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

[Oldermanish]

I appreciate your sentiments, but, really, the Tour is so much bigger than the Giro and Vuelta for a rider like Roglic and Evenepoel. For an Aru, fine, a Vuelta is a huge accomplishment, but not even four of them compensates for the Tour Roglic lost. In 20 years nobody will remember his 4 Vueltas, but only the Tour he lost. I know that's harsh, but the truth. Ask Fignon

Very much the point for Primoz. To be that close and then see the disappointment on your teammates faces. Only one thing will bury that memory where it belongs.

 

[Extinction]

Very much the point for Primoz. To be that close and then see the disappointment on your teammates faces. Only one thing will bury that memory where it belongs.

One thing I admire about Primoz is his ability to bounce back after huge disappointment and trama. Fignon never really bounced back from his 89 defeat to Lemond. Then again, he thought the race was stollen from him by unapproved tri-bars and he was French on home soil.

 

[Extinction]

Coppi, Bartali, Gimondi, Nibali disagree with you.
Delgado, Indurain, Contador disagree as well.
And then there are the list of riders that def. had the talent but somehow never won it.

Cycling has become bigger since 85. so point is flawed to begin with. (money)
Since 2010 only Contador won the vuelta for spain.
Only Basso, Scarponi and Nibali won the giro for italia.
Contador won the tdf, nibali won the tdf, basso was capable of winning the tdf.

Nibali was a one trick poney who won under most lucky circumstances. Contador kept doing the Tour, but never was the same after clengate. The others regularly road the Tour, so I don't get your point. Cycling may have gotten bigger since 85, although arguably it's only gotten more global, while the fanbase hasn't really increased significantly, as it has certainly gotten smaller in Europe. Why is it that no Frenchman has won the Tour in so long, while Italians and Spaniards continued to win their national GTs? It's because the Tour is so much bigger and harder to win. So my point isn't flawed, however you may see things otherwise.

 

[Oldermanish]

One thing I admire about Primoz is his ability to bounce back after huge disappointment and trama. Fignon never really bounced back from his 89 defeat to Lemond. Then again, he thought the race was stollen from him by unapproved tri-bars and he was French on home soil.

Yeah, Fignon also had bad saddle sores for the one effort that forces you to stay in an uncomfortable position. As for any theft; he tested tri-bars a few times and he and his tech guys chose not to use them. There's no guarantee he would have done better and could've done much worse. He didn't lose the TT by 8 seconds; just the Tour.

 

[Extinction]

Yeah, Fignon also had bad saddle sores for the one effort that forces you to stay in an uncomfortable position. As for any theft; he tested tri-bars a few times and he and his tech guys chose not to use them. There's no guarantee he would have done better and could've done much worse. He didn't lose the TT by 8 seconds; just the Tour.

Right, I'm quoting, however, what he said in his book.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Perhaps I didn't explain my point well. It's not the Tour per se, if not for a rider of his calibre. Would we have expected anything less from Merckx, Hinault, Fignon or Lemond? No, their talent was such that it's impossible to miss a Tour in your palmarès. If we were talking about any other rider than Evenepoel, it wouldn't matter if he won lots of big races, but not the Tour. Remco's an excellent climber and TTist with a huge engine, so a natural Tour pedigree and a race he wants ardently to win. Evenepoel, in the final analysis, will have an asterix on his career of he doesn't win the Tour against Pogacar and Vingegaard. He could win a bunch of classics, GTs, worlds (although with this Pogacar there is nothing for anyone else) and he would still, without the Tour, be less touted. Roglic came into cycling from another sport, who, in contrast to Remco, did not have the incredible expectations placed upon him; and then blew it in the only Tour he could have won. Does Roglic's 4 Vueltas and 1 Giro compensate for the lost Tour? Ask yourself would Roglic trade a win in that Tour for his other GTs and the answer is obvious. Yes. So, with this much talent, winning another monument, Vuelta, a Giro or WC won't make a difference for Remco, the way a Tour would against them. The problem is the current gap between them, an abyss.

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.

Roglic will be more remembered in my opinion than Sastre, and probably more so than Evans (and if history does not prove that to be so then it would be because of his countryman Pogacar racing in the same era), and he would be more satisfied with his career than Sastre (Evans could be a ? there because of his WC). Is that a reasonable statement?

As for Remco, he is only 3rd in the pecking order, so if the giro offers a better parcours for him (and Vingegaard and Pogacar skip it) then it makes sense for him to race it. In regards to the sponsors argument, I somewhat agree. But he could tell them he is racing both (when really he is only targeting the giro) with the argument "well Pogacar did it, it's good training for the tour", and happily take his giro win and top 10 tour finish over a non start and a 3rd place at the tour.

(Bit of a side topic): I think that Remco beating Pogacar head to head next year at LBL or Lombardia would be a pretty big deal anyway, and much more realistic than beating Pogacar at the tour also.

 

[gregrowlerson]

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.

 

[KoopaCycling]

Someone said Tour of Norway, ... honestly you are deliberately trying to be condescending, when you well know that wasn't the point i'm making. Trying to twist words and intent.

as to the guy thinking no french winners is a good point.
1 french rider won the vuelta since 1985 (Jalabert)
1 french rider won the giro since 1985 (Fignon)

So rly, it's not so much that the level of competition is that much harder (it's a bit harder yes, but others are hard as well) it's that french riders haven't been that good at GT since then. Same for Belgian riders if we are being honest. And yes it's also cause the sport has become more global.

Since 85 we've seen american, russian, british, colombian, australian, slovenian , Khazak, Irish, Danish riders win GT's. All of whose nationalities unless i'm wrong (could very well be, only did a quick check) had never won a GT before 85.

 

[Extinction]

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.

Roglic will be more remembered in my opinion than Sastre, and probably more so than Evans (and if history does not prove that to be so then it would be because of his countryman Pogacar racing in the same era), and he would be more satisfied with his career than Sastre (Evans could be a ? there because of his WC). Is that a reasonable statement?

As for Remco, he is only 3rd in the pecking order, so if the giro offers a better parcours for him (and Vingegaard and Pogacar skip it) then it makes sense for him to race it. In regards to the sponsors argument, I somewhat agree. But he could tell them he is racing both (when really he is only targeting the giro) with the argument "well Pogacar did it, it's good training for the tour", and happily take his giro win and top 10 tour finish over a non start and a 3rd place at the tour.

(Bit of a side topic): I think that Remco beating Pogacar head to head next year at LBL or Lombardia would be a pretty big deal anyway, and much more realistic than beating Pogacar at the tour also.

You are right, but only in so far as the specific nature of Roglic's predicament. That the other wins in GTs take away some of the sting of losing the Tour like that is doubtless, but it does not compensate. And he is still licking the wounds, judging from his nervousness and constant falling in the Grande Bouclé, which just can't be chalked up to bad luck. Fall once, fall twice, three times, it's bad luck, fall 5, 7, 8, 9 times you are the problem. As far as Remco beating Pog at Liege is concerned, if the level remains like this the great Remco gets beaten on home turf.

 

[Luthor]

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.

 

[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.

 

[Red Rick]

Giro getting that Eurosport exclusive nerf

 

[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.