why he will be riding the Tour next year.

 

[RedheadDane]

It appears that the TDF has approximately 5X the viewership in the key 8 European countries (Spain, Italy, France, Sweden, Denmark, Flanders, Netherlands, Wallonia)

Interesting list of "key countries"... what determines it? Definitely not success in cycling.

 

[FroomeWagon]

Interesting list of "key countries"... what determines it? Definitely not success in cycling.

That was from the link that Luthor posted. Here is the table I was referencing. I think they didn't include some countries in this table (Germany for example) because the data was somewhat incomplete? They did include TDF numbers for those other countries, however, in other parts of the document. For example, they talk about the US viewership is about 300k per day for the TDF. I am pretty sure it is close to nil (or quite minimal) for all the other races. I believe the Germany TDF numbers were around 1,500,000.

 

[KoopaCycling]

You neglect a fundamental thing, however, apart from your analysis being highly debatable: the Tour has much more prestige, otherwise a Frenchman would have won it in the past 40 years. The emphasis on the Tour isn't a gimmick, as the event has held higher prestige long before the Armstrong narrative. It's a sporting and economic fact. Sponsorship at the World Tour level needs the Tour, end of story. Maybe the Tour is something casuals watch in the US, but not in Europe. Yet even casuals watching in America is by far more than any other race, if it's broadcast at all. Lemond knew the Tour was something else and it's been that way from the beginning. Coppi became il Campionissimo only after winning the Tour. Indurain never won the Vuelta, but who remembers Heras? In Italy, while they think their race offers more spectacular terrain, nobody would question the superiority of the Tour in terms of prestige. As a Belgian, without a home GT, Remco will certainly ride the Tour for many years to come. And it doesn't matter that Roglic may be a better cyclist than those you mentioned, but his failure to win the Tour will be more memorable than anything else in 20 years. We can image alternative universes, but that doesn't make them real.

I already debunked this. The only 2 frenchies to have won a GT in the last 40 years were Jalabert and Fignon. One of whom actually won the tour. So whilst i do agree the TdF is harder. It ain't harder to the point that the other GT's aren't in the same ballpark. I remember Heras. Great climber.

No one is arguing the tour isn't bigger or does not edge the giro in terms of prestige. However i am arguing that the thought that it's Tour and nothing but the Tour is wrong. The Giro's history/prestige is up there, and a close second in my books. If someone want to ride the Giro cause the parcours suits him better i'm all good with that. A rider does not need to/should not be almost forced to ride the tour by fans, sponsors( & not the giro as their main goal ) when the giro maybe suits him better that particular year.

The narrative that only the Tour matters i won't ever follow. These 'bigger' names in cycling won the Giro the last 40 years: Hinault, Roche, Fignon, Bugno, Indurain, Rominger, Pantani, Basso, Contador, Nibali, Dumoulin, Froome, Bernal, Roglic, Pogacar. I would not argue with their quality.

 

[AmRacer]

I already debunked this. The only 2 frenchies to have won a GT in the last 40 years were Jalabert and Fignon. One of whom actually won the tour. So whilst i do agree the TdF is harder. It ain't harder to the point that the other GT's aren't in the same ballpark. I remember Heras. Great climber.

No one is arguing the tour isn't bigger or does not edge the giro in terms of prestige. However i am arguing that the thought that it's Tour and nothing but the Tour is wrong. The Giro's history/prestige is up there, and a close second in my books. If someone want to ride the Giro cause the parcours suits him better i'm all good with that. A rider does not need to/should not be almost forced to ride the tour by fans, sponsors( & not the giro as their main goal ) when the giro maybe suits him better that particular year.

The narrative that only the Tour matters i won't ever follow. These 'bigger' names in cycling won the Giro the last 40 years: Hinault, Roche, Fignon, Bugno, Indurain, Rominger, Pantani, Basso, Contador, Nibali, Dumoulin, Froome, Bernal, Roglic, Pogacar. I would not argue with their quality.

All of them raced the Tour.

 

[FroomeWagon]

All of them raced the Tour.

I agree, furthermore, it's less about who wins it, and more about the overall quality of the field. Like I mentioned earlier, Pogi is a great winner for this year's Giro, but the rest of the field was relatively weak. Same with Roglic's win this year at the Vuelta. Where in the top 10 do we think the 3rd step of the Giro (or Vuelta) would end up, on average, in the TDF for a particular year. ( FYI ... 3rd in this year's Vuelta was 19th in the TDF, 3rd in this years Giro was 42nd at the TDF).

 

[KoopaCycling]

All of them raced the Tour.

Yes, and? No one is saying Remco should never compete in the tour. The argument is that he should get to choose each year which of the 2 he wants to ride.

Also this drop in quality froomewagon speaks of when it comes to podium spots is just cherry picking. There have been relative weak tour fields as well. Years in which i felt the field was tougher in the giro/vuelta.

Third in this year Giro was Geraint Thomas. Yeah absolute disgrace to have a rider of his level on the podium of the giro... oh wait.. Thomas won the tour...

Third in this year Vuelta was Enric Mas, what an absolute disgrace to have him on the podium of the vuelta... oh wait, he finished 5th and 6th in the tour previously...

 

[Oldermanish]

I admire the consistency in your stance, but I cannot be even close to agreeing that 1 tour is worth more than 1 giro and 4 vuelta's. Each of those grand tour wins bought a level of happiness and satisfaction to Roglic that was surely each worth at least 20% of a tour win, and sure, there is an element of being unfulfilled in his career because he hasn't won the tour, but if he had won that tour and then just lost that 1 giro and 4 vuelta's then his career would still be unfulfilled (probably more so), but in a different way.

It would be settled if Roglic was ever asked the question, IMO. Knowing the combination of people, effort and future representation by Visma that shared that one disappointing loss; he might sleep better making the trade. Not that it can happen but he is reminded by every fan on either side of his "greatness" discussion that the big one slipped away. Lemond's beat down of Fignon broke the Frenchman's will and caused him some bitterness it seems. Roglic has been more versatile and had been a winner since he was young in ski jumping. He knows what it feels like winning and losing but he was an individual in that sport. In a GT you aren't singular. All of those folks riding with him felt that loss and I'm sure he'd want to give that back.

Remco, the thread leader and Kid of the Future surely has learned some lessons about total investment in one goal. He seems increasingly better adjusted to being a pro and what represents a good effort for him. I wish him the form to contend for that Tour if it means that much to him. Otherwise, I'm satisfied watching him race when he's going well and happy about it.

 

[Extinction]

I already debunked this. The only 2 frenchies to have won a GT in the last 40 years were Jalabert and Fignon. One of whom actually won the tour. So whilst i do agree the TdF is harder. It ain't harder to the point that the other GT's aren't in the same ballpark. I remember Heras. Great climber.

No one is arguing the tour isn't bigger or does not edge the giro in terms of prestige. However i am arguing that the thought that it's Tour and nothing but the Tour is wrong. The Giro's history/prestige is up there, and a close second in my books. If someone want to ride the Giro cause the parcours suits him better i'm all good with that. A rider does not need to/should not be almost forced to ride the tour by fans, sponsors( & not the giro as their main goal ) when the giro maybe suits

First bolded: right, but if it is harder, the terrain does not account for it, but the competition, the stress, that everyone puts everyone else on Edge, ore else! It's not like that in the Giro or Vuelta, except for national riders, who may or not be the best. Good for you on Heras, but not the magiority.

Second bolded: unfortunately it is for Evenepoel. He should try again at the Giro, my beloved race, and then try again at the Tour. There is no other way for him, as he himself recognizes.

 

[Extinction]

Just to elaborate further, I don't think it's as clear cut to say, "2 giro's far exceeds 1 tour" or that "1 tour always exceeds 4 giro's" so to speak. I think that career narratives/arcs and the way in which races are won also play a part. Also consider that the human ego is never entirely satisfied, at least not for long; Roglic' tour win in 2020 would not have completed his career, especially as it came quite early. Consider what his narrative would be now if he traded his 5 GT's for 1 tour....."Well, Roglic was somewhat lucky to win the tour before Pogacar reached his peak and before Vingegaard came along; that luck seems further emphasised after his failure to even win one of the lesser grand tours despite numerous close calls/opportunities. " As opposed to, "Well, Roglic came back from adversity on numerous occasions to win five grand tours, not bad at all for a former professional ski jumper who some cycling fans derided as being merely a 'mountain sprinter' (but never a Slovenian Spilak)."

Whereas for Evans his tour (actual, rather than hypothetical for Roglic) win is a bit different in my opinion. Because he had those near misses early in his career, and it felt like his time may have passed. I believe his 2012 Tour win means more to him then it would have if it came earlier, even if he was a better cyclist then.

And what about Froome? I'm not even sure if he'd trade his 1 giro for another (2018?) tour. Holding all 3 GT's at once is very memorable, and the manner in which he won that race certainly was.

The generational thing though comes to the fore. Between Armstrong and Contador (pre-clengate)/Froome, there were opportunities, before and after, but now the calibre is once again higher. So with Pogacar, Vingegaard, Evenepoel we're in another stratosphere. These guys establish the parameters and they do so at the Tour. It doesn't diminish the Giro, but winning the Italian GT and then attempting to win the Tour is hors categorie. By contrast, a Giro winner like Carapez, like Hindley puts this race in perspective, whereas a Pogacar winning the Tour (Giro-Tour) settles all matters.

 

[Extinction]

It would be settled if Roglic was ever asked the question, IMO. Knowing the combination of people, effort and future representation by Visma that shared that one disappointing loss; he might sleep better making the trade. Not that it can happen but he is reminded by every fan on either side of his "greatness" discussion that the big one slipped away. Lemond's beat down of Fignon broke the Frenchman's will and caused him some bitterness it seems. Roglic has been more versatile and had been a winner since he was young in ski jumping. He knows what it feels like winning and losing but he was an individual in that sport. In a GT you aren't singular. All of those folks riding with him felt that loss and I'm sure he'd want to give that back.

Remco, the thread leader and Kid of the Future surely has learned some lessons about total investment in one goal. He seems increasingly better adjusted to being a pro and what represents a good effort for him. I wish him the form to contend for that Tour if it means that much to him. Otherwise, I'm satisfied watching him race when he's going well and happy about it.

I'm not taking about who is happy or not with what they are doing. The rigors of professional cycling don't care about this, but only results. Now which results are placed upon a rider depends on what said rider can hope to achieve, and Remco, till now, is thought capable of winning the Tour. It's why his Belgian team has invested so heavilly in him. Otherwise they should demote him and look for another possible solution to the "next Merckx".

 

[AmRacer]

Yes, and? No one is saying Remco should never compete in the tour. The argument is that he should get to choose each year which of the 2 he wants to ride.

Also this drop in quality froomewagon speaks of when it comes to podium spots is just cherry picking. There have been relative weak tour fields as well. Years in which i felt the field was tougher in the giro/vuelta.

Third in this year Giro was Geraint Thomas. Yeah absolute disgrace to have a rider of his level on the podium of the giro... oh wait.. Thomas won the tour...

Third in this year Vuelta was Enric Mas, what an absolute disgrace to have him on the podium of the vuelta... oh wait, he finished 5th and 6th in the tour previously...

And? So? He has done all three GT's and won one of them. It's time for Remco to race the Tour, he can do the double as many rider do.

 

[Oldermanish]

I'm not taking about who is happy or not with what they are doing. The rigors of professional cycling don't care about this, but only results. Now which results are placed upon a rider depends on what said rider can hope to achieve, and Remco, till now, is thought capable of winning the Tour. It's why his Belgian team has invested so heavilly in him. Otherwise they should demote him and look for another possible solution to the "next Merckx".

Let's be honest...Patrick knows what Remco is capable of and an appearance at the Tour is what his sponsors may be paying for. If there was a serious sponsor bonus to Patrick for winning the Tour he'd also have negotiated enough cash to compete for talent with the Big Two to provide even better support. He'd also be kicked out of Belgium for letting Remco go to Visma so he needs to keep Remco happy for what he can win and keep undue pressure and expectations in check. Remco is excellent but he may still be the late bloomer for the effort required.

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

What is up with everyone granting Remco the status as third best GC rider over Roglic? Because he looked better on a couple stages in the Tour this year? Come on.

 

[Berniece]

What is up with everyone granting Remco the status as third best GC rider over Roglic? Because he looked better on a couple stages in the Tour this year? Come on.

Yes, he kept showing throughout the Tour he didn’t lose his power and was always the third best and on 1-2 occasions even the 2nd best. Roglic never showed this throughout the Tour.

 

[Extinction]

Let's be honest...Patrick knows what Remco is capable of and an appearance at the Tour is what his sponsors may be paying for. If there was a serious sponsor bonus to Patrick for winning the Tour he'd also have negotiated enough cash to compete for talent with the Big Two to provide even better support. He'd also be kicked out of Belgium for letting Remco go to Visma so he needs to keep Remco happy for what he can win and keep undue pressure and expectations in check. Remco is excellent but he may still be the late bloomer for the effort required.

The main issue is the size of the gap to Pogacar fundamentally. He needs to up his game considerably, but it's not like his level is just sort of up there. He's a generational talent, except he's in a rough generation. And who is to say Pogacar won't up his game for the next several years? Imagine that, the carnage. I'd say Remco has to go to the Tour for the next three years and see how it goes. If Pog continues to be unreachable, then do the Giro, to try and win pink, or Vuelta as well. The problem is, what if Tadej continues to utterly dominante from Paris-Nice to Lombardia? And this isn't just a problem for Evenepoel. There would likely be a rebelion. Indeed, Pog himself seems to be aware of this in a sort of tragi-comic and grotesque way. I bet Don Patrick doesn't have restful nights, unless he's approached Mauro to ask what gives? I'm talking purely from the business and investments point of view.

 

[Luthor]

That was from the link that Luthor posted. Here is the table I was referencing. I think they didn't include some countries in this table (Germany for example) because the data was somewhat incomplete? They did include TDF numbers for those other countries, however, in other parts of the document. For example, they talk about the US viewership is about 300k per day for the TDF. I am pretty sure it is close to nil (or quite minimal) for all the other races. I believe the Germany TDF numbers were around 1,500,000.

Thanks for the link. That was very informative.

It appears that the TDF has approximately 5X the viewership in the key 8 European countries (Spain, Italy, France, Sweden, Denmark, Flanders, Netherlands, Wallonia) and 8X globally than the other grand tours have. But viewership is not the only mark of prestige. I would also look at who was also on the podium and in the top 10.

Giro is not even in your list and it has 2 million from Italy alone where is more watched than TDF. Vuelta also has n.a. in 3 countries including Italy and France and pips TDF in Spain. 8X and 5X numbers you mention are nowhere near truth. it even says in the doc itself if you actually want to read it

Because in Italy the Giro d’Italia has higher TV ratings as well, of the 8 countries in the table the Tour de France is the best‐watched cycling race in only 3: Denmark, France and the Netherlands. This comes as no surprise since this was the case in 2018 as well

 

[Berniece]

I bet Don Patrick doesn't have restful nights, unless he's approached Mauro to ask what gives? I'm talking purely from the business and investments point of view.

I think PL isn’t that faded by it, with the results Evenepoel rode past season he will be happy. Double Olympic Gold winner

 

[Extinction]

I think PL isn’t that faded by it, with the results Evenepoel rode past season he will be happy. Double Olympic Gold winner

But PL said the Olympics are only a partial compensation, because not a sponsorship team thing. He wants Lieges, Tours, some other classics and GTs, etc., with an Evenepoel on the payroll.

 

[Berniece]

It's just taking like 2 stages in the TdF as only data point while ignoring essentially the last 2 full seasons, including ignoring the last GC stage they did race in that Tour before Roglic crashed out.

The one where Roglic blew himself up, crashed and was still given the same time as Evenepoel?

Yeah that really showed Roglic was better… /s

 

[Peyroteo94]

It's just taking like 2 stages in the TdF as only data point while ignoring essentially the last 2 full seasons, including ignoring the last GC stage they did race in that Tour before Roglic crashed out.

Like, sure if you wanna argue they're similar level, fine by me. But if we're gonna put one clearly ahead of the other, I'm taking the one that won 2 GTs and 3 WT stage races over the guy who's only WT stage race win in the last 2 years was UAE Tour where he reversed spanked Adam Yates

You nailed it. Remco is the most overrated rider right now when we talk about GTs. Is he good? Of course he is! But let's not pretend he is anywhere close to Vingegaard/Pogacar and he still needs to prove he is capable of beating a 100% Roglic. I would like to see both of them in the Giro just to clarify who is the best.

 

[Berniece]

We live in a fantastical world where getting dropped on the Galibier and coming back on the descent matters everything but getting dropped on Puy Mary and getting back in the descent is completely irrelevant.

On Galibier Roglic was barely able to follow Rodriguez, Landa, etc, while Evenepoel decided to ride his own pace on Puy Mary.

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

It was pretty obvious to anyone who watched the race that Roglic came in undercooked. I'm not saying Remco was necessarily in prime condition, but Roglic was getting better each stage after starting badly. I don't know where he would have ended up by the end of the Tour relative to Remco, but I do know that these are their notable GC results in Grand Tours and top 7 weeklong stage races for the past few years:

Primoz Roglic

• 2021
  • 1st in Vuelta
  • 1st in Basque Country
  • 15th in Paris-Nice after crashing, won 3 stages and in lead before
• 2022
  • 1st in Paris-Nice
  • 1st in Dauphine
• 2023
  • 1st in Giro
  • 1st in Tirreno-Adriatica
  • 1st in Catalunya
  • 3rd in Vuelta due to team decision
• 2024
  • 1st in Dauphine
  • 1st in Vuelta

Remco Evenepoel

• 2021
  • None
• 2022
  • 1st in Vuelta
• 2023
  • None
• 2024
  • 3rd in Tour

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

Remco >>> Roglic in classics
Remco > Roglic in ITTs
Roglic > Remco in stage races