Which TdF's could Roglič have won?

[Peyroteo94]

The only way Roglic could win the 2020 TdF was by working against Pogacar when he had his mechanical instead of working to WVA.
It's very clear he didn't have the legs to attack Pogacar on Col de la Loze.

 

[aphronesis]

He won the ones he won. What more to it is there?

Say it louder.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

Looks like netserk forgot to log into his cyclistabi account at first when voting

 

[Krzysztof_O]

2019 surely. If he focuses on the Tour instead of Giro and Vuelta (and avoids crashes) then it's his victory. His level was great while the Tour 2019 was the weakest in recent memory.
I didn't vote 2020 because he simply lost it (despite having a double advantage: super strong team and gap after echelons stage). No excuses, he had a worse day in that TT but it's on him.
In 2021 he would likely lose enough time in the cold Alps not to overcome the gap (Pogi's weaker moment on Ventoux not enough, Rogla likely wouldn't gain anything in the Pyrenees and he himself could have some weaker day as well).
From 2022 on Vingegaard or/and Pogacar were too good. In 2022 Visma's priority was probably Vingegaard anyway.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Looks like netserk forgot to log into his cyclistabi account at first when voting

He also voted "never".

 

[kingjr]

He also voted "never".

"...confusing the audience"

 

[Mayomaniac]

The only way Roglic could win the 2020 TdF was by working against Pogacar when he had his mechanical instead of working to WVA.
It's very clear he didn't have the legs to attack Pogacar on Col de la Loze.

The day afterwards he was dropping people on Glieres without even trying and that includes Pogacar. Had he actually pushed hard he would have gotten a sizable gap, but the Jumbo strategy of minmaxing and just doing uphill sprints + the TT and him not being the most offensive minded rider got in the way.

 

[Valv.Piti]

The day afterwards he was dropping people on Glieres without even trying and that includes Pogacar. Had he actually pushed hard he would have gotten a sizable gap, but the Jumbo strategy of minmaxing and just doing uphill sprints + the TT and him not being the most offensive minded rider got in the way.

But he didn't, and that was part of their defensive strategy throughout. Roglic lost 2020 fair and square, sothats out of the question IMO. He lost to the better rider - maybe not psyshically, but strategially and mentally Pogacar was better overall. Pogacar even lost time for no reason and had a much, much, MUCH worse team. No excuses in 2020. Roglic just didn't cash in where he could've in fear - his motto "no risk, no glory" comes across rather funny after this race. Or maybe thats where he adopted it.

Its 2019 if anything, and arguing 2021 IMO is unserious as well considering the Alps in that race. Roglic would likely have suffered the same fate as Carapaz, and then maybe those two would have reduced the gap slightly more in Grand Bornand than what it ended up being, but Pogacar was also flying in the time trials and easily controlled the Pyrenees for stage wins the same way we have seen peak Roglic do.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

He also voted "never".

That's exactly what I would do if I wanted to cover my tracks

 

[Netserk]

Looks like netserk forgot to log into his cyclistabi account at first when voting

D'oh!

 

[hrotha]

But he didn't, and that was part of their defensive strategy throughout. Roglic lost 2020 fair and square, sothats out of the question IMO. He lost to the better rider - maybe not psyshically, but strategially and mentally Pogacar was better overall

The whole point is that he could have won it if he had been better at strategy, which in turn would have made him better than Pogačar overall at that Tour. In fact, the reasoning only works because he lost to Pogačar fair and square

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

But he didn't, and that was part of their defensive strategy throughout. Roglic lost 2020 fair and square, sothats out of the question IMO. He lost to the better rider - maybe not psyshically, but strategially and mentally Pogacar was better overall. Pogacar even lost time for no reason and had a much, much, MUCH worse team. No excuses in 2020. Roglic just didn't cash in where he could've in fear - his motto "no risk, no glory" comes across rather funny after this race. Or maybe thats where he adopted it.

Its 2019 if anything, and arguing 2021 IMO is unserious as well considering the Alps in that race. Roglic would likely have suffered the same fate as Carapaz, and then maybe those two would have reduced the gap slightly more in Grand Bornand than what it ended up being, but Pogacar was also flying in the time trials and easily controlled the Pyrenees for stage wins the same way we have seen peak Roglic do.

Losing fair and square isn't incompatible with having been capable of winning under different circumstances (no bad Dauphine crash) and/or with different strategy (ride all out to take as much time as possible anywhere and everywhere). IIRC, Tom Dumoulin said Roglic's numbers in training before that Tour were terrible and he just barely rounded into form. I'm sure that's part of why he rode that way.

 

[Peyroteo94]

The whole point is that he could have won it if he had been better at strategy, which in turn would have made him better than Pogačar overall at that Tour. In fact, the reasoning only works because he lost to Pogačar fair and square

In your opinion what is a better strategy?
For me, his only way was to take advantage of Pogacar's mechanical and that's not strategy. That's luck. You can't make a strategy (something you prepare before the race) based on a future mechanical from your rival.

 

[Mayomaniac]

But he didn't, and that was part of their defensive strategy throughout. Roglic lost 2020 fair and square, sothats out of the question IMO. He lost to the better rider - maybe not psyshically, but strategially and mentally Pogacar was better overall. Pogacar even lost time for no reason and had a much, much, MUCH worse team. No excuses in 2020. Roglic just didn't cash in where he could've in fear - his motto "no risk, no glory" comes across rather funny after this race. Or maybe thats where he adopted it.

Its 2019 if anything, and arguing 2021 IMO is unserious as well considering the Alps in that race. Roglic would likely have suffered the same fate as Carapaz, and then maybe those two would have reduced the gap slightly more in Grand Bornand than what it ended up being, but Pogacar was also flying in the time trials and easily controlled the Pyrenees for stage wins the same way we have seen peak Roglic do.

Yeah, hard to argue about that one...

 

[Wyndbrook]

2006

 

[hrotha]

In your opinion what is a better strategy?
For me, his only way was to take advantage of Pogacar's mechanical and that's not strategy. That's luck. You can't make a strategy (something you prepare before the race) based on a future mechanical from your rival.

Honestly, I remember what I thought about his strategy at the time way better than I remember the details of the actual race right now, so the best I can do is tell you to search for the word "Roglič" in my post history, see if you can find my opinions from 5 years ago and whether or not you find them convincing

 

[Lurkerman]

One could also make a similar thread for basically every rider-race combination. For example:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2018 and/or an earlier edition
- 2019
- 2020
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

Or perhaps these are better voting options, for those who want to make it clear that they're a big believer in the rider:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2019 and/or an earlier edition
- 2020
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

Or we can even do this:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2020 and/or an earlier edition
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- I voted for at least one of the listed editions, but I also want to make it clear that he can't win a future edition
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

The concept makes sense even if said rider has already won said race:

Which Vuelta’s could Roglic also have won?
- 2016 and/or an earlier edition
- 2017
- 2018
- 2022
- 2023
- 2025
- I voted for at least one of the listed editions, but I also want to make it clear that he can't win a future edition
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

There is also this variation which makes good sense for retired riders:

How many TdF’s could Valverde have won?
- None, sorry
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9 or more

Said rider could even have won said race:

How many more TdF’s could Nibali have won?
- No more, sorry (so, 1 in total)
- 1 (so, 2 in total)
- 2 (so, 3 in total)
- 3 (so, 4 in total)
- 4 (so, 5 in total)
- 5 (so, 6 in total)
- 6 (so, 7 in total)
- 7 (so, 8 in total)
- 8 (so, 9 in total)
- 9 or more (so, 10 or more in total)

Said rider doesn’t even have to be retired yet, but this situation give rise to two different polls, an easier one and a harder one. The easier one goes:

Imagine the day that Evenepoel is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many more Giro’s could he have won, besides the ones that he did actually win?
- No more, sorry
- 1 more
- 2 more
- 3 more
- 4 more
- 5 more
- 6 more
- 7 more
- 8 more
- 9 more or even more

This doesn't presuppose that said rider ever won or will ever win said race - Remco's imagined actual number of Giro wins, after retirement, could be 0. But this easy variation, of course, makes sense also even if said rider actually has already won said race.

The harder version is harder because here you have to give not a relative number of editions of said race that said rider could have won, but instead an absolute one:

Imagine the day that Evenepoel is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many Giro’s could he have won?
- None, sorry
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9 or more

This is obviously more difficult because if it was the Lombardia poll for Pogacar in 2020, it would be possible to vote for him as being someone who could never win a Lombardia, which posterity, since, has proven false. With that said, said voter can of course try again in the 2025 pre-race poll:

Imagine the day that Pogacar is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many GdL’s could he have won?
- 4, no more than he has actually won as of today's date, sorry
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13 or more

 

[Cookster15]

It's very clear he didn't have the legs to attack Pogacar on Col de la Loze

Didn’t Pogacar lose 15 seconds to Roglic on Col de la Loze that day in 2020?

Since his collapse on Loze in 2023 it wasn’t until the 2024 Giro (Livigno stage) and then the Tour I felt that Pogacar erased concerns about his ability at over 2,000 meters.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

One could also make a similar thread for basically every rider-race combination. For example:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2018 and/or an earlier edition
- 2019
- 2020
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

Or perhaps these are better voting options, for those who want to make it clear that they're a big believer in the rider:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2019 and/or an earlier edition
- 2020
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

Or we can even do this:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2020 and/or an earlier edition
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- I voted for at least one of the listed editions, but I also want to make it clear that he can't win a future edition
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

The concept makes sense even if said rider has already won said race:

Which Vuelta’s could Roglic also have won?
- 2016 and/or an earlier edition
- 2017
- 2018
- 2022
- 2023
- 2025
- I voted for at least one of the listed editions, but I also want to make it clear that he can't win a future edition
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

There is also this variation which makes good sense for retired riders:

How many TdF’s could Valverde have won?
- None, sorry
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9 or more

Said rider could even have won said race:

How many more TdF’s could Nibali have won?
- No more, sorry (so, 1 in total)
- 1 (so, 2 in total)
- 2 (so, 3 in total)
- 3 (so, 4 in total)
- 4 (so, 5 in total)
- 5 (so, 6 in total)
- 6 (so, 7 in total)
- 7 (so, 8 in total)
- 8 (so, 9 in total)
- 9 or more (so, 10 or more in total)

Said rider doesn’t even have to be retired yet, but this situation give rise to two different polls, an easier one and a harder one. The easier one goes:

Imagine the day that Evenepoel is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many more Giro’s could he have won, besides the ones that he did actually win?
- No more, sorry
- 1 more
- 2 more
- 3 more
- 4 more
- 5 more
- 6 more
- 7 more
- 8 more
- 9 more or even more

This doesn't presuppose that said rider ever won or will ever win said race - Remco's imagined actual number of Giro wins, after retirement, could be 0. But this easy variation, of course, makes sense also even if said rider actually has already won said race.

The harder version is harder because here you have to give not a relative number of editions of said race that said rider could have won, but instead an absolute one:

Imagine the day that Evenepoel is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many Giro’s could he have won?
- None, sorry
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9 or more

This is obviously more difficult because if it was the Lombardia poll for Pogacar in 2020, it would be possible to vote for him as being someone who could never win a Lombardia, which posterity, since, has proven false. With that said, said voter can of course try again in the 2025 pre-race poll:

Imagine the day that Pogacar is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many GdL’s could he have won?
- 4, no more than he has actually won as of today's date, sorry
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13 or more

We get it.

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

One could also make a similar thread for basically every rider-race combination. For example:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2018 and/or an earlier edition
- 2019
- 2020
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

Or perhaps these are better voting options, for those who want to make it clear that they're a big believer in the rider:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2019 and/or an earlier edition
- 2020
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

Or we can even do this:

Which Giro’s could Evenepoel have won?
- 2020 and/or an earlier edition
- 2021
- 2022
- 2023
- 2024
- 2025
- I voted for at least one of the listed editions, but I also want to make it clear that he can't win a future edition
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

The concept makes sense even if said rider has already won said race:

Which Vuelta’s could Roglic also have won?
- 2016 and/or an earlier edition
- 2017
- 2018
- 2022
- 2023
- 2025
- I voted for at least one of the listed editions, but I also want to make it clear that he can't win a future edition
- In addition to the listed editions that I voted for, he can also win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, but he can win a future edition
- None of the listed editions, and he also can’t win a future edition

There is also this variation which makes good sense for retired riders:

How many TdF’s could Valverde have won?
- None, sorry
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9 or more

Said rider could even have won said race:

How many more TdF’s could Nibali have won?
- No more, sorry (so, 1 in total)
- 1 (so, 2 in total)
- 2 (so, 3 in total)
- 3 (so, 4 in total)
- 4 (so, 5 in total)
- 5 (so, 6 in total)
- 6 (so, 7 in total)
- 7 (so, 8 in total)
- 8 (so, 9 in total)
- 9 or more (so, 10 or more in total)

Said rider doesn’t even have to be retired yet, but this situation give rise to two different polls, an easier one and a harder one. The easier one goes:

Imagine the day that Evenepoel is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many more Giro’s could he have won, besides the ones that he did actually win?
- No more, sorry
- 1 more
- 2 more
- 3 more
- 4 more
- 5 more
- 6 more
- 7 more
- 8 more
- 9 more or even more

This doesn't presuppose that said rider ever won or will ever win said race - Remco's imagined actual number of Giro wins, after retirement, could be 0. But this easy variation, of course, makes sense also even if said rider actually has already won said race.

The harder version is harder because here you have to give not a relative number of editions of said race that said rider could have won, but instead an absolute one:

Imagine the day that Evenepoel is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many Giro’s could he have won?
- None, sorry
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9 or more

This is obviously more difficult because if it was the Lombardia poll for Pogacar in 2020, it would be possible to vote for him as being someone who could never win a Lombardia, which posterity, since, has proven false. With that said, said voter can of course try again in the 2025 pre-race poll:

Imagine the day that Pogacar is retired for good. You will say to yourself, how many GdL’s could he have won?
- 4, no more than he has actually won as of today's date, sorry
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13 or more

What? Also, the only question anyone cares about is, How many Tours should Contador have won?

 

[Pippo_San]

Woulda. Coulda. Shoulda.
He won what he won and that's that.

Although a case could be instated regarding the 2020 edition...I still can't believe he lost to THAT Pogi (who wasn't even the shadow of his actual self).
Stupid tactics, wrong decisions, and a bit of bad luck.

 

[Lorzenz08]

Didn’t Pogacar lose 15 seconds to Roglic on Col de la Loze that day in 2020?

Since his collapse on Loze in 2023 it wasn’t until the 2024 Giro (Livigno stage) and then the Tour I felt that Pogacar erased concerns about his ability at over 2,000 meters.

He did but I think the last few hundred meters Pogi almost came back signaling maybe that Roglic wasn't that superior

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

just rewatched the last kilometer. At the start of that kilometer, Pogacar is 8 seconds behind. Looks like he almost closes it with 400m to go but finishes 15 d comes back. Honestly no idea how he crushed Roglic on that final ITT two days later.

 

[Cookster15]

He did but I think the last few hundred meters Pogi almost came back signaling maybe that Roglic wasn't that superior

I think it was the reverse. Looking at the video of the last kilometer in the last few hundred metres Roglic skipped away and it was Pogi who appeared to crack after almost getting back to Rogla.

That day in 2020, Granon 2022 (when Roglic was also prominent) and Loze 2023 is why I had doubts on Pogacar at over 2.000 metres. All those doubts were erased in 2024 (and since).

But getting back to this thread, I was disappointed when Roglic was denied in the 2020 Tour. That was his big chance. Sadly I don't think he can win the Tour now.