Over- and underachievers during the last 20 years

[Mayomaniac]

2014 Wilco was actually fearless and willing to attack, fun to watch.
I think Garzelli could have won a lot more one day races, if he actually raced more outside of Italy. In 2006 he was able to outsprint Ciolek, Hondo and Zabel in Rund um den Henninger Turm. Durning his prime years he didn't really race the Ardennes Classics, between 2000 and 2005 he only raced LBL once, not a single edition of AGR or FW.

 

[Red Rick]

Nope, he was in the main group.
He attacked with Nibali before the last climb and was the best placed rider from that group.

Okay he dropped Dauphine Nibali once. So did Talansky.

I think Val Martello might have been his best climbing performance?

 

[skidmark]

I might have missed it, but I haven't seen anyone mention Frank Vandenbroucke. Definitely one of the biggest underachievers of the last 20 years, with a myriad of causes.

Is it possible to put Moreno Moser in both categories?

I saw it mentioned that alot of the focus on riders is on their physical gifts and not mental, and it's true that I tend to think of under/overachievement based on that. I didn't really follow closely enough to know why Coen Vermeltfoort's much-hyped power numbers never translated into professional wins, but he's certainly an underachiever in that sense, a mirror image of Mark Cavendish as an overachiever. I guess it's a bit self-selecting - someone with both mental and physical strength isn't really going to underachieve except for injury, and it's easier to gauge physical power as a basis for assessment. Wasn't Jesus Hernandez supposed to be a better pure climber in training than Contador? I remember it being discussed that he just couldn't do it after the length of a race, and so had an anonymous career.

Anyway, I guess your mileage may vary on how to assess that. But some promising youngsters in the last ten-ish years that come to mind that never really did what it looked like they could do include Sicard of course (although I'm inclined to think his blazing 2 months as an U23 in 2009 was just the form of his life rather than the baseline against which he should be judged), Silvio Herklotz, or guys who showed some moxie in pro races but never took it to the next level, like Enrico Battaglin or Matvey Mamykin. Or if you want guys who have had pretty great careers but really seem like they should have been much better, Edvald Boasson Hagen is right there in the Cunego level.

 

[lenric]

Unfortunately for the fans, some riders prefer to underachieve in order to oversize their bank accounts.


Also, apart from 2001-2003, looking at Roberto Heras record at the Vuelta one may be left wondering he could have won a couple Giros.

 

[Cookster15]

Evans and Schleck both should have won more than one grand tour. Schleck was more of a natural talent

Agree with the first bit. But I am always perplexed by the second. This thing about Andy I never understood. I don't think he was a more talented bike rider than Cadel.

 

[movingtarget]

Agree with the first bit. But I am always perplexed by the second. This thing about Andy I never understood. I don't think he was a more talented bike rider than Cadel.

More of a pure climber. Evans was more versatile, better sprinter, better TT, smarter tactics and Andy was second in the Giro when he was very young. If Schleck had the work ethic of Evans he would have won multiple tours and his tactics in the 2011 Tour with his brother were just naive, they were more worried about being on the podium together than winning the race. Andy only really wanted to race two or three races per season while Evans was competitive most of the time. Schleck was a superb climber though, as talented as Contador but not as tough and daring and Contador could also TT.

 

[BeagleOfToledo]

Yes, and don't forget that Gerrans could have won the 2014 WC RR, if he was actually willing to take a few pulls.
As a gt winner I have to mention Wiggins as an overachiver, all the stars aligned so that he managed to win the Tour.

Reckon Michael Matthews could have won the 2015 road worlds in Richmond if Gerrans was willing to take a few pulls - lost a bit of respect for Gerro that day

 

[Red Rick]

Agree with the first bit. But I am always perplexed by the second. This thing about Andy I never understood. I don't think he was a more talented bike rider than Cadel.

He was less alround but a far better climber, which is why he really should've won more than 0 GTs on the road. Evans tried all 3 GTs only won one Tour, got destroyed in the Giro every time and perhaps was a bit unlucky in the 2009 Vuelta but I think he wouldn't even have won without the mechanical on Sierra Nevada.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Reckon Michael Matthews could have won the 2015 road worlds in Richmond if Gerrans was willing to take a few pulls - lost a bit of respect for Gerro that day

Everyone else had already lost all of theirs.

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

biggest underachiver - Vino. He should've won atleast 8 Tours

 

[perico]

Underachiever:
Igor Gonzalez de Galdeano- After 1999 at the Vuelta, looked like a future GC star on the rise. Finished in the Top 5 in 2001, and looked like He might be Armstrong’s toughest rival when he took yellow at the 2002 Tour. Finished 5th and other than a 4th at the next years Vuelta was done. Although I remember some later clinical rumors, he was already completely irrelevant as a GC contender that he didn’t even last long enough to get busted in Puerto.

 

[staubsauger]

Underachiever:
Igor Gonzalez de Galdeano- After 1999 at the Vuelta, looked like a future GC star on the rise. Finished in the Top 5 in 2001, and looked like He might be Armstrong’s toughest rival when he took yellow at the 2002 Tour. Finished 5th and other than a 4th at the next years Vuelta was done. Although I remember some later clinical rumors, he was already completely irrelevant as a GC contender that he didn’t even last long enough to get busted in Puerto.

Didn't he crash harshly at the Tour of Germany that Rogers won and never fully recovered from his injuries? During the final TT it was from my memory.

 

[perico]

Didn't he crash harshly at the Tour of Germany that Rogers won and never fully recovered from his injuries? During the final TT it was from my memory.

Possibly I don’t remember. Sounds about right. He never reached the levels I thought he was capable of reaching either way. A nice palmares, but should’ve been much more, at least in my opinion.

 

[Roku]

Menchov won in 2007 and 2009, so well into Contador's years (even though no directly confronting him on those wins). Honestly, I've never rated him any higher than Evans, who physiologically was world-class (as it can easily be found out if you research). To me, Menchov was a lucky Uran, maybe a bit more talented, but that's it.
In 2008 he was 5th in the Giro and 4th on the Tour (3th after the dsq of Khol). Both of the GTs had weak fields, even Contador wasn't on his best days, considering he was aiming the tour, not the giro (only rode it because of Astana's shitshow).

I know the thing about Menchov might raise some eyebrows, but honestly I have always thought of him as a talented guy, yet very lucky on his GT wins, benefiting from weak competition. Basso was returning from a ban on Menchov's Giro win, the other 2 guys on the podium (di Luca and Pellizotti) were never GT podium contenders. Even the good old Leipheimer was already declining.

Sorry for my late reply. There is no way he is a slightly better Uran. Denis was much better than Uran.

2008 he was probably the strongest rider on the Tour, excepting the day of Alpe D'Huez, when Sastre was unmatched. Menchov lost time in stupid ways (1:15 combined in a flat stage and in the descent of the Bonnette) and fell while going on for yellow jersey in Prato Nevoso. That day he was real strong and had opened a serious gap. I'm sure he would have won the Tour without that fall.

Regarding the comparison with Cadel. IMHO, Denis had a higher ceiling that Cadel, but the australian was more consistent and focused, especially after 2009. Denis never cared about one week races and classics, where he had potential. In his early days he won Itzulia, he also showed a lot of potential in stagehunting and had a very good uphill kick. The real problem of Menchov was his head and a lack of ambition.

To put things into perspective, only 4 riders have been able to succesfully double up Giro & Tour in recent years: Froome (1 / 3 in 2018), Dumoulin (2 / 2 in 2018), Contador (1 / 5 in 2011 and 2015), Menchov (5 / 3 in 2008). And again, he was much stronger in TDF that 2008 year. That's how good he was.

 

[Red Rick]

Don't think we should overestimate Menchov in the 2008 Tour. He wasn't going for yellow on Pratonevoso, he was a minute down to Fränk Schleck at that point. Then Menchov attacked with Sastre on the Alpe d'Huez and Sastre made him look silly. His best race was probably the 2009 Giro, but I think 2010 should've ended all pretense he could hang with Contador and Schleck. 2 (3) GTs is a very nice haul for someone of his abilities IMO. Evans got the single one, but it's the Tour so it's pretty whatever. Both got lucky to score in the absence or when facing underperforming superior climbers.

Menchov perhaps was a big underachiever outside GTs, but I don't really think it matters that much. Don't think there was a lot of wasted classics potential there, and nobody really cares about shorter stage races once you get to the winning end of GTs in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Cookster15]

Both got lucky to score in the absence or when facing underperforming superior climbers.

Lucky? I don't follow Menchov so others can comment but to say Cadel was lucky? That is simply wrong. Everyone has luck depending where you draw the line. Evans had his fair share of bad luck too. There are lots of superior climbers who will never win a grand Tour much less the Tour de France.

 

[Axel Hangleck]

Agree with the first bit. But I am always perplexed by the second. This thing about Andy I never understood. I don't think he was a more talented bike rider than Cadel.

I'm not sure about this. A more natural climber, yes. He didn't seem to have the motivation to do more - and seemed to complain/underperform when conditions weren't perfect. And he could/should have been better in the ITT.
Evans made the absolute most of his talent; 2x MTB World Cup titles, TdF, WCRR, FW and other races suggests someone who put everything into what he had - and a very good all round career.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I'd actually argue Evans likely didn't make the most of his abilities, he just did a very good job in his twilight years of making up for the lost time he spent underachieving before Mendrisio and, much like the Tour he won, the fact that he was so successful late in his career means we sometimes overlook how long he took to get over that psychological hurdle and start to achieve to the appropriate level.

 

[Red Rick]

Lucky? I don't follow Menchov so others can comment but to say Cadel was lucky? That is simply wrong. Everyone has luck depending where you draw the line. Evans had his fair share of bad luck too. There are lots of superior climbers who will never win a grand Tour much less the Tour de France.

Here's the circumstances that Evans needed to win the Tour.

• Contador going to the Giro pending a Clinic case
• Gaining a minute and a half on Contador due to a crash
• Schleck waiting around the entirety of the Pyrenees
• Climbing times being by far the worst that year
• Contador inititiating a Col de Manse blowup resulting in Schleck losing over a minute
• Contador breaking on exactly the right stage.
• Contador attacking the Telegraphe, dragging Schleck with him
• Having a mechanical while in a pointless attack that got brought back later anyway
• Voeckler blowing up trying to follow Schleck and Contador

None of these things he initiated himself. Now if you compare 2011 Evans to all the other tour winners this century, he's probably only decidedly better than Pereiro and the only other one he might arguably beat is Bernal juust maybe.

The big elephant in the room for Evans is that he literally never was among the best in the mountains. Never won a mountain stage in a GT. Wasn't a GT prodigy early on, and even when he got 2nd in the Tour he got destroyed in the mountains so badly. The more I think about it, the more I think he overperformed tremendously in GTs and probably slihgly underperformed in one day races overall but then he won the WCRR in the only chance he had.

 

[roundabout]

Underachiever:
Igor Gonzalez de Galdeano- After 1999 at the Vuelta, looked like a future GC star on the rise. Finished in the Top 5 in 2001, and looked like He might be Armstrong’s toughest rival when he took yellow at the 2002 Tour. Finished 5th and other than a 4th at the next years Vuelta was done. Although I remember some later clinical rumors, he was already completely irrelevant as a GC contender that he didn’t even last long enough to get busted in Puerto.

Why is he an underachiever?

He had modest results pre Vitalicio Seguros and then bam, GT podium at age 26 season/5th pro year.

 

[roundabout]

Evans rode his first GT aged 25 and led it with 1 mountain stage and 1 TT to go. In a second season IIRC of riding full time on the road.

 

[Red Rick]

Evans rode his first GT aged 25 and led it with 1 mountain stage and 1 TT to go. In a second season IIRC of riding full time on the road.

He completely broke on one of 2 hard mountain stages.

 

[staubsauger]

Menchov got all his major victories after Rabobank fired Rasmussen and got a Carte blanche! He's a crystal clear overachiever and probably never was more than a mediocre rider in first instance.

Leipheimer his predessor at Rabobank on the other hand might be a huge underarchiver. Entered both the 2006 Tour de France & 2009 Giro d'Italia as main-favorite on paper. Won the 2008 Vuelta a Espana based on mere racing time. He never believed in his own strength. Riding extremely conservative and becoming a notorious wheelsucker. He was a gifted climber actually and even had the ability to make attacks. His test balloons for Contador at that Vuelta all were pretty shaky. It seems he just never knew when to make his move when racing in Europe. That's what has been so frustrating about him: He didn't dare to attack while he perfectly could have done so.

 

[Red Rick]

2008 Vuelta had pretty much only the Angliru as a climb over 6%.

 

[roundabout]

He completely broke on one of 2 hard mountain stages.

Yes. I watched that stage live.

I am just giving a bit more context.

Come to think of it, with Garzelli in the team, Evans was probably not intended to be a leader. Just looking at his calendar that year before the Giro seems to confirm it - 37 race days and doing Paris-Nice, Pais Vasco and Romandie all at high level.