Tour de France 2024 Debrief: Breaking Down Exactly Where/How Tadej Pogačar Dominated the Race

Breaking down what a dominant performance tells us about Tadej Pogačar's historic greatness and the challenge of defeating him at future Grand Tours

Thank you for reading the daily BTP coverage of the 2024 Tour de France. This coverage was only possible thanks to all BTP readers, particularly premium subscribers. BTP will take a short break but return for the Olympic Road Race and daily Vuelta a España coverage.

---

After taking a few days to ponder Tadej Pogačar’s historic performance to win his third career Tour de France, which saw him win a staggering six stages along the way and make completing the incredibly challenging Giro/Tour double win look easy, I wanted to pause to look back at how and where exactly he won the race over the rest of the final podium. Pogačar’s staggering stage win record and ability to take time fairly consistently across the three weeks allowed him to win by a margin of just over six minutes to his biggest rival, Jonas Vingegaard, the sport’s only other stage racer who can match Pogačar when he takes flight. Considering that Remco Evenepoel was the only other rider to finish within ten minutes, there is a lot to unpack here regarding how to view the feasibility of anyone challenging Pogačar at future Grand Tours.

Final GC Top Ten:
1) Tadej Pogačar (UAE Team Emirates) +0
2) Jonas Vingegaard (Visma-Lease a Bike) +6’17
3) Remco Evenepoel (Soudal-QuickStep) +9’18
4) João Almeida (UAE Team Emirates) +19’03
5) Mikel Landa (Soudal QuickStep) +20’06
6) Adam Yates (UAE Team Emirates) +24’07
7) Carlos Rodríguez (INEOS Grenadiers) +25’04
8) Matteo Jorgenson (Visma-Lease a Bike) +26’34
9) Derek Gee (Israel-Premier Tech) +27’21
10) Santiago Buitrago (Bahrain-Victorious) +29’03

Polka Dot (KOM) Jersey
1) Richard Carapaz (EF Education-EasyPost) 127pts
2) Tadej Pogačar (UAE Team Emirates) 102pts
3) Jonas Vingegaard (Visma-Lease a Bike) 70pts

Green Jersey
1) Biniam Girmay (Intermarché-Wanty)-387pts
2) Jasper Philipsen (Alpecin-Deceuninck) 354pts
3) Bryan Coquard (Cofidis)-208pts

Young Rider Jersey
1) Remco Evenepoel (Soudal-QuickStep) +0
2) Carlos Rodríguez (Ineos Grenadiers) +15’46
3) Matteo Jorgenson (Visma-Lease a Bike) +17’16

BTP's Tour de France Coverage is brought to you by RedWhite Apparel®

RedWhite makes Long Distance Bibshorts and their goal is to become your Go-To bibshort supplier. RedWhite is laser-focused on bibshorts and doesn’t produce any other product.

• RedWhite Apparel®’s signature bibshort, The BIB, contains a heat-molded pad that stays plush mile after mile. The BIB is the go-to option for riders doing AUDAX rides over 600 miles in length.

• Get your pair at www.redwhite.cc (free worldwide express shipping)

• Use their Sizing Helpdesk to get a personalised size recommendation

• BTP Testimonial: The RedWhite Long Distance Bibshort was more than comfortable during a recent 5+ hour BWR gravel race

---

To help us digest the final result and attempt to understand what exactly happened and where mistakes/winning moves were made, I’ve isolated every stage where the top three won/lost time relative to each other and how much time they won(+) or lost(-).

Where Time Was Won or Lost

Stage 4 Mountains (Downhill Finish)
Tadej Pogačar +0
Remco Evenepoel -45
Jonas Vingegaard -50

Stage 7 Time Trial (Hilly/Flat)
Remco Evenepoel +0
Tadej Pogačar -12
Jonas Vingegaard -37

Stage 11 Mountains (Uphill Finish)
Jonas Vingegaard +0
Tadej Pogačar -1
Remco Evenepoel -34

Stage 14 Mountains (Summit Finish)
Tadej Pogačar +0
Jonas Vingegaard -43
Remco Evenepoel -1’16

Stage 15 Mountains (Summit Finish)
Tadej Pogačar +0
Jonas Vingegaard -1’12
Remco Evenepoel -2’57

Stage 17 Mountains (Uphill Finish)
Remco Evenepoel +0
Tadej Pogačar -10
Jonas Vingegaard -12

Stage 19 Mountains (Summit Finish)
Tadej Pogačar +0
Jonas Vingegaard -1’52
Remco Evenepoel -1’52

Stage 20 Mountains (Summit Finish)
Tadej Pogačar +0
Jonas Vingegaard -11
Remco Evenepoel -1’03

Stage 21 Time Trial (Mountains)
Tadej Pogačar +0
Jonas Vingegaard -1’03
Remco Evenepoel -1’14

When the Top Four Won or Lost Time Relative to Tadej Pogačar:

Week 1 (Stages 1-9)
Evenepoel -33
Vingegaard -1’15

Week 2 (Stages 10-15)
Vingegaard -1’54
Evenepoel -4’46

Week 3 (Stages 16-21)
Vingegaard -3’08
Evenepoel -3’59

The above graph and week-by-week breakdown reflect remarkable consistency in Tadej Pogačar’s time gains throughout the three-week race. After starting ‘slow,’ he continued to build throughout the race, becoming increasingly lethal in terms of time taking as the race continued.

• It is impressive that he could run this same playbook with almost the same level of success at both the Giro and Tour, considering the higher level of competition at the Tour.

Course Type Where Time Was Won or Lost Relative to Pogačar

When looking at the course types where the other major General Classification (GC) riders won/lost time relative to Tadej Pogačar, just like the Giro d’Italia, we see a clear picture of absolute dominance, with his time gains spread between every type of terrain covered, with no other GC contender taking a single second on Pogačar through any subset of the course. This balanced dominance across the entire course across two consecutive Grand Tours is unheard of in modern cycling and continues to speak to just how much of a higher level Pogačar is at compared to his GC competition.

• Additionally, it makes challenging his lead incredibly difficult since there is no type of course or stage on which any other contender has an advantage. When a rider is the best on the climbs, time trials, sprints, crosswinds, and explosive hilly stages, there isn’t much surface area left to take advantage of.

Mountain Stages
Vingegaard -4’15 (lost)
Evenepoel -7’26 (lost)

• Summit Finishes
  Vingegaard -3’38 (lost)
  Evenepoel -6’26 (lost)

Time Trials
Evenepoel -1’02 (lost)
Vingegaard -1’28 (lost)

Time Bonuses
Vingegaard -34 (lost)
Evenepoel -50 (lost)

Pogačar/Vingegaard Time Difference Per Stage Type
Time Trial (2): 44 seconds per stage (Pogačar)
Mountains (6): 42.5 seconds per stage (Pogačar)
Time Bonuses (8): 4.25 seconds per stage (Pogačar)

Six Key Takeaways

1) Tadej Pogačar and UAE’s Giro/Tour Double Strategy Was Executed to Perfection: Despite most pundits thinking he would pay for his Giro d’Italia efforts, where he also racked up six stage wins and won with a massive overall lead, Pogačar essentially replicated his Giro domination at the Tour. In fact, apart from Vingegaard staying within six minutes of him, his domination at the Tour was even more comprehensive, at least from a time gap perspective, than at the Giro.

• While his six stage wins and massive Giro time gaps were attributed to the lack of top-tier competition, the gap between Pogačar and 3rd, 5th place, and 10th place overall shows he was actually far more dominant against the higher level of competition at the Tour.

  • Giro vs Tour Time Gaps:
    3rd: 10’24 (Giro) vs 9’18 (Tour)
    5th: 12’49 (Giro) vs 20’06 (Tour)
    10th: 21’11 (Giro) vs 29’03 (Tour)

• Part of these increased time gaps can certainly be put down to the course and race dynamics, but part of it is because Pogačar was simply stronger at the Tour than he was at the Giro:

  • Giro d’Italia Peak Climbing Performances:

    • Stage 20 (Final Climb of Monte Grappa):
      Duration: 45:00
      Power: 6.4w/kg, 418w (assuming 65kgs at his published average power)
      VAM (vertical meters gained per hour): 1700

    • Stage 15 Attack (at 7,500ft)
      Duration: 20:00
      Power: 6.9w/kg, 450w (assuming 65kgs at his published average power)

      VAM: 1500

  • Tour de France Peak Climbing Performances:

    • Stage 14 (Pla d'Adet)
      Duration: 24:35
      Power: 6.9w/kg, 443w (assuming 64kgs at calculated average power)
      VAM: 1837

    • Stage 15 (Plateau de Beille)
      Duration: 39:50
      Power: 6.98w/kg, 447w (assuming 64kgs at calculated average power)
      VAM: 1887

• Despite being lighter than he was at the Giro, Pogačar was able to generate similar raw watts for shorter, 20-minute efforts and more watts for longer, 39-minute efforts, meaning he was able to produce nearly 7w/kg for 40 minutes 5+ hours into a mountain stage taking place two weeks into a Grand Tour.

  • Ultimately, Pogačar being able to produce this power for 40 minutes at the end of Stage 15 to deliver a knockout blow to Vingegaard and put every other contender minutes in the rearview on a single climb is when he won the Tour de France.

• By winning this race, Pogačar has become only the second rider ever to win five mountain stages at a single Tour de France, and the first rider to win their first two Tour appearances, go on to lose the next two to a seemingly stronger rival, and then come back and win a third.

  • This is hugely important since, to do so, he had to completely rebuild his training methodology and redefine himself as a rider.

    • Outside of his increased power-to-weight numbers on long climbs at the end of tough stages, Pogačar won both the Giro and Tour by showing relative restraint through the first week before looking stronger and more lethal as the race went on.

      • This starkly contrasted to previous years, where he would come out of the gate with flame-throwing early rides before fading in the third week.

• Pogačar’s ability to improve between the Giro and Tour while employing the same strategy of gaining increasing time throughout the three-week races tells us that UAE’s management and Pogačar’s coaches managed this Giro/Tour double effort to absolute perfection.

2) Jonas Vingegaard and Visma’s Second-Place Finish is a Great Result That Promises More Close Future Battles With Pogačar: The defending champion and his team can walk away from this Tour happy that he rode a great race, finishing second overall and winning a stage, especially considering his terrible crash this Spring and extremely blunted preparation for the race. The fact that they could line up and beat every rider except Pogačar with such limited preparation is a testament to their peerless internal structure.

• While it could be seen as discouraging that Vingegaard produced some of the best climbing performances of his life, albeit with some unusual inconsistency, it should be seen as a positive for Vingegaard and Visma.

  • If he could finish second with a smaller gap than Pogačar suffered the previous year with such a disputed pre-race training block, there is nothing to suggest that he can’t return next year with better preparation and go head-to-head with Pogačar.

    • It may be tempting to think that these riders' current performances are the best they can produce, but as we’ve repeatedly seen, the top riders can raise their level every year.

• The massive time gaps between Vingegaard and Pogačar over the past two Tours may make it appear as though one is head and shoulders above the others, but, in reality, this is a mirage. In fact, the time won/lost between the two over the last four years is just 1’25, with Pogačar holding the slight upper hand.

  • If we eliminate time bonuses, the margin is even slimmer, with Vingegaard in the lead by just three seconds.

3) The Riddle of How to Defeat Pogačar Will Now Haunt His Rivals: The context around Vingegaard’s loss and the cumulative time difference may be encouraging, but it doesn’t completely erase the fact that the question of how to defeat Pogačar will haunt Visma and Vingegaard over the winter, especially now that they can’t simply count on riding him off the wheel on difficult mountain stages.

• I said most of this in my post-Giro roundup, but it is worth reposting here since Pogačar’s performance was essentially a copy/paste of his dominant performance at the season’s first Grand Tour, and the challenge of defeating him seems no easier now than it was back in May.

  • For example, while a team like Visma was able to crack Pogačar at past Tours by putting him under pressure with an all-day hard pace on the front on the hardest mountain stages, his newfound consistency and durability has made this seemingly impossible due to simple math.

    • Even if a team like Visma has their domestiques, who are likely heavier than Pogačar, get to the front to pace at or just below threshold, which may be around 410-430 watts, it would be insufficient to pressure him.

      • Since this is far below his threshold, which is likely currently around 460-470 watts, outside of illness, injury, or a severe fueling mistake (which we did see on Stage 11), he simply won’t be under pressure at this pace.

      • Not only will Pogačar not be stressed about this increase in pace, but it will also soften up the rest of the GC contenders so that his eventual gap when he does inevitably attack will be larger than it would have been otherwise.

        • Also, trying to press Pogačar with lighter riders wouldn’t work either since they won’t be able to push enough watts to get him out of Zone 3 in the wheels.

• Thinking outside the box also starts to have diminishing returns. Attempting to slip into early breakaways to make up chunks of time is likely a flawed strategy since his UAE team is now stronger and able to keep the pace hard enough to reel in the breakaway and drop the attacking rider(s), and/or punish them the following day by setting a hard pace that dropped any riders ambitious enough to attack the stage prior.

  • And, as Pogačar proved when he attacked on the final few mountain stages, his ability just to go so much faster than anyone outside of Vingegaard on the toughest climbs meant that even if some form of mountain stage raid was successful in leaving him 3-4 minutes adrift at the base of the final climb, he could have closed it in the course of a single climb if he genuinely needed to.

4) Modern Fueling and Racing Tactics Have Significantly Altered Climbing Dynamics and Increased Speeds: With the increased timing climbs, the bar for GC success is higher than ever. The way the teams ride the start of the climbs, by having their most elite domestiques push over 6w/kg at the start of the climb instead of the former SkyTrain tactic of putting your entire team at the front and having them pace at an increasingly asphyxiating rate by ramping up the pace slowly, immediately thins down the competition and means when their leaders finally attack, there is almost nobody left, and those who do, don’t have the energy to respond.

• When GC teams hit the final climbs in this Tour, they had fewer teammates remaining than in the recent past due to burning through them with hard pacing on previous climbs. Still, they would deploy these ultra-strong helpers in a manner that extracts the maximum toll on their competition in as little time as possible.

  • For example, when Visma hit the final climb of Plateau de Beille on Stage 14, only a single teammate, Matteo Jorgenson, remained to support Vingegaard. But when Jorgenson hit the slopes, his leadout for the first 13 minutes of the climb was done at 6.7w/kg.

    • Only the most elite GC contenders can even remain in the group at this pace, and those who do will be so limited that they won’t be able to respond to an eventual attack from the team’s leader.

  • UAE would deploy this same tactic with the similarly elite Adam Yates and having riders who could likely finish on the overall podium if they were racing for themselves, ensures that nobody outside the very best has a chance to stay in the front group.

• On the day’s earlier climbs, UAE would have the less climbing-inclined Nils Politt blow up GC rivals by having him pace at over 450 watts on the lower slopes of the Col de la Bonette. This would be too much raw power for lighter climbers to match on the less-steep slopes, meaning they would have to drop out of the front GC group and ride to the top at their own pace.

  • While it may seem strange that a bigger rider like Politt can drop climbers, it is essential to remember that modern fueling, which sees riders taking in extremely high-carbohydrate drinks throughout the day, allows a rider with a massive engine to produce high-wattage performance for longer than in the past, and that he is racing up only half the climb. At the same time, those in the GC competition still have multiple climbs left to ride at a high pace.

    • This means that Politt has a massive built-in advantage due to his ability to push much higher watts and the fact that, when his work is done halfway up the climb, he can sit up and ride at a much slower pace to the finish line.

  • This is only a good strategy for a team with Pogačar since it favors the strongest rider in the race.

    • One major byproduct is that it sets the stage for ultra-fast climbing times since it essentially eliminates the tactical battles we used to see play out on final climbs.

      • To contextualize just how much these tactics and fueling have supercharged modern racing, Derek Gee and Matteo Jorgenson, who finished in 8th and 9th overall, would have dropped peak Chris Froome with the power numbers they produced on the long climbs at this race.

5) A Collection of Impressive GC Tour de France Rookies Produced Standouts Performances: Behind Pogačar and Vingegaard’s peloton-exploding battle for the win, there were some incredible GC performances from Tour de France GC rookies:

Remco Evenepoel: The Tour rookie finished on the overall podium behind the two best GC contenders in the world with a shockingly consistent and balanced performance throughout the demanding three-week race. After displaying that he has made a massive leap forward with physical and mental consistency, it won't be easy to count him out at any Grand Tour that doesn’t contain Pogačar and Vingegaard.

• However, in those Grand Tours that do include the two best stage racers in the world, Evenepoel’s losses to both riders in the mountains, and even the final time trial, make a path to victory against a full-strength Vingegaard and Pogačar challenging to imagine.

João Almeida: In his first Tour de France, the 25-year-old finished an impressive 4th place overall despite working for his team leader Pogačar throughout the race.

• He may not have been able to challenge Evenepoel even if he was focused on his own GC chances, but this performance means that in six career Grand Tour finishes, he has finished in the top ten on every occasion and in the top five four times.

Matteo Jorgenson: In his first year as a dedicated stage racer, the 25-year-old American finished 8th place overall, including 4th in the final time trial despite crashing after going all-in for Jonas Vingegaard’s GC campaign.

• Jorgenson’s overall result may have flown under the radar, but it definitively answered any doubts about his potential as a future Grand Tour contender.

  • His ability to climb with the best, even exploding the race in the Pyrenees, and time trial so well at the end of three weeks means the sky’s the limit if he continues his rapid improvement.

Derek Gee: The second North American in the final top ten (meaning this was the first time two North Americans finished inside the top ten since 2010), quietly produced what may have been the most impressive and unexpected GC ride in this race.

• After being a complete unknown in the spring of 2023, Gee has continued to re-define what he is capable of, going from an elite breakaway artist in the 2023 Giro d’Italia to a breakout stage racing talent at the 2024 Critérium du Dauphiné, affirming his three-week potential with a top ten at his first Tour de France.

  • By finishing just over two minutes behind Ineos’ main GC talent, Carlos Rodríguez, Gee has continued to make the Israel-Premier Tech team management look incredibly savvy for locking him down through the next four seasons.

    • With the top stage races being consistently won by a handful of big-budgeted teams (Visma, UAE, Red-BullBora), due to their money allowing them to dump massive time and resources into aero optimization in time trials, putting staff on the side of the road to ensure riders have a constant flow of high-carbohydrate feed zones and long-term altitude training camps, Gee’s big decision will be deciding if he stays with IPT, and their limited stage racing resources, or pushes for a move elsewhere.

6) The Intriguing Battle for the Points and KOM Jerseys Saved the Third Week: Outside of the battle for the overall classification, two sub-classifications, the Mountains and Points, were unusually thrilling, close battles that saved the race from getting stale after Pogačar ended any doubt in the outcome of the GC and the sprint stages lacked any terrain variety or tension between the breakaway and the peloton. Additionally, the fact that Points Jersey (Green) winner Biniam Girmay and KOM (Polka Dot) winner Richard Carapaz became the first riders from their respective countries, Ecuador and Eritrea, to win leader’s jerseys added a much-needed level of interest to the classifications.

• Girmay’s razor-thin 33-point Green Jersey win came due to his strong start early in the race, which saw him win three stages and rack up six top fives before the second rest day.

  • Ultimately, his ability to stay out of trouble on Stages 3 and 6, where he racked up 107 points, while Philipsen netted just 37 due to being caught behind crashes and being relegated for aggressive maneuvering in the final kilometers, was ultimately the difference maker.

• Richard Carapaz’s multi-year GC slump and subsequent transition to elite stage hunter single-handedly breathed life back into the battle for the KOM Polka Dot Jersey.

  • After having just four KOM points after Stage 13, Carapaz went on a final week rampage that saw him get into mountain stage breakaways at will and rack up 123 KOM points to just barely overtake Pogačar’s massive haul.

    • Even if Pogačar wasn’t actively chasing points or competing against Carapaz, the race was so tight due to Pogačar’s stage win clinic in the mountains that if Carapaz hadn’t successfully bridged up to the breakaway on Stage 20 after initially missing the move, he would have missed out on the win by a single point.

Catch Up Quick (become a premium member to receive full access to daily stage breakdowns):
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Stage 5
Stage 6
Stage 7
Stage 8
Stage 9
Rest Day #1 Reflections
Stage 10
Stage 11
Stage 12
Stage 13
Stage 14
Stage 15
Rest Day #2 Reflections
Stage 16
Stage 17
Stage 18
Stage 19
Stage 20
Stage 21