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

[joseph89]

What most of us forget to consider, is how riders are viewed inside the pro peloton. Remco indeed affects a lot of cycling 'fans' and divides them clearly because of his outspokenness. However, he is more popular among colleagues than for example Van Aert and Sagan. And I'm not that biased here, cause I support Wout very much. The best example that I could never get my head around is Cancellara, who was despised by so many riders, and still some people thought Boonen was the arrogant one.

Anyway. I'm often annoyed by all the beef and unfair criticism Remco gets. Certainly on this forum. Most of the time I let it pass, cause I don't want to stir things up even more.

 

[Carrick-On-Seine]

Reading this thread is like groundhog day 😂😂😂

Good movie, though it did have some irritating characters

 

[shadowrider]

On the other hand, he didn't cover an attack by a guy who was ahead of him in the race. Jorgenson went, and won. So he either didn't have it (kinda doubt that) or blew it. Or a little of both, as things usually are. *Shrug*

He was probably almost as strong as Jorgenson, and had a little advantage in the TTT. He wasn't strong enough to overcome a (not minor as he put it) tactical mistake.

Hopefully he learns. He's no choice but to chalk it up and move on.

It was, as you suggested already, a little of both. He made a mistake, but he hadn't the legs too. He could have countered Plapp, McNulty and Jorgenson. The others would have followed Evenepoel.... to counter him again. The end result would have been the same (or even worse). To win P-N., Evenepoel had to attack himself before good climbers did. But without altitude training, he hadn't really the legs. Not to be worried of. And proving he is a topathlete, but with limits.
I'm more worried about the five-times irresistible stage-attacks and the two easy GC-wins of Vingegaard. All because of the infamous food app (!?!?)

 

[Keldergoat]

Please stop trolling with this. This is not the first time you've posted it and repeating it doesn't make it true. You are purposely taking things out of context that should be taken figuratively and not literally.

All he is saying is that Evenepoel kept his eyes on Roglic, while Roglic was -unlike what everybody expected- not the rival he should have been keeping an eye on, as it turned out.

I don't know if your a native in Dutch or not (presuming from this post and how you misread the comments at Sporza I think you're not), but trust me, de Cauwer says in the interview at 1:25 without any irony that Roglic ruined things for Evenepoel. If de Cauwer says that Roglic 'de boel verpest heeft' for Evenepoel, is as laughable as it sounds like and it deserves all ridicule that @Lequack rightly gave it.

BTW: I can recommend the Rode Lantaarn podcast at 57:00 this week where they hilariously make fun of de Cauwer's analysis that Evenepoel second place was due to one man: Primoz Roglic.

 

[QueenStagiaire]

Reading this thread is like groundhog day 😂😂😂

Even killing the little *** didn‘t stop it in that movie

 

[Wvv]

I don't know if your a native in Dutch or not (presuming from this post and how you misread the comments at Sporza I think you're not), but trust me, de Cauwer says in the interview at 1:25 without any irony that Roglic ruined things for Evenepoel. If de Cauwer says that Roglic 'de boel verpest heeft' for Evenepoel, is as laughable as it sounds like and it deserves all ridicule that @Lequack rightly gave it.

Wrong. It was without irony, I'll give you that, but certainly as a figure of speech. @Logic-is-your-friend has it right, and of course is a native Dutch speaker.

 

[Keldergoat]

Well, if he's a native Dutch speaker he certainly lacks some skills in deriving irony. If it's a figure of speech he doesn't articulate it as such. For a guy like de Cauwer, who uses 'bij wijze van spreken', around a million times in his commentary to point out a figures of speech, he said this very literally.

And I didn't know he's a native Dutch speaker, I'm a newbie on this platform and we conversate in English.

 

[Berniece]

Well, if he's a native Dutch speaker he certainly lacks some skills in deriving irony. If it's a figure of speech is an extremely poorly chosen one. For a guy like de Cauwer, who uses 'bij wijze van spreken', around a million times in his commentary to point out a figures of speech, he said this very literally.

I think it's ridiculous that you think De Cauwer would actually believe that the sole reason Evenepoel lost Paris-Nice is due to Roglic. You have to look at it in context, as well as understanding what type of person De Cauwer is, and what he knows. When you do that, you know he just means what all of us have seen, that Evenepoel focused too much on Roglic in the beginning, and made a tactical mistake of not responding to Jorgensen or McNulty

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

I don't know if your a native in Dutch or not (presuming from this post and how you misread the comments at Sporza I think you're not), but trust me, de Cauwer says in the interview at 1:25 without any irony that Roglic ruined things for Evenepoel. If de Cauwer says that Roglic 'de boel verpest heeft' for Evenepoel, is as laughable as it sounds like and it deserves all ridicule that @Lequack rightly gave it.

BTW: I can recommend the Rode Lantaarn podcast at 57:00 this week where they hilariously make fun of de Cauwer's analysis that Evenepoel second place was due to one man: Primoz Roglic.

I'm a native speaker, and i can assure you that you are completely misinterpreting it. Roglic ruined things in the context that i already provided. Because Roglic was expected to be the man to beat, meaning he was the man to watch. It turned out he wasn't, which threw Evenepoel off, and had Jorgenson ride off. This is how he ruined it and this is exactly what De Cauwer means. You can recommend Rode Lantaarn, i tried to listen to it twice a few years ago, but i couldn't suffer through it again. And if they did actually make fun of De Cauwer for saying that, then they further prove my point. Trash.

What most of us forget to consider, is how riders are viewed inside the pro peloton. Remco indeed affects a lot of cycling 'fans' and divides them clearly because of his outspokenness. However, he is more popular among colleagues than for example Van Aert and Sagan. And I'm not that biased here, cause I support Wout very much. The best example that I could never get my head around is Cancellara, who was despised by so many riders, and still some people thought Boonen was the arrogant one.

Anyway. I'm often annoyed by all the beef and unfair criticism Remco gets. Certainly on this forum. Most of the time I let it pass, cause I don't want to stir things up even more.

Can't remember who it was, a French rider, a few weeks ago, who said Vingegaard is much more liked in the peloton than Pogacar, while Pogacar seem like the cool one because with Pogacar, what you see is fake. I think we can all agree Pogacar is by far the more popular rider among cycling fans.
Van Aert is also said to be more secluded than Van der Poel, which makes the latter more liked in the peloton. Yet Van Aert has at least as many fans (even more going by PCS' yearly favorite riders list).

 

[Gargamel35]

I'm a native speaker, and i can assure you that you are completely misinterpreting it. Roglic ruined things in the context that i already provided. Because Roglic was expected to be the man to beat, meaning he was the man to watch. It turned out he wasn't, which threw Evenepoel off, and had Jorgenson ride off. This is how he ruined it and this is exactly what De Cauwer means. You can recomment Rode Lantaarn, i tried to listen to it twice a few years ago, but i couldn't suffer through it again.

Isn't that basically how cycling works? There are paper favourites before the race that watch each other. Then someone else gets to the break and rides away and (maybe) wins at the end. Vuelta 2023 and many many other races. It's no one fault. It's cycling.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Isn't that basically how cycling works? There are paper favourites before the race that watch each other. Then someone else gets to the break and rides away and (maybe) wins at the end. Vuelta 2023 and many many other races. It's no one fault. It's cycling.

Yes of course. De Cauwer has been in the peloton for about 60 years. He was a rider, then a DS (he was the DS of Lemond when he won the TDF), he was also national coach for a while. He knows what he's talking about. This is not some journalist who had to cover cycling because it was the only job opening left. So Roglic not being as good as he was assumed to be, is used as an explanation, not to fault Roglic.

 

[Salvarani]

Isn't that basically how cycling works? There are paper favourites before the race that watch each other. Then someone else gets to the break and rides away and (maybe) wins at the end. Vuelta 2023 and many many other races. It's no one fault. It's cycling.

You are not wrong.

 

[Froome]

after Vingegaard 👍

I think Evenepoel and specially Roglic are more favourites for the Itzulia, because the route is not hard enough for him. The only place where i can see him doing some difference is on izua.
They have a better sprint than Vingegaard. Vingegaard is probably also lose some time in the TT. He will be fine in the TTs of the Tour, but he needs to be in peak shape to do better.

Evenepoel and Roglic also have more "pressure" in the race, because they need a first victory in 2024.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

I think Evenepoel and specially Roglic are more favourites for the Itzulia, because the route is not hard enough for him. The only place where i can see him doing some difference is on izua.
They have a better sprint than Vingegaard. Vingegaard is probably also lose some time in the TT. He will be fine in the TTs of the Tour, but he needs to be in peak shape to do better.

Evenepoel and Roglic also have more "pressure" in the race, because they need a first victory in 2024.

Evenepoel already won 3 4 races, so i assume you mean WT GC.

I have a hard time selling/buying this one with Vingegaard as the underdog. From what i have seen of Evenepoel in PN, he is clearly quite a bit removed from his top form. His attacks barely had an impact on 2nd tier riders. Roglic needs to show that what happened at PN was simply due to settling in at Bora. So i don't see how you could claim that the guy who won his previous two stage races, by finishing solo every time he attacked, is not the big favorite here.

 

[Andre]

I think Evenepoel and specially Roglic are more favourites for the Itzulia, because the route is not hard enough for him. The only place where i can see him doing some difference is on izua.
They have a better sprint than Vingegaard. Vingegaard is probably also lose some time in the TT. He will be fine in the TTs of the Tour, but he needs to be in peak shape to do better.

Evenepoel and Roglic also have more "pressure" in the race, because they need a first victory in 2024.

Good morning Froome: Remco already has a victory in 2024...and did very good in Paris-Nice; so not that much pressure on him.

 

[Froome]

Evenepoel already won 3 4 races, so i assume you mean WT GC.

I have a hard time selling/buying this one with Vingegaard as the underdog. From what i have seen of Evenepoel in PN, he is clearly quite a bit removed from his top form. His attacks barely had an impact on 2nd tier riders. Roglic needs to show that what happened at PN was simply due to settling in at Bora. So i don't see how you could claim that the guy who won his previous two stage races, by finishing solo every time he attacked, is not the big favorite here.

"The pressure" was me trying to do "mind games" with you Roglic fans and Remco fans, it's not that important. The main goal for everybody is july, what will happen on itzulia it will not mean that much.

Talking about the route of the race and the main favourite of the three, i honestly don't think vingegaard can be but above the other two on the race. It's my honest opinion because i am a vingegaard fan i would love to tell that he will race without doubts.

Simply, like i said, the race is not hard enough for him to do differences, and in the TT he will probably lose some time, just like happened on TA.

For the rest of the stages, the only hard stage, is the last stage, but even if he makes some difference on izua, it will not be much more than 15/20 s, it's a 10 min effort, not that long.

This is a race if 5 to 10 min effort in climbs.

If they stay together until the finish line, he will always lose some more seconds in the sprint.

I would prefer vingegaard in vuelta a catalunya, the route is better for him, but i understand that he probably want to test himself on the muritos, 5/10 min efforts.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

"The pressure" was me trying to do "mind games" with you Roglic fans and Remco fans, it's not that important. The main goal for everybody is july, what will happen on itzulia it will not mean that much.

Talking about the route of the race and the main favourite of the three, i honestly don't think vingegaard can be but above the other two on the race. It's my honest opinion because i am a vingegaard fan i would love to tell that he will race without doubts.

Simply, like i said, the race is not hard enough for him to do differences, and in the TT he will probably lose some time, just like happened on TA.

For the rest of the stages, the only hard stage, is the last stage, but even if he makes some difference on izua, it will not be much more than 15/20 s, it's a 10 min effort, not that long.

This is a race if 5 to 10 min effort in climbs.

If they stay together until the finish line, he will always lose some more seconds in the sprint.

I would prefer vingegaard in vuelta a catalunya, the route is better for him, but i understand that he probably want to test himself on the muritos, 5/10 min efforts.

Vinge rode away from Bernal, Carapaz. Gaudu, Martinez... on much lesser climbs in Camiño every time he sneezed, while Evenepoel and Roglic weren't able to drop Plapp or Skjelmose most of the time.

Objection denied!

 

[Froome]

Vinge rode away from Bernal, Carapaz. Gaudu, Martinez... on much lesser climbs in Camiño every time he sneezed, while Evenepoel and Roglic weren't able to drop Plapp or Skjelmose most of the time.

Objection denied!

Different races, different weather, roglic and Evenepoel are better riders than those riders you talked about, they will be in better shape than in PN.

 

[Berniece]

Some images of his recon today

Spoiler

 

[Wvv]

Some images of his recon today

Spoiler

This one tho

 

[Keldergoat]

I'm a native speaker, and i can assure you that you are completely misinterpreting it. Roglic ruined things in the context that i already provided. Because Roglic was expected to be the man to beat, meaning he was the man to watch. It turned out he wasn't, which threw Evenepoel off, and had Jorgenson ride off. This is how he ruined it and this is exactly what De Cauwer means. You can recommend Rode Lantaarn, i tried to listen to it twice a few years ago, but i couldn't suffer through it again. And if they did actually make fun of De Cauwer for saying that, then they further prove my point. Trash.

Well, I am native speaker, and I don't buy into the context because, frankly, it's bull. The scenario of Evenepoel supposedly merely looking to Roglic, when Roglic was 15th in GC after Thursday, not showing the greatest signals on Buitrago's stage, ignoring some top notch riders is comical. It wasn't only Jorgensen riding off, it were three top tier contenders with all a big motor. Claiming then that 'Roglic' ruined Remco's Paris Nice is just plain out laughable, and that's exactly what they rightly did in the beforementioned podcast. And they like to take cycling with some pinches of salt, which I tend to appreciate.

 

[red_flanders]

"The pressure" was me trying to do "mind games" with you Roglic fans and Remco fans, it's not that important. The main goal for everybody is july, what will happen on itzulia it will not mean that much.

Talking about the route of the race and the main favourite of the three, i honestly don't think vingegaard can be but above the other two on the race. It's my honest opinion because i am a vingegaard fan i would love to tell that he will race without doubts.

Simply, like i said, the race is not hard enough for him to do differences, and in the TT he will probably lose some time, just like happened on TA.

For the rest of the stages, the only hard stage, is the last stage, but even if he makes some difference on izua, it will not be much more than 15/20 s, it's a 10 min effort, not that long.

This is a race if 5 to 10 min effort in climbs.

If they stay together until the finish line, he will always lose some more seconds in the sprint.

I would prefer vingegaard in vuelta a catalunya, the route is better for him, but i understand that he probably want to test himself on the muritos, 5/10 min efforts.

I’m not left with the impression that Vingo needs it to be particularly hard to make a difference. He seems to be able to launch at will at this point.

I think he’s the obvious and huge favorite.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Well, I am native speaker, and I don't buy into the context because, frankly, it's bull. The scenario of Evenepoel supposedly merely looking to Roglic, when Roglic was 15th in GC after Thursday, not showing the greatest signals on Buitrago's stage, ignoring some top notch riders is comical. It wasn't only Jorgensen riding off, it were three top tier contenders with all a big motor. Claiming then that 'Roglic' ruined Remco's Paris Nice is just plain out laughable, and that's exactly what they rightly did in the beforementioned podcast. And they like to take cycling with some pinches of salt, which I tend to appreciate.

I take it you are Dutch and not Flemish. And no, the context is not bull, it is exactly that.

Your entire argument is based around trying to frame Roglic as if he were out of contention. The only time until that moment that he had lost compared to Evenepoel was time in the TTT and boni seconds. And "ignoring top notch riders"... compare the wins of those riders, combined, to either the palmares of Roglic or Evenepoel and you will realize how silly that sounds. This race was expected to be a Roglic/Evenepoel showdown.

 

[Keldergoat]

I take it you are Dutch and not Flemish. And no, the context is not bull, it is exactly that.

Your entire argument is based around trying to frame Roglic as if he were out of contention. The only time until that moment that he had lost compared to Evenepoel was time in the TTT and boni seconds. And "ignoring top notch riders"... compare the wins of those riders, combined, to either the palmares of Roglic or Evenepoel and you will realize how silly that sounds. This race was expected to be a Roglic/Evenepoel showdown.

Thanks for your interest, I'm half Dutch - half Flemish since my Mom is from Ingelmunster, but I grew up in the NL indeed. My West-Vlaams isn't at Lampaert's level but I can get along fine.

I doubt whether everyone expected it to be a two horse race. Read back the forum on Tuesday's stage or some well known twitter guru's on how underwhelming their performances were and how strong Skjelmose, McNulty and especially Jorgensen already looked and I can at least claim that Evenepoels overly thwarted focus on Roglic was strange.

 

[Eddy Evenepoel]

The scenario of Evenepoel supposedly merely looking to Roglic, when Roglic was 15th in GC after Thursday, not showing the greatest signals on Buitrago's stage, ignoring some top notch riders is comical. It wasn't only Jorgensen riding off, it were three top tier contenders with all a big motor.

If you watched the stage where Jorgenson gained a minute you could easily see that Skjelmose and McNulty “attacked” (Skjelmose himself said after the stage it wasnt really an attack, the group just let him go) on a flattish part and that Remco just looked around at the other riders in the group. This was a purely tactical question and Remco totally blew it, because he was looking at other riders and not just kept riding on. And who was he looking at do you think?

I can at least claim that Evenepoels overly thwarted focus on Roglic was strange

Of course it was strange, it’s why everyone says he (and his DS) totally blew it and should’ve realized earlier that Roglic wasn’t the main competition.