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

[Volderke]

He’s less entertaining than in some other races but it’s a GT, so he has to back off a bit in some stages. But who isn’t entertained?

1.. Taking 4th with his “inferior” team in ttt.
2. His stage win on Arinsal.
3. Sprinting for bonus on a flat stage
4. All the action in the stage to Xorret de Cati.
5. The crosswinds on Sunday’s stage where he was taking initiative.
6. Best of GC in that TT.

And while Roglic’ attack on javalambre was great (the only feat to remember as being less boring than Remco this Vuelta), Remco didn’t ride boring, he was on the defensive and equally entertaining.

And that’s only for the racing (not including his pre- and post- racing antics and incidents). And people complain he did what he did yesterday…? As if you couldn’t complain about around 10 other GC guys that were taking as much (as in: no) initiative.

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

Who has been setting the pace on every mountain finish climb? SQS and Evenepoel. The rest just sit in the wheel.

Are we to the point where setting a pace on a climb is entertaining?

 

[Gargamel35]

Are we to the point where setting a pace on a climb is entertaining?

It's clear these guys will always claim Roglič is boring and Remco entertaining no matter what. Bunch of clowns.

 

[Berniece]

Are we to the point where setting a pace on a climb is entertaining?

Nope, definitely not when everyone can follow. But the people in his wheel are riding even more boring.

 

[Volderke]

It's clear these guys will always claim Roglič is boring and Remco entertaining no matter what. Bunch of clowns.

So this far have we become...


All metrics (clicks, number of interviews, reporters, news articles) pointing towards Remco being the most entertaining rider of this Vuelta.

But then you have guys like you calling other 'a bunch of clowns' because Roglic is simply more boring as a rider and a person (and before Roglic fans take this personal: about all riders in top 10 of GC are more boring, or in equivalent wording, Remco is simply the most entertaining).
Guess what, that's just a fact, no matter how great / exciting I (and you, obviously) find some of Roglic' riding. Go and troll in another forum and show some respect for your peers.

 

[peterfin]

De Gendt shared his opinion on Remco yesterday in Het Nieuwsblad:

De Gendt follows from within the belly of the peloton how Remco Evenepoel is tackling this Tour of Spain. “I think he's racing very smartly so far. He doesn't break away unnecessarily. He said beforehand that he would race defensively for the first nine days, and he did exactly that. Whenever possible, he tries to save himself. He's good, isn't he? In other years, he might have accelerated twenty kilometers from the end just to show how good he is. He learns quickly from his mistakes. In his first Giro, he sprinted for every bonus second. Now he only takes them when he can. But he won't bend over backward for them. He's much wiser now. He's saving himself for the last week. And so is his team. Louis Vervaeke is through, Mattia Cattaneo rode a strong time trial, and Jan Hirt was also there in Arinsal when Remco won. His guys are good. Remco is a champion to cherish. Because he dares to express his ambitions, he sometimes comes across as arrogant in the media and receives a lot of criticism, but in real life, he's different.”

 

[Extinction]

That was a good victory, and he looked great (until his strange crash), but it was a Roglic style mountain sprint. Great display of force no doubt but not super exciting IMO. Not a lot of…panache…in waiting until the last couple hundred meters for a sprint.

No, I was referring to the stage Roglic won, in response to your inquiry.

 

[Barkintheeye]

De Gendt shared his opinion on Remco yesterday in Het Nieuwsblad:

De Gendt follows from within the belly of the peloton how Remco Evenepoel is tackling this Tour of Spain. “I think he's racing very smartly so far. He doesn't break away unnecessarily. He said beforehand that he would race defensively for the first nine days, and he did exactly that. Whenever possible, he tries to save himself. He's good, isn't he? In other years, he might have accelerated twenty kilometers from the end just to show how good he is. He learns quickly from his mistakes. In his first Giro, he sprinted for every bonus second. Now he only takes them when he can. But he won't bend over backward for them. He's much wiser now. He's saving himself for the last week. And so is his team. Louis Vervaeke is through, Mattia Cattaneo rode a strong time trial, and Jan Hirt was also there in Arinsal when Remco won. His guys are good. Remco is a champion to cherish. Because he dares to express his ambitions, he sometimes comes across as arrogant in the media and receives a lot of criticism, but in real life, he's different.”

Nice perspective provided by de Gendt. Yet the real test comes now. Can Remco keep it under control or even better begin to dominate, then he has really reached a whole new level. Should he beat this JV team on this terrain there should be no doubt that he is The New Merckx.

 

[Gargamel35]

Nice perspective provided by de Gendt. Yet the real test comes now. Can Remco keep it under control or even better begin to dominate, then he has really reached a whole new level. Should he beat this JV team on this terrain there should be no doubt that he is The New Merckx.

He never was and he never will be. He's got huge problems and isn't even a favourite beating a domestique with 3 GTs in his legs, a 34 year old boring guy with 2GTs in his legs and a guy with also 2GTs coming from vacation after his peak is long gone. Please. Merckx?

 

[Berniece]

He never was and he never will be. He's got huge problems and isn't even a favourite beating a domestique with 3 GTs in his legs, a 34 year old boring guy with 2GTs in his legs and a guy with also 2GTs coming from vacation after his peak is long gone. Please. Merckx?

 

[Keldergoat]

Roglic is simply more boring as a rider and a person.
Guess what, that's just a fact,

Stating that Roglic is boring as a rider and a person and then presumptuously add that that's just a fact, damn, that's pretty pretentious. And in the same post claiming that those who do find entertaining 'Go and troll in another forum and show some respect', that's pretty funny to be honest. I for one find Roglic far from being boring, neither as a rider nor as a person.

 

[Volderke]

Stating that Roglic is boring as a rider and a person and then presumptuously add that that's just a fact, damn, that's pretty pretentious.

I didn't say Primoz was boring. I said he was MORE boring.

And in the same post claiming that those who do find entertaining 'Go and troll in another forum and show some respect', that's pretty funny to be honest. I for one find Roglic far from being boring, neither as a rider nor as a person.

I don't find Roglic boring either, but that was not what I said. It's getting tiring if you don't read, assume things I didn't write and try to make yourself look smart by countering something I have never said.

The question is very easy and I repeat myself: is there any doubt Remco is the most entertaining from the lot? Remco gets a lot of flack for racing passively like he did yesterday, but they all did. And Remco is riding passively because he is trying to deal with a team that has double the budget of his team, and 3 riders that are currently in contention for the podium and the top spot. And thus he rides more conservative than he normally does, but while doing so, he is still pure gold for the media and the fans (and it seems also the haters), because he gives them something to talk about, every single day.

 

[Gargamel35]

Nah i don't find him entertaining at all. He's like that one extroverted guy in a room full of normal and introverted people. He's loud yes. Entertaining? No.

 

[Netserk]

Who has been setting the pace on every mountain finish climb? SQS and Evenepoel. The rest just sit in the wheel.

For the same reason, Wiggins was a very exciting Tour winner.

 

[Berniece]

For the same reason, Wiggins was a very exciting Tour winner.

I've already said this wasn't exciting either.

 

[Volderke]

Nah i don't find him entertaining at all. He's like that one extroverted guy in a room full of normal and introverted people. He's loud yes. Entertaining? No.

I'm sure you're going to find it very entertaining if he drops out of a Kuss/Roglic/Vingegaard lead group halfway up the Tourmalet

 

[Gargamel35]

I'm sure you're going to find it very entertaining if he drops out of a Kuss/Roglic/Vingegaard lead group halfway up the Tourmalet

I'm sure you won't find Kuss/Roglic/Vingegaard group entertaining if they drop Remco halfway up the Tourmalet

 

[Volderke]

I'm sure you won't find Kuss/Roglic/Vingegaard group entertaining if they drop Remco halfway up the Tourmalet

I don't find any group with riders from the same team very entertaining, because it means the battle is over and one team is too dominant. I wouldn't mind if Remco is dropped but Ayuso / Almeida / Soler / ... is still there and giving them some challenge. The battle is more important than the result, for me.

I mourned last year when Roglic was out in stage 16, because I knew the battle was over.

 

[Divergence]

Remco is very good for cycling, I just find it a bit childish when he downplays the days he loses (Rog did a slow sprint, I would have won) or when he does something silly (he sprints after blocking the road and says "a little acceleration"). Otherwise, any race with him in it is a better race.

 

[Volderke]

Remco is very good for cycling, I just find it a bit childish when he downplays the days he loses (Rog did a slow sprint, I would have won) or when he does something silly (he sprints after blocking the road and says "a little acceleration"). Otherwise, any race with him in it is a better race.

Both events seen from aa racer's (and not a fan's) perspective:
1. he was disappointed and frustrated because he didn't tackle the finale as if it was for the stage win. Should he have said Roglic went too hard and he never believed he could have won (and thus lie about what he feels) just to please you? And he didn't say he Would have won, he said he Could have won. That's a world of difference but once again, someone has to twist reality (for what?).
2. From interviews by e.g. Vingegaard, no GC team had any intention of doing a move, so claiming Remco is (again) the one (and only) that's guilty of blocking the road is ignoring the fact that all GC teams were on the front row and happy to just follow wheels and ride wide. The ones blocked (those really willing to attack, like Carthy) were 3-4 rows back, and only attacked becausse the pace was low. If the pace was high, those guys who were supposedly blocked, would simply have been dropped. And if they wanted to do a really good move dropping everybody, they should have let their teams set the pace up the climb, but they didn't. So don't complain about riders that are not even in the top 10 of GC not having an opportunity to attack, just because they are racing like lame ducks.
In the end he anticipated the possibility of a rider attacking from behind and getting a (small) gap at the finish.

 

[Divergence]

Both events seen from aa racer's (and not a fan's) perspective:
1. he was disappointed and frustrated because he didn't tackle the finale as if it was for the stage win. Should he have said Roglic went too hard and he never believed he could have won (and thus lie about what he feels) just to please you? And he didn't say he Would have won, he said he Could have won. That's a world of difference but once again, someone has to twist reality (for what?).
2. From interviews by e.g. Vingegaard, no GC team had any intention of doing a move, so claiming Remco is (again) the one (and only) that's guilty of blocking the road is ignoring the fact that all GC teams were on the front row and happy to just follow wheels and ride wide. The ones blocked (those really willing to attack, like Carthy) were 3-4 rows back, and only attacked becausse the pace was low. If the pace was high, those guys who were supposedly blocked, would simply have been dropped. And if they wanted to do a really good move dropping everybody, they should have let their teams set the pace up the climb, but they didn't. So don't complain about riders that are not even in the top 10 of GC not having an opportunity to attack, just because they are racing like lame ducks.
In the end he anticipated the possibility of a rider attacking from behind and getting a (small) gap at the finish.

1. Idk if you listened to the Belgian or the English interview. In the English interview his wording and expression is not one of regret of not winning but doubt if he could have won. It is regret of not winning and "almost" a certainty he could have won. He said "I was in Rog's wheel super easy", what does that imply?
2. Irrelevant for the discussion. The tactics are fine, attacking in the end is fine. But why say little acceleration after not dropping anybody. Just say it as it is, e.g., I went in the end but there were no time gaps.
3. Come to think of it he was saying something about his wheel slipping when he could not follow Rog on Sunday. Why the excuses?

 

[Volderke]

1. Idk if you listened to the Belgian or the English interview. In the English interview his wording and expression is not one of regret of not winning but doubt if he could have won. It is regret of not winning and "almost" a certainty he could have won. He said "I was in Rog's wheel super easy", what does that imply?
2. Irrelevant for the discussion. The tactics are fine, attacking in the end is fine. But why say little acceleration after not dropping anybody. Just say it as it is, e.g., I went in the end but there were no time gaps.
3. Come to think of it he was saying something about his wheel slipping when he could not follow Rog on Sunday. Why the excuses?

1.I always listen to the Belgian interview, and like with Herrada yesterday, the Spanish, and with Ganna, the Italian etc.
If he's easy in Roglic' wheel, it implies he thinks he Could (not Would) have won and is giving arguments why. If he couldn't follow Roglic and had 10 meters at the line, he would have said he wouldn't have won anyway. He just says it like it is. Many times in interviews when he didn't win, he said he didn't have the legs.
2. Again, he explained why he accelerated: in the first place to keep his position, and second, who knows there would be some time gaps. It was a no-risk move in a stage where no one wanted to risk it.
3. His wheel was slipping, and once at speed he stayed at the same distance of Roglic. Should he say he couldn't follow Roglic because he felt weak, while he wasn't? Again, he says it like it is.

You can call it excuses, I call it post-stage analysis. He could also just say nothing or give an explanation without saying anything, e.g.
1. when Roglic won he could just say he sprinted and Roglic won. That would be saying nothing, because that's what we saw on TV. But the neutral fan would ask himself: why did Remco pull all the way from the top of the climb to the finish and do the perfect lead-out? Why was he riding like simply riding to not face a time gap and come in quickly?).
2. In the stage yesterday he could have said he accelerated to try and gap other riders. Everybody knows though that his acceleration was simply to late to try and create any reasonable gaps. By adding some more info about his rationale (making sure he doesn't get attacked and he retains position) explains to the novice cycling fan why he did what he did.
3. In the stage where he said his wheel slipped, he could have simply said Roglic was faster (we all saw that Roglic got the kick). But that doesn't explain / say why he was about to overtake Mas and suddenly didn't. Now Remco explained it, it all made more sense, and Remco stating he felt great indicates that this shouldn't be seen as a weak moment, just a small mistake (in the same order as missing the best line in a curve and getting gapped etc.).

All these little snippets of info is what makes the race more interesting. So just be happy to have those details, and if you don't like them, ignore them / ignore Remco and this forum topic. That makes life much simpler and for some, much more enjoyable (living in their simple, comfortable bubble), it seems.

 

[Volderke]

Sky train was boring, that's for sure. I find this generation very entertaining and I don't have a device for gauging boredom.

What I don't stand is people that spin words to feel good about their own subjective tastes regarding who is the rider they favor while not acknowledging that they are doing it. Calling Roglic boring and then saying that Remco is not boring but rides defensive is just farsical and ridiculous.

I gave many arguments why Remco is LESS boring than Roglic, but you ignore them.
I am all about discussing based on arguments, but I get accused of behaving like Bill Clinton?

1.. Taking 4th with his “inferior” team in ttt.
2. His stage win on Arinsal.
3. Sprinting for bonus on a flat stage
4. All the action in the stage to Xorret de Cati.
5. The crosswinds on Sunday’s stage where he was taking initiative.
6. Best of GC in that TT.

I literally said that Roglic' attack on Javalambre was great.
You read what you want to read, with your Roglic filter glasses.

And while Roglic’ attack on javalambre was great (the only feat to remember as being less boring than Remco this Vuelta), Remco didn’t ride boring, he was on the defensive and equally entertaining.

And that’s only for the racing (not including his pre- and post- racing antics and incidents). And people complain he did what he did yesterday…? As if you couldn’t complain about around 10 other GC guys that were taking as much (as in: no) initiative.

To top it off in terms of who is most exciting, count the number of pages for any rider on this forum.
I rest my case!

 

[bNator]

To top it off in terms of who is most exciting, count the number of pages for any rider on this forum.
I rest my case!

If this was actually a thing, then I'm proud to present to you Mr. Froome - a rider twice as exciting as your guy...

1. Idk if you listened to the Belgian or the English interview. In the English interview his wording and expression is not one of regret of not winning but doubt if he could have won. It is regret of not winning and "almost" a certainty he could have won. He said "I was in Rog's wheel super easy", what does that imply?
2. Irrelevant for the discussion. The tactics are fine, attacking in the end is fine. But why say little acceleration after not dropping anybody. Just say it as it is, e.g., I went in the end but there were no time gaps.
3. Come to think of it he was saying something about his wheel slipping when he could not follow Rog on Sunday. Why the excuses?

We could even go as far as to say Remco has no panache when talking:

When he was dropped, he was actually even faster than Roglič, if you discard the first two minutes of Roglič attack.
When he lost stage to Roglič, he didn’t know they were racing for the win.
When he lost a couple of meters the day after that, it was a wheel slip, but even then he was almost at Roglič's wheel...
Yesterday, he wasn't really sprinting just stretching his legs a bit...

I mean these are just not the things you say out loud (if you're not a child)

 

[Volderke]

If this was actually a thing, then I'm proud to present to you Mr. Froome - a rider twice as exciting as your guy...

You're one of those who can turn oranges into apples with those comparisons of a rider just old enough to make the step from U23 to pro, with a rider who is fin-de-carriere at 38.

Sorry to burst your bubble anyway, Remco's at 811, Froome at 803, and that is including posts from people who only have one goal in the Froome thread:

Page 802 - Teams & Riders - Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

Page 802 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

forum.cyclingnews.com

We could even go as far as to say Remco has no panache when talking:

When he was dropped, he was actually even faster than Roglič, if you discard the first two minutes of Roglič attack.
When he lost stage to Roglič, he didn’t know they were racing for the win.
When he lost a couple of meters the day after that, it was a wheel slip, but even then he was almost at Roglič's wheel...
Yesterday, he wasn't really sprinting just stretching his legs a bit...

I mean these are just not the things you say out loud (if you're not a child)

again someone who only filters out what fits his narrative.