Breaking down how Tadej Pogačar's long-range attack exploited his rival's weaknesses & highlighted just how much the sport has changed in recent seasons
Best analysis I've seen of why Pogacar attacked from so far out. We saw he was tiring at the end and he said this move was not pre-planned. But the move made sense in the context of the moment. Really something to see how he put all those tactics into consideration to make the winning move in an instant.
As amazing as Pogacar is this level of dominance is bad for cycling. It is boring to know that no one else can challenge him. People hated the Yankees back in the day when they won all the time and this is no different. At least if the finishes were close and exciting then maybe it would be less boring.
Disagree. I think he’s great, and great for the sport. The last 40 km of the race on Sunday was super fun to watch. Couldn’t be more excited for 2025, even though odds are we won’t see this level of dominance from him (or anyone else) anytime soon.
Keep in mind: there are 164 world tour race days this year. And so many many more at Pro and Conti levels. Pogacar has won about 20 this year. “Dominant” is so relative! Want boring? Try college football, where the good teams go 12-1 or 13-0 every single year. Yawn. (Obviously most Americans don’t agree with me on that! 🤣)
I think Pogacar is great for the sport too. Pro cycling is not broadly popular in much of the world, has a niche following even in many European countries. Generational talent draws people to a sport. Look what Michael Jordan did for the NBA, Roger Federer for tennis, etc. My kids are watching some of the races and prior to Pogacar arriving on the scene, they just yawned when I tried to get them interested.
The other thing that's compelling about Pogacar, as Spencer explained, is Pogacar's instincts for the sport. Both van der Poel and Evenepoel might have been able to capitalize on Pogacar's risky 100 km attack, but they made repeated tactical mistakes. It's not just amazing physical capabilities but instincts.
I'm obviously an American, so an NFL football fan. I might compare Peyton Manning to Tadej Pogacar. Peyton certainly had the requisite physical skills, but you just knew that if Manning's team needed a score on the final drive of the game, it was game over. You could turn off the TV. You knew the result before it happened.
I think Tadej actually might have below average intelligence. I don’t think he was being tactical at all. But be never seen good tactics from him. He seems simple in interviews and I don’t think it’s the English difficulties. He could broaden the sports appeal but it’s worse for normal fans and all the suspicions around his performance are a bit triggering for older fans.
Best analysis I've seen of why Pogacar attacked from so far out. We saw he was tiring at the end and he said this move was not pre-planned. But the move made sense in the context of the moment. Really something to see how he put all those tactics into consideration to make the winning move in an instant.
As amazing as Pogacar is this level of dominance is bad for cycling. It is boring to know that no one else can challenge him. People hated the Yankees back in the day when they won all the time and this is no different. At least if the finishes were close and exciting then maybe it would be less boring.
Disagree. I think he’s great, and great for the sport. The last 40 km of the race on Sunday was super fun to watch. Couldn’t be more excited for 2025, even though odds are we won’t see this level of dominance from him (or anyone else) anytime soon.
Keep in mind: there are 164 world tour race days this year. And so many many more at Pro and Conti levels. Pogacar has won about 20 this year. “Dominant” is so relative! Want boring? Try college football, where the good teams go 12-1 or 13-0 every single year. Yawn. (Obviously most Americans don’t agree with me on that! 🤣)
I think Pogacar is great for the sport too. Pro cycling is not broadly popular in much of the world, has a niche following even in many European countries. Generational talent draws people to a sport. Look what Michael Jordan did for the NBA, Roger Federer for tennis, etc. My kids are watching some of the races and prior to Pogacar arriving on the scene, they just yawned when I tried to get them interested.
The other thing that's compelling about Pogacar, as Spencer explained, is Pogacar's instincts for the sport. Both van der Poel and Evenepoel might have been able to capitalize on Pogacar's risky 100 km attack, but they made repeated tactical mistakes. It's not just amazing physical capabilities but instincts.
I'm obviously an American, so an NFL football fan. I might compare Peyton Manning to Tadej Pogacar. Peyton certainly had the requisite physical skills, but you just knew that if Manning's team needed a score on the final drive of the game, it was game over. You could turn off the TV. You knew the result before it happened.
I think Tadej actually might have below average intelligence. I don’t think he was being tactical at all. But be never seen good tactics from him. He seems simple in interviews and I don’t think it’s the English difficulties. He could broaden the sports appeal but it’s worse for normal fans and all the suspicions around his performance are a bit triggering for older fans.