Male Cyclist of the year (2014)?

[Jspear]

First of all, I have no respect for posters like yourself who insult other posters that are engaging in thoughtful discussion.

Again I think this is a faulty way to measure palmares. It opens up the door for presumption and excuse making. Contador has so many impressive palmares, there is no reason for this.

I live in a world of facts. Here are some factual statements. Contador raced the 2014 tour de france. Contador did not win the 2014 Tour De France.

Contador lost the race. Just like Wiggins lost the Giro in 2013. He doesn't get off the hook because he dropped out. I don't care if you drop out because your sick, hurt, had bad luck, don't like the weather or whatever. You drop out, that means you lost.
Plus, all these excuses can be attributed to bad racing. When Contador crashed he wasn't at the front of the race. This is bad positioning. He also was eating on a wet descent I believe. Another risky move. These little things can add up. Grand Tours are so hard to win because you have to be nearly perfect the whole time. The rider who is closest to perfect wins. Small mistakes can cost the entire race or can create obstacles that are too big to overcome.

Most of the arguments which I have read, including from yourself, of how Contador should have won that tour revolve around his amazing conditioning. But you have to learn that a grand tour is about a lot more than legs. They aren't racing in a bubble. In a grand tour you need to stand on more than your legs to win and you need to do it for 3 weeks straight.

You have no respect? You do realize that you are being just as unreasonable as anyone else here.

You ask us to look at the facts and then completely smear them. You say "Contador raced the 2014 Tour." That is extremely misleading...he raced HALF of the 2014 Tour. That comment makes it seem as if he raced the entire Tour and lost. If you want to talk about facts you must include all of them, not only the one's that suit you.

 

[offbyone]

You have no respect? You do realize that you are being just as unreasonable as anyone else here.

You ask us to look at the facts and then completely smear them. You say "Contador raced the 2014 Tour." That is extremely misleading...he raced HALF of the 2014 Tour. That comment makes it seem as if he raced the entire Tour and lost. If you want to talk about facts you must include all of them, not only the one's that suit you.

Have you guys every raced a bike or competed in anything? I have raced my bike a good bit. During that time I have had numerous DNFs. Sometimes these were due to mechanicals, other times crashes and in some cases it was because I got dropped and it wasn't worth finishing to me. I certainly believe I was beat in all those races.

But you guys believe that if someone quits every race they start, then they can still proudly say, "I am a racer who has never lost a race." Maybe you should go sign up for some iron men events, drop out and then you can brag that you have raced in the iron man and never lost.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Have you guys every raced a bike or competed in anything? I have raced my bike a good bit. During that time I have had numerous DNFs. Sometimes these were due to mechanicals, other times crashes and in some cases it was because I got dropped and it wasn't worth finishing to me. I certainly believe I was beat in all those races.

But you guys believe that if someone quits every race they start, then they can still proudly say, "I am a racer who has never lost a race." Maybe you should go sign up for some iron men events, drop out and then you can brag that you have raced in the iron man and never lost.

One nil to you.

 

[Tonton]

Have you guys every raced a bike or competed in anything? I have raced my bike a good bit. During that time I have had numerous DNFs. Sometimes these were due to mechanicals, other times crashes and in some cases it was because I got dropped and it wasn't worth finishing to me. I certainly believe I was beat in all those races.

But you guys believe that if someone quits every race they start, then they can still proudly say, "I am a racer who has never lost a race." Maybe you should go sign up for some iron men events, drop out and then you can brag that you have raced in the iron man and never lost.

Very well put.

 

[cineteq]

Have you guys every raced a bike or competed in anything? I have raced my bike a good bit. During that time I have had numerous DNFs. Sometimes these were due to mechanicals, other times crashes and in some cases it was because I got dropped and it wasn't worth finishing to me. I certainly believe I was beat in all those races.

Yet another super post, well said.

 

[cineteq]

Now i'm starting to doubt you can actually read.

I've seen this way to many times from you two. It's tiresome. Telling people if they can read or not, is your new way to look the other way and ignore the facts? I think it's called "being in denial".

 

[Jspear]

Have you guys every raced a bike or competed in anything? I have raced my bike a good bit. During that time I have had numerous DNFs. Sometimes these were due to mechanicals, other times crashes and in some cases it was because I got dropped and it wasn't worth finishing to me. I certainly believe I was beat in all those races.

But you guys believe that if someone quits every race they start, then they can still proudly say, "I am a racer who has never lost a race." Maybe you should go sign up for some iron men events, drop out and then you can brag that you have raced in the iron man and never lost.

You pretty much avoided what I was saying in my last post. You are making it seem like AC rode the entirety of the Tour and lost out to Nibali. That is dishonest. He DID NOT. Let me also make this clear. NIBALI WON THE TOUR. But if you go and look at the 163 riders that are underneath his name, AC's name is not there.

 

[pigoonse]

Have you guys every raced a bike or competed in anything? I have raced my bike a good bit. During that time I have had numerous DNFs. Sometimes these were due to mechanicals, other times crashes and in some cases it was because I got dropped and it wasn't worth finishing to me. I certainly believe I was beat in all those races.

But you guys believe that if someone quits every race they start, then they can still proudly say, "I am a racer who has never lost a race." Maybe you should go sign up for some iron men events, drop out and then you can brag that you have raced in the iron man and never lost.

Agree with the points you make. Well said.

 

[LaFlorecita]

What's actually happening is that some people here are claiming stuff, and when other people simply point out that the arguments aren't true they either change it into something ridiculous to fit their own agenda, or they simply get butthurt.

/thead imo

That is exactly what's happening.

 

[LaFlorecita]

You pretty much avoided what I was saying in my last post. You are making it seem like AC rode the entirety of the Tour and lost out to Nibali. That is dishonest. He DID NOT. Let me also make this clear. NIBALI WON THE TOUR. But if you go and look at the 163 riders that are underneath his name, AC's name is not there.

This.

Nibali won the Tour.
Contador did not.
Nibali did not beat Contador.

Can't believe some people can't get that into their heads.

 

[LaFlorecita]

All you guys want to play the what if all the top riders were in top form and didn't have any problems game? Great. You can say maybe Contador would have won or actually maybe Froome or whoever. But all that means nothing. Contador was not on the podium.
You should celebrate his actual victories, he has enough spectacular ones that you don't need to live in fantasy land.

You are just twisting what we are saying. We are not claiming Contador won the 2014 TDF, or would have won, or is the moral winner. We are claiming Nibali did not beat Contador, because they did not both race the entire race. Is that so hard to understand? You are being unfair and twisting the facts by saying Nibali beat Contador, because guess what, he wasn't in the race any longer. Why can't you just say, Nibali won, Contador did not? Why do you so desperately want to claim Contador was beaten by Nibali? Do you not see that that isn't how it works in cycling? Contador was beaten by luck, stupidity or whatever, and got eliminated by a crash. NOT by Nibali.

It does not look good on you if you just start making things up.

 

[Red Rick]

I've seen this way to many times from you two. It's tiresome. Telling people if they can read or not, is your new way to look the other way and ignore the facts? I think it's called "being in denial".

No, this is me actually meaning that you take words out of context, which did again. This time i was actually meaning something else, and you take it literally, which I think you do just to keep arguing on.

As to the whole beat-didn't beat *****ing contest. I consider someone beat if it was clear he was never gonna win and then crashes out. If Contador is still 1 minute back in the last stage and manages to crash out on the last stage, I consider him beat. Fact is that he was still very much in contention at the point that he crashed out, had arguably shown previously that he was the best uphill 2 days before he crashed. If Nibali made a move downhill which caused AC to take risks downhill which caused him to crash Nibali had a direct part in AC not winning. Fact is that he didn't. AC crashed because of a lot of bad luck while making an unsafe move. Let's be serious, unless you crash on purpose, there's always luck involved in crashing and staying upright. Nibali did not have anything to do with the crash, so Nibali didn't have any influence on AC not finishing, ergo, he didn't beat him.

FYI, if the situation would've been the exact reverse, I'd also say that AC didn't beat Nibali

 

[Mellow Velo]

At least the debate as to who was the best cyclist had some merit.
Now it's ridiculous semantics over the inability to accept defeat.
The already intense level of fanboyism has cranked up several notches.

 

[LaFlorecita]

At least the debate as to who was the best cyclist had some merit.
Now it's ridiculous semantics over the inability to accept defeat.
The already intense level of fanboyism has cranked up several notches.

this man is talking sense

 

[bicifan]

The most entertaining thread for sure. The Contador phanatics won't let go.

 

[LaFlorecita]

The most entertaining thread for sure. The Contador phanatics won't let go.

And you don't mention the Nibali phanatics because...?

 

[scholar]

Would any of the people denying that Nibali beat Contador in this year's Tour also deny that he beat Wiggins in last year's Giro?

 

[Dr. Juice]

Would any of the people denying that Nibali beat Contador in this year's Tour also deny that he beat Wiggins in last year's Giro?

When Wiggins retired they had already done the long ITT where Wiggins should have gained time + Nibali already showed to be stronger in the first real mountain stage. He surely would have won anyway. Everything points to that.
Completely different to Contador ( you speak of A. Contador!) this year at the Tour. The mountains were still to come (AC's territory) with an on form Alberto to go ballistic.

 

[Jspear]

Would any of the people denying that Nibali beat Contador in this year's Tour also deny that he beat Wiggins in last year's Giro?

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

 

[Tonton]

The MCOTY 2014 is Vino. On the podium in Paris, never beat by Contador or Froome, Olympic Champion, congrats Vino!

 

[Parker]

Going back to the original question as to. the rider of the year, for me it's clearly Simon Gerrans.

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

He's a rider of fairly limited abilities and he maximises them. People like to say that cycling is chess or poker on wheels, well this guy is Kasparov or Unger.

 

[Tonton]

Going back to the original question as to. the rider of the year, for me it's clearly Simon Gerrans.

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

He's a rider of fairly limited abilities and he maximises them. People like to say that cycling is chess or poker on wheels, well this guy is Kasparov or Unger.

What a joke. You never cease to amaze me. It's not about who made the biggest bang for its bucks (and then Bouhani?), but who got the biggest bucks.

Kasparov...no less

 

[richo36]

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.)

 

[Red Rick]

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

 

[nhowson]

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

e.g. Stage in Tour of Poland = Stage in TdF.

Yeah man, yeah.