Milan-Sanremo underrated !

[Echoes]

I was reading the Montepaschi thread and ...

If Milan-San Remo is a hilly classic because it has Cipressa and Poggio di Sanremo, then Liège-Bastogne-Liège is a cobbled classic for the two tiny sections of them.

Well OK, I hate sprinters with a passion. Those riders who only make a true effort for 250m after staying peacefully in the peloton all day long.

Yet, I've watched my first Milan Sanremo in 1992 at age 8. Kelly won. In those days, nobody could have thought it would once finish with a sprint. No way in hell !

1997 was a big shock. And yet, in 1998, the sprint could have been avoided if Colombo didn't chase Elli for Zabel (bribe?). In 1999, sprint was avoided. So it all started in 2000.

How to explain all these sprints in the noughties? I guess we'd have to go to the clinic section.

By the way I've started this thread, last year (I feel strongly about this): http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=6415


Here are some quotes by all time greats (that I translated myself from French or Dutch into English), truly depicting what this great classic is all about. I'd take Milan Sanremo over Flanders any freaking day.

In the first kilometers of the Poggio, I increased the speed to test the sprinters. They were still all there: Sercu, Verbeeck, De Vlaeminck, Leman, Basso. All in all, the distance (288km) was my main ally. […] I went for it leading in the descent. In the first turn, raging Motta and Wolfshohl got the inside but in the 5th turn I went back didn’t look back again. […]
I was sure of myself, very fresh, and under these conditions, piloting was perfect. Absolute control is required.

Eddy Merckx - Plus d'un tour dans mon sac : mes carnets de route de 1972 - Arts & Voyages, 1972

In the climbing of the Poggio, Frans Verbeeck and Régis Ovion did a great job but when I saw De Vlaeminck passing first on the top, I believed in his chances. He sure must have made a great descent and take all the risks he needed to escape the way he did. […]
When a descent like that of the Poggio di Sanremo, is situated in the very last kilometers of the race, you have to accept risks. However, you can only do it if you’re fresh.
De Vlaeminck, sure, was, at the end of this close to 300km race (a distance that is rarely reached in modern classics).

Eddy Merckx - Mes 50 victoires en 1973 - Arts & voyages, 1973

He (Gallopin) started to make me think I could win Milan Sanremo. I first found the idea ludicrous. […] But Gallopin who started to know by heart my qualities and my weaknesses […] knew as well as I did that I needed a lot of kilometers in order to make my physique work. The 294 of Milan Sanremo, then, demanded unfailing stamina to which you had to add undeniable punching skills in the last 10km with the passing of the Poggio. Gallopin repeated it to me: “it’s for you, believe me.”

Laurent Fignon - Nous étions jeunes et innocents - Grasset 2009

Milan Sanremo can still be won in the Poggio and, most of all, in the descent. […] The Poggio comes up after 285km of racing: you need to be fresh, clear-minded, not just fast.

Eddy Merckx - Tout Eddy (Stéphane Thirion) - Jourdan 2006

It wrongly has that reputation [of being a race for sprinters]. I won it 7 times and I was not a sprinter, not more than Zabel or Cancellara. […] In the Primavera, the distance worked like a steamroller and my main rivals didn’t have the resistance that I acquired during the Six-Days [the true ones, not the modern ones]. I was better prepared than Gimondi, Godefroot, De Vlaeminck or Janssen. I could be beaten in a sprint after 200km but not after 280km because I managed to maintain the same standard when the others declined, this is why I could make the difference in the Poggio. […]

In Paris-Nice[1966] I was beaten by Durante in a 150k stage. Hence I wasn’t favourite but I managed to get back with Poulidor in the Poggio. Durante was there too. And there I beat him. The distance worked but also the Via Roma which suited me and it’s eyewash slope. […]

I didn’t like the Tour of Flanders too much. It’s a nice classic, made for the specialists with it’s climbs ridden sprinting, its turns which spared recovery times. The “Ronde” was too slow, and not hard enough. I needed 20 to 30km more to make the difference. […] I preferred fast races with high average speed which killed the riders, just like the Primavera, where you have to ride 50kmh during 30km in the wind, without braking and without lifting your head. In the end it’s exhausting.

All by Eddy Merckx to Philippe Brunel in Vélo Magazine #472, March 2010

In the Tour of Flanders, the climbs are so short that the sprinters can often come back. Besides, in my time there were fewer climbs. In Paris-Roubaix, the cobbles really make it hard but it’s also turning, re-starting from standstill or sort of. I liked races with longer climbs better or races such as Milan Sanremo, with kilometers long straight lines and a high speed. Then I was still fresh enough for a powerful attack in the final kilometers

Eddy Merckx - De Flandriens (the book corresponding to the TV program) - Canvas / Borgeroff & Lambrechts 2010

Tour of Flanders and Paris-Roubaix are certainly the most beautiful races. I find the Tour of Lombardy and Milan Sanremo more beautiful.

Roger De Vlaeminck - De Flandriens (the book corresponding to the TV program) - Canvas / Borgeroff & Lambrechts 2010

In Milan Sanremo, it’s all about shape. The beginning is easy but then we’re racing very hard. Then comes the first climb and the descent to the coast. Most of the time, it still goes very fast then and if you’re not in top form, you’re dead after 200km. But then you still have to do 80km…

Cesare Del Cancia (1937 winner and still alive !!!!) to Benjo Maso - De Klassieker - LJ Veen 2011

 

[hrotha]

300 km with some hills thrown in towards the end is no longer an insurmountable obstacle for anyone but the strongest riders because the average level of the pro field has risen lots since the 80s thanks to better training and also clinicness. If the race is less selective now, the chances of a reduced (or not so reduced) group finish increase.

 

[El Pistolero]

Eddy Merckx also said Milan-San Remo is worth a lot less now that it doesn't finish anymore on the Via Roma.

Just sayin'

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

Also, a lot of teams have a top sprinter, so they don't want to avoid a sprint.
Others have no top sprinter, but also nobody who can force a break...

I don't expect to end it in a sprint this year, btw...

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

it's most overrated classic there is. boring race until the end and ends up usually in a sprint.

 

[Ferminal]

But is it worth watching apart from the 30km from Cipressa to the finish?

 

[El Pistolero]

But is it worth watching apart from the 30km from Cipressa to the finish?

I usually just put on the TV, so I can hear the commentators, but only start watching at the Cipressa.

 

[ingsve]

Another big difference is that in the past the season had just started when MSR came around but in the last 10 years the season has extended with half the field starting their season in January and everyone is well on their way by the end of February. With all riders having many more kms in their legs already the 300km of MSR and the small bumps are not as decisive as they once were.

 

[Roland Rat]

But is it worth watching apart from the 30km from Cipressa to the finish?

The scenery is stunning.

I'll have it on in the background while dozing on the sofa after the morning's ride/race, and set an alarm for 50k to go.

 

[Met de Versnelling]

MSR is the monument i watch the least of, i'm glued to the other 4 for as long as TV allows me, but i tend to go from Cipressa onwards with it as well.

True though, absolutely stunning scenery, probably on of the most, if not the best looking one day race out there.

 

[Lanark]

I don't think it's underrated. Everyone agrees it's one of the most important one day races of the season. It's just that the preparation for the finale can be a bit boring, nothing happens before the Cipressa, or even the Poggio. Of course the good thing about that is that the race is usually exciting untill the finish line, with loads of guys who can still win.

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

True though, absolutely stunning scenery, probably on of the most, if not the best looking one day race out there.

montepaschi strade bianche might be better (if fully covered)

Toscana is so beautiful

 

[forty four]

i did not know it was not always a sprint finish type of thing which i find boring. too bad its not how it was in the days of kelly and the like.

 

[El Pistolero]

Perhaps they should only allow 6 cyclists per team for the classics. WOULD WORK A LOT BETTER THEN DITCHING THE RADIOS.

 

[Kvinto]

San Remo isn't underrated, San Remo isn't overrated, it occupies the place it should occupy. You can like or hate sprinters but they are the part of cycling and deserve their monument.

 

[Bumeington]

The point is from the top of the Poggio to the finish line there is now the descent and then a few k of flat. The course in the past more or less finished at the bottom of the descent, this is the difference. It's harder to make an attack on the Poggio (or the Poggio descent) stick, since there are 5 flat kilometers afterwards to reel in the attackers.

In sum: Course change = more sprint wins.

 

[El Pistolero]

It should end on the descend of the poggio

2011: Philippe Gilbert
2012: Philippe Gilbert
2013: Philippe Gilbert
2014: Philippe Gilbert

xD

 

[Magnus]

I can't help but think that Zabel changed the way the race is viewed by the sprinters.

 

[red_flanders]

San Remo isn't underrated, San Remo isn't overrated, it occupies the place it should occupy. You can like or hate sprinters but they are the part of cycling and deserve their monument.

I think what people lament is the change from a race that the top riders, the champions could win, to a race that's primarily the domain of riders who are more sprinters than champions.

Look at the post-war winner list.

1946 Fausto Coppi (ITA)
1947 Gino Bartali (ITA)
1948 Fausto Coppi (ITA)
1949 Fausto Coppi (ITA)
1950 Gino Bartali (ITA)
1951 Louison Bobet (FRA)
1952 Loretto Petrucci (ITA)
1953 Loretto Petrucci (ITA)
1954 Rik Van Steenbergen (BEL)
1955 Germain Derycke (BEL)
1956 Fred De Bruyne (BEL)
1957 Miguel Poblet (ESP)
1958 Rik van Looy (BEL)
1959 Miguel Poblet (ESP)
1960 René Privat (FRA)
1961 Raymond Poulidor (FRA)
1962 Emile Daems (BEL)
1963 Joseph Groussard (FRA)
1964 Tom Simpson (GBR)
1965 Arie den Hartog (NED)
1966 Eddy Merckx (BEL)
1967 Eddy Merckx (BEL)
1968 Rudi Altig (GER)
1969 Eddy Merckx (BEL)
1970 Michele Dancelli (ITA)
1971 Eddy Merckx (BEL)
1972 Eddy Merckx (BEL)
1973 Roger De Vlaeminck (BEL)
1974 Felice Gimondi (ITA)
1975 Eddy Merckx (BEL)
1976 Eddy Merckx (BEL)
1977 Jan Raas (NED)
1978 Roger De Vlaeminck (BEL)
1979 Roger De Vlaeminck (BEL)
1980 Pierino Gavazzi (ITA)
1981 Alfons De Wolf (BEL)
1982 Marc Gomez (FRA)
1983 Giuseppe Saronni (ITA)
1984 Francesco Moser (ITA)
1985 Hennie Kuiper (NED)
1986 Sean Kelly (IRL)
1987 Erich Maechler (SUI)
1988 Laurent Fignon (FRA)
1989 Laurent Fignon (FRA)
1990 Gianni Bugno (ITA)
1991 Claudio Chiappucci (ITA)
1992 Sean Kelly (IRL)
1993 Maurizio Fondriest (ITA)
1994 Giorgio Furlan (ITA)
1995 Laurent Jalabert (FRA)
1996 Gabriele Colombo (ITA)
1997 Erik Zabel (GER)
1998 Erik Zabel (GER)
1999 Andrei Tchmil (BEL)
2000 Erik Zabel (GER)
2001 Erik Zabel (GER)
2002 Mario Cipollini (ITA)
2003 Paolo Bettini (ITA)
2004 Óscar Freire (ESP)
2005 Alessandro Petacchi (ITA)
2006 Filippo Pozzato (ITA)
2007 Óscar Freire (ESP)
2008 Fabian Cancellara (SUI)
2009 Mark Cavendish (GBR)
2010 Óscar Freire (ESP)


The way I look at it, the winners make a change from champions who could and did win tours and all kinds of classics to sprinters and guys with a much more limited type of palmares, with hard questions needed about winners from 1990 and beyond. I'm not saying every rider who won in this period fits the sprinter mold (Cancellara, Bettini), but to me you can see the shift.

 

[Kvinto]

I think what people lament is the change from a race that the top riders, the champions could win, to a race that's primarily the domain of riders who are more sprinters than champions.

Look at the post-war winner list.

...

The way I look at it, the winners make a change from champions who could and did win tours and all kinds of classics to sprinters and guys with a much more limited type of palmares, with hard questions needed about winners from 1990 and beyond. I'm not saying every rider who won in this period fits the sprinter mold (Cancellara, Bettini), but to me you can see the shift.

I understand what people are lament over, they want the plot of LBL I guess

You've mentioned about the "champions who could and did win tours" but I really don't want to see the same faces on the podiums of Giro, LBL, Roubaix and San Remo. In cycling there are different types of riders but why those "champions who could and did win tours" are better than others? I don't want to bring the term "the champion" only to the cyclist who can win on a mountain top finish or so. Yes, the sprint races (and especially the stages of some tour) are boring but does it mean we should prohibit all the flat races or stages and exile every sprinter to a track events?

Yes, San Remo is predictable, but is it more predictable than Fleche Wallonne? It's just the other side of the same stick, San Remo is for very few and FW is for very few, but we're complaining only about M-SR. We have 5 Monuments and they are very different so it's extremely hard for the same rider to gather all 5, but if someone does it, we can be sure he is the champion, the real allrounder of classic races.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Like is stated earlier in the thread, this has to do with the level in the Pro peloton nowadays

Cycling isn't such an 'easy' sport anymore. Might sound disrespectfull for the old champions. But today there are probably hundreds of riders on the physical level of a top rider in 1970...
Hence, hills like Poggio are not nearly hard enough to drop all the sprinters, and most riders are technical enough to keep up in the downhill.

It's just a lot harder to make a difference. Also compare the mountain stages results through the eras.
In the past it was a matter of minutes. Now it's often a matter of seconds already. And you don't see people attacking early. That's not because they are 'cowards' like most people claim, but because when you go early, you'll get hauled back in and dropped. Again, level of peloton is simply much much higher.

 

[El Pistolero]

Like is stated earlier in the thread, this has to do with the level in the Pro peloton nowadays

Cycling isn't such an 'easy' sport anymore. Might sound disrespectfull for the old champions. But today there are probably hundreds of riders on the physical level of a top rider in 1970...
Hence, hills like Poggio are not nearly hard enough to drop all the sprinters, and most riders are technical enough to keep up in the downhill.

It's just a lot harder to make a difference. Also compare the mountain stages results through the eras.
In the past it was a matter of minutes. Now it's often a matter of seconds already. And you don't see people attacking early. That's not because they are 'cowards' like most people claim, but because when you go early, you'll get hauled back in and dropped. Again, level of peloton is simply much much higher.

People didn't specialize in sprints back in the 70s hence they didn't need the tactics that sprinting teams now use. They raced everything on the calender and needed to be able to win on all kinds of terrains, instead of just specializing in one thing. In fact, Eddy Planckaert was one of the first to really specialize in the sprinting department. And I do think the radios play a big role in a race like Milan-San Remo.

Nowadays nothing happens until the Poggio or the Cipressa, but back then they started racing hard really early in the race.

That's pretty much the only reason. And the race also had a different profile in the 70s. And I'm pretty sure the roads were totally different as well...

People complain about overpowered teams nowadays, but HTC fades away to nothing if you compare it to a team like Molteni.

If a 100 active cyclists can match the champions from the 70s then why don't they try and break Eddy Merckxs one hour record? Trust me, you won't find 10 cyclists than can break it. Certainly not if they had ridden what Merckx had ridden that season... And combine that with his back injury...

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Sorry but I think that's too black/white thinking. It's not only that.

Just look at the many different nationalities compared to 1970/1980. Compare the level of training, the science that goes along with it, even the specialized food programs...

It's just at a way higher level.

 

[El Pistolero]

Sorry but I think that's too black/white thinking. It's not only that.

Just look at the many different nationalities compared to 1970/1980. Compare the level of training, the science that goes along with it, even the specialized food programs...

It's just at a way higher level.

Yes, if everyone has pretty much the same training, science and specialized food programs than the advantage is non existant, no?

If everyone had a crappy training, science and crappy food programs everyone would still be fighting with equal weapons, no?

And yes, the big boys have better programs than the small boys now, but the same was true in the 70s.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

One thing I'd like to address is that my quote that started this whole thing off was not intended to disparage Milan-San Remo.

I was simply making the point that Milan-San Remo cannot be considered a hilly classic, because it simply ISN'T. What makes Milan-San Remo what it is is distance; after which a smallish climb becomes a killer. The Cipressa and Poggio are easier than almost any climb in the Ardennes Classics, way easier than the climbs in the Giro di Lombardia and easier than the climbs in San Sebastián. You get tougher climbs in myriad one day races all around Europe. But those don't come after you already have 260+ km in your legs. I was addressing the argument that Zabel was a good hilly classic rider pointing at his Sanremo results by saying that Sanremo isn't a hilly classic.

Two small hills do not make Milan-San Remo a hilly classic, just as two short cobbled sections do not make Liège-Bastogne-Liège a cobbled classic. Doesn't stop it being a classic though.