Always ready here for any rider who contributes to lead the history pen.
However, I don't need someone to define who is the greatest, against which competitors through his era, and in which terrains, he was the greatest. It doesn't really bother me.
I watch bike races and take what comes, so I'm per-definition ready
And then I could stop here.
However, this thread ignites me.
It is both about the viewer's temperament and a trend as time goes by.
And not at least the trend's influence on how the viewer perceives a bike race.
When I started watching bike races, far, far away back in the analogue world, cycling was a bit more of a "here and now" thing, also by the commentators - not only a more measured use of language, but also the way of commenting, as a more descriptive commentary on the present. And even more pronounced with slow-news newspaper reports of races that took place the day before.
As a boy, I sporadically glanced lists of former race winners for an upcoming race and could set dreams in motion just because of the lists. Those dreams would be absolutely poor if it put blinders on me and I only thought about 1-2 riders and the rest as loosers. Couldn't be further away from my POV.
My clear experience at the time was that both TV commentators, radio commentators and newspapers left more up for the viewer and reader to assess.
And extremely rarely weave themselves into so-called "expert interpretations" or comparisons.
Heroes of bygone times were mentioned as curious tales.
But not with purpose of comparisons to different eras.
Hard for me to explain, but for me the world was different even though there was also idol worship back then.
Today, it's all turned upside down, where the urge to compare is glaring.
My own experience is that the media changed the method of covering cycling during the Lance dictatorship, mixed with the Internet becoming for the masses and even more so with SoMe.
Worst when the Tour coverage on TV2 Danmark back in 2004 acquired handball-commentator Thomas Kristensen as main commentator - and the cycling journalism dissapeared in favor of meaningless TikTok questions "How much have you suffered today? How tired are you? How happy are you?", which the entire channel made almost its DNA - everything had to be seen from almost below child height.
I simply cannot stand this simplistic approach. In my eyes it has no purpose. So I don't accept the premise of sticking one's nose in the dirt for one-sided focus.
For me, cycling is about making history while things are happening on the road, whether it's a Tour de France, a minor stage race, a monument, a semi-classic or a neo-classic. What I enjoy when I watch bike races is to feel the presence in the moment, to have all senses altert in the details.
Nothing could interest me less than the question of "ONCE FOR ALL" deciding who is the greatest. It shows disrespect for history in my eyes. Not disrespect to Merckx, but in general.
But as I wrote - I'm ready. Anytime
But frankly the question doesn't interest me.
Sorry.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram