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

Page 235 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
So many believe Remco has shown nothing as of yet and question his potential for future greatness...

Fine. It’s a matter of opinion.

However, many of these same posters have indicated that Pidcock has a bright GT future.

Based off of what exactly? Has Pidcock in anyway demonstrated more potential in his results?

Oh wait a second, when Pidcock races, his opponents are always trying to win too. With Remco, they are simply training and are not putting out any effort.

*Please note: the above is not a criticism of Pidcock, who is another wonderful talent with exciting potential. Simply pointing out the inherent and illogical bias of many of the anti-Remco posters.
 
However, many of these same posters have indicated that Pidcock has a bright GT future.

Based off of what exactly? Has Pidcock in anyway demonstrated more potential in his results?
Actually, I haven't seen anyone ever ground their praise for Pidcock merely in his potential as a GT rider. Quite the opposite, even.

What's clear is that Pidcock and Evenepoel are both incredible talents, but for diametrically opposed reasons.

Evenepoel is an aerobullet with efficient leg muscles. This makes him excel at one big thing: riding solo against the wind on asphalt roads. A pretty nice core talent to have, given that it can be win you plenty of GT's. Especially one week ones.

Pidcock is the master of racing any type of bike on any type of surface. His soul has wheels, so to say. And that translates itself to incredible demonstrations in every possible discipline. He's the world champion eMTB, which requires navigating extremely tricky terrain at super speeds. He went toe-to-toe twice with the far bigger WvA in a sprint on the road in April and then crushed MvdP and the world MTB elite in May. It's only on the back of amazing feats like these, that his record as a junior in GC races (like winning the baby Giro), makes one marvel at his potential in that area too.
 
WVA and VDP were winning in cyclocross but u could not have predicted at that time that they would be dominant racers on the road. Landa was predicted to be the big thing on the base of his 2015 Giro but bad choices and bad positioning doomed his career. Horner won a GT at 43(Not even Horner predicted that).
Considering both Pidcock and Evenepoel are ~21, and both have one GT participation among them, which is insufficient data to decide a GT failure or even a GT legend. I would wait until they are 30 to call either of them by any adjective.
Both have huge talents and both have much to learn as well. Raw talent only goes so far. That is why Caruso is 2nd in the Giro not Almeida.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
WVA and VDP were winning in cyclocross but u could not have predicted at that time that they would be dominant racers on the road. Landa was predicted to be the big thing on the base of his 2015 Giro but bad choices and bad positioning doomed his career. Horner won a GT at 43(Not even Horner predicted that).
Considering both Pidcock and Evenepoel are ~21, and both have one GT participation among them, which is insufficient data to decide a GT failure or even a GT legend. I would wait until they are 30 to call either of them by any adjective.
Both have huge talents and both have much to learn as well. Raw talent only goes so far. That is why Caruso is 2nd in the Giro not Almeida.
His point was that Evenepoel has beaten the world's elite, be it in ITT's, one week GC's, classics or mountain stages. He's been on the bike as a pro for less than 2 full seasons, and has 16 pro wins so far. Yet at every turn people insist on downplaying his achievements, or questioning his actual potential. While Pidcock, the older of the two, has won... Brabantse Pijl, and somehow his actual achievements as a young pro don't get called into question when discussing his future.

I also don't really agree on the Caruso/Almeida comparison. Had Almeida not had his one bad day (which appears to have come from forgetting to eat in time), he would actually have been able to come close to Bernal in GC. We can only discuss what we think the potential of a rider is, i don't think we should take into account potential errors like forgetting to eat for instance.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Big Doopie
WVA and VDP were winning in cyclocross but u could not have predicted at that time that they would be dominant racers on the road. Landa was predicted to be the big thing on the base of his 2015 Giro but bad choices and bad positioning doomed his career. Horner won a GT at 43(Not even Horner predicted that).
Considering both Pidcock and Evenepoel are ~21, and both have one GT participation among them, which is insufficient data to decide a GT failure or even a GT legend. I would wait until they are 30 to call either of them by any adjective.
Both have huge talents and both have much to learn as well. Raw talent only goes so far. That is why Caruso is 2nd in the Giro not Almeida.
Waiting till 30 is a bit much, but I would probably give it 2 years with no big crashes etc.
 
Don't be silly.

I'm giving Evenepoel the 2021 Vuelta and 2022 Tour to show us his potential in three week grand tour racing.

He doesn't have to beat Pogacar and Bernal and the Waffen-INEOSS, but he should at least pose some kind of threat to them.

In the mean time, I'll make sure to throw plenty of satisfying adjectives around.

Feel free to respond in 2029.
There is a very good chance he competes in neither of those GTs. Hard to be a threat or fulfill your criteria if he doesn’t compete. That’s like expecting him to win a bunch of races while recovering from a pelvis fracture… oh wait now…some people did do that.
 
He won't ride Giro anytime soon. That's not a race for him, at least not yet. Tour is the most favorable GT for him, so why not try it...
I think the Vuelta is slightly more favorable for him.
Descents have little impact on race dynamics (unless Formigal is included), lower chances of crashes, less chaotic first week. Also, a lot less pressure to perform at high level day in and day out. Steepness of climbs hasn't really been a problem for him so far.

Agree that the Giro will always be the hardest to win for him though.
 
I think the Vuelta is slightly more favorable for him.
Descents have little impact on race dynamics (unless Formigal is included), lower chances of crashes, less chaotic first week. Also, a lot less pressure to perform at high level day in and day out. Steepness of climbs hasn't really been a problem for him so far.

Agree that the Giro will always be the hardest to win for him though.
I'm not so sure about this. I think he goes much better on a less steep terrain, above 10% he will lose time against the strongest guys. Or at least, that's my opinion.
ITT km's are not significant, he can't grab bonus seconds, he might suffer on the steep stuff, no I think Vuelta will not be his most favorable GT. But let's see...
 
Reactions: Sandisfan and KZD
lol
He's shown nothing but amazing recovery in every race ever, except the Giro of which we know he had an extremely limited prep. But yeah, "recovery is the issue". Oh, he can't sprint like van der Poel? He should retire then, because obviously Bernal, Carapaz and Pogacar they blast van der Poel out of the water. You're comparing apples with oranges just whatever fits your argument. Let's ignore the fact that he's a woldclass ITT'er as opposed to for instance Bernal, but hey, that's just a minor detail for a GC rider, amirite.

Or we could wait for him to get in decent shape before judging his recovery in a GT. We could also try to remain realistic and realize he, nor any other GC rider, will have the same punch as van der Poel. And we could try and be honest with our assessment regarding his GC skills, and include his TT. But of course, that's just my opinion.
“ He's shown nothing but amazing recovery in every race ever, except the Giro of which we know he had an extremely limited prep.”

Hold on a second... How has he shown amazing recovery in every race except the Giro when that’s the only Grand Tour he’s ridden? Nobody rates a rider’s recovery rate as phenomenal for winning the Tour of Poland. It’s all about the 3 week grind, where Remco, as of now, is still a complete unknown because of his less than ideal build up.

We have no idea how he will recover over multiple mountain stages in the high Alps, Pyrenees, Dolemites, or Asturian climbs. He could prove to be on par with his rivals, better or one of those riders who is great on one stage and then goes to dogshit from the effects of altitude.
 
I've never seen a rider inspire such strong emotions.

A few weeks ago, I dared to suggest, in the mildest possible terms, that Remco didn't play the final 10k of the first stage of the BBT as well as he could have.

Judging by the reactions, you'd think I'd have kicked his grandma in the stomach and stolen her purse as she was leaving church, while making fun of Remco's name. (and what kind of name is "Remco" anyway? It sounds like a paving company)

I wonder why that is? I think it's the Merckx comparisons. The very idea that there could ever be another Cannibal just seems so preposterous, so out there, that either you think it just cannot happen and feel the need to crap on Remco, or his story is so improbable that he might just be the Chosen One.

Anyway, not quite sure what the latest kerfuffle is about on this thread, but I haven't seen anything from him to indicate that he can't win a GT at some point. Or at least podium. Or at least Top 10.
 
I'm not so sure about this. I think he goes much better on a less steep terrain, above 10% he will lose time against the strongest guys. Or at least, that's my opinion.
ITT km's are not significant, he can't grab bonus seconds, he might suffer on the steep stuff, no I think Vuelta will not be his most favorable GT. But let's see...
I tend to agree with this. I’m not a Remco expert, but in the Giro it was assumed that there was a gradient point where it tilted the favor away from him towards a Bernal or a Landa-type.

If the case is that long climbs over 10% and explosiveness are his Achilles heel than the Vuelta is the last GT he needs to focus on.

If he is able to recover on par with other favorites, then he looks to be best suited as a classic TDF rider (depending on Prudhomme’s whims when it comes to the route).
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
“ He's shown nothing but amazing recovery in every race ever, except the Giro of which we know he had an extremely limited prep.”

Hold on a second... How has he shown amazing recovery in every race except the Giro when that’s the only Grand Tour he’s ridden? Nobody rates a rider’s recovery rate as phenomenal for winning the Tour of Poland. It’s all about the 3 week grind, where Remco, as of now, is still a complete unknown because of his less than ideal build up.

We have no idea how he will recover over multiple mountain stages in the high Alps, Pyrenees, Dolemites, or Asturian climbs. He could prove to be on par with his rivals, better or one of those riders who is great on one stage and then goes to dogshit from the effects of altitude.
Because recovery only matters in a GT lol
 
Because recovery only matters in a GT lol
That’s what the point of it is? When has he shown recovery that is required to compete for podiums at a GT? You can be a great 1 week stage racer and yet struggle over 3 weeks. That’s been proven time and time again. Riders who were never able to escape a 3 week Tour without a bad day. Remco may be have it, but it hasn’t been proven that he can survive a GT at the top yet.
 
I've never seen a rider inspire such strong emotions.

A few weeks ago, I dared to suggest, in the mildest possible terms, that Remco didn't play the final 10k of the first stage of the BBT as well as he could have.

Judging by the reactions, you'd think I'd have kicked his grandma in the stomach and stolen her purse as she was leaving church, while making fun of Remco's name. (and what kind of name is "Remco" anyway? It sounds like a paving company)

I wonder why that is? I think it's the Merckx comparisons. The very idea that there could ever be another Cannibal just seems so preposterous, so out there, that either you think it just cannot happen and feel the need to crap on Remco, or his story is so improbable that he might just be the Chosen One.

Anyway, not quite sure what the latest kerfuffle is about on this thread, but I haven't seen anything from him to indicate that he can't win a GT at some point. Or at least podium. Or at least Top 10.
Well I disagreed with you for what I thought and still definitely think were very good reasons...which I outlined. Maybe you're overreacting to pushback on what several people thought was fairly poor race analysis.

So while your general premise, that this rider creates strong reactions seems correct, your specific and hyperbolic example doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny. Which makes me think yours is yet another of the very strange overreactions to Remco.
 
Reactions: Bolder
That’s what the point of it is? When has he shown recovery that is required to compete for podiums at a GT? You can be a great 1 week stage racer and yet struggle over 3 weeks. That’s been proven time and time again. Riders who were never able to escape a 3 week Tour without a bad day. Remco may be have it, but it hasn’t been proven that he can survive a GT at the top yet.
True, and has been stated ad nauseum. It's interesting to me why this POV is has been, and LONG before the Giro, such a strong part of the narrative around Remco and his potential. I don't see it with other potential GT riders...like PIdcock for example.
 
Reactions: Big Doopie
I think very few elite climbers particularly struggle with recovery I don't see why it's a problem for Evenepoel.
Actually it is the opposite, at least traditionally.

Small elite climbers would have many more off days than more all-rounders. That is why the classic GT winner is a rider who would not get run down by the stages on the flat.

It is why, in the past, Merckx and Hinault (though not being pure climbers) would drop the likes of Fuente and Herrera in the mountains of a GT.

Pushing big gears for lots of kms often weakens (if not destroys) a small climber’s effectiveness once the riders hit the mountains. Not so much an authentic all-rounder.

If you consistently eliminate ITT kms and shorten stages, you actually lessen the importance of overall recovery ability. And you completely alter what a GT is supposed to test.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan
Well I disagreed with you for what I thought and still definitely think were very good reasons...which I outlined. Maybe you're overreacting to pushback on what several people thought was fairly poor race analysis.

So while your general premise, that this rider creates strong reactions seems correct, your specific and hyperbolic example doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny. Which makes me think yours is yet another of the very strange overreactions to Remco.
I'm definitely including myself.
 
Actually it is the opposite, at least traditionally.

Small elite climbers would have many more off days than more all-rounders. That is why the classic GT winner is a rider who would not get run down by the stages on the flat.

It is why, in the past, Merckx and Hinault (though not being pure climbers) would drop the likes of Fuente and Herrera in the mountains of a GT.

Pushing big gears for lots of kms often weakens (if not destroys) a small climber’s effectiveness once the riders hit the mountains. Not so much an authentic all-rounder.

If you consistently eliminate ITT kms and shorten stages, you actually lessen the importance of overall recovery ability. And you completely alter what a GT is supposed to test.
Strong teams and weak mountain stages have eliminated that anyway, yet somehow it's always too few ITTs that kills them
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
True, and has been stated ad nauseum. It's interesting to me why this POV is has been, and LONG before the Giro, such a strong part of the narrative around Remco and his potential. I don't see it with other potential GT riders...like PIdcock for example.
Is it interesting to you because of the accuracy of that POV, rendering it indisputable? In any case, I do agree that every potential GT rider should be held to the same standards. Remco is a super talent, only an ignorant would state the opposite. With that being said, @perico has a point as it is an indisputable fact that Remco has yet to translate his elite recovery displayed in 1-week races into 3-week races.

This year's Giro isn't a proper parameter for gauging this attribute for obvious reasons. So we'll have to wait until the next GT he contests, hopefully fully recovered and in-form, in order to make a proper assessment.
 
Strong teams and weak mountain stages have eliminated that anyway, yet somehow it's always too few ITTs that kills them
Sorry. I do not understand this. Seriously. Not being facetious.

It is a fact, btw, that longer flat stages and forcing little climbers to have to actually exert themselves against the clock in order to stay in contention, pushing big gears, actually does reduce their effectiveness in the mountains and over three weeks.

In fact many have pointed to Simon Yates having to kill himself to not lose too much time on Dumoulin and Froome in the Giro ITT in 2018 as being at the root to his collapse in the final days. Imagine if climbers had to kill themselves alone against the wind (no Gannas protecting them) over 80-100kms of TT. You would see some very different contenders than what we are seeing.

So, yes, the GTs don’t test effectively what they used to test.

The other extreme is riders like Anquetil and Wiggins (or even Indurain) winning when it is slanting a bit (though not as much) the other way.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Logic-is-your-friend Professional Road Racing 40

ASK THE COMMUNITY