Gilbert V Cancellara - who is the best one day rider of this generation?

[Spine Concept]

Boonen won 2 Roubaix's solo and also one Flanders. Same as Cancellara

A sprint is a better weapon than having time trial skills, that's what makes Boonen better than Cancellara. Besides, in 2008 it was very clear who was the strongest man of the race. Sprint or not...

Unless you want to argue that having superior time trialing skills will get you into a position where sprinting is not needed This was masterfully displayed by Cancellara in 2010. I don't necessarily disagree with your contention though, just giving it another perspective.

 

[El Pistolero]

belgian road champs don't count either... come on, see even last year when gilbert won there's still cammaerts, hovelynck, polazzi etc in the top 10

i take no national championship seriously actually

1. Tom Boonen
2. Philippe Gilbert
3. Greg van Avermaet

On a hilly course in the Ardennes

That's why I'm counting it. Besides, Gilbert would have destroyed everyone that day when he won the Belgian nats.

 

[Flamin]

Boonen won 2 Roubaix's solo and also one Flanders. Same as Cancellara

A sprint is a better weapon than having time trial skills, that's what makes Boonen better than Cancellara. Besides, in 2008 it was very clear who was the strongest man of the race. Sprint or not...

A bit black-and-white, no? Do you think of Cavendish as a better one day rider than say Flecha and Pozzato, because both have a worse record and worse sprint than Cav?

Somehow I hope Valverde wins LBL the next 3 years, after wheelsucking Gilbert so hard even Pozzato will feel ashamed, then outsprinting him for victory. Just so I can say to you how Valverde is simply the better of the 2

 

[Panda Claws]

A bit black-and-white, no? Do you think of Cavendish as a better one day rider than say Flecha and Pozzato, because both have a worse record and worse sprint than Cav?

Somehow I hope Valverde wins LBL the next 3 years, after wheelsucking Gilbert so hard even Pozzato will feel ashamed, then outsprinting him for victory. Just so I can say to you how Valverde is simply the better of the 2

As if Valverde can still outsprint Gilbert.

 

[El Pistolero]

A bit black-and-white, no? Do you think of Cavendish as a better one day rider than say Flecha and Pozzato, because both have a worse record and worse sprint than Cav?

Somehow I hope Valverde wins LBL the next 3 years, after wheelsucking Gilbert so hard even Pozzato will feel ashamed, then outsprinting him for victory. Just so I can say to you how Valverde is simply the better of the 2

Boonen didn't wheelsuck Cancellara in 2008, so your point is moot. Hoping for a rider's failure is really pathetic, so I'm ending this discussion.

Cancellara was cramping up till behind his ears that day, Boonen was simply stronger. He got 30 meters on them in the sprint for crying out loud!

Boonen has 3 solo Monument victories and four from small group sprints. That's what makes him, at this very moment, better than Cancellara. A sprint is a big weapon, but if it's your only weapon(Cavendish) you're not going to win a lot of classics

A sprint is what makes the difference between someone like Boogerd and Bettini

 

[Flamin]

As if Valverde can still outsprint Gilbert.

Why not?

....

 

[Wallace]

Main conclusion I draw from this list is that Boonen is a better sprinter than Cancellara.

I Know this isn't entirely what you mean, but one of the things that's really been bugging me about the Boonen vs Cancellara discussions, and the P-R/Flanders discussions, is that a lot of posters here seem to think there's something underhanded or kind of cheap about winning a race by sprinting, as opposed to riding away from the pack and winning solo. A win is a win. Period. Boonen has the ability to unleash a powerful sprint after 250 km. He knows that if he arrives at the finish with a small group, he'll win. His team also knows that--that's why they work so hard to make sure that happens--and he repays their confidence and hard work. Cancellara knows that if he arrives at the finish with Boonen, Boonen will win. It's Cancellara's--and everyone else's job--to get rid of Boonen. Even if he wheel-sucked (which he doesn't) he'd still be the deserved winner. This whole "yeah, Boonen won, but he wasn't the strongest guy and he only won because he out-sprinted them" logic is ridiculous. Do you think Boonen should have arrived at the Flanders finish thinking, "gee, it really isn't fair that I'm faster than these guys--I'll just let Pozzato win." If he wins using it it doesn't mean that his win is any less than Cancellara soloing in alone, or better than himself crossing alone. He crossed the line first. He beat everyone else. That's the point. That's the only point.

 

[BillytheKid]

Impossible to answer. Two different riders for different types of races. Gilbert might have the over all Classics advantage, but Cancellarra is among the best short ITT and prologue riders ever. Some won't rank those as much, but I do.

 

[Flamin]

Boonen didn't wheelsuck Cancellara in 2008, so your point is moot. Hoping for a rider's failure is really pathetic, so I'm ending this discussion.

Cancellara was cramping up till behind his ears that day, Boonen was simply stronger. He got 30 meters on them in the sprint for crying out loud!

Boonen has 3 solo Monument victories and four from small group sprints. That's what makes him, at this very moment, better than Cancellara. A sprint is a big weapon, but if it's your only weapon(Cavendish) you're not going to win a lot of classics

A sprint is what makes the difference between someone like Boogerd and Bettini

The Gilbert-Valverde part had nothing to do with Paris-Roubaix 2008. I was just using your own coloured arguments against you in general. Since you didn’t seem to care that much how results have been achieved, I therefore wondered if you would acknowledge Valverde is the better one day rider if that happened or if you would suddenly be a lot more of a critic. I suspect the second.

And where did I express any hope for someone to fail?

I Know this isn't entirely what you mean, but one of the things that's really been bugging me about the Boonen vs Cancellara discussions, and the P-R/Flanders discussions, is that a lot of posters here seem to think there's something underhanded or kind of cheap about winning a race by sprinting, as opposed to riding away from the pack and winning solo. A win is a win. Period. Boonen has the ability to unleash a powerful sprint after 250 km. He knows that if he arrives at the finish with a small group, he'll win. His team also knows that--that's why they work so hard to make sure that happens--and he repays their confidence and hard work. Cancellara knows that if he arrives at the finish with Boonen, Boonen will win. It's Cancellara's--and everyone else's job--to get rid of Boonen. Even if he wheel-sucked (which he doesn't) he'd still be the deserved winner. This whole "yeah, Boonen won, but he wasn't the strongest guy and he only won because he out-sprinted them" logic is ridiculous. Do you think Boonen should have arrived at the Flanders finish thinking, "gee, it really isn't fair that I'm faster than these guys--I'll just let Pozzato win." If he wins using it it doesn't mean that his win is any less than Cancellara soloing in alone, or better than himself crossing alone. He crossed the line first. He beat everyone else. That's the point. That's the only point.

Disagree. Crossing the line first isn't always the only point. Otherwise this thread would be completely useless. Just check wikipedia and that's it...

 

[El Pistolero]

Yes, and Boonen has just as many solo victories in classics on his palmares than Cancellara.

No offence, but you sound like the typical Fleming who can't stand it when a countryman does something special. Always something to bicker about. I can be wrong here, and if so I'll apologize, but that's how you're coming over right now.

Winning is what matters and Boonen has done it with a lot of panache.

Does Boonen's Paris-Roubaix solo not count? Or his solo in the Ronde van Vlaanderen?

You make it sound like Boonen wheel-sucked during Paris-Roubaix 2005/2008 and the Ronde van Vlaanderen 2005/2006... It was pretty clear to me who was the strongest man in those races...

 

[El Pistolero]

Impossible to answer. Two different riders for different types of races. Gilbert might have the over all Classics advantage, but Cancellarra is among the best short ITT and prologue riders ever. Some won't rank those as much, but I do.

Time trials don't have anything to do with this discussion.

 

[Flamin]

Yes, and Boonen has just as many solo victories on his palmares than Cancellara.

No offence, but you sound like the typical Fleming who can't stand it when a countryman does something special. Always something to bicker about. I can be wrong here, and if so I'll apologize, but that's how you're coming over now.

Winning is what matters and Boonen has done it with a lot of panache.

Does Boonen's Paris-Roubaix solo not count? Or his solo in the Ronde van Vlaanderen?

Actually, Cancellara has 1 more, but that's not the point. My point is that there is more to it than comparing both riders' palmares and then conclude rider X is better. Of course Boonen's PR and RVV-solo count, why not? Now I ask you, do you take into consideration some of Cancellara's out-of-this-world performances like MSR last month or RVV 2011, or do you just ignore it because he didn't win?

Why? Because I think Cancellara is better than Boonen? Lol.

 

[The Hitch]

As if Valverde can still outsprint Gilbert.

As if he can't

 

[El Pistolero]

Actually, Cancellara has 1 more, but that's not the point. My point is that there is more to it than comparing both riders' palmares and then conclude rider X is better. Of course Boonen's PR and RVV-solo count, why not? Now I ask you, do you take into consideration some of Cancellara's out-of-this-world performances like MSR last month or RVV 2011, or do you just ignore it because he didn't win?

Why? Because I think Cancellara is better than Boonen? Lol.

Dumb riders rarely become the best one day riders of their generation. Tactic is part of the game. His RVV 2011 is one of the reasons why I rate him lower by the way.

The title is: who's the best... Not: who's the strongest.

Why? Because I recognize your style of posts. They remind me of reactions to online articles of newspapers

 

[Wallace]

The Gilbert-Valverde part had nothing to do with Paris-Roubaix 2008. I was just using your own coloured arguments against you in general. Since you didn’t seem to care that much how results have been achieved, I therefore wondered if you would acknowledge Valverde is the better one day rider if that happened or if you would suddenly be a lot more of a critic. I suspect the second.

And where did I express any hope for someone to fail?



Disagree. Crossing the line first isn't always the only point. Otherwise this thread would be completely useless. Just check wikipedia and that's it...

Bingo! We have a winner!

 

[Flamin]

Dumb riders rarely become the best one day riders of their generation. Tactic is part of the game. His RVV 2011 is one of the reasons why I rate him lower by the way.

Why? Because I recognize your style of posts. They remind me of reactions to online articles of newspapers

You're kidding right? Well actually I know you're not. His tactics were so dumb indeed, there was a mighty strong BMC team + Devolder needed to pull him back.

I have never ever posted on an HLN, HNB or any other newspaper's online article, by the way.

 

[El Pistolero]

You're kidding right? Well actually I know you're not. His tactics were so dumb indeed, there was a mighty strong BMC team + Devolder needed to pull him back.

I have never ever posted on an HLN, HNB or any other newspaper's online article, by the way.

Yes, his tactics were dumb. He would have won that edition so easily if he wasn't so cocky.

Mighty strong teams will always exist He knew that before the race started, he should have adjusted his tactics with that in mind. That's what a smart rider would have done anyway. Besides, it was his choice to go to a team where he wouldn't have a lot of support. He could have gone to BMC

I never said you posted on those sites by the way

So only solo rides count and smart tactics don't? I think it's more impressive if you win a race despite not being the strongest.

 

[FabulousCandelabra]

one of the things that's really been bugging me about the Boonen vs Cancellara discussions, and the P-R/Flanders discussions, is that a lot of posters here seem to think there's something underhanded or kind of cheap about winning a race by sprinting, as opposed to riding away from the pack and winning solo.

I think most people just enjoy watching Fabian pull off a courageous solo effort a lot more than watching someone take a sprint win. It is just kind of a bummer to watch a strong, attacking rider get shut down over and over by people who are stronger sprinters, but that's just bike racing,and it happens the majority of the time, and that's why those special solo breakaways are 100x more exciting to watch.

 

[El Pistolero]

I think most people just enjoy watching Fabian pull off a courageous solo effort a lot more than watching someone take a sprint win. It is just kind of a bummer to watch a strong, attacking rider get shut down over and over by people who are stronger sprinters, but that's just bike racing,and it happens the majority of the time, and that's why those special solo breakaways are 100x more exciting to watch.

2010 and 2012 were the most boring editions of Paris-Roubaix I've ever seen. So no, people don't think that way.

 

[Flamin]

Yes, his tactics were dumb. He would have won that edition so easily if he wasn't so cocky.

Mighty strong teams will always exist He knew that before the race started, he should have adjusted his tactics with that in mind. That's what a smart rider would have done anyway. Besides, it was his choice to go to a team where he wouldn't have a lot of support. He could have gone to BMC

I never said you posted on those sites by the way

So only solo rides count and smart tactics don't? I think it's more impressive if you win a race despite not being the strongest.

What makes you think he would have won that edition so easily? His team was a joke and there was no one who would've given Cancellara a free ticket to just sit in the bunch and bring Chavanel back.

His move was brave. Do or die. "Klinkt het niet dan botst het".

 

[El Pistolero]

Picking a good team is part of the strategy. Like I said, BMC were interested in him.

His move was dumb. He would have won easily if he attacked later. It's one thing to do a 53km solo in Paris-Roubaix, but it's another thing to do it in the Ronde van Vlaanderen. Different races and it's practically impossible to do a 50km solo there.

 

[the pope]

(...) Cancellara's out-of-this-world performances like (...) or RVV 2011, or do you just ignore it because he didn't win?

out-of-this-world?
looked more like out-of-sugar to me.

[replace by petrol/motor joke if wanted]

 

[Wallace]

2010 and 2012 were the most boring editions of Paris-Roubaix I've ever seen. So no, at least one person doesn't think that way.

Corrected.

 

[Froome19]

What makes you think he would have won that edition so easily? His team was a joke and there was no one who would've given Cancellara a free ticket to just sit in the bunch and bring Chavanel back.

His move was brave. Do or die. "Klinkt het niet dan botst het".

Just look at his Roubaix perfomance a week later , he realised he couldnt lose Hushovd to early into the race and just stopped trying to shake him off and then he attacked and got rid of everyone towards the end of the race.
In RVV he also evidently was still one of the strongest in the end and his final attack succeeded in dropping everyone but 2 other riders i have a feeling if he hadnt gone on his suicidal 50km out attack he would have had enough in the tank in order to dislodge them (whatever you claim about Chavanel's strength)
One day races are incredibly energy sapping and the longer in the harder it gets, you see many riders who are riding on limit and then get dropped when a surge is made by a strong rider/s. Just look at LBL last year when the Schlecks and Gilbert attacked it was obviously the decisive move but everyone was riding on threshold and therefore couldnt respond.

 

[maltiv]

Dumb riders rarely become the best one day riders of their generation. Tactic is part of the game. His RVV 2011 is one of the reasons why I rate him lower by the way.

The title is: who's the best... Not: who's the strongest.

Why? Because I recognize your style of posts. They remind me of reactions to online articles of newspapers

Gilbert is pretty "dumb" too (some would call it panache). How many times hasn't he wasted his energy attacking like possessed on a climb when he already was the best sprinter in the group? RVV 2011 can be used as an example here too...