Gilbert vs. Sagan

[Mayomaniac]

The other thing is the courses as well. Sagan's ability to survive hills and be the fastest man left means he racked up a lot of wins in stages like those awful Tour of California ones where there was a bunch of climbing but all of it way too far from the finish to be relevant so they dropped all the sprinters but had next to no action - but while they may account for a larger % of his wins, they're also a lot of his least memorable wins, certainly compared to things like Grindelwald in the Tour de Suisse or the Sant'Elpidio a Mare one in Tirreno-Adriatico which were much rarer in terms of his palmarès but to my mind far more impressive.

Or going full Peter Sayar on Mt. Baldy...

 

[Libertine Seguros]

So the climbing was irrelevant other than to remove all the guys who would otherwise have won.

It's more about the way the difficulty was hyped up and then it had zero impact on the race as a whole because of how the obstacles were placed. Lots of Sagan supporters would hype up how everything he did was exciting, but a lot of those wins were interchangeable sprints-from-a-reduced-bunch where any interesting action happened before the stage made air. The ones that live longest in our memory are the ones where he did do exciting stuff, but often if the best way to win was to have a really boring stage and then win a sprint, that's what he'd do.

Laguna Seca as an overall stage was one of the easier Tour of California stages Sagan won, by contrast, but it was a much better stage because the finish was really nicely designed and conducive to racing.

 

[Red Rick]

Gilbert's greatest achievement might be making people not discount Lombardia compared to the WCRR lol

 

[JoshSchmidt]

Sagan always.

 

[KenFiamingo]

From a talent perspective, Sagan is of the same pedigree as MVDP, REV, POG. Gilbert is not.

That said, I look at Sagan more as a sprinter with above average climbing/punching capabilities, rather than a classics rider. For me Gilbert is a classics king and that over a broader range of races.

Due to Sagan's sprinter's legs he had more tactical options and definitely had an edge during WC's that often end with a 30-man bunch sprint (during his prime).
Gilbert otoh had exceptional race intelligence and was able to mold the race into his favor at the point where he could benefit from his punching abilities the most.

They both did incredible things and sometimes rode as they were unbeatable. But as crazy as it sounds, looking back at their careers, I feel like Sagan kind of underachieved in relation to his talent and Gilbert overachieved.

And the classics lover i am, i'd be happily willing to trade 5 green jerseys for 2 Lombardias.

For the record, in my ranking Sagan is slightly ahead of Gilbert.

28​	MUSEEUW, Johan	BEL	3966​
29​	KUBLER, Ferdi	SUI	3961​
30​	OCANA, Luis	ESP	3957​
31​	CANCELLARA, Fabian	SUI	3944​
32​	SAGAN, Peter	SVK	3856​
33​	LEMOND, Greg	USA	3801​
34​	BITOSSI, Franco	ITA	3700​
35​	BOONEN, Tom	BEL	3687​
36​	MAGNI, Fiorenzo	ITA	3687​
37​	GUERRA, Learco	ITA	3595​
38​	ZABEL, Erik	GER	3574​
39​	CAVENDISH, Mark	GBR	3466​
40​	VAN SPRINGEL, Herman	BEL	3445​
41​	REBELLIN, Davide	ITA	3435​
42​	RAAS, Jan	NED	3384​
43​	ROCHE, Stephen	IRL	3368​
44​	GILBERT, Philippe	BEL	3280​

 

[Bolder]

Sagan's collection of Zabel jersey's isn't worth a damn compared to Gilbert's one day race pedigree.

That said, pre-child support Sagan was a spectacular rider, but let's not pretend that he didn't have any worse years.

Overall Sagan had a higher base level over all of his career, but Gilbert has a better palmares an more spectacular peak years.

That's a fair assessment. Gilbert won a crazy assortment of races. Downside: Maybe too good to be true in 2011, especially.

Sagan slacked off after 2018. That bothered me. Upside: I really enjoyed watching him race.

 

[Netserk]

2016 was better than 2011.

 

[KenFiamingo]

2016 was better than 2011.

No, Sagan never won the Ster ZLM Tour.

 

[Netserk]

After 38 votes:

Better rider: Sagan with 84.2 % of the votes
Better palmarès: Equal between the two with 19 votes each
More favoured: Sagan with 55.3 % of the votes.

 

[kingjr]

If both are on a normal day, I'd pick Sagan; on their best day, probably Gilbert.

 

[memyselfandI]

Both were astonishing, unbelievable athletes. For me Sagan is better of these two, because triple Worlds and the fact that he raked one thirds more wins in one thirds less seasons.

 

[Kwaremonster]

Apples and oranges to me, makes more sense to compare Sagan with someone like Boonen, than to Gilbert.

Ofcourse I'm gonna do it anyway. And Sagan comes out on top for me, WC's are the biggest on day races and of those Sagan has 3. Plus with the monuments Gilbert won at the end of his career was a fair bit of luck involved imo. His 2011 season was absolutely out of this world though.

 

[Forever The Best]

Sagan underachieved with his talent imo. Should have absolutely won Sanremo for example. Also wonder what he could have done in Liege if he concentrated on it. 2012 he finished 3rd on Amstel when the tougher climbs were close to finish (unlike 2013-2016).

 

[Tour de Berghem]

4 monument on 5 + world championship.
Both on cobbles and climber classic.
Only Pogacar among active riders can win Flanders and Lombardia.
No battle.
Gilbert > Sagan.

 

[Tour de Berghem]

Sagan underachieved with his talent imo. Should have absolutely won Sanremo for example. Also wonder what he could have done in Liege if he concentrated on it. 2012 he finished 3rd on Amstel when the tougher climbs were close to finish (unlike 2013-2016).

As many riders was too focused on a overestimate trophy: the green jersey.

If in the first part of his career he absolutly could win Liege, especially with the old route with arrive in Ans

 

[Salvarani]

Sagan underachieved with his talent imo. Should have absolutely won Sanremo for example. Also wonder what he could have done in Liege if he concentrated on it. 2012 he finished 3rd on Amstel when the tougher climbs were close to finish (unlike 2013-2016).

Underachieved is harsh, given he was the only one as talented as him.

Other teams, stronger teams, and other riders used that against Sagan many times. They had to, to beat him.

He would have probably won more if there were a few others as good or close to as good as him, but they marked him instead. Used their numbers. It was tactics in the end.

The only race where radio wasnt allowed and the numbers wasnt the same... he beat them three years in a row during his prime, with little help from teammates. He wasnt targeted the same in Worlds.

 

[Netserk]

4 monument on 5 + world championship.
Both on cobbles and climber classic.
Only Pogacar among active riders can win Flanders and Lombardia.
No battle.
Gilbert > Sagan.

Is that just a convenient argument for the occasion, or do you believe that your point holds more generally? If the latter, then Gilbert is above Boonen too?

 

[Tour de Berghem]

Is that just a convenient argument for the occasion, or do you believe that your point holds more generally? If the latter, then Gilbert is above Boonen too?

Yes, for me he is.

It's an opionion of course, many can disagree.

Boonen is a great champion, one of the greatest of all time on cobbles, but too linked to the hyperspecialization period of cycling in 2000s.

I consider more riders that can win on more terrains.

To win in Roubaix and at San Sebastian, at Flanders and to keep wheels of the top climbers on Ghisallo and in the same time be able to challenge sprinters in Sanremo as Gilbert did in 2005 , 2008 and 2011 reserve much more appreciation from me that win 4 Roubaix.

Boonen won 7 monument but only 2 types + WC + podium on Sanremo
among the other very important classic 5 harelbeke and 3 Gent-Wevelgem (all cobbled)
than other many minor classics

Gilbert won 5 monuments but of 4 types + WC + podium on the remaining monument (Sanremo).
Then won many of the most important classics after monument but of very various type (amstel, strade, fleche, san sebastian, paris tours).

We have also to say the Gilbert won 11 stages in all 3 GTs in all terrain, also mountain stages.
Boonen 8, lacks the triple crown of stages. More than Gilbert has a green in TdF.

It's not a sin in my opinion to say that Philippe had something more as a rider than Boonen.
Boonen actually out of cobbles and sprint (but only in the first part of the career, then his sprinting ability became much more weak) did not exist.