Passing of the torch

[Irondan]

Tom Dumoulin emerged as a legitimate GC threat during this years Vuelta. Rohan Dennis stamped his authority on the Tour's only ITT this year, while also showing that he climb by taking out the GC and mountains jersey's in the US Pro Challenge. Nairo Quintana is already established but his compatriot Esteban Chaves proved he's a force to be reckon with in a grand tour.

All these riders are 25 years old, or younger.

What other riders 25 or younger would be included in this list of great young riders as the heir apparent to grand tour glory, and why?

 

[HSNHSN]

Fabio Aru, if only for the fact that he already won one? (He is still 25, right?)

 

[Irondan]

Re:

Fabio Aru, if only for the fact that he already won one? (He is still 25, right?)

I forgot about Aru, he definitely belongs on this list. He's 25 also.

 

[hrotha]

Wrong subforum?

 

[Irondan]

Re:

Wrong subforum?

I figured most of these convo's end up talking about doping at some point, but I'll move it if I'm wrong.

 

[Billie]

all the guys mentioned in this thread are from the same build year.

And that's without mentioning the two last World champions who are from the same year aswel

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

Wrong subforum?

I do wonder if there may be something to a broad analysis of age groups in different sports and its relationship to doping.

I think back to the fact that in tennis we have had the same 4 guys hold a chokehold on the sport for almost a decade now. 3 of those guys were born within 11 months of eachother. Not a single person from the 1990's has so much as made a grand slam final yet.

In football, messi and Ronaldo have similarly alternated best player in the world for almost a decade. They were born 2 years apart.

In cycling there's a greater age window but guys like Boonen, Canc Valverde Contador have managed to hold on to the top for a very long time too. But its also more complicated by the fact that cycling actually does drug tests

Its not so much about specific years but about the guys that were at the top 8 years ago still being there now in so many sports. Gatlin and Bolt in athletics as well.

In tennis its the most shocking and obvious. Really, by now some of the younger guys should have come through, in a sport where its not unheard of for teenagers to be at the top.

Anyway, eventually new guys have to come through. That might very well be the 1990 (+) generation in cycling.

Why them in particular and not the guys (Sicard, Uran, Betancur, Henao) from 2 years earlier? Maybe its a the a case of where cycling was at in 2009-2011 when the previous generation was coming up and 2012- now for the current one. With 2012 representing a shift back to anyone can dope over the stranglehold a few teams had earlier when more people were getting caught and young riders were afraid to be scapegoated. Just a theory.

That said 1970(-71) was also an amazing year for cycling births (all doped of course) and same to a lesser extent with 1985.

 

[The Hitch]

Just to see, I'll rank the top 26 and under by dodgyness.

The ranking system i will use is the 2010 UCI blood doping probability ranking under where the higher the number the more chance of being dodgy but a lower number doesn't mean you are clean. You could still be like Horner and score a 0 and dope.

Anything other than a 0 or 1 is suspicious and anything above 4 is probably doping. 5-7 is a theoretical but unlikely chance of being clean and 8-10 is a matter of how much rather than if.

Aru 10
Bardet 3
Betancur 6
Bouhanni 3
Chavez 4
Degenkolb 2
Demare 1
Dennis 3
Dumourain 4
Kwiatkowski 5
Majka 6
Matthews 3
Pinot 1
Quintana 7
Sagan 6
Ulissi 6

 

[Catwhoorg]

What about the Yates brothers ?

I think they need another year of conditioned, but 2016 will hopefully show their talents to the full

 

[hrotha]

No way Ulissi isn't a 9-10.

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

No way Ulissi isn't a 9-10.

9-10 is reserved for Riis, Froome, Horner types. I was being facetious with Aru even, should be more like 8. Remember everything above 5 is doped for sure, but I can't give someone like Ulissi full house as then there's no room for the true stars

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I can't reconcile the strange packet of pills Matthews was snapped chowing on mid-race and your assertion of a 3.

 

[saganftw]

why degenkolb only 2 while kwiatek at 5 and sagan at 6?

not that i disagree (im even more cynical)

 

[Bronstein]

Miguel Angel Lopez.

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

why degenkolb only 2 while kwiatek at 5 and sagan at 6?

not that i disagree (im even more cynical)

I probably focused too much on the teams themselves. Sagan is on Tinkov (which is like a 10 on team rankings), and emerged on 2010 Liquigas (which was like an 11)

Kwiatkowski was on Rs and then with iburaugen.

 

[Pentacycle]

Louis Meintjens stealthily rode a good Vuelta, but it remains to be seen how he will improve. He still lacks consistency which showed in the Dauphiné and Tour, although that might have to do with illness or weather conditions.

Ilnur Zakarin had the same in the Giro; he seemed past his peak there, anonymous besides a stage win on a hilly circuit, but then he put out that monster performance over the Finestre. Katusha might have seen this as the proof of a succesful experiment. This is one of the guys to look out for, as we don't know his true limits. IMO more interesting right now than Frenchies Badret/Pinot or the Yates. Might be a high ranking member of The Hitch's list.

 

[Red Rick]

The dominance of the Big 4 in tennis also because the next generations is so, so bad.

 

[old.edu]

Re:

I can't reconcile the strange packet of pills Matthews was snapped chowing on mid-race and your assertion of a 3.

I first mentioned this during the Paris Nice viewtopic.php?p=1671110#p1671110 and only two other posters seemed to pick up on it?

Its strange that nothing else has been mentioned until now?

 

[Billie]

Re:

Just to see, I'll rank the top 26 and under by dodgyness.

The ranking system i will use is the 2010 UCI blood doping probability ranking under where the higher the number the more chance of being dodgy but a lower number doesn't mean you are clean. You could still be like Horner and score a 0 and dope.

Anything other than a 0 or 1 is suspicious and anything above 4 is probably doping. 5-7 is a theoretical but unlikely chance of being clean and 8-10 is a matter of how much rather than if.

Aru 10
Badret 3
Betancur 6
Bouhanni 3
Chavez 4
Degenkolb 2
Demare 1
Dennis 3
Dumourain 4
Kwiatkowski 5
Majka 6
Matthews 3
Pinot 1
Quintana 7
Sagan 6
Ulissi 6

Fits the narrative

Dirty: Eastern Europe, South America, Southern Europe

Clean: Everyone who speaks English, North/West-Europe