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

[Skijumper Roglic fan]

I‘m happy for Remco he‘s at the start of Lombardia 2021, and even one of the favourites. When I first saw his crash in Lombardia 2020, I even feared he died, in the first moment. Glad he‘s back, he‘s strong, and he still has his aggressiveness and self-confidence.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

I‘m happy for Remco he‘s at the start of Lombardia 2021, and even one of the favourites. When I first saw his crash in Lombardia 2020, I even feared he died, in the first moment. Glad he‘s back, he‘s strong, and he still has his aggressiveness and self-confidence.

Yes. He is lucky to be alive.

 

[Skijumper Roglic fan]

Yes. He is lucky to be alive.

Indeed. So let‘s hope we don‘t see any crashes in the final downhill kilometres of Saturday‘s edition of Il Lombardia. Fingers crossed...

 

[Volderke]

Yes. He is lucky to be alive.

We are all lucky to be alive in the same days as remco Evenepoel. Think about it, if we lived just 200 years ago, we would have missed out on all of this!

 

[Red Rick]

We are all lucky to be alive in the same days as remco Evenepoel. Think about it, if we lived just 200 years ago, we would have missed out on all of this!

But really tho what would I do in 1821 without Valverde vs Nibali arguments

 

[Extinction]

The rare exception does happen. Lemond won the World RR title when he felt horrible the entire way until 3 miles from the finish climbing the last hill, bridging to Fignon and then to the group of Rooks, Claveroylet and Koneyshev for the wet downhill. Sean Kelly joined them. Lemond realized everyone remaining were as shredded as he felt.

That account convinced me to stick in several races that I'd thought were gone.

Indeed but the American team in 89 was a completely different story and had no alternative to Lemond, unless you could have considered a feable Hampsten. For one thing Lemond had won the Tour on his own practically, so his caliber was a bit higher than Wout's. And for another the altimetric difficulty in 89 meant that there was no place to hide any weakness, unlike the Flandrian course, as Van Aert demonstrated until it was too late. Then there is the fact that with Evenepoel Belgium had at the very least a wild card to play, but rather chose to waste it for a leader who could not deliver the goods.

 

[BlueRoads]

Indeed but the American team in 89 was a completely different story and had no alternative to Lemond, unless you could have considered a feable Hampsten. For one thing Lemond had won the Tour on his own practically, so his caliber was a bit higher than Wout's. And for another the altimetric difficulty in 89 meant that there was no place to hide any weakness, unlike the Flandrian course, as Van Aert demonstrated until it was too late. Then there is the fact that with Evenepoel Belgium had at the very least a wild card to play, but rather chose to waste it for a leader who could not deliver the goods.

Well, that happens, right? I mean, a lot of Almeida fans will tell you how Almeida's Giro chances got wasted because of Evenepoel... I think you have to analyze afterwards what happened and what you can do better next time, but it's part of cycling to bet on a leader who in the end may not deliver, that happens practically everyday... and just because a leader fails that doesn't mean it was wrong to bet on him in the first place. I'm totally with you guys on "using Evenepoel differently would have brought Belgium more options". But I could never count the number of times I've seen a team go all in for a leader who then couldn't deliver and among those betting on van Aert alone was certainly not the craziest option.
And in the end, Evenepoel is young and other WCs where he will get a chance will come. It's not like this was likely his last or best chance.

 

[SHAD0W93]

But really tho what would I do in 1821 without Valverde vs Nibali arguments

Farm. A whole lot of farming and staring at a wall.

 

[Carrick-On-Seine]

Remco was told that under now circumstances could he be a factor in the final and he raced accordingly, following team orders. The team should never have sent him into early breaks, while deciding it wanted him in the final. You can't have it both ways. As Luke Rowe said...Go f-ck yourself!

All that effort to help a potential silver medalist.

 

[GuntherL1]

My apologies if this information was posted earlier, but I can't read all posts.

REv needs to clean up his act quickly before it's too late. Criticism is mounting and rightly so.

• Three championships in a row, he has (at least partially) ignored team orders. In De Cooke & Verhulst show, Planckaert told the hosts that REv was the only one who didn't follow team orders during the WC RR.
• Bobbie Traksel said in the 'Kop over Kop' podcast that REv shouldn't have taken part in the talkshow after the WC and that he has to be very careful not to be hated by the entire peloton. Personally, I don't understand why DQS allowed it.
• Philippe Gilbert said that REv is mainly concerned about his image and number of followers. He added that he's not well guided. https://www.dhnet.be/sports/cyclism...-retourne-contre-lui-61598b07d8ad581e98a364a0

 

[noob]

I love McEnroe

Then you have to watch Never have I ever on Netflix. He's the voice of the main female character and it's soooooo good!

 

[Oldermanish]

Indeed but the American team in 89 was a completely different story and had no alternative to Lemond, unless you could have considered a feable Hampsten. For one thing Lemond had won the Tour on his own practically, so his caliber was a bit higher than Wout's. And for another the altimetric difficulty in 89 meant that there was no place to hide any weakness, unlike the Flandrian course, as Van Aert demonstrated until it was too late. Then there is the fact that with Evenepoel Belgium had at the very least a wild card to play, but rather chose to waste it for a leader who could not deliver the goods.

The Lemond comparison was not intended to be about team tactics, only the relative "feeling" a rider can have throughout.
I've had a chance to watch more of the race as we didn't get a broadcast feed in the US.

As for Remco in Belgium's strategy this is clear: 1)No radios meant communication relied on direct contact with teammates, neutral motos, team feeders, etc. 2)Because of the 1) qualification; a strategy that would have a strong rider like Remco saved for a later race control or a Plan B victory would also have expectations that free-lancing early on was not on the table. They had ample help to fill that role.
My conclusion from his early sorties is he had "felt" the time was right but also effectively nuked team strategy and hoped to gain from it. Later in the race and after he'd spent energy on his attempts to drive away from the field he relented and did the heroic PR move of being on the front to no end effect on his team's success. His show of strength might have pleased his fervent Belgian followers and his own ego but it was a total BS approach and in no way proved he could win. That he'd go in front of media and then suggest he could have won and provided a thinly veiled challenge to the team strategy he chose to neutralize piles more on to the heap of BS. It's a team sport.

 

[Big Doopie]

1. Merckx is an idiot and a blowhard. he may be the reason i got into cycling, but the champion does not make the man. since retiring he has not held up well - harsh critic of lemond, depressing remarks on clinic matters during the height of the epo years, and absolute horrendous prognosticating of any and all races and racers. i would not be surprised if his present comments aren't because he feels he may actually get eclipsed by remco in the minds of Belgians...(btw remco has 22 wins, merckx had 15 by this age, and remco lost almost an entire year of his young career and has no sprint... just saying)

2. The Belgian team director should be fired. Unable to manage the team; having the Belgian team make the effort to close the gap to remco's second break (unforgivable!) when it was only 40-50 seconds; and not realizing that, tactically, both remco and wout serve each other unbelievably well if allowed to race for their own success. remco literally cannot wait for a final sprint so he is no competition for wout there. wout, for all his dominance at times has never been one to attack from far and ride in alone (Ventoux appears to be the one exception that comes to mind). Let remco be remco and allowing him to attack 50-60kms from the finish would have served wout perfectly. he could sit on. I get the feeling that wout's declarations early on that there should only be one leader is that he feared that in the above scenario remco could actually pull it off. and he might. then again it was also likely that he would not, and then wout would be served the WC on a freakin' platter.

3. The question of form was not as clear as some may have thought before the race. remco had found his and had dropped entire pelotons three times from between 30-60Kms out and held them off. One of these victories happened when he created a gap that Ala himself could not follow and thus gave him the benediction to go it alone. wout had a great tour of britain, no doubt, but he hardly dropped Ala off his wheel like that. just based off of that, remco's form was arguably at least something to use rather than telling such a rider he should never ever try to win. besides it would have helped wout in the exact scenario that could have seen him become champion.

my 2 cents.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

My apologies if this information was posted earlier, but I can't read all posts.

REv needs to clean up his act quickly before it's too late. Criticism is mounting and rightly so.

• Three championships in a row, he has (at least partially) ignored team orders. In De Cooke & Verhulst show, Planckaert told the hosts that REv was the only one who didn't follow team orders during the WC RR.
• Bobbie Traksel said in the 'Kop over Kop' podcast that REv shouldn't have taken part in the talkshow after the WC and that he has to be very careful not to be hated by the entire peloton. Personally, I don't understand why DQS allowed it.
• Philippe Gilbert said that REv is mainly concerned about his image and number of followers. He added that he's not well guided. https://www.dhnet.be/sports/cyclism...-retourne-contre-lui-61598b07d8ad581e98a364a0

And yet De Gendt said Remco is a normal and calm guy in the peloton who comes around for a chat once in a while, and that he can understand if he gets frustrated when dealing with wheelsuckers.
He didn't "ignore" team order during the Euros, he just didn't know how to go about it. That was lack of experience. Him getting frustrated was exactly because he didn't know what to do to get Colbrelli in front.
Listening to Bobbie Traksel as some kind of authority is also a bit peculiar.

But i agree that he's not well guided. I've brought that up many times in the past. He appears in the press too often, they (DQT) haven't addressed his shortcomings. I feel the team is to blame more than him. However you are overreacting to this particular instance. And i have little sympathy for the ongoing and unrelenting trolling by Merckx or certain journalists. I think his parents need to get involved more, not per se to "set him straight" but to protect and shelter him. I feel the team is doing a lousy job at it.

 

[Extinction]

Well, that happens, right? I mean, a lot of Almeida fans will tell you how Almeida's Giro chances got wasted because of Evenepoel... I think you have to analyze afterwards what happened and what you can do better next time, but it's part of cycling to bet on a leader who in the end may not deliver, that happens practically everyday... and just because a leader fails that doesn't mean it was wrong to bet on him in the first place. I'm totally with you guys on "using Evenepoel differently would have brought Belgium more options". But I could never count the number of times I've seen a team go all in for a leader who then couldn't deliver and among those betting on van Aert alone was certainly not the craziest option.
And in the end, Evenepoel is young and other WCs where he will get a chance will come. It's not like this was likely his last or best chance.

Well that happens right? Only if you mean Belgium gets an award for the most umfathomingly stupid, nonsensical gameplan going into the race. And can't compare a Giro, which is ridden on brand teams, to a World's, which is ridden on national teams. For one thing you only get one shot at the Worlds's, so you must be perpared to play all your cards on the day, never just one and only one, and for another, it shouldn't matter who wins on your team, so long as it is someone from the nation. In the end Belgium probably won't get a chance to win another World's before a home crowd until both Wout and Remco are long retired.

 

[Extinction]

The Lemond comparison was not intended to be about team tactics, only the relative "feeling" a rider can have throughout.
I've had a chance to watch more of the race as we didn't get a broadcast feed in the US.

As for Remco in Belgium's strategy this is clear: 1)No radios meant communication relied on direct contact with teammates, neutral motos, team feeders, etc. 2)Because of the 1) qualification; a strategy that would have a strong rider like Remco saved for a later race control or a Plan B victory would also have expectations that free-lancing early on was not on the table. They had ample help to fill that role.
My conclusion from his early sorties is he had "felt" the time was right but also effectively nuked team strategy and hoped to gain from it. Later in the race and after he'd spent energy on his attempts to drive away from the field he relented and did the heroic PR move of being on the front to no end effect on his team's success. His show of strength might have pleased his fervent Belgian followers and his own ego but it was a total BS approach and in no way proved he could win. That he'd go in front of media and then suggest he could have won and provided a thinly veiled challenge to the team strategy he chose to neutralize piles more on to the heap of BS. It's a team sport.

My point was that the relative "feeling" issue was moot for the 89 World's, because either Lemond was going to bring USA the rainbow jersey or nobody would. USA had no other option, in other words, whereas Belgium did but egrigiously chose to neglect it. Nay the Belgian DS determined even before the race got underway that under no circumstances would such an alternative option be allowed to win, which defies all strategic logic. The only thing not on the table, therefore, was playing the Remco card as plan B late in the race. Sending him out on early sorties demonstrates this. So if anything was neutralized it was Evenepoel, which was the "team strategy" all along after all. Irrefutable proof of this was having Remco further drill it from 50 k out causing him inevitably to blow up. Worse was Wout allowing this to unfold without informing the team that he didn't even have the legs to win, all in the name of "sticking to the plan". The real "heroic PR move", therefore, was claiming such reticence really showed just how determined he was to not give up for Belgium. But in so doing the captain merely shirked upon his responsibility towards the team. To then say afterward he was upset with how Evenepoel rode is singularlly hypocrical and a subterfuge to mask his own shortcomings. That's the real pile of BS. It takes a perverse spin-doctor to run someone into the ground in vane and then accuse him of riding against team intersts, as a diversion tactic to draw attention away from your own failure and lay blame elsewhere. Evenepoel didn't "nuke team strategy," therefore, but the DS and Wout team Belgium.

 

[Extinction]

All that effort to help a potential silver medalist.

It's mindboggling, isn't it?

 

[Oldermanish]

My point was that the relative "feeling" issue was moot for the 89 World's, because either Lemond was going to bring USA the rainbow jersey or nobody would. USA had no other option, in other words, whereas Belgium did but egrigiously chose to neglect it. Nay the Belgian DS determined even before the race got underway that under no circumstances would such an alternative option be allowed to win, which defies all strategic logic. The only thing not on the table, therefore, was playing the Remco card as plan B late in the race. Sending him out on early sorties demonstrates this. So if anything was neutralized it was Evenepoel, which was the "team strategy" all along after all. Irrefutable proof of this was having Remco further drill it from 50 k out causing him inevitably to blow up. Worse was Wout allowing this to unfold without informing the team that he didn't even have the legs to win, all in the name of "sticking to the plan". The real "heroic PR move", therefore, was claiming such reticence really showed just how determined he was to not give up for Belgium. But in so doing the captain merely shirked upon his responsibility towards the team. To then say afterward he was upset with how Evenepoel rode is singularlly hypocrical and a subterfuge to mask his own shortcomings. That's the real pile of BS. It takes a perverse spin-doctor to run someone into the ground in vain for you and then accuse him of riding against team intersts, as a diversion tactic to draw attention away from your own failure and lay blame elsewhere. Evenepoel didn't "nuke team strategy," therefore, but the DS and Wout team Belgium.

Again, the Lemond reference was based on a different circumstance and not relevant to this race or strategy. You can check that off your response list.

If you can refresh what I had heard as team strategy: Wout was to be protected and Remco was the late reserve guy and best 2nd option. Seems simple. Was I misinformed?

 

[Bolder]

My point was that the relative "feeling" issue was moot for the 89 World's, because either Lemond was going to bring USA the rainbow jersey or nobody would. USA had no other option, in other words, whereas Belgium did but egrigiously chose to neglect it. Nay the Belgian DS determined even before the race got underway that under no circumstances would such an alternative option be allowed to win, which defies all strategic logic. The only thing not on the table, therefore, was playing the Remco card as plan B late in the race. Sending him out on early sorties demonstrates this. So if anything was neutralized it was Evenepoel, which was the "team strategy" all along after all. Irrefutable proof of this was having Remco further drill it from 50 k out causing him inevitably to blow up. Worse was Wout allowing this to unfold without informing the team that he didn't even have the legs to win, all in the name of "sticking to the plan". The real "heroic PR move", therefore, was claiming such reticence really showed just how determined he was to not give up for Belgium. But in so doing the captain merely shirked upon his responsibility towards the team. To then say afterward he was upset with how Evenepoel rode is singularlly hypocrical and a subterfuge to mask his own shortcomings. That's the real pile of BS. It takes a perverse spin-doctor to run someone into the ground in vane and then accuse him of riding against team intersts, as a diversion tactic to draw attention away from your own failure and lay blame elsewhere. Evenepoel didn't "nuke team strategy," therefore, but the DS and Wout team Belgium.

Victory has a thousand fathers but defeat is an orphan.

 

[Extinction]

Again, the Lemond reference was based on a different circumstance and not relevant to this race or strategy. You can check that off your response list.

If you can refresh what I had heard as team strategy: Wout was to be protected and Remco was the late reserve guy and best 2nd option. Seems simple. Was I misinformed?

In fact the Lemond case is not relevant to this race or strategy, so why did you bring it up?

Yes, you were misinformed. Remco was not the reserve guy, as the Belgian director plainly stated to Evenepoel when asked for clarification about the team's strategy on the eve of the race. In fact, the main criticism has been that Belgium unwisely used Evenepoel up too early instead of having him as a card to play at the end in the context of a plan B. Because there was no plan B and the designated winner would only be Wout.

 

[Riek s]

Given Merckx is also complaining and all the useless fud.. doesn't change the fact he wasn't a protected rider and WVA wouldn't have won either way.
Maybe i'm a bit more dramatic, but Remco should just change nationality, bet the dutch or french would love him. If the belgian team doesn't want him, screw them tbh

 

[Extinction]

Victory has a thousand fathers but defeat is an orphan.

Remco can't be blamed for Wout not having the legs, but the Belgian director can be faulted for playing only one card.

 

[wheresmybrakes]

FFS, I really hope this lad wins Lombardia . Can you imagine the amount of "what if's, why's and whatever the f**ks" this thread will gain if he doesn't.

 

[Red Rick]

Given Merckx is also complaining and all the useless fud.. doesn't change the fact he wasn't a protected rider and WVA wouldn't have won either way.
Maybe i'm a bit more dramatic, but Remco should just change nationality, bet the dutch or french would love him. If the belgian team doesn't want him, screw them tbh

He should not change nationality, that just makes no sense.

 

[Riek s]

He should not change nationality, that just makes no sense.

I said I was a bit more dramatic

(also i'm belgian myself, don't mind saying screw the belgians )