Male Cyclist of the year (2014)?

[Bushman]

He had four World Tour wins - no other team got more than three. And he had two podiums (three if you include the Worlds).

What kind of bull**** is this? Contador alone has something like 7 World Tour wins. Tony Martin also had 7 wins (a lot of them itts of course). I think this is the most wrong "fact" I ever heard of.

 

[The Hitch]

Lol Gerrans is a chessmaster now. It takes brains to follow wheels all day every day regardless of the situation

It's tactically sound to lose a wc race you are favourite for because you don't know a single other tactic besides the most basic one?

 

[richo36]

You're not proving who's the best rider of the year, you're proving what's wrong with your points scale

I'm not saying it's perfect as obviously some races are worth more than others, but it was a less subjective way of me deciding what are the most important races on the calendar. it's also how you evaluate sprinters in the peloton.

If we take degenkolb and kristoff out, the order is:
1. contador
2. Simon
3. Valverde
4. kwiats
5. Nibali

I could argue that is the correct order.

First nibali ONLY got results in July. Therefore case for cyclist of the year is hard to impossible. So he is happily 5th
Simon gerrans won a monument, won a WT race start of the year and 2 WT races at the end of the year, so he has been consistent.
Valverde didn't win a monument, and his 2 WT wins I would argue that San seb is below gerrans wt wins in Canada with FW is on par. So I would put valverde below gerrans.
Kwiats besides the worlds every other race he won, valverde races were better. So I would put valverde above kwiats.
Now contador I would put above gerrans as both have a monument/gt but contadors other wins are better then gerrans.
So therefore:
1.contador
2. Gerrans
3. Valverde
4. Kwiats
5. Nibali

Is in my opinion a good order of how they rate this year. It is just how you rate sprinters, to put degenkolb and kristoff into that order.

 

[richo36]

Lol Gerrans is a chessmaster now. It takes brains to follow wheels all day every day regardless of the situation

It's tactically sound to lose a wc race you are favourite for because you don't know a single other tactic besides the most basic one?

To be fair to gerrans I think that's alittle harsh. It's easy in hindsight to say he should of taken a pull. But if he takes a pull and they catch kwiats and he loses the sprint everyone will say he panicked into taking a pull. He should of just sat back and let others do the work. Sometimes you have to gamble on the outcome. Gerrans gambled and was wrong. Not that he can complain, it works for him time and time again.

 

[LaFlorecita]

No he didn't beat Wiggins in the 2013 Giro, but If Wiggins had stayed in the race Nibali would have smoked him.

Exactly, +1000

 

[LaFlorecita]

I'm not saying it's perfect as obviously some races are worth more than others, but it was a less subjective way of me deciding what are the most important races on the calendar. it's also how you evaluate sprinters in the peloton.

If we take degenkolb and kristoff out, the order is:
1. contador
2. Simon
3. Valverde
4. kwiats
5. Nibali

I could argue that is the correct order.

First nibali ONLY got results in July. Therefore case for cyclist of the year is hard to impossible. So he is happily 5th
Simon gerrans won a monument, won a WT race start of the year and 2 WT races at the end of the year, so he has been consistent.
Valverde didn't win a monument, and his 2 WT wins I would argue that San seb is below gerrans wt wins in Canada with FW is on par. So I would put valverde below gerrans.
Kwiats besides the worlds every other race he won, valverde races were better. So I would put valverde above kwiats.
Now contador I would put above gerrans as both have a monument/gt but contadors other wins are better then gerrans.
So therefore:
1.contador
2. Gerrans
3. Valverde
4. Kwiats
5. Nibali

Is in my opinion a good order of how they rate this year. It is just how you rate sprinters, to put degenkolb and kristoff into that order.

Now this I could agree with

 

[Dr. Juice]

Time to start a new thread: Most disappointing riders in 2014 ...or " surprise of the year + expectations for the future"

 

[cineteq]

I decided to make my own point system to see who I think should get the cyclist of the year. Pretty much point scale is:

GT win/monument/worlds: 5 points
World tour stage race or single day race/classification in gt or wt race:3 points
Stage win in GT or WT stage race: 2
Stage race or single day race non WT/stage win non WT:1

Results:
Simon: 20
tdu-3+3 +2
Lbl-5
Quebec-3
Montreal-3
Nat Road race: 1

Contador: 22
Volta algrave: 1
Tirreno adriatico: 3+2+2
Pais vasco: 3+2
Vuelta: 5+2+2

Valverde: 18
Andulicia: 1+1+1+1
Murcia: 1
Roma maxima: 1
Gp indurian: 1
FW: 3
Nat itt: 1
San Sebastián: 3
Vuelta: 2+2

Nibali: 14
Nat rr: 1
Tour: 5+2+2+2+2

Kristoff: 22

Kwiatowski: 17

Degenkolb: 23

So in order:
1. degenkolb
2. Contador
3. Kristoff ( lost to contador on a count back of removing 1 point races)
4. simon
5. Valverde
6. Kwiatowski
7. Nibali

So Degenkolb is male cyclist of the year, according to my point scale.

(I got lazy towards the end and couldn't be bothered typing all the races.)

You forgot to multiply the Tour results by 2. That'll give Lo Squalo a total of 27, thus giving him the male cyclist of the year. Note: TdF is the most important race in the calendar, the only one with double points according to the rules.

"Now this I could agree with"

 

[Angliru]

I'm not saying it's perfect as obviously some races are worth more than others, but it was a less subjective way of me deciding what are the most important races on the calendar. it's also how you evaluate sprinters in the peloton.

If we take degenkolb and kristoff out, the order is:
1. contador
2. Simon
3. Valverde
4. kwiats
5. Nibali

I could argue that is the correct order.

First nibali ONLY got results in July. Therefore case for cyclist of the year is hard to impossible. So he is happily 5th
Simon gerrans won a monument, won a WT race start of the year and 2 WT races at the end of the year, so he has been consistent.
Valverde didn't win a monument, and his 2 WT wins I would argue that San seb is below gerrans wt wins in Canada with FW is on par. So I would put valverde below gerrans.
Kwiats besides the worlds every other race he won, valverde races were better. So I would put valverde above kwiats.
Now contador I would put above gerrans as both have a monument/gt but contadors other wins are better then gerrans.
So therefore:
1.contador
2. Gerrans
3. Valverde
4. Kwiats
5. Nibali

Is in my opinion a good order of how they rate this year. It is just how you rate sprinters, to put degenkolb and kristoff into that order.

In what bizarre world are the two Canadian races equal to or above Fleche Wallone and Classica San Sebastian? This ludicrous.

 

[Red Rick]

In what bizarre world are the two Canadian races equal to or above Fleche Wallone and Classica San Sebastian? This ludicrous.

Obviously, Theo Bos winning 6 stages in Hainan against a bunch of amateurs is surely a bigger achievement than Contador's Tour win in 2010

 

[LaFlorecita]

In what bizarre world are the two Canadian races equal to or above Fleche Wallone and Classica San Sebastian? This ludicrous.

Obviously, Theo Bos winning 6 stages in Hainan against a bunch of amateurs is surely a bigger achievement than Contador's Tour win in 2010

but overall the ranking is not so bad. I'd swap Gerrans and Valverde I guess but that is the only thing I disagree with.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

So, the conclusion is still Valverde is the cyclist of 2014?

 

[LaFlorecita]

So, the conclusion is still Valverde is the cyclist of 2014?

A. Contador 109 45.99%
A. Valverde 41 17.30%

nah

 

[bicifan]

So, the conclusion is still Valverde is the cyclist of 2014?

Reading the posts, I would say most members support Nibali as cyclist of 2014. Valverde is just the guy who scored most WT points.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Reading the posts, I would say most members support Nibali as cyclist of 2014. Valverde is just the guy who scored most WT points.

I suggest have a look at the poll. Just because Nibali fans are the most vocal, he's not the one most members support

 

[richo36]

In what bizarre world are the two Canadian races equal to or above Fleche Wallone and Classica San Sebastian? This ludicrous.

Can you remind me which monument valverde won this year?

Lbl + Canadian classics + tdu is better than FW + San seb + 2 veulta stages

Obviously, Theo Bos winning 6 stages in Hainan against a bunch of amateurs is surely a bigger achievement than Contador's Tour win in 2010

I said it's not perfect. And with the exception of degenkolb and kristoff it got the order right. Or do you disagree?

 

[Carols]

I said it's not perfect. And with the exception of degenkolb and kristoff it got the order right. Or do you disagree?

Yes I disagree .

1. Contador
2. Valverde
3. Nibali
4. Kwiats
5. Gerrans

 

[LaFlorecita]

Yes I disagree .

1. Contador
2. Valverde
3. Nibali
4. Kwiats
5. Gerrans

Contador
Valverde
Gerrans
Kwiatek
Nibali/Kristoff/Degenkolb imo

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

A. Contador 109 45.99%
A. Valverde 41 17.30%

You are right, the guy on the top right is the real winner. Sorry for the interruption

 

[LaFlorecita]

You are right, the guy on the top right is the real winner. Sorry for the interruption

definitely

 

[richo36]

Yes I disagree .

1. Contador
2. Valverde
3. Nibali
4. Kwiats
5. Gerrans

1. Nibali did nothing outside of July, don't understand how he can be above riders who achieved things throughout the year.
2. Besides worlds rr how is the rest of kwiats results better then gerrans?
3. Valverde was the most impressive and consistent rider but he didn't win enough big races to be 2nd ahead of gerrans and kwiats. Both won monuments(counting worlds RR), valverde didn't.

 

[Red Rick]

Opened the thread again to see dumb arguments.

I'm pretty disappointed now

 

[Mellow Velo]

So, the conclusion is still Valverde is the cyclist of 2014?

The conclusion is that there is little or no objectivity in this thread.
Two fan tribes at war over who is best and they are both wrong.

 

[pigoonse]

You're not proving who's the best rider of the year, you're proving what's wrong with your points scale

Cheer up Red Rick

You made me lol and smile with your above comment and I hardly ever do these days.

 

[LaFlorecita]

The conclusion is that there is little or no objectivity in this thread.
Two fan tribes at war over who is best and they are both wrong.

How can it be wrong when it's an opinion

especially when our opinion is supported by the members of this forum and the international journalists