most favourite tour de france winner poll

[Havetts]

Because often enough mountain stages are left to be won by a breakaway which isnt controlled at 3 minutes for 180 kilometers and more reasons .

 

[c&cfan]

Because often enough mountain stages are left to be won by a breakaway which isnt controlled at 3 minutes for 180 kilometers and more reasons .

so what? should they "let" them win? if they aren't strong enough that's their problem.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

how is it sane to admire climbers (that weren't that successful) but hate sprinters?

2 GTs, 4 KOMs, countless GT stages and the Tour de Suisse is a pretty good palmarès for a guy who couldn't really descend or time trial.

Let's bear in mind that he retired at 30 too.

If you watch clips from those Vueltas and Giri, he would regularly set off on his own on the 3rd or 4th mountain from home, knowing that the mountain stages were his only real chance to win. He was one of very few riders Merckx actually feared.

When was the last time a sprinter spent back to back days in 100km+ solo breakaways? Sprinters don't usually work for more than 100m, let alone 100km.

 

[c&cfan]

2 GTs, 4 KOMs, countless GT stages and the Tour de Suisse is a pretty good palmarès for a guy who couldn't really descend or time trial.

Let's bear in mind that he retired at 30 too.

If you watch clips from those Vueltas and Giri, he would regularly set off on his own on the 3rd or 4th mountain from home, knowing that the mountain stages were his only real chance to win. He was one of very few riders Merckx actually feared.

When was the last time a sprinter spent back to back days in 100km+ solo breakaways? Sprinters don't usually work for more than 100m, let alone 100km.

hushovd 2009. where were the last time a climber did that? i can remember pantani 98.

 

[El Pistolero]

Hushovd did nothing spectacular. I still don't understand why people keep bringing that up. Every cyclist can go in a breakaway and do what Hushovd did, the great cyclists just don't need to do that.

As for a climber in a breakaway, enough examples. Arroyo for example last year at the Giro.

And at this year's Giro attacks started from 50km out at the queen stage. In the Tour 2007 attacks from the favorite group also started from 50km out in the stage won by Soler, who went into a long breakaway. Rujano went into a lot of breakaways in the Giro of 2005. Really, I got a lot of examples. Then there's Floyd Landis in the Tour of 2006. Oscar Pereiro in the very same Tour. Sella in the Giro of 2008.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

hushovd 2009. where were the last time a climber did that? i can remember pantani 98.

I said back to back days. Hushovd went in that one breakaway. Great ride, but it's almost unique - though Hondo went in breaks in the 2010 Giro and Tour.

Sella 2008? About 60km on his own on stage 14, then attacked the break to cut it down to 3 on the 3rd climb from the end on stage 15, then attacked the smaller group at the bottom of the last one.

Garzelli was hitting for home solo from the 3rd climb out in the Giro. How about Oleg Chuzhda on stage 1 of the Volta last year, when he waved goodbye to the péloton at km 0, to his break companions about 30km in, and soloed in by two minutes?

Or Emma Pooley at the GP Montréal 2009, who left the péloton the second they left the neutral zone, and nobody saw her again until two minutes after she finished? Floyd Landis in '06? Rujano winning the 2009 Vuelta a Colombia almost solo, winning mountain stage after mountain stage solo?

 

[c&cfan]

I said back to back days. Hushovd went in that one breakaway. Great ride, but it's almost unique - though Hondo went in breaks in the 2010 Giro and Tour.

Sella 2008? About 60km on his own on stage 14, then attacked the break to cut it down to 3 on the 3rd climb from the end on stage 15, then attacked the smaller group at the bottom of the last one.

Garzelli was hitting for home solo from the 3rd climb out in the Giro. How about Oleg Chuzhda on stage 1 of the Volta last year, when he waved goodbye to the péloton at km 0, to his break companions about 30km in, and soloed in by two minutes?

Or Emma Pooley at the GP Montréal 2009, who left the péloton the second they left the neutral zone, and nobody saw her again until two minutes after she finished? Floyd Landis in '06? Rujano winning the 2009 Vuelta a Colombia almost solo, winning mountain stage after mountain stage solo?

you are totally right.

however, in order to be a good sprinter, you need to save energy where you can. same with GT riders. only medium class riders will do that. that's their only hope, and that's good for us to watch, especially when they are caught by the BOSS right?lol

 

[Libertine Seguros]

you are totally right.

however, in order to be a good sprinter, you need to save energy where you can. same with GT riders. only medium class riders will do that. that's their only hope, and that's good for us to watch, especially when they are caught by the BOSS right?lol

Yes - it's what makes it good to watch. That's why I like guys like that. Because they make it good to watch. That's why I don't like dominant champions, sprinters and teams that race with a tight leash on the breakaway. Because they make it boring to watch.


Anyway, sometimes they are good enough to not be caught (Fuente was one of those guys). Sometimes it's close as to whether they can be (example being Arroyo last year - a rider good enough to make people sweat over beating him, but not good enough to make it a foregone conclusion).

Glad to see you understand.

 

[Maxiton]

but races were different and those riders simply weren't good enough. i know that some people here think that the best riders were all racing in the 60\70 (mr roubaix merckx gimondi etc) because of their palmares and completely forget that all of them had the same program, the competition against those 5\6 guys were just weak, and they all had the same characteristics. one was slightly better on the flat, other slightly better in the TT, but overall they were the same. and merckx was the best of them. that's it.

but since that I have a brain and I use it, I realised that cycling changed a lot and became too specialised <snipped for brevity>

merckx wasn't better than MIG armstrong or even contador. but I put him on pair with hinault.

<snipped for brevity>

It's a mistake of youth to think that the recent past was so very long ago that nothing of it could be of very much worth compared to today. In the case of something measurable, such as cycle sport, it's also a mistake of ignorance.

It's true of course that there have been changes in the sport. There is more specialization, as has already been mentioned. While to some extent this can be fairly attributed to the development of periodized training (i.e., peaking) and greater knowledge of physiology, the primary influences here, in my opinion, are the Armstrong style of success and the role of . . . let's just call it medicine (with the former being primary - he relied on the latter and peaked for one race. With Contador, who races full out all year, we already see this changing.)

Bikes are lighter and so is gearing, but beyond that changes are down to marketing. Bottom line, if you took the riders of the sixties/seventies and put them as young men in the peloton of today, with the preparation of today, you'd see their careers follow trajectories very similar to what we saw back then. De Vlaeminck would still dominate Roubaix and Merckx would still dominate everything (perhaps he wouldn't win as many stages but he'd still dominate over all).

You could just as easily argue that the riders of today, with their carbon bikes and well paved roads, specialized tasks and designer medicines, are lightweights compared to the earlier generation. But we won't make that mistake. Fundamentally they're all highly skilled athletes in a sport whose fundamentals haven't changed.

EDIT: I place Merckx above everyone else on the list because . . . because he was above everyone. I place Hinault and Anquetil above Armstrong and Indurain because, if there has been one fundamental, salient change in cycling, it certainly isn't periodized training or carbon fiber, it's the introduction of oxygen vector drugs. This is a discussion for the Clinic, so suffice it to say that Armstrong and Indurain very likely wouldn't be on this list at all had it not been for that.

 

[c&cfan]

It's a mistake of youth to think that the recent past was so very long ago that nothing of it could be of very much worth compared to today. In the case of something measurable, such as cycle sport, it's also a mistake of ignorance.

It's true of course that there have been changes in the sport. There is more specialization, as has already been mentioned. While to some extent this can be fairly attributed to the development of periodized training (i.e., peaking) and greater knowledge of physiology, the primary influences here, in my opinion, are the Armstrong style of success and the role of . . . let's just call it medicine (with the former being primary - he relied on the latter and peaked for one race. With Contador, who races full out all year, we already see this changing.)

Bikes are lighter and so is gearing, but beyond that changes are down to marketing. Bottom line, if you took the riders of the sixties/seventies and put them as young men in the peloton of today, with the preparation of today, you'd see their careers follow trajectories very similar to what we saw back then. De Vlaeminck would still dominate Roubaix and Merckx would still dominate everything (perhaps he wouldn't win as many stages but he'd still dominate over all).

You could just as easily argue that the riders of today, with their carbon bikes and well paved roads, specialized tasks and designer medicines, are lightweights compared to the earlier generation. But we won't make that mistake. Fundamentally they're all highly skilled athletes in a sport whose fundamentals haven't changed.

EDIT: I place Merckx above everyone else on the list because . . . because he was above everyone. I place Hinault and Anquetil above Armstrong and Indurain because, if there has been one fundamental, salient change in cycling, it certainly isn't periodized training or carbon fiber, it's the introduction of oxygen vector drugs. This is a discussion for the Clinic, so suffice it to say that Armstrong and Indurain very likely wouldn't be on this list at all had it not been for that.

yes, because merckx never doped nor did anquetil said that they were doping hard in those days.

really, your post is the most well articulated piece of sh+t related to this sport that i ever read.

you clearly have no basis nor logical explanation for saying what you just said. you said that it's a mistake of youth saying what i said, well you are making a mistake proper from old, senile persons, like mr roubaix did:

- how can you compare me to bonnen? i was all that he is plus i was much better climber and TTer.
-how can you compare me to cancellara? i was mutch better sprinter and climber.

merckx wasn't the best at anything besides TT (maybe) but he raced in an amateurish era were basically only endurance mattered. today the level of endurance is so much higher that he, like everyone else, would just be unable to escape at km 0 and win, against a full gas peloton. and there's nothing to proof (au contraire) that he would beat a gilbert, cav or contador, canc and tom. nothing. he was the best of his generation of amateurish (but hard working man) riders.

wake up please.

 

[Duartista]

yes, because merckx never doped nor did anquetil said that they were doping hard in those days.

really, your post is the most well articulated piece of sh+t related to this sport that i ever read.

you clearly have no basis nor logical explanation for saying what you just said. you said that it's a mistake of youth saying what i said, well you are making a mistake proper from old, senile persons, like mr roubaix did:

- how can you compare me to bonnen? i was all that he is plus i was much better climber and TTer.
-how can you compare me to cancellara? i was mutch better sprinter and climber.

merckx wasn't the best at anything besides TT (maybe) but he raced in an amateurish era were basically only endurance mattered. today the level of endurance is so much higher that he, like everyone else, would just be unable to escape at km 0 and win, against a full gas peloton. and there's nothing to proof (au contraire) that he would beat a gilbert, cav or contador, canc and tom. nothing. he was the best of his generation of amateurish (but hard working man) riders.

wake up please.

You are totally wrong about there being no specialisation in Merckx's day. There was, but he beat the specialists.

You say that there is nothing to prove he would beat today's riders, but seem convinced that he would not - where is your 'proof'?

 

[luigiV]

im sure by the end of this week indurain will come out on top

 

[issoisso]

Hinault. Tossup between Eddy and Bernard, but I got to see Bernard race (Coors Classic mid 80s), so he gets it. When was the last time the yellow jersey won the stage in Paris?

Heck, he's the only yellow jersey to ever win the BUNCH SPRINT on the Champs

Hinault was absolutely incredible.

 

[Chuffy]

Surprised that Jacques isn't doing better or getting a single mention on this thread. Come on, it can't be that hard to Google him!

 

[ultimobici]

Yes, winning a bicycle race hardly makes you a hero. But Bartali was a cool *** on his bike by the way Went as far as to search Coppi's room to find drugs or go pick up the bottles Coppi threw away during a race to check what was in it.

He wasn't looking to catch him out, more to find out how to beat him.

 

[Michielveedeebee]

yes, because merckx never doped nor did anquetil said that they were doping hard in those days.

wake up please.

wake up please yourself, the difference in drugs between then and now is huge. Peds in the 60/70 do nothing in comparison with EPO and stuff like that... simple chemistry dude....

 

[Michielveedeebee]

As for a climber in a breakaway, enough examples. Arroyo for example last year at the Giro.

And at this year's Giro attacks started from 50km out at the queen stage. In the Tour 2007 attacks from the favorite group also started from 50km out in the stage won by Soler, who went into a long breakaway. Rujano went into a lot of breakaways in the Giro of 2005. Really, I got a lot of examples. Then there's Floyd Landis in the Tour of 2006. Oscar Pereiro in the very same Tour. Sella in the Giro of 2008.

2 words, the clinic

 

[blutto]

yes, because merckx never doped nor did anquetil said that they were doping hard in those days.

really, your post is the most well articulated piece of sh+t related to this sport that i ever read.

you clearly have no basis nor logical explanation for saying what you just said. you said that it's a mistake of youth saying what i said, well you are making a mistake proper from old, senile persons, like mr roubaix did:

- how can you compare me to bonnen? i was all that he is plus i was much better climber and TTer.
-how can you compare me to cancellara? i was mutch better sprinter and climber.

merckx wasn't the best at anything besides TT (maybe) but he raced in an amateurish era were basically only endurance mattered. today the level of endurance is so much higher that he, like everyone else, would just be unable to escape at km 0 and win, against a full gas peloton. and there's nothing to proof (au contraire) that he would beat a gilbert, cav or contador, canc and tom. nothing. he was the best of his generation of amateurish (but hard working man) riders.

wake up please.

...wasn't Merckx the winner of all the available jerseys in his first tour?....I don't want to question your incredible knowledge of cycling but to a piker such as myself Merckx seemed to have a bit of talent...and then there is that graph floating around this forum of output during the riding of the hour...Merckx, if memory serves me correctly still has ( despite all the advances in cycling training since his time ) the highest output....oh. and season where he won over 50% of the races he entered ( and he as a marked man )?....oh, and the 7 Milan-San Remo wins....

...but of course you are absolutely right...the guy was nothing special....

Cheers

blutto

 

[moi123]

Alberto Contador

 

[Chuffy]

wake up please yourself, the difference in drugs between then and now is huge. Peds in the 60/70 do nothing in comparison with EPO and stuff like that... simple chemistry dude....

...still against the rules and still cheating. Efficacy is a red herring.

Driver, to the Clinic at full speed!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Surprised that Jacques isn't doing better or getting a single mention on this thread. Come on, it can't be that hard to Google him!

Maybe we're all disgruntled Poulidor fans.

 

[Archibald]

Id actually vote Laurent Fignon

that...
..

 

[Maxiton]

wake up please yourself, the difference in drugs between then and now is huge. Peds in the 60/70 do nothing in comparison with EPO and stuff like that... simple chemistry dude....

...wasn't Merckx the winner of all the available jerseys in his first tour?....I don't want to question your incredible knowledge of cycling but to a piker such as myself Merckx seemed to have a bit of talent...and then there is that graph floating around this forum of output during the riding of the hour...Merckx, if memory serves me correctly still has ( despite all the advances in cycling training since his time ) the highest output....oh. and season where he won over 50% of the races he entered ( and he as a marked man )?....oh, and the 7 Milan-San Remo wins....

...but of course you are absolutely right...the guy was nothing special....

Cheers

blutto

The great thing about the Hour Record is that everything is recorded for posterity. The figure I saw for Merckx's Hour Record was an average of 485 watts over the hour. That exceeds what every rider since has been able to do, remarkably, even with intense medical augmentation. Merckx truly was a freak.

 

[blutto]

that...
..

...yes...yes...and yes...Fignon's second Tour victory was as spectacular a win as I have seen ( unfortunately wasn't plugged into the cycling world to really appreciate the Merckx years so difficult to comment on The Man's Achievement though they were/are without peer )...

Cheers

blutto

 

[c&cfan]

You are totally wrong about there being no specialisation in Merckx's day. There was, but he beat the specialists.

You say that there is nothing to prove he would beat today's riders, but seem convinced that he would not - where is your 'proof'?

they are minutes and minutes faster when going up the climbs, the average speed is also much higher, specialized riders, specialized teams, 30 sprinting to win roubaix and liege is proof, the average rider in today's peloton is that much better ( also no more amateurs racing like every man for himself like only endurence matters), evolution and natural selection made it impossible for a all rounder (sprints cobbles hilly GT and TT) to be successful again. but hey, maybe darwin and lamark are wrong, right? and maybe we will be monkeys again. who knows?