• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Why is Pogacar riding the Giro?

Why is Pogacar riding the Giro?

  • He thinks Giro + Tour will optimize his form for WC / Olympics

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • His sponsors want him to win the Giro

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • He wants to give Roglic a fair chance at a Tour to make up for the 2020 ninja move

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    66
I think it's strange you don't have "he wants to win the Giro and doesn't believe it will compromise his preparation for the Tour, also considering the relatively easy Giro parcours" which in my opinion is by far the most likely explanation.
That was a miss on my part and it looks like there’s no way to add that option.

I wouldn’t select this one because, based on history, including his own, it’d be odd to think riding the Giro wouldn’t at least somewhat compromise his form.
 

The Vuelta a España had been pencilled in Pogačar's race programme this year by the UAE Team Emirates team management, with sports director Joxean Fernández Matxin saying prior to the Tour 'if all goes well, he'll be there.'

But doing the Giro has of course also historically proved to be the best prep...
 
How hard is it to use a different conjunction if you believe the quoted part was conditional on the latter part?

I added that clause after initially posting (before you answered though) so it might not be the most clearly structured sentence of all time. I don't really see how it can confuse you, though, as I am not trying to suggest that the easy route is the sole determinant of his decision but only playing a part in the consideration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
I added that clause after initially posting (before you answered though) so it might not be the most clearly structured sentence of all time. I don't really see how it can confuse you, though, as I am not trying to suggest that the easy route is the sole determinant of his decision but only playing a part in the consideration.
So do you believe the decision was conditional on how hard the route was relative to other years or not? Playing a part without being sufficient in itself doesn't answer if it is necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
So do you believe the decision was conditional on how hard the route was relative to other years or not? Playing a part without being sufficient in itself doesn't answer if it is necessary.
I don't understand this question. Are you suggesting that there can always be only one reason behind a decision? Or what? Sorry for not wanting to attend your philosophy class on a Friday evening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
I don't believe that he and his coach don't think doing the Giro will compromise his form for the Tour. That said, whether he's at 100% or 95%, he should come second in the Tour pretty comfortably, so it probably won't compromise his chances of winning the Tour very much. I think option A, hedging against Vingegaard, is a reasonable explanation, but I also think that he wants to race - and win - a lot of different, important races. Oh and money of course.
 

TRENDING THREADS