- Mar 17, 2009
- 1,863
- 0
- 0
God you're hard to please.laziali said:As for Bauer, my opinion is that, overall taking into account his entire career, he was OK but not great. I say that having regard to my memory of his palmares, and the circumstances in which they arose. I think there are very few riders who are truly "great", so let's not misunderstand one another on definitional issues. So, for me, Bauer would have been closer to my definition of "great" if he had hit the following:
- He had won gold, not silver, in the '84 Olympics.
- He had won gold, not bronze, at the Barca Worlds.
- He had finished better than 4th in the '88 Tour, which was a comparatively weak field (he was beaten by Delgado, Rooks and Parra).
- He had won the '88 worlds (I know, I know, crashes are bad luck, but the fact remains he didn't win).
- He hadn't lost P-R by a millimetre or whatever it was.
- He hadn't relinquished yellow in '90 to Ronan Pensec of all people.
- He hadn't embarrassed himself with that chopper bike at P-R (I forget which edition, but he was out of contract that spring).
By way of comparison, riders who spring to mind as being truly "great" from Bauer's era include Hinault, Lemond, Kelly.
I think all will agree that there are great riders and there are riders who become one of The Greats. Coppi, Merckx, Hinault & Anquetil are in the latter category without question. Other riders are or aren't in the same league depending on one's opinion. Indurain, Lemond, Kelly, Fignon & Armstrong would fit this mould. But there are many, many riders across the eras who were great riders. Mottet, Bauer, Tafi, Millar, Vanderaerden etc all were great riders despite not crushing all before them.

Bauer did win GP Zurich in 89, as well as spending a fortnight in yellow in his career. His loss to Pensec in 1990 was inevitable when you consider Pensec was more of a climber than Bauer was, with two podium finishes in the Daupine in 86 & 87. It didn't help that Bauer's 7-11 team was not designed to help him win the Tour, but was centred around Hampsten who was more likely to win.
To say that the 88 Tour had a weak field is not accurate at all. Delgado had already got on the podium in the Tour the previous year, as well as finishing 7th in the Giro. Rooks & Theunisse were like a Dutch tag team and Parra finished 7th in his first Tour in 85 taking the White Jersey to boot. Hampsten the Giro winner was there, as was Herrera, who had won the Polka-dot jersey in 85 & 87. Just because Lemond wasn't there & Fignon didn't finish one cannot say it was a weak field. If you do then almost every one of Armstrong's wins was against a weak field as Jan had eaten all the pies, Beloki had lost in his head. The only Tour I can think of in recent times with a weakened field is 2006, and that was due to Operation Puerto.