De Vlaeminck trashes Gilbert

[Echoes]

Just read Roger De Vlaeminck Mijn memoires, onverbloemd - De koers is nooit gedaan

These lines were just fun :

"Italië was 30, 40 jaar geleden samen met België het land van het wielrennen. Toen hadden ze nog coureurs, nu hebben ze er geen enkele meer. Nederland ook niet en België heeft er nog maar één: Tom Boonen. Wat er met Gilbert aan de hand was, daar durf ik niet over uit te spreken. Zegt u me eens wat er aan de hand was? Het is onmogelijk dat je zo slecht bent. Vorig jaar reed hij van iedereen weg. Waarin zit het verschil?"

My translation:

30, 40 years ago Italy was along with Belgium, the cycling country. They still had riders back then. Now they don't have any left. Neither do the Netherlands and Belgium has only one left: Tom Boonen. Wat's going on with Gilbert I don't dare speak out. Would you tell me what's going on with him? It's impossible to be so bad. Last year, he dropped everybody. Where's the difference?

It was published before the Vuelta though.

A lot is implied in these comments !

Edit: My mistake, this was meant to be a new thread but I first posted it in another one. My apologies the OP if he read it.

 

[c&cfan]

roger is ignorant in anything related to modern cycling. he looks almost senile. he still lives in 1970. Guess what roger: Tom, fabian, valverde and alberto would kick your *** in any race and are more talented and better riders than you ever were. if you do not know modern cycling and trade-offs riders must do, it's your problem.

roger is irrelevant. Boonen is the Mr Roubaix.

 

[ebandit]

trashes

'trashes?' is that what you read

i read 'i don't dare speak out'

 

["Jeff"]

Sometimes I like Roger but most of the time I dont like Roger. He's a bit whiney. 'Everything was so much better in the early days'' kinda thing.

Roger needs to understand that in the '70s there was not much competition. He's not going to like this but its the cold hard truth.

Vets like Raymond Poulidor could still finish top 3 in the Tour and in the classics you always saw the same group of riders. The 70's was the worst era regarding competition.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

Roger pooped all over Boonen, and called the rest of the field second class riders after Paris Roubaix. He is a miserable, sad man and can not accept that Tom Boonen will displace him as the best classics rider from Belgium, if not the whole world.

 

[Big Doopie]

Roger pooped all over Boonen, and called the rest of the field second class riders after Paris Roubaix. He is a miserable, sad man and can not accept that Tom Boonen will displace him as the best classics rider from Belgium, if not the whole world.

huh?

first off -- Merckx is by far the greatest classics rider from the entire world (let alone Belgium).

secondly, devlaeminck was an absolutely awesome rider, better than boonen.

and -- for that matter -- i agree with this year's P-R. boonen hardly had to deal with Merckx, Verbeeck, Goodefroot, Moser, Gimondi, Maertens, Hinault, DeMeyer, Dierickx, and on and on...the 70s had the deepest classics field in all of cycling.

 

[MacRoadie]

huh?

first off -- Merckx is by far the greatest classics rider from the entire world (let alone Belgium).

secondly, devlaeminck was an absolutely awesome rider, better than boonen.

and -- for that matter -- i agree with this year's P-R. boonen hardly had to deal with Merckx, Verbeeck, Goodefroot, Moser, Gimondi, Maertens, Hinault, DeMeyer, Dierickx, and on and on...the 70s had the deepest classics field in all of cycling.

I'd argue that Merckx, DeMeyer, DeVlaeminck, and Maertens were all better Belgian classics riders. Especially given that they all had to go up against each other.

I think Boonen is cast from the same mold, but the quality of competition, especially from his fellow Belgians just isn't there.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

huh?

first off -- Merckx is by far the greatest classics rider from the entire world (let alone Belgium).

secondly, devlaeminck was an absolutely awesome rider, better than boonen.

and -- for that matter -- i agree with this year's P-R. boonen hardly had to deal with Merckx, Verbeeck, Goodefroot, Moser, Gimondi, Maertens, Hinault, DeMeyer, Dierickx, and on and on...the 70s had the deepest classics field in all of cycling.

Different era....all the riders he refers to are good / great. The point is that de Vlaeminck makes extremely negative comments about Belgian riders....maybe true in some instances but poorly chosen words. He does come across as a miserable old fart unable to accept that racing has changed, and the media doesn't talk about the 'good old days' when he was the man.

There is no need to debate who was better than who.

 

[rghysens]

30, 40 years ago Italy was along with Belgium, the cycling country. They still had riders back then. Now they don't have any left. Neither do the Netherlands and Belgium has only one left: Tom Boonen. Wat's going on with Gilbert I don't dare speak out. Would you tell me what's going on with him? It's impossible to be so bad. Last year, he dropped everybody. Where's the difference?

Exactly 1 year ago he said the exact opposite (aout Boonen and Gilbert) and I'm not using this as a hyperbole.
Guys like Merckx and De Vlaeminck were among the greatest cyclists ever, but they should be ignored when saying anything about modern cycling or current cyclists.

 

[rghysens]

Roger pooped all over Boonen, and called the rest of the field second class riders after Paris Roubaix.

No, he called them 3rd-rate.

 

[hiero2]

roger is ignorant in anything related to modern cycling. he looks almost senile. he still lives in 1970. Guess what roger: Tom, fabian, valverde and alberto would kick your *** in any race and are more talented and better riders than you ever were. if you do not know modern cycling and trade-offs riders must do, it's your problem. . . .

. . .a bit whiney. 'Everything was so much better in the early days'' . . .
Roger needs to understand that in the '70s there was not much competition. . . .

Roger pooped all over Boonen, and called the rest of the field second class riders after Paris Roubaix. He is a miserable, sad man . . .

huh?

first off -- Merckx is by far the greatest classics rider from the entire world (let alone Belgium).

secondly, devlaeminck was an absolutely awesome rider, better than boonen.
. . .

I'd argue that Merckx, DeMeyer, DeVlaeminck, and Maertens were all better Belgian classics riders. Especially given that they all had to go up against each other.

I think Boonen is cast from the same mold, but the quality of competition, especially from his fellow Belgians just isn't there.

Different era....all the riders he refers to are good / great. The point is that de Vlaeminck makes extremely negative comments about Belgian riders....maybe true in some instances but poorly chosen words. He does come across as a miserable old fart unable to accept that racing has changed, and the media doesn't talk about the 'good old days' when he was the man.

There is no need to debate who was better than who.

Wow. Either RDV is a whining nobody, or he is greater than any living cyclist. How about something in the middle? Oh! Good, I see we do have a couple of responses in the middle on that.

Asfaic, anyone who has ridden as a pro is qualified, as a result, to comment as an insider. Anyone who has ridden more than one year, is more qualified. Anyone who has won, is more qualified to discuss other winners. All that experience does NOT mean those comments are more brilliant or intelligent than some joe-bloke from the crowd, but they are MORE LIKELY to offer us insight. Still doesn't mean they should be crowned as the All-Knowing King, just because of that experience, but they have earned SOME respect, yes?

Now, as for the level of competition - I would be willing to bet that the top riders would be competitive today - or in 1914 - or in 2050. The pack however, would be a different story - the money is much better today, which automatically means that good riders are choosing to stay in the peloton instead of choosing better-paying jobs. They are just being people, you know?

As for what RDV said, about Italy and Belgium not having cyclists today, I see his point. Compared to then, they don't. It is not because the potential cyclists do not exist, it is because, in the Euro countries, young sportsmen now have more options. It is just like in the USA, where black young men have grown up to look first at basketball, and 2nd to football, to make their fortunes. When their subculture has a broader base, and more financial success, this trend will end. From WW2 onwards, young Italian and Belgian men looked to bicycle racing for fame and fortune. That changed. THAT is what RdV is commenting on.