OPINION | Mathieu van der Poel is the 'Vingegaard' of the classics

I tried to illustrate this article with a picture of Mathieu van der Poel and Jonas Vingegaard together, but I couldn't find one.

I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but the fact that it's very difficult to find one with both of them perfectly exemplifies my idea: I think that a sector of cycling fans are very critical of the Danish rider for choosing his calendar in the same way as the Dutch rider, who nevertheless seems to have the approval of all.

Both ride like Armstrong, only that in Vingegaard it is not something new, but with Mathieu van der Poel it is. Let me explain...

Since Miguel Induráin won his last two Tour de France, and after he stopped racing the Giro and several classics along with the Grande Boucle, it was believed that whoever wanted to win the Tour had to practically discard any other goal during the season. Essentially, the entire season should revolve around the Tour.

To do so most riders would ride 2 or 3 one-week stage races, to get in shape for the Grande Boucle, which is how Vingegaard prepares for the Tour. Then, from time to time, riders would race the Vuelta after the Tour, a tactic both Vingegaard and Chris Froome experimented with.

This has been completely broken by Tadej Pogacar, who does not have the yellow jersey as his only goal for the year, and who has dared to race the Giro and the cobbled monuments as well. This has led to unbridled criticism of his Danish rival, who is simply doing what he normally does to try to win cycling's most important race in July.

And here we come to the moment of comparing Van der Poel and Vingegaard.

The Alpecin rider plays the same as the Visma rider, except he does the polar opposite: with Monuments in mind. Not even in classics. He races the minimum, even cyclocross, to arrive in shape for Milano-Sanremo, Flanders and Roubaix. He doesn't care about the rest.

If one year it suits him to ride the E3, he rides it. If another year Gent-Wevelgem, he rides it. But he doesn't have a full classics season like someone like Mads Pedersen, nor will he be involved in the Ardennes in the coming weeks.

His calendar is very short. In grand tours his track record is small in terms of his talent (just compare it with Van Aert's) and, despite having surpassed Tom Boonen in number of monuments, he is a long way behind Tom Boonen in the number of classics won.

There was a day, especially since the beginnings of Lance Armstrong, when it seemed that the only thing that mattered for most cycling fans was the Tour. Now the day has come when it seems that the only thing that matters to some are the Monuments. Some may feel that the Giro and Vuelta don't matter too.

And there are two cyclists who exemplify this perfectly: Jonas Vingegaard and Mathieu van der Poel: both ride the minimum to win the maximum.

I'm not criticizing either of them, I think their strategies are wonderful. I'm just saying that if you criticize one, criticize the other as well. Are they are two sides of the same coin?