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

[Pozzovivo]

I agree, Evenepoel is a better rider than Onley and would have better chances. But my point is that if you take Pog and Vingegaard out, then the rest of the bunch is quite similar, and race becomes more open. Factors such as luck, who has a bad day and who doesn’t, who loses time in echelons, who makes a tactical mistakes and who doesn't, who is just lucky, how do team strategies change etc. who benefits from team tactics become much more prominent.

We don’t know what the racing would look like if you took Pog and Vingegaard out. Would it be basically the same—full gas from the bottom to the top? Or would it be different, more open, maybe more tactical, with more stop-and-go attacks, different attackers, and different counterattackers?

But overall, I am in your camp. I think that Evenepoel is capable of winning the Tour. But he is not a dominant rider (like Pog, Froome or Contador), where the question is not if they win the Tour, but when. Evenepoel needs the right circumstances and some luck on his side. Maybe it happens, maybe it doesn’t.


For instance, I would say that Roglič was the best GC rider around 2019-2020—not dominant, just a little bit better than the others—but he wasted his opportunities, or maybe he just wasn’t lucky and his window of opportunity closed. Maybe Evnepoel gets his chance, maybe not.

Very fair.

 

[Karl Merckx]

Although the climb itself is much easier so winning the stage or being close is somewhat important for Remco. As for steeper and harder climbs, there he obviously has some work left to do.

if he finishes behind tobias halland johanessen and tijmen graat, it means that the problem is not the climb but remco himself...

 

[Cycling111]

But those cyclists exist. If MVDP didn't exist, Pogacar would already have all 5 Monuments. But he exists.

And Remco debuted the same year as the two who exist. Although Remco's climbing problems have been exist against many rides. It's very obvious; you can't keep denying it and thinking that because he finished third one year he'll win the Tour. There are more races where he's struggled in the mountains.

 

[Red Rick]

I see no reason to believe either would have been a big threat to the best cyclist we've ever seen and the only one who's been able to beat him. The level in their time was rather crappy compared to today.

Being better tham athletes of decades ago isnt something to give credit for. Sports naturally evolve.

I might as well argue the depth of the field is extremely weak now cause 2 guys win everything.

 

[KoopaCycling]

Well, i guess we won't see that big gear in a TT from Remco again in a stage race. I doubt it really mattered as much as he thinks it did. But if he thinks it affected him negatively, he better not use it again if only for the mental side of things.

I'm not a fan of sports people doing unhealthy stuff. So I would not recommend doing crazy stuff to get lean if it is that unhealthy for him. I understand that pro sports are probably unhealthy to begin with. But there got to be limits.

Seixas can time trial as well. if Pogacar beats him in the mountains but Seixas shows he is equal in the TT, we might see a change.

 

[Netserk]

I see no reason to believe either would have been a big threat to the best cyclist we've ever seen and the only one who's been able to beat him. The level in their time was rather crappy compared to today.

fignon would never have stood a chance against zulle and rominger too ?

 

[Divergence]

I don't think that has anything to do with professionalism or discipline in his case. They have always thought he needed to weigh more during spring classics.

Idk about that.
First of all, I would not trust the "they" if I were Remco. As I said before, most of the people in cycling are not very good when it comes to scientific deductions.
But if it is really the case that he could easily stay lean throughout the season but he intentionally pouts on weight, then it might be time for him to switch his approach

 

[Krzysztof_O]

That’s not how it works. People don’t decline simultaneously, Remco could decline earlier or later

It's true but their primes strongly overlap. Seixas has a big chance for success after Pogacar era, maybe he will be the one to beat declining Pogacar and end his reign.

 

[Berniece]

It's true but their primes strongly overlap. Seixas has a big chance for success after Pogacar era, maybe he will be the one be beat declining Pogacar and end his reign.

Who knows, he's 19 so hard to make a guess on his future development. It's easier to make a conclusion after this season when he has ridden Strade, LBL and a GT.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Who knows, he's 19 so hard to make a guess on his future development. It's easier to make a conclusion after this season when he has ridden Strade, LBL and a GT.

Sure, Ayuso had GT top3 at the age of 19 and then stagnated. Seixas still has to show big improvement in the next 2-3 years.

 

[Netserk]

Sure, Ayuso had GT top3 at the age of 19 and then stagnated. Seixas still has to show big improvement in the next 2-3 years.

on the eye test, he seems more similar to ayuso in how physically mature he looks than pogi did in his first years. but not to the same degree as juan

 

[Berniece]

Sure, Ayuso had GT top3 at the age of 19 and then stagnated. Seixas still has to show big improvement in the next 2-3 of years.

His performance yesterday was nice, but it's hard to properly see in what shape Seixas is compared to others. Maybe he's peaking early this season. It's not like Ayuso and Almeida are at their best now, and that the race was extremely hard.

Seixas showed last year he is already subtop, with a great performance at Dauphine, UEC RR and Lombardia. Looking forward to the bigger races this year to see if he got better. Strade is in 2.5 weeks.

 

[kingjr]

fignon would never have stood a chance against zulle and rominger too ?

The 90s are useless for comparison against any era. The picture is completely distorted.

 

[Netserk]

The 90s are useless for comparison against any era. The picture is completely distorted.

today is more distorted than the 90s.

pogi and vingegaard are greater outliers than pantani and indurain were

 

[kingjr]

Being better tham athletes of decades ago isnt something to give credit for. Sports naturally evolve.

I might as well argue the depth of the field is extremely weak now cause 2 guys win everything.

It's hardly decades ago.

You might, but it's beside the point.

 

[jotafap]

It's hardly decades ago.

You might, but it's beside the point.

It may not have been decades ago, but wasn’t there a significant boom in numbers post-COVID? Yes, so his point remains valid.

 

[kingjr]

today is more distorted than the 90s.

pogi and vingegaard are greater outliers than pantani and indurain were

The 90s were distorted by widespread use of the most effective drug the sport has ever known.

 

[kingjr]

It may not have been decades ago, but wasn’t there a significant boom in numbers post-COVID? Yes, so his point remains valid.

Whose numbers? And when exactly does "post-Covid" start?

 

[Netserk]

The 90s were distorted by widespread use of the most effective drug the sport has ever known.

this is not the clinic, please

whatever the cause is, sports science nowadays distorts the sport more

 

[kingjr]

this is not the clinic, please

whatever the cause is, sports science nowadays distorts the sport more

Would you mind going into a bit more detail as to how you think sports science distorts the sport today in ways not related to doping, and more so than EPO in the 90s?

You can respond in the clinic in whatever thread seems appropriate.

 

[Netserk]

Would you mind going into a bit more detail as to how you think sports science distorts the sport today in ways not related to doping, and more so than EPO in the 90s?

You can respond in the clinic in whatever thread seems appropriate.

i dont have a view behind the curtains, so i cant speak as to the mechanics

i can see the consequences, the state of the peloton

gaps are bigger now, dominant riders dominate more. a decade ago was the opposite, much smaller gaps than in the 90s

the long solo of gilbert in ronde was nothing like the long solo of pogi in rwanda. completely different worlds

 

[kingjr]

i dont have a view behind the curtains, so i cant speak as to the mechanics

i can see the consequences, the state of the peloton

gaps are bigger now, dominant riders dominate more. a decade ago was the opposite, much smaller gaps than in the 90s

the long solo of gilbert in ronde was nothing like the long solo of pogi in rwanda. completely different worlds

Most of these exploits come from a very small circle of riders (often just one, in fact). If we compare the performances of Gilbert and Pogacar, the main difference, IMO, is that Pogacar is inherently much better. It's something you see across all sports every now and then.

 

[Netserk]

Most of these exploits come from a very small circle of riders (often just one, in fact). If we compare the performances of Gilbert and Pogacar, the main difference, IMO, is that Pogacar is inherently much better. It's something you see across all sports every now and then.

and vingegaard is also just inherently much better than everyone but pogi
and rogla inherently so much better (for a while)
and van der poel inherently so much better

if you assume the conclusion, that the dominant riders dominate to this degree because of their inherent characteristics and not because of this age of cycling, sure

 

[Netserk]

weirdly enough, the dominant riders were all less dominant in 21 and 22

and much more dominant in 24 all of a sudden. and completely in lockstep.

 

[kingjr]

1) and vingegaard is also just inherently much better than everyone but pogi
2) and rogla inherently so much better (for a while)
3) and van der poel inherently so much better

4) if you assume the conclusion, that the dominant riders dominate to this degree because of their inherent characteristics and not because of this age of cycling, sure

1) In climbing, and to a lesser extent time-trialling, in a GT context and depending on the profile.
2)Roglic is versatile, consistent, and has a lethal finish. He's a bit like Valverde, except better in TTs and less good in one-day races.
3) He is much better only in certain races that suit his particular characteristics. The most striking example is Glasgow, which was a highly atypical course (and predates 2024, incidentally). In the Belgian classics, he's of course extremely strong, but he also benefits from van Aert being very unlucky and Pedersen being stupid. In GTs, he struggles mightily to win stages.

4) I assume that's the main factor, yes, with the caveats in 1-3 taken into account