Most overrated (good) rider in the peloton?

[Samamba]

Pretty funny that number 1 and 2 in the poll are probably having the best weeks of their career.

 

[Peyroteo94]

These people must have amnesia. Comparing Ganna with probably the most powerful rider in the last 30 years is almost an offense to Cancellara (and to me btw).

 

[Peyroteo94]

Track performances are comparable to road, you just don't like it. You cannot dismiss it, though, given they're as pure a power challenge as you get.

Cancellara was an early in bloomer in that he was an excellent time trallist by 23/24, which was young for the early 2000s. It doesn't mean that he was bad in his 30s. Martin wasn't a late bloomer, you're right, but he reached his top level at 25. But it's not really relevant aside from the fact that Ganna did have a better TTer emerge onto the scene at an earlier stage in his career than Cancellara did – which is undoubtedly true. The late 00s had a weak TT field, sort of like the late 10s, and then Wiggins and Martin came along. Ganna did not get to enjoy the same amount of time without a fellow generational TTer on the scene.

But the concept of early bloomer is a rider who performed well when he was very young and was past his prime (almost finished) in his early 30's. Sagan is a prime example.
Cancellara was not an early bloomer. He just was so good he was able to perform at a very young age. But he was very good in his 30's.
Do you call Valverde a early bloomer? Of course not! But he was delivering very good performances in his early 20's.

 

[Brullnux]

These people must have amnesia. Comparing Ganna with probably the most powerful rider in the last 30 years is almost an offense to Cancellara (and to me btw).

Ganna has done 610 watts over four minutes. Cancellara could do 640 over three (at his best). You tell me which is better.

 

[Brullnux]

But the concept of early bloomer is a rider who performed well when he was very young and was past his prime (almost finished) in his early 30's. Sagan is a prime example.
Cancellara was not an early bloomer. He just was so good he was able to perform at a very young age. But he was very good in his 30's.
Do you call Valverde a early bloomer? Of course not! But he was delivering very good performances in his early 20's.

An early bloomer is just someone who is good at a young age, it doesn't necessarily mean they decline at a young age too. Just like not all flowers that bloom early die early.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Ganna has done 610 watts over four minutes. Cancellara could do 640 over three (at his best). You tell me which is better.

So you are comparing numbers from different eras? Cheap argument and you know that. Can I say Simon Yates is a better climber than Contador because he is doing better numbers than him?
Cancellara would be OTL in PR 2024. Can I say the Top 20 of that edition is faster and more powerful than Cancellara? Of course not.

 

[Peyroteo94]

An early bloomer is just someone who is good at a young age, it doesn't necessarily mean they decline at a young age too. Just like not all flowers that bloom early die early.

Normally in cycling when we refer to early bloomers, those riders reach their ceilling at a very young age and decline early too (late 20's/early 30's). Cunego, Sagan,
Late bloomers normally reach later in their 20's (Froome, Thomas for example) and decline later (in their middle/late 30's). Froome declined at 34th due to his horrible crash IMO.
I will never call Cav or Valverde early bloomers because they were both early and late bloomers. So it's stupid call them early bloomers.

 

[Brullnux]

Normally in cycling when we refer to early bloomers, those riders reach their ceilling at a very young age and decline early too (late 20's/early 30's). Cunego, Sagan,
Late bloomers normally reach later in their 20's (Froome, Thomas for example) and decline later (in their middle/late 30's). Froome declined at 34th due to his horrible crash IMO.
I will never call Cav or Valverde early bloomers because they were both early and late bloomers. So it's stupid call them early bloomers.

It isn't stupid, you just have a different definition to what I do. Early bloomer can just mean is good at a young age – just because you use it for Sagan and not Valverde does not mean that it is stupid to do so.

The phrase itself comes from horticulture, where it includes perennials that flower for months as well as daffodils that die within weeks, and biology, where it is used to describe early-ish puberty and does not suggest people also die quicker.

Re. numbers, I think sub five minute efforts are probably those that have changed the least due to training/nutrition development among road cyclists. Besides, Ganna's numbers are from 2022, pre big-bang.

 

[Peyroteo94]

It isn't stupid, you just have a different definition to what I do. Early bloomer can just mean is good at a young age – just because you use it for Sagan and not Valverde does not mean that it is stupid to do so.

The phrase itself comes from horticulture, where it includes perennials that flower for months as well as daffodils that die within weeks, and biology, where it is used to describe early-ish puberty and does not suggest people also die quicker.

Re. numbers, I think sub five minute efforts are probably those that have changed the least due to training/nutrition development among road cyclists. Besides, Ganna's numbers are from 2022, pre big-bang.

I think we need to compare riders in their era. Performances like Harelbeke 2011, the stage Cance won in yellow with an attack in the last km, PR 2010, Mendrisio 2009. Ganna never dominated the field in TTs like Cancellara did and this is very telling.

 

[Eagle_Alps]

Unfortunately for Ganna, there are just no more real TTs on the calendar.
As always: don't compare eras

 

[tobydawq]

Del Toro is a great candidate, but the Giro hype has died down somewhat, especially after he failed totally on the Finestre, but before that the overhype was some of the craziest I've seen in my days as a cycling fan.

No, he isn't a great candidate...

 

[Red Rick]

No, he isn't a great candidate...

Well **** you've fully convinced me.

 

[tobydawq]

Well **** you've fully convinced me.

Nice, it usually takes a bit more.

Seriously, though, he is a terrible candidate. Third on CQRanking and very likely the next rider to win his first Grand Tour (if Almeida doesn't end up beating Vingegaard this week). I don't know if people unanimously claimed during the Giro that he would win 8 Tours, but I have a very hard time seeing how he can be overrated unless you judge his Finestre debacle really harshly and base all expectations of his future on the rather lacklustre tactical nous he showcased in that moment.

 

[AlfaLum]

I think there are no real overrated riders at the moment. On average I believe that all riders are taken at face value at the moment.

Of course there are a couple of riders that were predicted to have a future to which standard they are not performing at the moment.

Until a few weeks ago Pidcock was maybe the biggest name out of these combined with Ayuso who was predicted to be the new Pogacar.

Similarly Uijtdebroeks hasnt lived up to expectations yet, which everybody acknowledges, so he is not really overrated. Just not performing at the level that was expected of him a couple of years ago.

Same thing can be said about Nys, who got some justified hype after 2024 and the start of 2025, but now has a very rough period. But again, for me not overrated, just not able to continue his performances for the time being.

In the end I think it is just a bit of a bull**** topic this one. Expectations within sports and cycling shift as fast as the wind. So one minute you can be overrated the other one underrated.

 

[Netserk]

Nice, it usually takes a bit more.

Seriously, though, he is a terrible candidate. Third on CQRanking and very likely the next rider to win his first Grand Tour (if Almeida doesn't end up beating Vingegaard this week). I don't know if people unanimously claimed during the Giro that he would win 8 Tours, but I have a very hard time seeing how he can be overrated unless you judge his Finestre debacle really harshly and base all expectations of his future on the rather lacklustre tactical nous he showcased in that moment.

Stage 16 was worse for his prospects than Fineste.

I think Almeida is most likely to be the next first time GT winner, even if he loses this Vuelta. Lipowitz is also more likely than Del Toro imo.

 

[Red Rick]

Nice, it usually takes a bit more.

Seriously, though, he is a terrible candidate. Third on CQRanking and very likely the next rider to win his first Grand Tour (if Almeida doesn't end up beating Vingegaard this week). I don't know if people unanimously claimed during the Giro that he would win 8 Tours, but I have a very hard time seeing how he can be overrated unless you judge his Finestre debacle really harshly and base all expectations of his future on the rather lacklustre tactical nous he showcased in that moment.

Rankings are to me the worst argument why he wouldn't be overrated, simply because his schedule is the single most egregious example of how messed up all the ranking systems are.

And if he only struggled on the Finestre, my assessment of the Giro might be harsh, but he also got dropped hard on San Valentino, and he struggled to follow a 10 man group on the Mortirolo when the stage hadn't been that hard until that point.

Before San Valentino, more than few posters were arguing he was clearly the strongest in the Giro, and by the end if you compiled the results of the biggest mountain stages, and he was basically treated as the next GT great GT rider even if not at the level of Pogacar or Vingegaard.

Fast forward to after the Giro, where he keeps beating up 1.1 and 1.pro races mostly, leading to him being the standout favorite for Clasica San Sebastian, where he ends up looking great until he collapses completely and getting 5th, and then going to Burgos where he gets dropped convincingly by Ciccone on Lagunas de la Neila and only winning GC because he took out Ciccone in a crash

Even putting him as the next new GT winner or the the highest tier below Pogacar and Vingegaard is giving him a status he hasn't earned in the slightest. The most similar performer to him in this Vuelta is probably Tom Pidcock, and aint nobody acting as if he's gonna win GTs for sure in the next few years.

 

[Rob5091]

When De Lie drops Pogi in Canada, you'll all be well dang! Maybe he can ride a bit!

 

[ChasingPotatoes]

Ganna has done 610 watts over four minutes. Cancellara could do 640 over three (at his best). You tell me which is better.

I honestly don't know what is better, but it's clear that, in road racing, and even TT, Cancellara was winning a lot more and unless Ganna is ramping up his wins, he won't get close.

 

[Red Rick]

I honestly don't know what is better, but it's clear that, in road racing, and even TT, Cancellara was winning a lot more and unless Ganna is ramping up his wins, he won't get close.

He won't get close, just like Cancellara wouldn't get remotely close to his current palmares if he was 10-15 years younger and rode in the current era.

 

[Peyroteo94]

Del Toro is not overrated at all. He wasn't even supposed to be a leader in the Giro and almost won it. With a better team that day, he would be a GT winner at 21 years old.
Overrated riders are those who were expected to do a lot more in the beginning of the season and ended up being flops.
Remco Evenepoel - TdF
Nys - Ardennes
Ganna - PR
Pidcock- Ardennes
Roglic - GTs (he crashed in the Giro so probably hard to say)
Ayuso - GTs
Cian - probably the most obvious early bloomer

 

[Cycling111]

Del Toro overrated? Just because he lost to Ciccone at 21 doesn't mean he's overrated.
Over the years, he'll have to prove he can win higher-level races against better riders, but he's only 21 and is his second year in a professional catetecory.

It's like saying that Brenan is overrated because he hasn't beaten the best riders in bigger races than Poland.

 

[Red Rick]

Del Toro overrated? Just because he lost to Ciccone at 21 doesn't mean he's overrated.
Over the years, he'll have to prove he can win higher-level races against better riders, but he's only 21 and is his second year in a professional catetecory.

It's like saying that Brenan is overrated because he hasn't beaten the best riders in bigger races than Poland.

Brennan is a 1st year WT rider, younger than Del Toro, and has beaten the best in the world at his specialist disciplins.

Del Toro meanwhile was supposed to be the best in the Giro midway through, got convincingly beaten by it's C-tier field, and has avoiding C-Tier fields ever since in favor of mowing like E-tier fields figuratively, and Giulio Ciccone literally.

 

[Berniece]

I think for his age Del Toro is a great rider, but I also think he's a bit overrated at the moment. I'm not sure he can become the powerhouse everyone expects him to be. Because those expectations were set because of when he beats C-Tier riders easily. He was in great form in July-August and won many races, but the opposition wasn't that impressive. If he then rides San Sebastian, still in great form, he finishes 5th and finishes in the same group as Tiesj Benoot.

 

[Bolder]

Nice, it usually takes a bit more.

Seriously, though, he is a terrible candidate. Third on CQRanking and very likely the next rider to win his first Grand Tour (if Almeida doesn't end up beating Vingegaard this week). I don't know if people unanimously claimed during the Giro that he would win 8 Tours, but I have a very hard time seeing how he can be overrated unless you judge his Finestre debacle really harshly and base all expectations of his future on the rather lacklustre tactical nous he showcased in that moment.

Yeah, bad tactics don't equate to inability to physically perform. No way at this point is DT overrated.

 

[Red Rick]

Yeah, bad tactics don't equate to inability to physically perform. No way at this point is DT overrated.

Losing 1 minute or more to guys like Simon Yates, Carapaz, Gee and Pellizzari on a climb like San Valentino however, do indicate that.