Best Sprinter ever

[El Pistolero]

When Maertens won so many Vuelta stages the organizers had included very few mountain stages just so they could attract him. He sarcastically said "do they have mountains in Spain?". Though I think he won or came close to winning a mountain stage in that Vuelta. Plus he dominated the time trials.

He viewed the Vuelta as a mere prep race for his big goal that season: the Giro. Vuelta wasn't as prestigious as it is nowadays. That explains why Merckx only rode it once.

Maertens crashed out after 7 stage wins(after only one week) in that Giro. He would've most likely won the GC as well that year because his domestique won the overall instead. That sparked a rivalry between them and the manager of the team started focusing more on Pollentier. Pollentier also won the Tour de Suisse that year, which was considered the fourth GT then. Maertens also won a stage there, but he never should've ridden there with his injuries.

 

[Echoes]

Actually this is not really true. Cavendish and Jelle Nijdam were pursuit champions before turning road sprinters. Whereas Theo Bos still is struggling.

Cav was a Madison specialist, just like Sercu. Nijdam was a pursuit specialist on the track but can hardly be considered a road sprinter in any ways. He was also pursuit rider on the road. A last km flyer. An extinct species.

Bos is struggling, that's true. But that's because he lacks stamina to endure a 200km race. In a raw sprint - 500m - I'm not sure, he's beaten by Cavendish, quite on the contrary.

Bos having difficulties on the road highlights Sercu's greatness, who evolved from a track sprinter, to a track madison specialist and ultimately to a road sprinter (+ baroudeur at his moments). He even tried to stayer (though that failed).

They won a lot more than GT stages... and I wonder why you think Cippo does not belong in this section.

I'm not entitled to say why.

Yes, as I'm not as young a you might think.

Basso and Maertens managed a title. Knetemann and Moser too (but those two aren't archetypical sprinters).

What?

Basso won in a 7-man group, while Maertens only beat Moser at Ostuni, the only one who could follow him. So yeah, I guess THOSE two were not archetypical sprinters. In any case, they did not win as sprinters.

The Kneet and Moser were not sprinters at all, for me...

The only bunch sprint at the Worlds in those days were 1969, I think but Sercu was still only a part-time roadie that year.

Perhaps you fail to realize that not only do point jersey have value for sprinters, some classics also end in bunch finishes.

Classics normally don't end in bunch sprints, Paris-Tours aside, and even Paris-Tours in the late 70's was a hilly race since the route was in the opposite direction. Otherwise there weren't any single classic finishing in a bunch sprint. And fortunately, it's now the case again.

Jerseys are mere entertainment for me.

Van Steenbergen, Van Looy (!!!), Basso, Bitossi, Sercu, Darrigade, Reybroeck, De Vlaeminck (though he was more allround, he was a very good sprinter), Raas (like De Vlaeminck, a tad more sprint oriented), Bontempi.

I thought it was not serious to mention him.

That's actually not really true as in the past there had been great sprinters who didn't do much on the track.

Who? Normally, Sixes were a prerequisite for every roadie who wished to be fit for Milan-Sanremo. Very few dropped them.

You can make a best track sprinter ever poll?

Again, Sercu's greatness was not just his being a great trackie, but his being a trackie AND a roadie ! A complete sprinter.

Yes, there seem to be more sprints in the GT's. But on the other hand, guys like Maertens also racked up massive career wins, so it's not that clear cut.

More sprints because stronger domestiques who would systematically catch the breakaways and prevent any attack from Nijdam-like flyers . And that has nothing to do with sprinters' skills.
You can't blame 70's sprinters for not having such powerful teams totally dedicated to their sprinters.

 

[Franklin]

Nijdam was a pursuit specialist on the track but can hardly be considered a road sprinter in any ways.

You know a lot about cycling, but here you are a tad off. Nijdam won bunchsprints (all beit drawn out).

I'm not entitled to say why.

If it's the "D" word I give a huge shrug. Alejet has the same issue and for the 60-70 generation there's also little faith (though the impact certainly changed).

Basso won in a 7-man group, while Maertens only beat Moser at Ostuni, the only one who could follow him. So yeah, I guess THOSE two were not archetypical sprinters. In any case, they did not win as sprinters.

And yet the courses weren't especially hard. The breaks were more a sign of the era then the course itself. Cycling simply was different (more fun to watch).

The Kneet and Moser were not sprinters at all, for me...

Another example of flyers winning bunch sprints, but my point is more that these guys were rather lousy climbers. The Nurburgring could have ended in a bunch sprint.

The only bunch sprint at the Worlds in those days were 1969, I think but Sercu was still only a part-time roadie that year.

As I said, I think Sercu's main issue was he never was the main Belgian ace for a WC. Bluntly put he would never win in those days. It's not a slam, but it's something the others did manage. And thus it does count.

Classics normally don't end in bunch sprints, Paris-Tours aside, and even Paris-Tours in the late 70's was a hilly race since the route was in the opposite direction. Otherwise there weren't any single classic finishing in a bunch sprint.

Errr, you might have missed MSR in those years.

http://d4nuk0dd6nrma.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/CORVOS_00000190-097.jpg

MSR has always been between the bunch finish and the late break. As an aside, this classic brings up the name Miguel Poblet who won MSR twice in a bunch sprint in the late fifites.. so even then it ended in bunch finishes in some years.

I thought it was not serious to mention him.

You made your point succintly. Though I still would say it's ridiculous to call him the best road sprinter. But if you don't concede the distinction he becomes a valid option.

Who? Normally, Sixes were a prerequisite for every roadie who wished to be fit for Milan-Sanremo. Very few dropped them.

Riding a six is a lot different than being Post or Sercu. There were quite a few very good road racers who weren't being great at the track, though as you said, they loved the money the sixes offered.

Again, Sercu's greatness was not just his being a great trackie, but his being a trackie AND a roadie ! A complete sprinter.

And I'd say it's not the subject of this poll as is made clear by the list the OP put up (which is indeed a rather flawed list).

More sprints because stronger domestiques who would systematically catch the breakaways and prevent any attack from Nijdam-like flyers . And that has nothing to do with sprinters' skills.
You can't blame 70's sprinters for not having such powerful teams totally dedicated to their sprinters.

I'm not blaming anyone. But you can't say sprinters now have it easier to rack up wins if the win counts of 60-70-80 racers were actually higher. There were a lot more races back then.

It's a different era and comparisons are extremely hard. It's why you end up with either palmares, or perhaps recorded top speeds. Otherwise it becomes a "Mr. Popular" contest. In that case it's always the FOTM who will win. (In this case the FOTM actually seems well on his way to smash all records, but still).

 

[Echoes]

You know a lot about cycling, but here you are a tad off. Nijdam won bunchsprints (all beit drawn out).

Not many. Paris-Tours 1989 is the one I have in mind. I'll always remember him as a flyer, just like Bitossi or Teirlinck.

And yet the courses weren't especially hard. The breaks were more a sign of the era then the course itself. Cycling simply was different (more fun to watch). [...] The Nurburgring could have ended in a bunch sprint.

Yes I agree.

Another example of flyers winning bunch sprints, but my point is more that these guys were rather lousy climbers.

David Boucher is also a lousy climber, that does not make him a sprinter.

If I'm not mistaken Knetemann would win bunch sprints if the finish is uphill but on a flat finish he had no chance.

Errr, you might have missed MSR in those years.

http://d4nuk0dd6nrma.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/CORVOS_00000190-097.jpg

You'd believe it if I say I was born 4 years after that.

In 1979 the group was very tiny, 15 men, with a huge gap with the rest of the field. I don't call it a bunch sprint. The only true bunch sprint there was, for me, was the following year with Gavazzi's win.

MSR has always been between the bunch finish and the late break. As an aside, this classic brings up the name Miguel Poblet who won MSR twice in a bunch sprint in the late fifites.. so even then it ended in bunch finishes in some years.

Poblet won before the Poggio was added. The first of his wins was a breakaway win. Back then, Milan-Sanremo had to deal with the constant asphaltisation of strade bianche roads. Just like the other classics.

When the Poggio was added there was no more bunch sprint, until 1980.

You made your point succintly. Though I still would say it's ridiculous to call him the best road sprinter. But if you don't concede the distinction he becomes a valid option.

Thank you, lol.
Between 1970 and 75 there are arguments to say he was the best.

I'm not blaming anyone. But you can't say sprinters now have it easier to rack up wins if the win counts of 60-70-80 racers were actually higher. There were a lot more races back then.

Win counts do not necessarily mean more sprints.
Though it's usually due to kermess wins, and criterium wins.

 

[Miburo]

Hearing these things about Maertens, makes me think of Sagan.

I think the closest thing to compare Maertens to is Sagan

 

[Ruby United]

Hearing these things about Maertens, makes me think of Sagan.

I think the closest thing to compare Maertens to is Sagan

Sagan isn't as good on mountains as Maertens

Though he very well might become better.