If a GC is supposed to be a true test of the best overall cyclist then shouldn’t the best climber not always be the winner? In other words, shouldn’t a climbing specialist always win the polka dots and still be a better climber than the GC winner, in a true well rounded competition? Maybe this is a rant about how GCs are structured but the whole polka dot jersey situation is kind of underwhelming because it’s either a random breakaway rider or the overall winner, every time.
The best climber is not necessarily the best overall rider. Put in a route with 110km of ITT. If the best climber loses 10 minutes in the ITT, he probably shouldn't be the overall winner. Have the best climber do a real cobbled stage. If he loses another 5 minutes there, he definitely shouldn't be the GC winner
Pure climbers are only winning now because Govenou and the RCS director are deathly allergic to time trials