Denis Menchov v Cadel Evans

[Libertine Seguros]

By stats, menchov will be in 20 to 30 years viewed as the better rider. But i dont know, It depends what you rate higher, Cadel 2x2nd place tdf or menchovs 2xvueltas. Cadels worlds and fleche or menchovs giro win. I think they are very similar and the only thing that separates them is that menchov is smarter. Like everyone is saying cadel has alittle more natural ability but isnt as smart wen racing and picking his races.

But in the future, people will see the winners of past Tours, but they will have to dig deeper to remember who was 2nd. Quick - without looking, who was 2nd to Kelly in his Vuelta win? Who was 2nd in the 1980 Tour? This is harder to remember than the winners, unless there was some famous dispute or argument, or they become famous solely for being second, like Raymond Poulidor. Evans may have, in coming 2nd, beaten some stronger riders than those Menchov beat to win his Vuelta. But that is irrelevant once we arrive 20-30 years in the future and the depth of the field is totally forgotten.

That's why I brought up the Beloki vs. Savoldelli discussion. Beloki was the better rider, but he will be known in the future for crashing and causing Armstrong's detour through the field just as well as any of his great rides, while Savoldelli will be remembered as a two-time Grand Tour winner. That simply makes him sound stronger to the ears of impressionable newcomers to the sport who never saw them ride. People who know enough about cycling to know about the three Grand Tours will be more impressed by Menchov's exploits; people who don't know enough about cycling to know about the three Grand Tours won't remember riders who didn't win it.

As one generation of cycling fans tails off, another one will arrive. In 20-30 years those who remember Menchov and Evans will be the minority of old fuddy-duddies, and archive footage (most of which will show neither attacking) and statistics will be all there is for these people to judge Menchov and Evans by. And if they were to retire with their current palmarès? Statistically Menchov is superior.

I'm not saying that Menchov is the better rider, I'm saying that, by current palmarès, he will be remembered as the better rider unless Evans can pick up at least one more major win, preferably a Grand Tour.

 

[richo36]

But in the future, people will see the winners of past Tours, but they will have to dig deeper to remember who was 2nd. Quick - without looking, who was 2nd to Kelly in his Vuelta win? Who was 2nd in the 1980 Tour? This is harder to remember than the winners, unless there was some famous dispute or argument, or they become famous solely for being second, like Raymond Poulidor. Evans may have, in coming 2nd, beaten some stronger riders than those Menchov beat to win his Vuelta. But that is irrelevant once we arrive 20-30 years in the future and the depth of the field is totally forgotten.

That's why I brought up the Beloki vs. Savoldelli discussion. Beloki was the better rider, but he will be known in the future for crashing and causing Armstrong's detour through the field just as well as any of his great rides, while Savoldelli will be remembered as a two-time Grand Tour winner. That simply makes him sound stronger to the ears of impressionable newcomers to the sport who never saw them ride. People who know enough about cycling to know about the three Grand Tours will be more impressed by Menchov's exploits; people who don't know enough about cycling to know about the three Grand Tours won't remember riders who didn't win it.

As one generation of cycling fans tails off, another one will arrive. In 20-30 years those who remember Menchov and Evans will be the minority of old fuddy-duddies, and archive footage (most of which will show neither attacking) and statistics will be all there is for these people to judge Menchov and Evans by. And if they were to retire with their current palmarès? Statistically Menchov is superior.

I'm not saying that Menchov is the better rider, I'm saying that, by current palmarès, he will be remembered as the better rider unless Evans can pick up at least one more major win, preferably a Grand Tour.

Sorry it was poor english by me. I meant in the future menchov will be higher, like you are saying but right now all of us here now the races, and i was asking what do you see as a greater result, Cadel 2007 tdf 2nd to contador or menchov first in the 2007 veulta????

 

[Climbing]

I think they are a bit different, but probably at the same level all considered.
Menchov is probably stronger in the GT, because Evans normally miss something in his third week.
Evans is stronger in classics and one day races, so it levels out to me.
Probably on paper Evans could be stronger, but he always seems to miss something here and there.

 

[Delicato]

After Evans came in second in the TdF. The 2007 was also the worst GT courses of recent memory until the 2009 TdF came along.

Menchov does not time trial as well as Evans. He does not climb as well as Evans. He has been smart enough (or his team has allowed him) to target GTs other than the Tour. Evans has the misfortune of coming so close to winning the Tour that he kept chasing that white whale when he could have been winning other GTs. Menchov has not had that problem because his Tour performance has never lived up to the hype.

Evans's TT are skills are overestimated. In 2008, Menchov beat him in the final TT of the Tour (Menchov also was 5th in Giro in that year).In 2009 Menchov beat Leipheimer (one of the best TTers in the world) in a long TT in Giro. Menchov won both the prologue and long TT of the 2005 Vuelta which he won. Heras wasn't climbing better than him, Menchov just had one bad day and sh!t team. On the other hand, Liberty Seguros was Vuelta's US Postal.

As for climbing...well, he won 3 GTs. Against Sastre, Evans, DiLuca (who was supercharged), Basso,Pellizotti, Heras, Mancebo. I don't understand your point when you say that Evans is climbing better. Was Evans climbing better in 2008 when they were team-leaders in their teams? No. In 2006 Tour? Not really.Menchov was worse in Alps but better in the Pyrenees.

As for 2007, well, Menchov also was participating in the Tour. Evans also had a Tour in his legs in 2009, though it could'nt prevent him from reaching 3rd place (I know, that he wasn't in contention in 2009 Tour but still)

 

[red_flanders]

Winning is winning and nothing anyone can say about being a real fan, or who the better climber is, or some other such rot is going to change that. Menchov has won 3 GT's and a host of stage wins. He's a strong finisher. Evans keeps trying to win a race he can't win. He's not good enough, end of story. I hope he does well this year, I really do, but truth be told I don't look for much from him. Menchov is also somewhat of an enigma, with form you can't count on.

Should Evans have more wins? Yes. Does he? No. Is he a better rider on paper? Probably. Should anyone care? Not me.

 

[offbyone]

Winning is winning and nothing anyone can say about being a real fan, or who the better climber is, or some other such rot is going to change that. Menchov has won 3 GT's and a host of stage wins. He's a strong finisher. Evans keeps trying to win a race he can't win. He's not good enough, end of story. I hope he does well this year, I really do, but truth be told I don't look for much from him. Menchov is also somewhat of an enigma, with form you can't count on.

Should Evans have more wins? Yes. Does he? No. Is he a better rider on paper? Probably. Should anyone care? Not me.

+1

Evans mental game is horrible and that is a big part of the sport, racing isn't all in the legs. Menchov rides with guts and produces.

 

[Von Mises]

But in the future, people will see the winners of past Tours, but they will have to dig deeper to remember who was 2nd. Quick - without looking, who was 2nd to Kelly in his Vuelta win? Who was 2nd in the 1980 Tour?

You are oversimplifing. Kelly is not famous because of his Vuleta win, but because of his overall career.
Quick - who is Agustin Tamames, who is José Pesarrodona, who is Giovanni Battaglin? If you are spanish or italian, you may know them, but there are many past winners who are not known by most members of this forum, not even talking about general public,
I am not saying that you are wrong, but you are oversimplifying...

 

[jaylew]

Head to head in GTs:

2009 Tour: Evans 29th. Menchov 50th.
2008 Tour: Evans 2nd, Menchov 3rd.
2007 Vuelta: Menchov 1st, Evans 4th.
2007 Tour: Evans 2nd, Menchov DNF(was in 29th through 16 stages).
2006 Tour: Evans 4th, Menchov 5th.
2005 Tour: Evans 8th, Menchov 85th.
2004 Vuelta: Evans 60th, Menchov DNF(23rd through 13 stages).

They have gone head-to-head at the Tour the last 5 years with Evans always finishing better. Menchov's sole victory over Evans in a GT was on the heels of a Cadel 2nd at the Tour. Of course Menchov's 50th behind Evans' 29th in 09 was on the heels of his Giro victory, but neither was in the mix so I'm not sure it really matters.

I'm going to agree with what most have said. Evans the more talented rider but Menchov the better palmares and if their careers ended now, history would treat Menchov more kindly.

 

[Anonymous]

Probably the most important point raised in this thread and perhaps better argued in the clinic..

Yea, there is a discussion there on how HCT can remain constant during a 3 week tour...

This is a close call. I voted Menchov, but only out of spite.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

You are oversimplifing. Kelly is not famous because of his Vuleta win, but because of his overall career.
Quick - who is Agustin Tamames, who is José Pesarrodona, who is Giovanni Battaglin? If you are spanish or italian, you may know them, but there are many past winners who are not known by most members of this forum, not even talking about general public,
I am not saying that you are wrong, but you are oversimplifying...

I wasn't picking out Kelly as an example of a GT winner vs. somebody being 2nd. As you say, Kelly is (rightfully) known for much more than his one GT win, because he was one of the true great all-rounders of the sport. If I was deliberately trying to pick a comparison of a GT winner vs. the 2nd place I'd have picked someone like Melchor Mauri. No, Kelly was just a random pick there. The point was, we can remember off the top of our heads that Kelly won a Vuelta, and we'll all have heard of Kelly because he has an outstanding palmarès, but most of us would have to look up to see who was 2nd to him (Raimund Dietzen, for the record). Similarly, in 10-15 years' time we'll remember Jan Ullrich for winning the Tour in '97 more than coming 2nd to Armstrong. Because people who don't dig into past cycling will look in the record books and see Ullrich's name on the list of winners, right above Pantani and Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong. It's only people who choose to look further into those Tours that will discover Ullrich's longevity.

 

[red_flanders]

Head to head in GTs:

2009 Tour: Evans 29th. Menchov 50th.
2008 Tour: Evans 2nd, Menchov 3rd.
2007 Vuelta: Menchov 1st, Evans 4th.
2007 Tour: Evans 2nd, Menchov DNF(was in 29th through 16 stages).
2006 Tour: Evans 4th, Menchov 5th.
2005 Tour: Evans 8th, Menchov 85th.
2004 Vuelta: Evans 60th, Menchov DNF(23rd through 13 stages).

They have gone head-to-head at the Tour the last 5 years with Evans always finishing better. Menchov's sole victory over Evans in a GT was on the heels of a Cadel 2nd at the Tour. Of course Menchov's 50th behind Evans' 29th in 09 was on the heels of his Giro victory, but neither was in the mix so I'm not sure it really matters.

I'm going to agree with what most have said. Evans the more talented rider but Menchov the better palmares and if their careers ended now, history would treat Menchov more kindly.

The one instance where your statement about their head-to-head record is incorrect, is the one instance which matters the most. Menchov won with Cadel placing 4th. Cadel has no wins, and none head-to-head.

 

[Bag_O_Wallet]

I'd say Cadel's the better weapon, but Menchov has been better utilized. Advantage Menchov.

 

[BroDeal]

Head to head in GTs:

2009 Tour: Evans 29th. Menchov 50th.
2008 Tour: Evans 2nd, Menchov 3rd.
2007 Vuelta: Menchov 1st, Evans 4th.
2007 Tour: Evans 2nd, Menchov DNF(was in 29th through 16 stages).
2006 Tour: Evans 4th, Menchov 5th.
2005 Tour: Evans 8th, Menchov 85th.
2004 Vuelta: Evans 60th, Menchov DNF(23rd through 13 stages).

They have gone head-to-head at the Tour the last 5 years with Evans always finishing better. Menchov's sole victory over Evans in a GT was on the heels of a Cadel 2nd at the Tour. Of course Menchov's 50th behind Evans' 29th in 09 was on the heels of his Giro victory, but neither was in the mix so I'm not sure it really matters.

I'm going to agree with what most have said. Evans the more talented rider but Menchov the better palmares and if their careers ended now, history would treat Menchov more kindly.

This is exactly my point. People are saying Menchov is better or slightly better than Evans at GTs, but that is not borne out by the results when they race against each other.

Evans will end up being one of those riders who has much worse palmares than he could have had because of the his concentration on the Tour plus his bad team choices. Even Leipheimer has a bunch of short stage race wins that make his palmares better than Evans.

Evans has one more year where it is possible for him to win a GT. He should then switch his focus to the classics, where he might have another few years of being competitive. He is my long range pick for Lambardy this year.

 

[tgsgirl]

Similar in abilities, but Menchov has used his better. Vote for the Russian.

 

[Liquigas]

Menchov has done better to get that last bit that you always need to win a Grand tour, so I go with Denis.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Yes but in a lot of those head-to-heads Menchov gave up really soon.

With Menchov, when he feels he doesn't have it, he gives up completely and focusses on something else already (like the Vuelta).

So half of those head-to-head results can't be taken seriously.

 

[Von Mises]

I wasn't picking out Kelly as an example of a GT winner vs. somebody being 2nd. As you say, Kelly is (rightfully) known for much more than his one GT win, because he was one of the true great all-rounders of the sport. If I was deliberately trying to pick a comparison of a GT winner vs. the 2nd place I'd have picked someone like Melchor Mauri. No, Kelly was just a random pick there. The point was, we can remember off the top of our heads that Kelly won a Vuelta, and we'll all have heard of Kelly because he has an outstanding palmarès, but most of us would have to look up to see who was 2nd to him (Raimund Dietzen, for the record). Similarly, in 10-15 years' time we'll remember Jan Ullrich for winning the Tour in '97 more than coming 2nd to Armstrong. Because people who don't dig into past cycling will look in the record books and see Ullrich's name on the list of winners, right above Pantani and Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong Armstrong. It's only people who choose to look further into those Tours that will discover Ullrich's longevity.

Are you sure that Ullrich is going to be remebered because his win or because of his rivalry with Armston and all these ifs and buts (what if he hasnt eaten so much pie).
Fame is a strange thing sometimes. Who is more famous Robert Millar or Álvaro Pino?
Btw, Evans has in this regard similar advantage - he is first australian like Millar was first brit challenging GC. Spain and Italy have so many winners that there is just not enough room for everyone. Also, Evans is a english speaker, this comes as an advantage - international media is dominated by english.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

I wouldn't be surprised if Menchov is riding for Katusha next season.

i wouldn't mind this at all. I like menchov, but I'd rather see dutch riders get the opportuinty to lead a team at GTs.

I think everybody including Evans himself overestimate his TT skills, which is why he lost the 2008 Tour if you ask me.

Menchov at his best is a better climber than Evans and not a much worse time trialer. He's also won 3 GTs, which I'd say makes him a better GT rider than someone who has never won one.

I agree. Menchov imo, has never been his best as the tour. Maybe 2008, and if he actually stayed on his bike (seriously who falls going uphill), and payed more attention on less important stages would have probably won that tour.

Head to head in GTs:

2009 Tour: Evans 29th. Menchov 50th.
2008 Tour: Evans 2nd, Menchov 3rd.
2007 Vuelta: Menchov 1st, Evans 4th.
2007 Tour: Evans 2nd, Menchov DNF(was in 29th through 16 stages).
2006 Tour: Evans 4th, Menchov 5th.
2005 Tour: Evans 8th, Menchov 85th.
2004 Vuelta: Evans 60th, Menchov DNF(23rd through 13 stages).

gotta love stats, but make sure to consider some necessary circumstances.

2009 tour - yeah menchov just won the giro (which imo, evans has never ridden a GT as good as dm rode this) so it is a little unfair to count this.
2008- I already stated my thoughs for 2008 earlier. Evans got the better placing, but I disagree that he was stronger then dm.
2007- menchov buried himself for the chicken the moment rasmussen got the yellow... so I again I wouldn't consider this a fair head to head comparison.
Then Menchov went and creamed his competition at the vuelta.
2006: fair enough. But again Menchov went on to win the vuelta after this.
Tour 5th + Vuelta 1st > Tour 4th
2005: Menchov had a stomach bug the entire tour (before dropping out) so his tour was ruined, and thus another unfair comparison.
2004: meh, neither had devopled into the GT riders they are, yet. And as mentioned, Menchov was looking decent until he dropped out.

Forsure evans is the better all round rider, but Menchov is the much better GT rider.

 

[ak-zaaf]

Evans has one more year where it is possible for him to win a GT.

Evans' had opportunities very few riders with his capabilities had.
He was a major contender in some of the weakest GT's in history and he didn't win any.

In 2007 he came very close to Contador, but Contador was the only one able to follow Rasmussen in the mountains. When Chicken was kicked Evans failed the golden opportunity presented to hum: the TT. In 200 8he was actually the favorite, but when a dangerous guy made the first move on the only mountain left, he did nothing.
Last years Vuelta was already lost before the puncture, lost to a guy who could also never win a GT.
This years Giro is another example, Evans has had his chances, he'll never win a GT.

 

[Delicato]

2006: fair enough. But again Menchov went on to win the vuelta after this.
Tour 5th + Vuelta 1st > Tour 4th

No. He went to Vuelta and then pulled out of it. Vinokourov won.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

In 2008 Menchov kinda blew it in the Tour by losing so much time in downhill, he wasn't weaker than Evans in the mountains/TT

 

[issoisso]

Fame is a strange thing sometimes. Who is more famous Robert Millar or Álvaro Pino?

Btw, Evans has in this regard similar advantage - he is first australian like Millar was first brit challenging GC. Spain and Italy have so many winners that there is just not enough room for everyone. Also, Evans is a english speaker, this comes as an advantage - international media is dominated by english.

You speak a lot of sense and make some very good points

Just...about the part in bold. Phil Anderson.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Evans' had opportunities very few riders with his capabilities had.
He was a major contender in some of the weakest GT's in history and he didn't win any.

In 2007 he came very close to Contador, but Contador was the only one able to follow Rasmussen in the mountains. When Chicken was kicked Evans failed the golden opportunity presented to hum: the TT. In 200 8he was actually the favorite, but when a dangerous guy made the first move on the only mountain left, he did nothing.
Last years Vuelta was already lost before the puncture, lost to a guy who could also never win a GT.
This years Giro is another example, Evans has had his chances, he'll never win a GT.

There is a BIG difference between not doing something and not being able to do something. This years giro and the 2008 tour, he was simply not strong enough.

 

[issoisso]

There is a BIG difference between not doing something and not being able to do something. This years giro and the 2008 tour, he was simply not strong enough.

That's exactly what people are saying. It's not about him not winning. It's about him not being able to win. He's simply not as strong as Menchov.
That's what the entire topic is about

 

[Libertine Seguros]

There is a BIG difference between not doing something and not being able to do something. This years giro and the 2008 tour, he was simply not strong enough.

I think that since the Tour is about to turn this place into even more of a post-apocalyptic wreckage than it already is, I might have to bottle this post and keep it as a reminder of better times - ACF admitting Evans has a failing. A rare commodity in these trying times.