Most impressive riders this season so far

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Ryo Hazuki said:
they are offcialli germanic right?

hilarious btw when some years ago cia and fbi had no idea about iranian secret services infiltrating them as they were looking for dark guys with mustaches while they all used blond iranians to infiltrate lol
No, but they are Indo-European.

Perhaps the confusion is that the Indo-Iranian branch of Indo-Europeans is sometimes (especially linguistically) called 'Aryan' (an etymology from which 'Iran' comes), which of course is a term with very different connotations (which we shan't go into) in Germanic Europe.

Though you are right - there are large amounts of variation and Iranians, ethnically, have more in common with white Americans than they have with Arabs.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,463
0
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
they are offcialli germanic right?

hilarious btw when some years ago cia and fbi had no idea about iranian secret services infiltrating them as they were looking for dark guys with mustaches while they all used blond iranians to infiltrate lol
I don't know, but a lot of Iranians are just as white as us, but some are mixed(the closer you get to Afghanistan)

Think they're Caucasian.
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
the most impressive rider was, in my opinion, fabian cancellara, followed by alberto contador.

for cancellara, because he was alone, but he defeated all of his main enemies and, unlike others, wasnt called superman because he was at the front 1.5km before atack. he was called superman because he murdered the peloton by himself (no one ever did that since cycling is trully professional) and made the races the amazing spectacule that we were able to watch.

for contador, because he still was the real deal even after what happened, with already so many wins dispite the fact that the true goals are still to come.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,463
0
0
Since you're referring to Gilbert in your post. Gilbert has a sprint and a brain. He doesn't need to win solo if he can beat his opponents in the sprint. He uses different, but smarter tactics.

AGR, FW and LBL are races that rarely favor long solos anyway. Paris-Roubaix on the other hand is "easier" to solo.
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
El Pistolero said:
Since you're referring to Gilbert in your post. Gilbert has a sprint and a brain. He doesn't need to win solo if he can beat his opponents in the sprint. He uses different, but smarter tactics.

AGR, FW and LBL are races that rarely favor long solos anyway. Paris-Roubaix on the other hand is "easier" to solo.
i knew that you would bite lol

if valverde isn't there, otherwise you know what happens. he tries to go solo, but isn't strong enough. i think that after so many failures in big races, he realized that. and his brain together with his explosive accelerations are gilbert's hopes in order to succeed.

still he is taking advantage from the lack of puncheurs. where are they?

roubaix is for hard man. the strongest. that's why it ends in solos. its some sort of selection, just like in hills, with the difference that it is much more selective. that's why roubaix is the queen, the orgasm of this sport.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,463
0
0
c&cfan said:
i knew that you would bite lol

if valverde isn't there, otherwise you know what happens. he tries to go solo, but isn't strong enough. i think that after so many failures in big races, he realized that. and his brain together with his explosive accelerations are gilbert's hopes in order to succeed.

still he is taking advantage from the lack of puncheurs. where are they?

roubaix is for hard man. the strongest. that's why it ends in solos. its some sort of selection, just like in hills, with the difference that it is much more selective. that's why roubaix is the queen, the orgasm of this sport.
Take a look at Fleche Wallone 2006 and compare it to Fleche Wallonne 2011.

Take a look at Amstel Gold Race 2008 and compare it to 2010/2011.

Valverde actually looked weak in the Ardennes classics 2009/2010. Didn't impress me at all and he ain't going to do anything in 2012 either.

Roubaix might be for hard man, but the toughest race is and always will be La Doyenne.

On the hills, Valverde will get dropped by Gilbert. If he can have someone like the Schlecks following him he's good to go.

I really can't see how you would be more impressed by Contador than by Gilbert by the way. He had a good season, but nothing stellar. His time to shine has yet to come.

Valverde doesn't win all the classics he enters. Let's keep in mind he has only won 3 of them. So he still lost the majority of classics he entered "despite being there".

There's no real lack of puncheurs. There have never been a lot of good puncheurs at one given time. They're a rare breed.
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
El Pistolero said:
Take a look at Fleche Wallone 2006 and compare it to Fleche Wallonne 2011.

Take a look at Amstel Gold Race 2008 and compare it to 2010/2011.

Valverde actually looked weak in the Ardennes classics 2009/2010. Didn't impress me at all and he ain't going to do anything in 2012 either.

Roubaix might be for hard man, but the toughest race is and always will be La Doyenne.

On the hills, Valverde will get dropped by Gilbert. If he can have someone like the Schlecks following him he's good to go.

I really can't see how you would be more impressed by Contador than by Gilbert by the way. He had a good season, but nothing stellar. His time to shine has yet to come.

Valverde doesn't win all the classics he enters. Let's keep in mind he has only won 3 of them.
each race is a chapter in history, so they cannot be compared because the circumstances are always different. still you can compare their protagonists.

unlike gilbert (until now), valverde has much more to think about than classics, he has another goals. gilbert may drop him in some accelerations, but when he did that, he was caught and lost the sprint. right?

valv has two doyennes. that combined with some minor stage races is more than what gilbert has.

for example.. fignon had two tours. heras 4 vueltas. who was the best GT racer?

like i said, gilbert is taking advantage from the lack of other pure specialists and i can't explain why he is the only one left.

about contador, the way he won them after what happened, without the right preparation and because those weren't his goals (just training), he really was dominant. taking 30 secs in small climbs winning the TTs, well.. i guess that if he isn't banned, we have the winner of the CQ ranking.

gilbert victories weren't that good because his opponents weren't worth it.

look to who valverde won those LBL.

why the toughest race is la doyeene? that's based in what? the toughest race is made by the cyclists. even lombardia can be the toughest. however, in history, roubaix was the one. like you said, the solo win.. the only man left to be destroyed.
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
El Pistolero said:
Take a look at Fleche Wallone 2006 and compare it to Fleche Wallonne 2011.

Take a look at Amstel Gold Race 2008 and compare it to 2010/2011.

Valverde actually looked weak in the Ardennes classics 2009/2010. Didn't impress me at all and he ain't going to do anything in 2012 either.

Roubaix might be for hard man, but the toughest race is and always will be La Doyenne.

On the hills, Valverde will get dropped by Gilbert. If he can have someone like the Schlecks following him he's good to go.

I really can't see how you would be more impressed by Contador than by Gilbert by the way. He had a good season, but nothing stellar. His time to shine has yet to come.

Valverde doesn't win all the classics he enters. Let's keep in mind he has only won 3 of them. So he still lost the majority of classics he entered "despite being there".

There's no real lack of puncheurs. There have never been a lot of good puncheurs at one given time. They're a rare breed.
sorry, that's stupid. bettini rebellin boogerd di luca paolini jalabert argentin kelly etc etc
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,463
0
0
Boogerd and Paolini are no puncheurs lol.

Bettini/Rebellin aren't of the same generation as Argentin/Jalabert and Kelly.

Kelly stopped being good in '92. Jalabert had yet to break through then. These guys didn't race at the same time. Di Luca is still here, he's old and standing next to him can make you test positive.

Rebellin is back as well, but he's old as well and can't find a team atm.
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
El Pistolero said:
Boogerd and Paolini are no puncheurs lol.

Bettini/Rebellin aren't of the same generation as Argentin/Jalabert and Kelly.

Kelly stopped being good in '92. Jalabert had yet to break through then. These guys didn't race at the same time. Di Luca is still here, he's old and standing next to him can make you test positive.

Rebellin is back as well, but he's old as well and can't find a team atm.
in the start of the subject i was talking about pure hilly classics specialist. so they fit there. i said those names from the top of my head, there are much more. my point is that they had rivals. at least one or two just like we had since a long time and lots of 2nd tiers... until now. look even at the cobbled ones, so the problem is just in this generation of pure hilly specialists. there is only gilbert left!!! why??

and also why aren't you having a proper discussion about this? what's your point? don't you know vandenbroeck rebellin bettini boogerd bartoli di luca valverde(different case) etc just from the last generation? dont you know kelly jalabert argentin armstrong etc etc?
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
El Pistolero said:
Since you're referring to Gilbert in your post. Gilbert has a sprint and a brain. He doesn't need to win solo if he can beat his opponents in the sprint. He uses different, but smarter tactics.

AGR, FW and LBL are races that rarely favor long solos anyway. Paris-Roubaix on the other hand is "easier" to solo.
hap, hap, hap
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,463
0
0
c&cfan said:
in the start of the subject i was talking about pure hilly classics specialist. so they fit there. i said those names from the top of my head, there are much more. my point is that they had rivals. at least one or two just like we had since a long time and lots of 2nd tiers... until now. look even at the cobbled ones, so the problem is just in this generation of pure hilly specialists. there is only gilbert left!!! why??

and also why aren't you having a proper discussion about this? what's your point? don't you know vandenbroeck rebellin bettini boogerd bartoli di luca valverde(different case) etc just from the last generation? dont you know kelly jalabert argentin armstrong etc etc?
From 2000-2005 the only real puncheurs who focused on hilly classics alone were Rebellin and Paolo Bettini. Vandenbroucke disappeared after his win in 1999. Showed some flashes of his old form in 2003, but after that it was game over for him.

Boogerd was always there at the Tour, in his final Tour for example he did some amazing work for Rasmussen.

Andy and Frank Schleck are definitely better than Boogerd in these hilly classics. Well, Andy at least. Frank Schleck actually compares really well to Boogerd. There's also Joaquim Rodriguez who broke through after Valverde got banned(Much in the same way as Paolo Bettini broke through after Bartoli's injury). And you're forgetting about Alexandr Kolobnev. He got second at LBL behind Vinokourov. And second at the Worlds losing the sprint only just against Paolo Bettini. And also got second at the Worlds in Mendrisio after Cuddles surprised them all.

Vinokourov is also another puncheur, he mostly focuses on hilly classics and stage wins in the Tour. He had bad luck this year @LBL, but he was there. Got fourth at FW and did bad at AGR.

Then there's also Olympic champion Samuel Sanchez who has beaten Davide Rebellin in a sprint there ;)
Damiano Cunego is also a hilly classics specialist. He just sucks right now for reasons no one knows. But in his heyday he wasn't second tier. Danilo Di Luca didn't focus on hilly classics alone. He could win GTs(we all know why) and has actually won one and got second in 2009 as well. He's back this year, we'll see how he does next year after some racing in his legs. Wouldn't expect too much of him though.
 
c&cfan said:
the most impressive rider was, in my opinion, fabian cancellara, followed by alberto contador.

for cancellara, because he was alone, but he defeated all of his main enemies and, unlike others, wasnt called superman because he was at the front 1.5km before atack. he was called superman because he murdered the peloton by himself (no one ever did that since cycling is trully professional) and made the races the amazing spectacule that we were able to watch.

for contador, because he still was the real deal even after what happened, with already so many wins dispite the fact that the true goals are still to come.
"ever" is a very long time. You do know that the sport has existed for more than a century?
 
Don't think Fränk Schleck is much better than Boogerd. Andy definately is.
But Fränk is almost exactly like Boogerd.

Very good on hills, very good but too inconsistent on longer climbs (one day brilliant, one day **** poor). And absolutely no finishing skills.
I do rate F.Schleck as more of a climber than Boogerd. So overall a bit better. But the characteristics and the races they won are almost identical.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,463
0
0
Dekker_Tifosi said:
Don't think Fränk Schleck is much better than Boogerd. Andy definately is.
But Fränk is almost exactly like Boogerd.

Very good on hills, very good but too inconsistent on longer climbs (one day brilliant, one day **** poor). And absolutely no finishing skills.
I do rate F.Schleck as more of a climber than Boogerd. So overall a bit better. But the characteristics and the races they won are almost identical.
Frank just needs one more podium at LBL :p

And a sh*t load more at AGR.

Frank will probably be one of the best climbers this Tour though granted Contador and Menchov won't show up. Don't think his Vuelta last year is a good indication for anything as he was already after his peak in la Vuelta and we all know how the Schlecks are with their peaks.
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
that's like a 100 years also :rolleyes:
not really..

truly professional = after an amateur killed them all in the mountains for the last time. i guess you know who he was. still, he was an amateur.
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
Parrulo said:
fausto coppi in the 40's?

by the merchx era cycling was a professional sport.
the 80's. herrera i suppose.

before that all of them had the same program, they all peaked for the same goals and the best climber could also be the best sprinter. amateurs.
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
c&cfan said:
not really..

truly professional = after an amateur killed them all in the mountains for the last time. i guess you know who he was. still, he was an amateur.
I know for a fact that in the 30s cycling was already professional, theo middelkamp once said in an interview why he choose cycling while he was an increidble football talent he said with cycling I could make good money and with football nothing
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
c&cfan said:
the 80's. herrera i suppose.

before that all of them had the same program, they all peaked for the same goals and the best climber could also be the best sprinter. amateurs.
herrera wasn't amateur, lol, he made good money in colombia but they didn't ride with an official registered uci team that's why they were called amateurs in their first tour, it's like saying cycling teams in brazil or clubs in uruguay are amateur because they aren't uci registered while they have bigger budgets than pretty much any euro ct team
 
c&cfan said:
the 80's. herrera i suppose.

before that all of them had the same program, they all peaked for the same goals and the best climber could also be the best sprinter. amateurs.
not really. the specialization of cycling was yet to happen but there were teams already with clear leaders and guys working for them. they also had sponsors and stuff like that. so they could be considered professionals before herrara's era
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
Parrulo said:
not really. the specialization of cycling was yet to happen but there were teams already with clear leaders and guys working for them. they also had sponsors and stuff like that. so they could be considered professionals before herrara's era
but they weren't riding in a professional way like they are now (specialized). that's why i think that cav, valv, conta, cancellara, bonnen, bettini are all better cyclists than merckx for example.

and i can't believe in the merckx the best ever. maybe the dirtiest ever.
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
c&cfan said:
but they weren't riding in a professional way like they are now (specialized). that's why i think that cav, valv, conta, cancellara, bonnen, bettini are all better cyclists than merckx for example.

and i can't believe in the merckx the best ever. maybe the dirtiest ever.
do you even know what professional means??
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS