In the world of professional cycling, the motto 'Go big or go home!' is more than just a catchy phrase; it often reflects bold strategies that can spark controversy. Recently, this sentiment has been echoed in criticisms of Red Bull’s approach to team management and race planning, particularly regarding their tactics to sidestep direct competition with the talented Tadej Pogacar. But here's where it gets controversial—some argue this strategic restraint might be short-sighted or even counterproductive.
The off-season has been a notably busy period for the Red Bull team, especially after their significant signing of one of cycling's brightest stars, Remco Evenepoel. This move underscores their intent to strengthen their roster with top-tier talent, but it also raises complicated questions about team hierarchy and race strategy. According to veteran cyclist and analyst Chris Horner, there are signs of tension within Red Bull’s organizational structure, fueled by disagreements over how to manage their superstars, the division of race schedules, and even the selection for the upcoming Tour de France, where Primoz Roglic was surprisingly excluded from the longlist.
During his podcast, 'Beyond the Coverage,' Horner expressed his belief that Evenepoel’s arrival has caused a significant shake-up within the team, effectively pushing Roglic out of the spotlight. He recalls the major roster switch from Soudal Quick-Step to Red Bull last year, which involved a costly contract buyout for Evenepoel. This transfer, Horner explains, effectively demoted Roglic—a rider many consider among the best in the world—despite his impressive palmarès including victories in the Vuelta a España, Giro d’Italia, and prestigious one-day races.
Horner emphasizes that Roglic’s standing shouldn’t be dismissed lightly. While acknowledging that he may not be the top favorite for the 2025 season, he highlights Roglic’s career achievements as proof of his exceptional ability. However, the current team plans suggest a different picture—most notably, Roglic’s absence from the team roster for the 2026 Tour de France, where Evenepoel has been designated as team leader. Meanwhile, Roglic’s focus is now on conquering his fifth Vuelta a España, which would set a new record.
And this is the part most people miss—Horner suggests that Red Bull appears to be intentionally avoiding direct confrontations between Roglic and Evenepoel with Pogacar by scheduling their efforts separately. This tactic, which some critics might label as 'cherry-picking,' seems designed to minimize internal conflict and controlled competition, rather than to dominate the entire season as some might expect from a powerhouse like Red Bull. Horner questions the logic behind it, arguing that if the team truly believed in their racers’ capacities, they should go all-in against Pogacar, challenging the reigning champion head-on.
Horner’s critique extends further—he proposes that the team’s current strategy might be a calculated move to accumulate victories in races with less intense competition, thus appeasing sponsors. The point? Winning titles without necessarily facing the strongest opponents could still boast success but might fall short when it matters most, particularly against the dominant Pogacar. "Sponsors care about wins, not necessarily about the level of competition," Horner explains, hinting at a potentially superficial victory count that masks deeper strategic weaknesses.
Adding to the drama, Horner sketches a hypothetical scenario involving upcoming races like Liège-Bastogne-Liège and the Tour de Romandie. Suppose Evenepoel suffers a setback against Pogacar at Liège, but Roglic then defeats Pogacar in Romandie—this could force team management into a difficult position. Would they reconsider their approach to the Tour de France and reassemble their roster to unify their leadership? Considering the split schedule and the absence of Roglic from early-season races, Horner questions whether the team could effectively bring these two top-quality riders together if they decide to race collaboratively, or if the internal divide might undermine their championship ambitions.
In essence, this ongoing strategic debate highlights a fundamental tension in modern cycling: is a team’s goal to secure as many wins as possible, even if it means avoiding direct head-to-head battles with a formidable opponent? Or should they embrace bolder tactics, risking internal rivalry to confront the biggest challenge head-on? The answer is far from simple, and it’s one that invites passionate disagreement. Are Red Bull’s cautious, segmented approach ultimately smart or shortsighted? Do you believe teams should prioritize clean, unified front-line battles against their fiercest rivals? Or is it smarter to selectively target races where the opposition is weaker? Share your thoughts in the comments—this debate is far from over.
