Has there ever been a case similar to Valverde?

[TMP402]

The timespan is amazing. No multiple LBL winner has had more than 6 years between their first and last win. Whereas Valverde won in 06, 08, 15 and perhaps again this weekend and maybe even in years to come.

 

[ray j willings]

I would put Valves up there among the best.
I think its not fair to compare with the man with more hair who has won more GTs out there "small poem there"
Bertie has focused on GT victory's that is his strength.
Valves seems to have more. He is a great stage racer as well as a super GT rider and I only wish he would have focused on trying to win the tour. He seems to be climbing as good as ever . His attack on the big ring a few weeks ago was awesome -old school.
I for one salute him.

 

[Mr.White]

Re:

I'd definitely take Nibali's palmares over Valverde's

I think his results at the WCRR give a great example of Valverde. (no need to do a most top 10s without win for WCRRs specifically). Up there in every classic, stage race or GT, but when the biggest prizes in cycling are for the takening, he just misses out on the biggest ones

Yes his results at WCRR gives a great example of what rider he is, how versatile and great rider he is. Do you know how hard is to get a top placement in a race that completely change parcours every year. And to done that year after year! He has 6 medals, and in current peloton you only got two riders with 2 medals! 6 (SIX) Medals!!! He has more medals than some countries (in fact only SIX countries have more medals then him)! Should I remind you he's the all time leader (quite comfortably) in the almost 90 years of WCRR history. Many would say he didn't won it, but I would say his six medals are at least equal to a WCRR Gold, and in my opinion they worth much more

 

[happytramp]

Sean Kelly was winning multiple GT stage wins in 1979 and still winning monuments in 1991. His palmares in between those years are fairly gob smacking. He was also ranked world number 1 for five years in a row.

Maybe not over as long a period Valverde but his results during that time were on a completely different level.

 

[KyoGrey]

Insane talent, a good structure (in all senses) for more than a decade and something that it isn't mentioned normally:

He has mantained a great work ethic during a very long career.

I don't say it with the ridiculous US Postal/Sky rhetorica of "he wins because our brave boys train more than the rest", but the fact is that Valverde always creates a very good base at the start of the year with hard training in winter, something that not all superstars are able to replicate season after season (Contador and Cancellara for example have had some weak years in winter that dragged on to their season).

A fun fact is that Valverde is very very obsesive with his diet, however he does allow himself icecreams in certain situations.

 

[Angliru]

Re:

I'd definitely take Nibali's palmares over Valverde's

I think his results at the WCRR give a great example of Valverde. (no need to do a most top 10s without win for WCRRs specifically). Up there in every classic, stage race or GT, but when the biggest prizes in cycling are for the takening, he just misses out on the biggest ones

Since when is LBL not one of the " biggest ones"? He's won major stage races, grand tour stages, major one day races, multiple LBL's, with FW and LBL won together in the same season multiple times. He is greatly unappreciated with a standard of consistency that is virtually unprecedented. I'm biased as I've been a huge fan since the start of his career.

 

[Fernandez]

Re: Re:

I'd definitely take Nibali's palmares over Valverde's

I think his results at the WCRR give a great example of Valverde. (no need to do a most top 10s without win for WCRRs specifically). Up there in every classic, stage race or GT, but when the biggest prizes in cycling are for the takening, he just misses out on the biggest ones

Yes his results at WCRR gives a great example of what rider he is, how versatile and great rider he is. Do you know how hard is to get a top placement in a race that completely change parcours every year. And to done that year after year! He has 6 medals, and in current peloton you only got two riders with 2 medals! 6 (SIX) Medals!!! He has more medals than some countries (in fact only SIX countries have more medals then him)! Should I remind you he's the all time leader (quite comfortably) in the almost 90 years of WCRR history. Many would say he didn't won it, but I would say his six medals are at least equal to a WCRR Gold, and in my opinion they worth much more

Nine top ten including 6 medals means way much more than a single lucky strike that sometimes make a world champion.

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

I'd definitely take Nibali's palmares over Valverde's

I think his results at the WCRR give a great example of Valverde. (no need to do a most top 10s without win for WCRRs specifically). Up there in every classic, stage race or GT, but when the biggest prizes in cycling are for the takening, he just misses out on the biggest ones

Since when is LBL not one of the " biggest ones"? He's won major stage races, grand tour stages, major one day races, multiple LBL's, with FW and LBL won together in the same season multiple times. He is greatly unappreciated with a standard of consistency that is virtually unprecedented. I'm biased as I've been a huge fan since the start of his career.

Biggest stage races are obviously T our>Giro>Vuelta, won one Vuelta out of 6 (?) podiums. Once 3rd in the Tour, never won it

Biggest one day race is obviously the WCRR, where he has 6 medals but never won.

I'd say the monuments are a small step below that.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Still, the 5 monuments are still to be considered 'big ones'. He has 3 of them, may very well end up with 4 in 4 days time.

You really lost me when you said Nibali's palmarés is bigger the Bala's, but each to their own I guess.

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

I'd definitely take Nibali's palmares over Valverde's

I think his results at the WCRR give a great example of Valverde. (no need to do a most top 10s without win for WCRRs specifically). Up there in every classic, stage race or GT, but when the biggest prizes in cycling are for the takening, he just misses out on the biggest ones

Yes his results at WCRR gives a great example of what rider he is, how versatile and great rider he is. Do you know how hard is to get a top placement in a race that completely change parcours every year. And to done that year after year! He has 6 medals, and in current peloton you only got two riders with 2 medals! 6 (SIX) Medals!!! He has more medals than some countries (in fact only SIX countries have more medals then him)! Should I remind you he's the all time leader (quite comfortably) in the almost 90 years of WCRR history. Many would say he didn't won it, but I would say his six medals are at least equal to a WCRR Gold, and in my opinion they worth much more

Nine top ten including 6 medals means way much more than a single lucky strike that sometimes make a world champion.

Without a doubt the best WC rider to never win it. Not sure it shows that much versatility though. Mostly shows that he can sprint

 

[Red Rick]

Re:

Still, the 5 monuments are still to be considered 'big ones'. He has 3 of them, may very well end up with 4 in 4 days time.

You really lost me when you said Nibali's palmarés is bigger the Bala's, but each to their own I guess.

Nibali has won bigger races. Giro + Tour + Vuelta, one in 6 riders in history to complete the triple in his career, and in this era of specialism, also won a monument as well as podium two others.

 

[Arredondo]

I want to congrat Bala on a great win. He's in the form of his life the past 2 years. He's by far the best Ardennes rider of his generation, and one of the best of riders in general of the past 30 years.

The guy is always in shape, which is incredible. And really good for the Bala fans, because you just know he will be up there in every race. A good situation i suppose

Edit: Couldn't watch FW live today, but did see the last 10 km of the race now.

 

[KyoGrey]

I think that the talk should be between Kelly, Jalabert, Valverde and other historical all-rounders.

Nibali doesn't belong to the conversation. I mean he has a very good palmares (incredible for his talent base), but he is a 1-dimensional rider.

 

[Brullnux]

Re: Re:

In a non specialist cycling world he would be an Eddy Merckx.

In a non specialist cycling world, Valverde would win far less than he does now.
He maybe the rider that benefits most of the recent decrease in (long) itt's in GT's, the focus on hilly finals in one day races and the loss of multiclimb marathon mountain stages without mtf (how much of these has he actually won?). Granted, Valverde is the ultimate youtube-cyclist, but not more than that.

Valverde is actually pretty good in TTs.


His palmares is good, but he has only ever won one monument, and podiumed in two. Looking at it that way, then Nibali's monuments palmares is almost as good

Of course, Valverde is much, much better in classics than Nibali's, but he is sort of the nearly man. Never won a gold at the WC, only ever won 3 different classics, albeit a total of 9 times. Podiumed 7 different, with a total of 20 podiums (including Strade Bianche and WC). Only ever won one GT, despite having a top 10 thirteen times and a podium 6. So close, yet so far. One of the greats of Ardennes races. A GOAT? Not quite, IMO. Very, very close? Yes. A Liege, WC gold and GdL? Easily would put him there, but it's not up to me.

 

[Red Rick]

I think that the talk should be between Kelly, Jalabert, Valverde and other historical all-rounders.

Nibali doesn't belong to the conversation. I mean he has a very good palmares (incredible for his talent base), but he is a 1-dimensional rider.

Yeah, he's only useful in mountains, hills, tt's, descents and even wet cobbles when they're there. Sure. Or do you just mean that Nibali cannot sprint?

 

[Brullnux]

Sorry but Kelly > Bala. The guy almost won all 5 monuments.

 

[KyoGrey]

I think that the talk should be between Kelly, Jalabert, Valverde and other historical all-rounders.

Nibali doesn't belong to the conversation. I mean he has a very good palmares (incredible for his talent base), but he is a 1-dimensional rider.

Yeah, he's only useful in mountains, hills, tt's, descents and even wet cobbles when they're there. Sure. Or do you just mean that Nibali cannot sprint?

Yes, I mean that he cannot sprint and that he is basically a climbing oriented GT-rider that has made some noise in one day racing. But he is not as multidimensional as Valverde.

I don't wan't to sound as a hater but, what is this with Nibali in TT's and cobbled classics?

 

[Valv.Piti]

I think that the talk should be between Kelly, Jalabert, Valverde and other historical all-rounders.

Nibali doesn't belong to the conversation. I mean he has a very good palmares (incredible for his talent base), but he is a 1-dimensional rider.

Yeah, he's only useful in mountains, hills, tt's, descents and even wet cobbles when they're there. Sure. Or do you just mean that Nibali cannot sprint?

Yes, I mean that he cannot sprint and that he is basically a climbing oriented GT-rider that has make some noise in one day racing. But he is not as multidimensional as Valverde.

I don't wan't to sound as a hater but, what is this with Nibali in TT's and cobbled classics?

I suppose its that one stage in Le Tour. Andy is a brilliantly cobbles riders as well, not many riders are capable of hanging unto Cancellara's wheel!
On the ITT-matter, I think Valverde is better at prologues (he is brilliant really, especially when they are a bit hilly), and Nibbles is the better TT'er for the long ones.

 

[Brullnux]

Nibali has proven more on cobbles than Valverde has...

But yes, Nibali is generally a GT rider, but sort of in the same sense that Valverde is mainly a hilly one day specialist, but to a lesser extent. The fact that a man with 3 GTs has podiumed 3 monuments is pretty impressive. Valverde definitely has the more impressive palmares, but Nibali has, when it comes to wins, an only slightly worse one.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re: Re:

I'd definitely take Nibali's palmares over Valverde's

I think his results at the WCRR give a great example of Valverde. (no need to do a most top 10s without win for WCRRs specifically). Up there in every classic, stage race or GT, but when the biggest prizes in cycling are for the takening, he just misses out on the biggest ones

Yes his results at WCRR gives a great example of what rider he is, how versatile and great rider he is. Do you know how hard is to get a top placement in a race that completely change parcours every year. And to done that year after year! He has 6 medals, and in current peloton you only got two riders with 2 medals! 6 (SIX) Medals!!! He has more medals than some countries (in fact only SIX countries have more medals then him)! Should I remind you he's the all time leader (quite comfortably) in the almost 90 years of WCRR history. Many would say he didn't won it, but I would say his six medals are at least equal to a WCRR Gold, and in my opinion they worth much more

I hear what you're saying, but this is a great example of the difference of a fan's perspective and the competitors. The actual person racing has their own goals, and finds their personal victories beyond 1st. A single or collection of Top-5, top-10 placings can mean everything to the racer.

But the fan doesn't care about those minor placings (and in cycling, anything after 1st is a minor placing). I feel guilty that I don't care as a fan, because I've been there as the racer. But that's how it goes, I guess.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Of course Kelly > Valverde. Kelly's only like, one of the top 10 cyclists of all time. Valverde > Jalabert though.

And I wouldn't say Nibali's palmarès is necessarily "bigger" than Valverde's, but I'd much rather have the Italian's.

 

[Pricey_sky]

Re: Re:

Yes his results at WCRR gives a great example of what rider he is, how versatile and great rider he is. Do you know how hard is to get a top placement in a race that completely change parcours every year. And to done that year after year! He has 6 medals, and in current peloton you only got two riders with 2 medals! 6 (SIX) Medals!!! He has more medals than some countries (in fact only SIX countries have more medals then him)! Should I remind you he's the all time leader (quite comfortably) in the almost 90 years of WCRR history. Many would say he didn't won it, but I would say his six medals are at least equal to a WCRR Gold, and in my opinion they worth much more

And yet, I bet if you offered to swap him those 6 medals for 1 World Championship gold, he would.

 

[jsem94]

Re:

Of course Kelly > Valverde. Kelly's only like, one of the top 10 cyclists of all time. Valverde > Jalabert though.

And I wouldn't say Nibali's palmarès is necessarily "bigger" than Valverde's, but I'd much rather have the Italian's.

QFT.

Nibali is one of few who have won all three GTs, and he's also on a monument. I think Valverde would give all his FW, Ruta del Sol etc to have Nibali's palmares. Nibali's may have a thinner wallet, but he has a few hundred dollar bills while Valverde's wallet is full of tens.

Edit: not to belittle Valverde's palmares. Vuelta win, 3x LBL, 4x FW etc. One of the top riders of his generation and old school in that he's good all season round (for whatever reason ).

 

[Carols]

I think that the talk should be between Kelly, Jalabert, Valverde and other historical all-rounders.

Nibali doesn't belong to the conversation. I mean he has a very good palmares (incredible for his talent base), but he is a 1-dimensional rider.

All 3 GTs and a monument is one dimensional???

 

[SevenTimeTdfChamp]

In a few months valverde is gonna have 2 gt´s under his belt. Also Valverde is much better at doing what he does than nibali is at winning gt´s