Male Cyclist of the year (2014)?

[search]

Agree.
When is the last time we had a such a winner?

Merckx 1975, as far as I can see

edit: too slow

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Merckx. However if we include Worlds, then Bettini was only a bike-length away from doing that in 2006, and Boonen did it the year before. Argentin and Moser were very close as well. However the last one to win two (and three) monuments and the Worlds in the same season since Boonen was Merckx in 1971.

Thanks. Worlds different ball game than a Monument, but Boonen's trio of big wins was definitely better than a TdF win in any case imo.

Merckx 1975, as far as I can see

edit: too slow

So last rider was Merckx back in '75.

End of discussion methinks.

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

3 monuments in the same season >>> a Tour win.

In fact, 3 monuments in one season >> 2 GT's in one season

 

[LaFlorecita]

In fact, 3 monuments in one season >> 2 GT's in one season

Giro-Vuelta, just maybe. TDF + another GT still beats it by a mile. IMO of course.

 

[cineteq]

In fact, 3 monuments in one season >> 2 GT's in one season

The impossibilty makes it true

 

[Miburo]

In fact, 3 monuments in one season >> 2 GT's in one season

Nope, just no unless one of them isn't the tour then maybe

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

Giro-Vuelta, just maybe. TDF + another GT still beats it by a mile. IMO of course.

Nope, just no unless one of them isn't the tour then maybe

To my knowledge, there's only one rider who ever succeeded in winning three monuments in one season. He even did it thrice (1969, 1971, 1972). His name is Eddy Merckx.

 

[scholar]

My entirely subjective opinion:

1 Monument < 1 GT win
2 Monuments > 1 GT win

 

[Red Rick]

In fact, 3 monuments in one season >> 2 GT's in one season

Lol, ****ing no

I'd rather win Giro-Tour than 3 monuments + WC

For dutchies, I think by doing the latter it would mean you are world champion and won 3 races only the fans care about. You've won the one race that everyone actually watches and the race which is actually known to be the hardes, most beautiful stage race in the world.

 

[Jspear]

1) put a 34 in the mix.
2) I've already said that cycling is not a matter of percentage. Terpstra will have raced for 103 days altogether. When you ride so much you run a lot more risks to get some poor results because other riders are not as stakhanovists as you are.

Besides Terpstra has a lot more diversity in his calendar. He started on the track, then asphalt stage races with ITT's, "berg" races, Paris-Roubaix and then some hilly stage races.

Same for Cancellara. On which terrain was Contador better than Cancellara this year? Certainly not in ITT's, certainly not in sprints, certainly not in hills, certainly not on cobbles. Only remains the mountains. But of course, Cancellara is 81kg ...

Cancellara is the most all-round of all riders. Hence he's the best rider, period.




But why is it that you always have the same reactions as me, you?




"Paris-Roubaix is the biggest cycling race in the world, bigger than the Tour de France, bigger than any other bike race," (Sir Bradley Wiggins)

"Paris-Roubaix is a race that you are just happy to finish because it's so hard. The hardest race in the world." (Thor Hushovd)

"It's harder than the Tour of France" (Philippe Gilbert after finishing Paris-Roubaix for the only time in 2007)

"You can't feel confident or cocky about Paris-Roubaix, it's the hardest race in the world" (Roger Hammond)
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...out-roubaix-chances-69644#DL5h1m8P0hU5zB8U.99

That settles it then. Winning Paris-Roubaix is bigger than winning the Tour of France. Not Echoes speaking, the riders...

You do realize that those riders do not represent the opinions of the entire peloton? If you torture something long and hard enough you can make it say anything you want.

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

Lol, ****ing no

I'd rather win Giro-Tour than 3 monuments + WC

Well, there's a bunch of rider's who did the Giro-Tour double. All of them legends, no doubt. But there's only one legend who won three monument's in one season.

 

[Electress]

"Paris-Roubaix is the biggest cycling race in the world, bigger than the Tour de France, bigger than any other bike race," (Sir Bradley Wiggins)

"Paris-Roubaix is a race that you are just happy to finish because it's so hard. The hardest race in the world." (Thor Hushovd)

"It's harder than the Tour of France" (Philippe Gilbert after finishing Paris-Roubaix for the only time in 2007)

"You can't feel confident or cocky about Paris-Roubaix, it's the hardest race in the world" (Roger Hammond)
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...out-roubaix-chances-69644#DL5h1m8P0hU5zB8U.99

That settles it then. Winning Paris-Roubaix is bigger than winning the Tour of France. Not Echoes speaking, the riders...

'hardest' does not equate with 'most important' Even if I accepted that P-R is the hardest (let's say I do) it doesn't mean it is the most significant win.

Why is the ability to ride cobbles more important than the ability to climb mountains, descend mountains, sprint, perform in a TT?

GTs by their nature require a variety of skill-sets. You cannot be truly crap at anything and expect to win. For that reason, and the ability to deal with both stage tactics and three week race strategy, as well as rise to perform on individual stages and maintain mental and physical endurance over three weeks, means that winning a GT is much more impressive, IMO. It's also where the desire to win and the no. of riders peaking to win is highest, so the competition is toughest too.

For me, the 'how many monuments or stage races or whatever =' question is really about whether the non-GT race wins show mastery over a range of comparable skills. (Edit - or, I suppose, utter dominance of a speciality to an extent which is unprecedented).

And regarding the second places - my view is that if you've won a few significant races, then 2nd places can augment your achievements. You're a champion who's been consistent across the season. But if you haven't won anything of significance, all the second places in the world don't really make up for it, because ultimately, racing is about winning. Being consistently good at coming second is impressive, but it is also never quite being good enough.

 

[Netserk]

In the same season:

1 monument < 1 GT < 2 monuments < 2 GTs < 3 monuments < 4 monuments < 3 GTs < 5 monuments

 

[Red Rick]

Winning a monument these days is so dependent on luck that it's not even funny.

I'd take skill over luck anyday.

Winning all 3 GT's in one year would be the sickest achievement an athlete can do in one year imo.

 

[Netserk]

Winning a monument these days is so dependent on luck that it's not even funny.

I'd take skill over luck anyday.

Winning all 3 GT's in one year would be the sickest achievement an athlete can do in one year imo.

You can be lucky to win one monument, but you can't be lucky to win two or three in the same season. It's much harder to win a monument as the favourite than a GT.

 

[Red Rick]

You can be lucky to win one monument, but you can't be lucky to win two or three in the same season. It's much harder to win a monument as the favourite than a GT.

It's also way easier to be in decent/good shape in all monuments

 

[The Hitch]

You can be lucky to win one monument, but you can't be lucky to win two or three in the same season. It's much harder to win a monument as the favourite than a GT.

But you can be a favourite for multiple monuments in the season or at least its far easier to imagine.

Gilbert 2011 was a candidate for the win in 4.

To win all 3 gts, you aren't going to be a favourite for all 3. The third one you will be so exhausted from the first 2 that even luck isn't going to win it for you.

So its easier to win monuments where multiple factors come into play. You can rely a little more on luck on one, on tactics in other, on injuries in another, and with a bit of luck can go on a streak like that.

In gts since pure strentgh is 90% of the battle, and that deteriorates from gt to gt its actually pretty much impossible for someone to win all 3.

 

[HSNHSN]

Why are all monuments ranked equally in this discussion? Are they really considered to be of equal importance?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

In the Clinic people would be called trolls for the way this topic has headed.

http://www.uci.ch/road/ucievents/2014-road-uci-worldtour/360432014/widgets/rankings/

Statistics dont lie, people bend.

 

[Netserk]

In the Clinic people would be called trolls for the way this topic has headed.

http://www.uci.ch/road/ucievents/2014-road-uci-worldtour/360432014/widgets/rankings/

Statistics dont lie, people bend.

Clearly Purito was cyclist of the year in 2012, better than both Wiggins and Boonen

 

[scholar]

Clearly Purito was cyclist of the year in 2012, better than both Wiggins and Boonen

For that matter clearly Rui Costa was better than Nibali this season. I mean, wouldn't anyone take a stage and the GC at Suisse (plus the points jersey at Algarve) over the Italian national RR champs and 4 stages plus the GC at the Tour?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Clearly Purito was cyclist of the year in 2012, better than both Wiggins and Boonen

Wasnt he?

For me he was, sorry. Stop proving my point.

 

[Echoes]

For that matter clearly Rui Costa was better than Nibali this season. I mean, wouldn't anyone take a stage and the GC at Suisse (plus the points jersey at Algarve) over the Italian national RR champs and 4 stages plus the GC at the Tour?

Yes

3 chars only

 

[Netserk]

Wasnt he?

For me he was, sorry. Stop proving my point.

Without looking it(rankings) up, who was rider of the year in 2010 in your opinion?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Wasnt he?

For me he was, sorry. Stop proving my point.

Rankings also take into account placings while people care more about wins.

For me Boonen was rider of the year in 2012.