Male Cyclist of the year (2014)?

[scholar]

LBL is also the Monument with the best field, I don't think anyone will deny that.

Really?

10char

 

[El Pistolero]

Really?

10char

What Monument has a better field? Surely not Roubaix.

 

[Netserk]

What Monument has a better field? Surely not Roubaix.

How many of the contenders have Liège as number 1 goal of the year?

 

[El Pistolero]

How many of the contenders have Liège as number 1 goal of the year?

How many contenders can realistically win Roubaix?

Simon Gerrans, Valverde, Philippe Gilbert, Dan Martin, Kwiatkowski, Joaquim Rodriguez, etc all have LBL as a major goal.

 

[scholar]

What Monument has a better field? Surely not Roubaix.

As my formatting made clear, I was disagreeing less with your claim (although I'm hardly convinced by it) than with your trolling expression of expectation that everyone would agree.

 

[GoodTimes]

How many of the contenders have Liège as number 1 goal of the year?

Arguably a couple

Would not be surprised if LBL were number 1 on the calender for the likes of Martin, Gerrans, Valverde (maybe a stretch for this list), Gilbert, etc.

I love cobbled classics. Generally, they are the best races of the year. But... I think the majority of serious cycling talent is groomed towards sprinting / hills / mountains / TT, rather than cobbles (not to take anything away from the cobbled specialists, they are some of the best, if not THE best, riders out there).

I think it would be interesting to look at it financially. I bet the top 20 at LBL are higher paid than the top 20 at PR.

 

[El Pistolero]

As my formatting made clear, I was disagreeing less with your claim (although I'm hardly convinced by it) than with your trolling expression of expectation that everyone would agree.

It's basically a fact. A lot more riders are good on hills than they are on cobbles.

 

[Netserk]

How many contenders can realistically win Roubaix?

Simon Gerrans, Valverde, Philippe Gilbert, Dan Martin, Kwiatkowski, Joaquim Rodriguez, etc all have LBL as a major goal.

How many contenders can realistically win the Tour?

Yet there's still plenty who has it as goal number 1.

Neither Purito nor Valverde had Liège as number 1 goal this year. Many of the contenders have GTs as their primary goal of the year. In Roubaix pretty much everyone up there has it as number 1 goal of the year.

 

[El Pistolero]

And then they dissapear for the rest of the year because outside of cobbles they're mediocre riders. *cough* Vanmarcke *cough*

Last few years the field is getting better though with the likes of Sagan, Degenkolb and Kristoff.

Your post basically proves my point. The riders in LBL can perform throughout the season, a lot of the cobbled specialists can't. Devolder, Nuyens, Vanmarcke, Vansummeren, Terpstra, Langeveld, Gaudin, Turgot, Pozzato, etc

 

[Netserk]

Arguably a couple

Would not be surprised if LBL were number 1 on the calender for the likes of Martin, Gerrans, Valverde (maybe a stretch for this list), Gilbert, etc.

I love cobbled classics. Generally, they are the best races of the year. But... I think the majority of serious cycling talent is groomed towards sprinting / hills / mountains / TT, rather than cobbles (not to take anything away from the cobbled specialists, they are some of the best, if not THE best, riders out there).

I think it would be interesting to look at it financially. I bet the top 20 at LBL are higher paid than the top 20 at PR.

That is because GT riders are those who are paid the most, and several of those also ride Liège.

Of those who contests the cobble classics, the majority are specialists.

 

[Netserk]

And then they dissapear for the rest of the year because outside of cobbles they're mediocre riders. *cough* Vanmarcke *cough*

Last few years the field is getting better though with the likes of Sagan, Degenkolb and Kristoff.

Your post basically proves my point. The riders in LBL can perform throughout the season, a lot of the cobbled specialists can't. Devolder, Nuyens, Vanmarcke, Vansummeren, Terpstra, etc

If there were as many races with cobbles as there are with hills, you'd see them active during the whole year.

 

[El Pistolero]

But there aren't, so most talented cyclists become climbers, sprinters or puncheurs/hilly riders.

But like I said, I'm mostly talking about Roubaix. I think the Ronde has a great field. Not quite LBL level though.

 

[Netserk]

But there aren't, so most talented cyclists become climbers, sprinters or puncheurs/hilly riders.

But like I said, I'm mostly talking about Roubaix. I think the Ronde has a great field. Not quite LBL level though.

Yet it happens often that the winner of Liège didn't even have it as number 1 goal of the year, yet manages to beat all the über talented hilly riders who base their season around it

Who was the last who managed to win Roubaix without having it as number 1 goal of the year?

Says a lot about the level in the two races...

 

[Angliru]

Well, Boonen has won 3 Monuments solo. How many riders in this peloton have won 3 Monuments at all? Lol. I think only 3 riders in the current peloton have won at least 3 Monuments.

I'd also rate the WC RR over at least 2 WC TT. It's just a lot more prestigious. You need brains, luck and strength to win the RR. The strongest rider always wins the TT, that's why it's a boring discipline imo.

So Bettini's 2 WC RR titles and his Olympic RR title are a lot better than 4 WC TT titles and an Olympic TT title imo. LBL is also the Monument with the best field, I don't think anyone will deny that.

For me Bettini is the best one day racer of this century.

And let's be honest, when Cancellara dominated the time trials his competition was pathetic.

Now at least we have Tony Martin, Bradley Wiggins and Tom Dumoulin. Bradley Wiggins is older than Cancellara and can still win the WC TT, so age isn't an excuse for Cancellara. He beat duds for the most part. He beat Zabriskie in 2006 (biggest win is a stage win in Romandie), Bodrogi in 2007 (biggest win is a prologue in P-N), Gustav Larsson in 2009 (biggest win a TT in the Giro) and Millar in 2010 (the only good cyclist he beat).

In Cancellara's defense, if I recall correctly he has been less focused on the ITT as a discipline and more on the WCRR and the classics, at least within the past 2 years or so. Maybe he's spending less time on his tt bike and more on his sprint so that when folks ride his wheel in breaks he has something (burst of speed) left to get the win in the end.

 

[El Pistolero]

In Cancellara's defense, if I recall correctly he has been less focused on the ITT as a discipline and more on the WCRR and the classics, at least within the past 2 years or so. Maybe he's spending less time on his tt bike and more on his sprint so that when folks ride his wheel in breaks he has something (burst of speed) left to get the win in the end.

Wasn't very succesful at the WC this year or last year though! Despite abandoning the Tour, Eneco Tour and Vuelta for it... Very disrespectful towards the race organisers.

 

[GoodTimes]

So backing up a moment, it occurs to me that the argument is maybe a bit flawed...

We are hearing it argued that the race with the best field has the most riders targeting it as #1 goal for the season.

But we kjnow this isn't true. Almost none of the contenders target Dauphine as a major (let alone, #1) goal for the season. Yet, due to where it is on the calender, it has probably the strongest field of any 1 week race.

So, for me, the fact that PR is a #1 objective for a small handful of specialists is irrelevant to the relative strength of field contesting the win here.

 

[GoodTimes]

Taking the illustration further, when I was in highscool and competed in alpine skiing, winning the local championship was the #1 goal of the season for all of us competing. Did this mean that it had a stronger field than a pro warmup race that is considered a practice round for all those competing? Absolutely not...

 

[Netserk]

So backing up a moment, it occurs to me that the argument is maybe a bit flawed...

We are hearing it argued that the race with the best field has the most riders targeting it as #1 goal for the season.

But we kjnow this isn't true. Almost none of the contenders target Dauphine as a major (let alone, #1) goal for the season. Yet, due to where it is on the calender, it has probably the strongest field of any 1 week race.

So, for me, the fact that PR is a #1 objective for a small handful of specialists is irrelevant to the relative strength of field contesting the win here.

By that logic Dauphiné has a better field than the Giro pretty much every year.

I'd like to see Talansky, Brajkovic etc. win the Giro...

 

[GoodTimes]

By that logic Dauphiné has a better field than the Giro pretty much every year.

I'd like to see Talansky, Brajkovic etc. win the Giro...

Indeed.

But the point is that the Giro is definitely more prestigious than the Dauphine... however, arguably does not have as strong of a field.

I think the same is true of PR vs LBL. PR (along with maybe WCRR) is the #1 1 day race of the year, bar none. I don't question this. But, perhaps, the field at LBL is deeper / stronger / more talented.

 

[Bushman]

It's basically a fact. A lot more riders are good on hills than they are on cobbles.

But why does that make it more prestigious to win? Maybe PR just takes a more special rider to win, whereas "anyone" who can climb and sprint can win Liege.

 

[Netserk]

Indeed.

But the point is that the Giro is definitely more prestigious than the Dauphine... however, arguably does not have as strong of a field.

I think the same is true of PR vs LBL. PR (along with maybe WCRR) is the #1 1 day race of the year, bar none. I don't question this. But, perhaps, the field at LBL is deeper / stronger / more talented.

No, the field is stronger in the Giro than the Dauphiné for that simple reason that many aren't at their best in Dauphiné. Strength of the field isn't just in the names participating.

 

[El Pistolero]

Dauphiné is an obvious training race, who the hell uses LBL for training? It's perfectly possible to peak for the Tour and LBL. Giro and LBL is a little harder, but not impossible.

And the WC RR is obviously better than P-R, let's not oversell races. I don't really distinguish a lot between Monuments. I could care less if my favorite rider wins the Ronde, Roubaix, LBL, Lombardia or Milan-San Remo. I'd be happy with a Monument win for them. Lombardia used to have the weakest field, but now that it takes place a week after the WC it has a very strong field. The only thing hurting the race is the fact that it doesn't take place during the classics season I guess.

 

[El Pistolero]

But why does that make it more prestigious to win? Maybe PR just takes a more special rider to win, whereas "anyone" who can climb and sprint can win Liege.

I never said LBL was more prestigious. I heavily implied that it's harder to dominate the hilly classics than it is to dominate the cobbled classics. Why? Because the first has a deeper field.

 

[GoodTimes]

No, the field is stronger in the Giro than the Dauphiné for that simple reason that many aren't at their best in Dauphiné. Strength of the field isn't just in the names participating.

I have a hunch that the avg climbing W/kg for the top 10 in Dauphine is higher than Giro. Would be interesting to compare..... granted 1 is the hardest 3 week event known to man, and the other is a 1 week prep race with a few uphill sprints. so perhaps the comparison would be a little bit pointless. And really, has nothing to do with the point I was making.

The point is all a bit moot, but, like it or love it, more young talented riders will pursue and develop climbing skills than cobbled skills. There will be more space in top teams for climbing talent than cobbled talent. There is more money available for climbing talent than cobbled talent. And, as a result, the depth in field in a climbing race is higher than a cobbled race.

 

[Netserk]

I have a hunch that the avg climbing W/kg for the top 10 in Dauphine is higher than Giro. Would be interesting to compare..... granted 1 is the hardest 3 week event known to man, and the other is a 1 week prep race with a few uphill sprints. so perhaps the comparison would be a little bit pointless. And really, has nothing to do with the point I was making.

The point is all a bit moot, but, like it or love it, more young talented riders will pursue and develop climbing skills than cobbled skills. There will be more space in top teams for climbing talent than cobbled talent. There is more money available for climbing talent than cobbled talent. And, as a result, the depth in field in a climbing race is higher than a cobbled race.

Climbing talent = Mountains = Tour de France =/= Liège