Best Sprinter ever

[Franklin]

No, it's about the best sprinter.

1. This is the road forum.
2. The list clearly is about Road sprinters.

Thinking this is about mixed sprinters is ridonculous.

But I insist. Patrick Sercu was not only the all-time greatest trackie, he was also a fearsome road sprinter ! Arguably the best of his era and, in my opinion, the G.A.T. Or perhaps my favourite, let's put it that way.

It's very this is about road, so we have to lok at Sercu's palmares on the road. And there, how ever much you love him, he isn't near the greatest.

If you want more atacking maertens beats his palmares hands down.
If you look at stages Darrigade, Alejet, Cippo and Cav beat him.
He won many titles, but never the WC road.
He won less classics and jerseys than Zabel.
etc. etc.

Nobody says he wasn't a great cyclist, but by any objective standard he isn't the greatest road sprinter.

 

[Captain Sensible]

As good as Freddy Maertens was I don't think he should be in this poll as he was from a era when team mates were allowed to push there team leaders up hills so he could rest and let them get him up them as another rider in the poll had to for him ie Sean Kelly .

My heart wants to vote for Kelly but I think by the end of his career Cav might be looked back on as the best.

 

[TANK91]

lol at the Belgians, Patrick who?

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

One factor which hasn't been raised is that as participation in sports widen, and populations grow, it becomes harder and harder to achieve dominance.

Given the generally high standards nowadays, an average of ~73 would be an equivalent achievement to Bradman's 99, in terms of standard deviation.

 

[Franklin]

One factor which hasn't been raised is that as participation in sports widen, and populations grow, it becomes harder and harder to achieve dominance.

Given the generally high standards nowadays, an average of ~73 would be an equivalent achievement to Bradman's 99, in terms of standard deviation.

That's an interesting suggestion, but think it's not so clear cut. Clearly Merckx-like domination is impossible right now, but on the other hand with Sprinters this is different.

I'll try to explain my reasoning:
- Escapees have much less chance to make it than they used to, so it's very clear which stages will end in bunch sprints.
- Sprinting is more or less a straight up combat of speed and skills. Just like Usaint Bolt usually wins, it's also clear that given the same leadout Cav will almost always win. He simply is that much stronger. The reason he sometimes looses are related to tactical manouvering (and crashes).
- Clearly sprinters have less need to peak than other disciplines. History is filled with sprinters being good in two GT's, whereas the same can't be said about the GC riders.

Clearly Cavendish is phenomenal and his continued dominance is unprecedented, but just as there are factors that makes it harder to acchieve, there are also factors which makes this a bit easier than it used to be.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

That's fair in terms of number of opportunities (although the number has decreased from the early naughties when Petacchi racked up the wins) but I don't think it affects winning rate from sprints entered.

In a fair fight Cav wins a ridiculously high percentage, and given the high randomised element in a sprint, where slight changes in position can determine the result, it suggests a very large margin of superiority at the precise moment in the history of cycling where you would expect it to be hardest to gain dominance (the present).

 

[spalco]

I sounds trivial, but you also simply have to be there at the front in the final couple kms to win the sprint, which given the chaotic nature of road cycling is often easier said than done, and emphasises how impressive Cavendish's win ratio is.

 

[El Pistolero]

That's fair in terms of number of opportunities (although the number has decreased from the early naughties when Petacchi racked up the wins) but I don't think it affects winning rate from sprints entered.

In a fair fight Cav wins a ridiculously high percentage, and given the high randomised element in a sprint, where slight changes in position can determine the result, it suggests a very large margin of superiority at the precise moment in the history of cycling where you would expect it to be hardest to gain dominance (the present).

Ever thought about how Cav would do in the 70s? Something tells me he wouldn't fare so well.

So Cav 40 years back with the same training regiment as the riders of the 70s.

 

[spalco]

Was there a "market" back then for riders who drop to the gruppetto as soon a hill goes steep? If yes, then I do think he would have done reasonably well. Otherwise he'd probably have stayed on the track.

No reason to think he couldn't have won on the Champs Elysees in the 70s too (as soon as they started to finish there).

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Ever thought about how Cav would do in the 70s? Something tells me he wouldn't fare so well.

So Cav 40 years back with the same training regiment as the riders of the 70s.

Put, say, Boonen in the same situation and maybe he wins nothing on the cobbles?

Why don't you wire up a flux capacitor to Cav's bike and when he hits 88mph we may find out because he starts disappearing from all his pictures.

 

[El Pistolero]

Put, say, Boonen in the same situation and maybe he wins nothing on the cobbles?

Why don't you wire up a flux capacitor to Cav's bike and when he hits 88mph we may find out because he starts disappearing from all his pictures.

Cobbled races haven't changed all that much(if anything, Roubaix had less cobbles for some time). Sprints however have.

Ergo your example doesn't really hold up.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Cobbled races haven't changed all that much(if anything, Roubaix had less cobbles for some time). Sprints however have.

Ergo your example doesn't really hold up.

Actually, your point makes my point more valid. Two of the all time classics riders were racing in the early seventies. What's to not say they ride over Boonen? Given 70s training were no doubt more lax it would be easy to see Boonen go off on a few benders.

Speeds would also be slower so perhaps Cav fairs better.

Id est your argument has so many variables that is really amounts to nothing as your arguments normally do.

 

[Netserk]

No matter the year Boonen would dominate

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

No matter the year Boonen would dominate

Coming from someone as impartial as you that means a lot. And by a lot I, of course, mean nothing.

 

[El Pistolero]

Actually, your point makes my point more valid. Two of the all time classics riders were racing in the early seventies. What's to not say they ride over Boonen? Given 70s training were no doubt more lax it would be easy to see Boonen go off on a few benders.

Speeds would also be slower so perhaps Cav fairs better.

Id est your argument has so many variables that is really amounts to nothing as your arguments normally do.

Your variable is Boonen doing things because things are more lax? Lol.

Two of the all time classics riders only won the Ronde once and twice in their career. And Roger de Vlaeminck only won that one because Freddy Maertens was dqed and started to ride for Roger instead. Meaningless win. Those 2 were defeated a lot in the Ronde van Vlaanderen, they're not unbeatable you know.

Distance on average in any kind of race would be longer: suits Boonen much more than Cav.
Racing is more aggressive: suits Boonen much more than Cav.
There are no leadout trains: so pure sprinters would win much less.
Road conditions were worse than they are now, also more cobbles: suits Boonen much more than Cav.

Even on flat stages in the 70s you'd often see such aggressive racing that only a small group would arrive at the finish line together. Cav is used to being protected from the wind all the time by his team. He would again be at a disadvantage while Boonen wouldn't.

Yes it has many variables, and many aren't in Cav's favour.

 

[Netserk]

Coming from someone as impartial as you that means a lot. And by a lot I, of course, mean nothing.

I'm sure I'm not more impartial than you are to Cav.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

Ever thought about how Cav would do in the 70s? Something tells me he wouldn't fare so well.

So Cav 40 years back with the same training regiment as the riders of the 70s.

Agreed, it's a disgrace the way Cav is allowed to ride carbon frames whilst everyone else is on steel and spends their winters working down the mines.

------

Mockery aside, you do realise you didn't advance a single substantive point in that post, don't you. It said absolutely nothing beyond 'I think Cav is worse' and completely failed to understand or engage with the point that the competition pool is much larger now, so the probabilities side with Cav being better, given he's a standout in a larger population.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Two of the all time classics riders only won the Ronde once and twice in their career. And Roger de Vlaeminck only won that one because Freddy Maertens was dqed and started to ride for Roger instead. Meaningless win. Those 2 were defeated a lot in the Ronde van Vlaanderen, they're not unbeatable you know.

Distance on average in any kind of race would be longer: suits Boonen much more than Cav.
Racing is more aggressive: suits Boonen much more than Cav.
There are no leadout trains: so pure sprinters would win much less.
Road conditions were worse than they are now, also more cobbles: suits Boonen much more than Cav.

Even on flat stages in the 70s you'd often see such aggressive racing that only a small group would arrive at the finish line together. Cav is used to being protected from the wind all the time by his team. He would again be at a disadvantage while Boonen wouldn't.

Yes it has many variables, and many aren't in Cav's favour.

Those guys were beaten but that is arguably because the competition was more fierce. So what competition has Boonen faced other than Cancellara?
People raced a lot more in the 70s. You think that benefits Boonen? He much prefers to pick his races doesn't he? That said it sounds like he might be leading Cav out at the Tour.

GT stages would be raced slower which favours Cav. He might not have a train but then neither would other sprinters. In a straight drag race Cav normally wins and he has proven many times he does not need one. He has shown he can change his style if required i.e. lose weight and sacrifice speed. Could he ever have been a rounded one day rider.. unlikely but then he gets paid to win races. And he does that. A lot. Why would he bother changing his style.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

I'm sure I'm not more impartial than you are to Cav.

Possibly but why don't you show me all the examples of me fawning over Cav and I will do the same for you and Boonen?

 

[The Hitch]

I'm sure I'm not more impartial than you are to Cav.

Did you answer the question why you thought Boonen's comments at MSR were perfectly fine but Cancellara's at the Giro were so horrible?

 

[carllog]

Tom Steels

 

[El Pistolero]

Agreed, it's a disgrace the way Cav is allowed to ride carbon frames whilst everyone else is on steel and spends their winters working down the mines.

------

Mockery aside, you do realise you didn't advance a single substantive point in that post, don't you. It said absolutely nothing beyond 'I think Cav is worse' and completely failed to understand or engage with the point that the competition pool is much larger now, so the probabilities side with Cav being better, given he's a standout in a larger population.

But is he really? Cycling is less popular now in Europe than in the 70s. Sure some Western countries outside of Europe are now real threats in the cycling world, but most of the world still doesn't care one bit for cycling(no Asians or Africans).

Also you forgot to take into account specialization. Cav is not racing against GC riders, classic riders or hilly riders, but only against sprinters. If anything his competition pool is much smaller now considering that in the 70s cyclists were much more allround than nowadays.

Who are Cav's main sprint rivals?

- Andre Greipel
- Marcel Kittel
- John Degenkolb
- Elia Viviani
- Sacha Modolo
- Alessandro Petacchi(from 2008-2012)
- Daniele Bennati
- Tom Boonen(though due to circumstances Boonen could never reach the Tour in decent shape)
- Tyler Farrar
- Thor Hushovd

A couple of Germans, Italians, a Belgian, a Norwegian and an American. Very big pool there.

 

[El Pistolero]

Did you answer the question why you thought Boonen's comments at MSR were perfectly fine but Cancellara's at the Giro were so horrible?

Boonen said he was against the race neutralization because it allowed some people who already were dropped from the peloton to return after the race kicked off again.

Very different than Cancellara's comments.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Did you answer the question why you thought Boonen's comments at MSR were perfectly fine but Cancellara's at the Giro were so horrible?

What comments by boonen and cancellera?

 

[The Hitch]

But is he really? Cycling is less popular now in Europe than in the 70s. Sure some Western countries outside of Europe are now real threats in the cycling world, but most of the world still doesn't care one bit for cycling(no Asians or Africans).

Also you forgot to take into account specialization. Cav is not racing against GC riders, classic riders or hilly riders, but only against sprinters. If anything his competition pool is much smaller now considering that in the 70s cyclists were much more allround than nowadays.

Who are Cav's main sprint rivals?

- Andre Greipel
- Marcel Kittel
- John Degenkolb
- Elia Viviani
- Sacha Modolo
- Alessandro Petacchi(from 2008-2012)
- Daniele Bennati
- Tom Boonen(though due to circumstances Boonen could never reach the Tour in decent shape)
- Tyler Farrar
- Thor Hushovd

A couple of Germans, Italians, a Belgian, a Norwegian and an American. Very big pool there.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make. You list a bunch of riders some of whom competed with Cav others who (like Boonen) aren't half as fast as him.

If these names are supposed to mean something, maybe you should explain what it is.

You then list some nationalities.

And...