The comparison offers itself;
Tadej Pogacar is dominant in a fashion unseen since the times of the original 'Cannibal'
Eddy Merckx. Half a century ago, there was no other rider in the peloton that would be so feared and hated, yet at the same time as respected as the Belgian all-rounder who had won 11 Grand Tours, 19 Monuments and three world titles.
And he achieved all that by the age of 32 (technically his last Monument victory - Milano-Sanremo 1976 was when he was still just 30 years old). "Pogacar still has a long way to go to match Merckx's palmares," says
Johan Museeuw in his analysis for
Wieler Revue.
However we should remember that the cycling has changed and evolved over the fifty years. Where Merckx could afford to ride Giro-Tour double and pick up a handful big Classics along the way year in, year out. The competition nowadays is much fiercer and that's why Pogacar's approach needs to more thought through.
"But I don't think it's necessary to make comparisons between generations. Pogacar is an extraordinary rider who will continue to dominate in the future. In a cycling sport where the level is currently extremely high. You can certainly speak of a similarity with Merckx. He also stood out in his time."
There's only one man able to hold back the avalanche of Pogacar's victories these days - perhaps the best one-day racer of our generation: Mathieu van der Poel. "Only in certain specific races he has to acknowledge Mathieu van der Poel as his superior, but that is the only one."
Museeuw grew up in the era of Merckx, which explains his attachment to the Cannibal. "I was still a child but of course I was a fan of Eddy Merckx then. I would sit in front of the television with my parents and watch Merckx riding solo in front."
The key similarty for the analyst is that they're both likable figures. Each in their own regard, at least as long as you aren't a supporter of their rivals.
"You can't dislike either Merckx or Pogacar. Pogacar is a rider who always smiles and is positive in front of the camera. He sometimes makes a joke and I like to see that in a rider. He is certainly not arrogant. But again: the comparison with Merckx is nonsense. That was a different time, different material, different preparation, different nutrition. Merckx knew nothing about good nutrition."
(Just notice how long this is. Sorry.) I wonder why people rank van der Poel above Pogacar as a classics rider, like Museeuw does. Using Procyclingstats for what follows:
Pogacar has 22 classics wins, of which 9 are monuments and 19 are at world tour level, and then there’s also one national and one world championship. His first classics win was 2021.
Van der Poel has 26 classics wins, of which 8 are monuments and 17 are at world tour level, and there are 2 national and one world championship. His first classics win was in 2014.
If we compare only the seasons from 2021 to now (meaning, from Pogacar’s first season with a classics won forward), van der Poel has 16 classics wins, of which 7 are monuments and 12 are at world tour level, and there’s a world championship. If we compare the seasons since Pogacar turned pro in 2019, then they are even at 22 classics wins, back to the 9 vs. 8 comparison of monuments, more of Pogacar’s are at world tour level (19 vs 16 of their 22), and they are even with 1 national and 1 world championship each.
So it is damn close, but when I look at the stats alone, Pogacar comes out as the better classics rider in a head to head comparison, except at San Remo and Roubaix (his 4th place in a 2 man sprint at his first Flanders race has been more than rectified since). And yes, Pogacar will basically always lose the sprint at the end of a race to van der Poel, which requires him to use different tactics.
So I get it, van der Poel is amazing, I absolutely love watching him race, I still think his Amstel win is one of the more superhuman feats I’ve seen in biking, and I got into CX and mountain biking because of him. But Pogacar, on the road, has a better head-to-head record. Sure, he also wins grand tours, but does that make him a worse classics rider? It shouldn’t. His record shows how amazing he is.
I have no idea how the points are weighted but hopefully it’s somehow fair and in that case I guess the reason is because 1. Some races are worth more points, 2. You also get points when you don’t win. Maybe MVDP won something in 2014 (or did you mistype?) but his real wins only started in 2019..
I don't know where you are referring to "points," given that I was looking at wins in different categories (overall, monuments, world tour) and trying to make different comparisons to illustrate my point. Could you clarify?
You were wondering how come MVDP is rated higher by whoever and the way JM refers to a website. Obviously they’re all somehow ranking which means attributing a score to performance. As I said, no idea how but one reason he may be ranked higher is if more than just wins are counted. Like at the Olympics, some rank by gold, some prefer considering all medals, usually in order for a preferred country/athlete to look better. At some moment, in order to rank more than wins, every ranking or algorithm has to attribute points or value to different positions in order to tally and compare.