My top ten, on talent

[AmRacer]

As I understand the word talent, it is “highest achievable level”. At his best Froome could nuke all the other GC contenders. That he didn’t manage to reach that level until 26-27 years of age, suggests that he didn’t have the right people around him to give him the perfect training schedule, nutrition plan, plus he was suffering from a parasitic infection.
It was a hidden talent. He would likely have achieved even more had he gotten the right support earlier.

🤔

 

[YavorD]

As I understand the word talent, it is “highest achievable level”. At his best Froome could nuke all the other GC contenders. That he didn’t manage to reach that level until 26-27 years of age, suggests that he didn’t have the right people around him to give him the perfect training schedule, nutrition plan, plus he was suffering from a parasitic infection.
It was a hidden talent. He would likely have achieved even more had he gotten the right support earlier.

Nah, someone's talent is clearly visible even in not so good/bad environment. If you're talented, you will outshine the people in your small, even local, team and people would see your talent. As I said, Sky themselves rated his talent level very low, and they certainly knew a thing or two more than us regarding how much of a talent he really was.

As for achieving, he would have achieved much less had he fought Pogacar/Vingegaard instead of Quintana and Bardet, but he got lucky competition wise while Pogacar and Vingegaard have to fight each other, so not much of a reason to regret.

 

[Shortcut]

1. Pogacar. 2. Roglic.3 Remco 4. MvDP. 5. Jonas 6. Wout 7. Valverde 8. Lance 9. Contador 10. Indurain. I am 100% first 6 are having the most/ best -talent/genetics ever and would destroy everyone in past.

 

[Charlyghoul]

1. Pogacar. 2. Roglic.3 Remco 4. MvDP. 5. Jonas 6. Wout 7. Valverde 8. Lance 9. Contador 10. Indurain. I am 100% first 6 are having the most/ best -talent/genetics ever and would destroy everyone in past.

Remco and Roglic would destroy everyone in the past?

 

[Charlyghoul]

Froome must have always had great talent, how can he win 7 grand tours without having that talent? Sky were wrong

 

[Shortcut]

Remco and Roglic would destroy everyone in the past?

Yes. Roglic came way too late into cycling and is still doing great. Remco the same. They are having crazy talent.

 

[Wyndbrook]

1. Pogacar. 2. Roglic.3 Remco 4. MvDP. 5. Jonas 6. Wout 7. Valverde 8. Lance 9. Contador 10. Indurain. I am 100% first 6 are having the most/ best -talent/genetics ever and would destroy everyone in past.

Impossible statement to make.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Lets not forget Rogla became a world champion even before riding a bicycle, hence not only a great talent but a true multi talent.

 

[Charlyghoul]

Roglic was ‘only’ a junior team world champion wasn’t he? I thought part of his switch was because he thought he wasn’t good enough to be at the top level in ski junping?

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Roglic was ‘only’ a junior team world champion wasn’t he? I thought part of his switch was because he thought he wasn’t good enough to be at the top level in ski junping?

Yup, he never made it to the ski-jumping world cup (top level in the sport). He had a nasty fall in Planica in 2007 which likely hampered his progress. He was a ski-jumper for 4 more years but didn't have any noticeable results in lower divisions (Continental Cup and FIS Cup).

 

[CyclistAbi]

So how many other cyclists mentioned in this thread where junior world champions in other sports? And to after achieve remotely close palmarès in cycling compared to Rogla. And at old age, while crashing a lot, cross sports.

 

[Shortcut]

Impossible statement to make.

I just wrote that statement. It was not impossible. Also i thought we are allowed to write our opinions in forum?

 

[Charlyghoul]

So how many other cyclists mentioned in this thread where junior world champions in other sports? And to after achieve remotely close palmarès in cycling compared to Rogla. And at old age, while crashing a lot, cross sports.

I don’t know if any were. Roglic has done great at an older age though, but him and Froome started being team leaders in the gts at a smiliar age ? I wouldn’t put Roglic above Froome let alone say he dominates the older riders
Edit
Armstrong was a national triathlon champion, yes there’s some strong crossover there, Remco played for Belgium in football. Not really what you asked but a lot of high level athletes are good at a lot of sports

 

[Vinther1991]

Nah, someone's talent is clearly visible even in not so good/bad environment. If you're talented, you will outshine the people in your small, even local, team and people would see your talent. As I said, Sky themselves rated his talent level very low, and they certainly knew a thing or two more than us regarding how much of a talent he really was.

As for achieving, he would have achieved much less had he fought Pogacar/Vingegaard instead of Quintana and Bardet, but he got lucky competition wise while Pogacar and Vingegaard have to fight each other, so not much of a reason to regret.

The dominating performances speak for themselves, he clearly was very talented. You don’t become the most successful GT rider of the 21st century if you’re not. He may have been lucky with the competition in later years (2017 in particular), but he also smoked Nibali and Contador routinely, and I think you underrate Quintana severely. The 2015 Tour probably has the best top five this century, Froome, Quintana, Valverde, Nibali, Contador. And who was on top? Chris Froome.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Charlyghoul

I don't know to be honest, personally i wouldn't put Froome ahead of Rogla any more. On top of that and IMHO Rogla is not done yet, still finding ways on how to return and to start dominating again. Currently mostly two riders are preventing that and somehow i feel Rogla will find a solution for that, now that is talent.

 

[Charlyghoul]

@Charlyghoul

I don't know to be honest, personally i wouldn't put Froome ahead of Rogla any more. On top of that and IMHO Rogla is not done yet, still finding ways on how to return and to start dominating again. Currently mostly two riders are preventing that and somehow i feel Rogla will find a solution for that, now that is talent.

Even with Froome having 4 tours ? Roglic is a bit unlucky with Pog and being Vingo around. Would say Roglic/Nibali are more about the same

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Charlyghoul

If i factor in everything and as this thread is about having talent, or not. Then yes.

P.S. As for again beating Pogi (and Jonas), still working on it, this two indeed stand in the way ATM.

 

[tobydawq]

Ah, sorry, overlooked what you had highlighted in bold. I think Valverde and Nibali both overachieved, so they both deserve a mention.

Valverde certainly did not overachieve...

 

[Shortcut]

Even with Froome having 4 tours ? Roglic is a bit unlucky with Pog and being Vingo around. Would say Roglic/Nibali are more about the same

I see Froome like someone who has same amount of talent like Bagnaia. Bagnaia is 2 time MOTO GP overall winner and looked like great rider when nobody talented was around. Now when Marquez is on the same motor and healthy he looks like really untalented rider. Lorenzo won also 2 times but against Rossi, Stoner, Marquez, Pedrosa. Are they on same level? Not even close. The same goes for Froome. He was lucky with competition. If somebody wins against best/most talented and gifted rider ever (so in that case Pogacar) that Tour still counts as winning one Tour. Jonas would destroy everyone in Froome era, the same goes for Roglic, Remco... MvDP would have 15 monument wins. They are all unlucky to ride against most gifted rider ever who is also always healthy but are still enough good to prevent Pogacar to totally destroy them in everything (MvDP MSR, P-R, Jonas 2XTour, Remco TTs). Just take MvDP out of races (like Marquez was out several years in Moto GP) this year-Pogacar would win all 5 monuments+ Tour.

 

[Charlyghoul]

I see Froome like someone who has same amount of talent like Bagnaia. Bagnaia is 2 time MOTO GP overall winner and looked like great rider when nobody talented was around. Now when Marquez is on the same motor and healthy he looks like really untalented rider. Lorenzo won also 2 times but against Rossi, Stoner, Marquez, Pedrosa. Are they on same level? Not even close. The same goes for Froome. He was lucky with competition. If somebody wins against best/most talented and gifted rider ever (so in that case Pogacar) that Tour still counts as winning one Tour. Jonas would destroy everyone in Froome era, the same goes for Roglic, Remco... MvDP would have 15 monument wins. They are all unlucky to ride against most gifted rider ever who is also always healthy but are still enough good to prevent Pogacar to totally destroy them in everything (MvDP MSR, P-R, Jonas 2XTour, Remco TTs). Just take MvDP out of races (like Marquez was out several years in Moto GP) this year-Pogacar would win all 5 monuments+ Tour.

Hmm, agree with some of that. Vingegaard might be favourite but If Froome and Vingegaard were racing against each other it would be interesting if Froome and sky can do anything with Vingegaard. Especially with other guys around like Nibali and Quintana .
Don’t agree that Remco would be winning those tours, Roglic would win one like Nibali did imo.

 

[YavorD]

The dominating performances speak for themselves, he clearly was very talented. You don’t become the most successful GT rider of the 21st century if you’re not. He may have been lucky with the competition in later years (2017 in particular), but he also smoked Nibali and Contador routinely, and I think you underrate Quintana severely. The 2015 Tour probably has the best top five this century, Froome, Quintana, Valverde, Nibali, Contador. And who was on top? Chris Froome.

But having better results doesn't necessarily mean bigger talent. People discussed Ullrich, who according to many, is one of the best talents even, and a bigger talent than a lot of riders who have better results than him. However, he was missing the discipline and determination to achieve them. But that's not talent. I, for one, think that Andg Schleck was a much bigger talent than Froome.
As I said, if Froome was such a talent we would have a glimpse in Barloworld already, instead I read an interview that he was signed by Sky not because of his talent, but because of his passport.

As for Quintana, I don't underrate him. I just rate him (much) below both Pogacar and Vingegaard. And I'm certain either of them would have a field day against Froome. Perhaps even Quintana would capitalize from a tougher racing and would beat Froome once or twice.

 

[Charlyghoul]

Interesting how an era with prime Pog, Ving, Froome and Quintana would go, throw in Nibali and Roglic as well.
Personally I couldn’t see anything other than a Pog, Ving, Froome podium for the majority of the time

 

[Escarabajo]

This is the most difficult question because we really don't know their true natural talent. IMHO.

That is why we always talk about palmares.

 

[Cookster15]

Having superior physiology isn't really talent, is it?

Of course it is! I would have thought that physiological talent is the main reason for all the riders being suggested?

 

[CyclistAbi]

If we are talking purely about talent, then i feel that the top 10 most talented ones in history of cycling are likely anonymous and we never heard of them.