Philippe Gilbert Discussion Thread

[Red Rick]

Problem is that GT riders who are good enough to have a chance in monuments outside Liege and Lombardia are just so good they'll focus on at least 1 GT a year.

 

[Bardamu]

True, it's a shame and I think the best GT-riders surely stand a chance in both Flanders and Roubaix. If Dumoulin would ride Flanders and Roubaix he probably wouldn't win because of his lack of finishing abilities, but I can't see him being dropped. Valverde could have won both in his career if he wanted to.

 

[Leinster]

Re:

Problem is that GT riders who are good enough to have a chance in monuments outside Liege and Lombardia are just so good they'll focus on at least 1 GT a year.

I’d like to see Dumoulin have a go at Roubaix or Flanders after he decides he’s too old/slow to win GTs any more. I’d like to see Geraint Thomas have a go at multiple Monuments, like Gilbert I don’t think there’s a race on the calendar he can’t win.

It’s just such a shame that it’s unlikely we’ll see any of them have a serious crack at a monument.

 

[Red Rick]

Re:

True, it's a shame and I think the best GT-riders surely stand a chance in both Flanders and Roubaix. If Dumoulin would ride Flanders and Roubaix he probably wouldn't win because of his lack of finishing abilities, but I can't see him being dropped. Valverde could have won both in his career if he wanted to.

I think in Vlaanderen it's quite the contrary. Dumoulin has a clear way to win, like Terpstra won. He needs to get a gap somewhere and then solo home.

Valverde's sprint just diminishes in a cobbles/MSR field. He sprinted for the win in MSR, and he sprinted for 3rd in Vlaanderen, and didn't make the top 5 in either.

That being said, Dumoulin has basically never managed to be great in the spring and he doesn't seem to know why. He did very well in the Binckbank Tour when he won it, but it's unfortunate that 4 out of 5 monuments are in a period when he's usually not at his best.

 

[Velolover2]

Re: Re:

Problem is that GT riders who are good enough to have a chance in monuments outside Liege and Lombardia are just so good they'll focus on at least 1 GT a year.

I’d like to see Dumoulin have a go at Roubaix or Flanders after he decides he’s too old/slow to win GTs any more. I’d like to see Geraint Thomas have a go at multiple Monuments, like Gilbert I don’t think there’s a race on the calendar he can’t win.

It’s just such a shame that it’s unlikely we’ll see any of them have a serious crack at a monument.

You forgot Primož Roglič. I'd be interesting to see if he has any weaknesses.

Never really tested himself in one-day races.

 

[Blanco]

Gilbert > Bettini

More classic wins, more diverse classics, more podiums, more stage wins.
The last rider to win 4 different monuments was Sean Kelly 30 years ago,
the fact that Gilbert does this in an era where specialization is the key word is truly impressive.

Simply no.
8 big wins beats 6, no matter what. No diversity could help, 2 big ones is a serious gap.
I mean Hennie Kuiper won 4 different Monuments plus WC (just like Gilbert), but who the hell puts him ahead of Moser or Argentin for example?!
If he wins 7th and if that is San Remo, I would gladly put him in the company of Sean Kelly and Fausto Coppi ahead of Bettini and Boonen, but for now he is below them imo.

Your definition of big wins is where we disagree, it narrows your view on things.
Let's take San Remo and Amstel Gold.
Bettini wins San Remo and has one 3th at Amstel. Gilbert has two 3th places at San Remo and 4 wins at Amstel Gold. The way you look at numbers, that one San Remo makes you forget about all the rest, while I think 4 times Amstel and 2 podiums in San Remo is much more impressive than one victory in San Remo and one 3th at Amstel.
And it's not only the wins, also the podiums in classics. In the Ronde van Vlaanderen Gilbert takes one win, but also got 3 other podiums, it all counts when you try to compare riders.

So you took Gilbert's most successful race by far and San Remo, very interesting Why didn't you choose some other race, like Liege or Lombardia, or any other? Would result be the same then? And then my view is narrow!?

Here's where things stands:
Gilbert won 6 biggest ones vs Bettini's 8 - a serious gap

Gilbert has 6 podiums in those races, Bettini 2 - can't fill that gap, not even close

Gilbert won 8 WT classics vs 4 Bettini's - a gap, but because of the smaller importance of the races, not as big as previous one.

Gilbert also won some important classics, outside of these two categories like 2x Het Volk and Strade, but Bettini won World Cup 3 times, which was then a very important competition and I believe one of his major targets of the season, so I think this neutralizes that wins of Gilbert, at least.

And last, I have to mention that a WC and OG win for me has a slightly bigger importance then a regular Monument, so when I consider all this things, for me it is Bettini>Gilbert, but I have to say that one major win for Gilbert would probably tip the balance in Gilbert's favor.

That's my stand.

 

[VDB44]

Gilbert > Bettini

More classic wins, more diverse classics, more podiums, more stage wins.
The last rider to win 4 different monuments was Sean Kelly 30 years ago,
the fact that Gilbert does this in an era where specialization is the key word is truly impressive.

Simply no.
8 big wins beats 6, no matter what. No diversity could help, 2 big ones is a serious gap.
I mean Hennie Kuiper won 4 different Monuments plus WC (just like Gilbert), but who the hell puts him ahead of Moser or Argentin for example?!
If he wins 7th and if that is San Remo, I would gladly put him in the company of Sean Kelly and Fausto Coppi ahead of Bettini and Boonen, but for now he is below them imo.

Your definition of big wins is where we disagree, it narrows your view on things.
Let's take San Remo and Amstel Gold.
Bettini wins San Remo and has one 3th at Amstel. Gilbert has two 3th places at San Remo and 4 wins at Amstel Gold. The way you look at numbers, that one San Remo makes you forget about all the rest, while I think 4 times Amstel and 2 podiums in San Remo is much more impressive than one victory in San Remo and one 3th at Amstel.
And it's not only the wins, also the podiums in classics. In the Ronde van Vlaanderen Gilbert takes one win, but also got 3 other podiums, it all counts when you try to compare riders.

So you took Gilbert's most successful race by far and San Remo, very interesting Why didn't you choose some other race, like Liege or Lombardia, or any other? Would result be the same then? And then my view is narrow!?

Here's where things stands:
Gilbert won 6 biggest ones vs Bettini's 8 - a serious gap

Gilbert has 6 podiums in those races, Bettini 2 - can't fill that gap, not even close

Gilbert won 8 WT classics vs 4 Bettini's - a gap, but because of the smaller importance of the races, not as big as previous one.

Gilbert also won some important classics, outside of these two categories like 2x Het Volk and Strade, but Bettini won World Cup 3 times, which was then a very important competition and I believe one of his major targets of the season, so I think this neutralizes that wins of Gilbert, at least.

And last, I have to mention that a WC and OG win for me has a slightly bigger importance then a regular Monument, so when I consider all this things, for me it is Bettini>Gilbert, but I have to say that one major win for Gilbert would probably tip the balance in Gilbert's favor.

That's my stand.

Like Saint Unix said: "Bettini was a God on the bike, but he never podiumed Flanders and he never even rode Roubaix, and for me those two races are the most important one-day races on the calendar. PhilGil has nearly copied Bettini in the hilly classics and in addition has won or podiumed pretty much every cobbled classic there is. Winning a wide spectrum of races once or twice weighs more heavily than winning a narrower spectrum of races more times, at least for me. Dominance comes along quite often. Versatility combined with dominance is at best a once-in-a-generation kind of thing.."

My stand also

 

[gregrowlerson]

Re: Re:

I know podiums don't matter to most posters here, but I have a fetish for them so...
Most podiums in Monuments + WCRR + ORR:

Fabian Cancellara 17 (7 wins)
Alejandro Valverde 16 (5)
Tom Boonen 15 (8)
Philippe Gilbert 12 (6)
Paolo Bettini 10 (8)
Peter Sagan 8 (5)
Oscar Freire 8 (6)

If there's any mistake please correct.

And Cancellara with 12 consecutive podiums in monuments that he finished is one of the most crazy achievements I have ever witnessed.

Really? That is incredible. Even more impressive than Valverde's 6 podiums (well 7 now) in the world's.

But people don't like podiums. Nor ITT

 

[tobydawq]

Re: Re:

I know podiums don't matter to most posters here, but I have a fetish for them so...
Most podiums in Monuments + WCRR + ORR:

Fabian Cancellara 17 (7 wins)
Alejandro Valverde 16 (5)
Tom Boonen 15 (8)
Philippe Gilbert 12 (6)
Paolo Bettini 10 (8)
Peter Sagan 8 (5)
Oscar Freire 8 (6)

If there's any mistake please correct.

And Cancellara with 12 consecutive podiums in monuments that he finished is one of the most crazy achievements I have ever witnessed.

Really? That is incredible. Even more impressive than Valverde's 6 podiums (well 7 now) in the world's.

But people don't like podiums. Nor ITT

Yep:

Flanders 2010: Win
Roubaix 2010: Win
MSR 2011: Second
Flanders 2011: Third
Roubaix 2011: Second
MSR 2012: Second
Flanders 2012: Crash -> DNF
Roubaix 2012: Out with injury
MSR 2013: Third
Flanders 2013: Win
Roubaix 2013: Win
MSR 2014: Second
Flanders 2014: Win
Roubaix 2014: Third

This is just crazy.

 

[spalco]

I think monument (and WC) podiums should count to an extent (podiums in other classics don't), and I would even argue GT stage wins count somewhat, since that's kind of a mini-one-day-race.

 

[Red Rick]

I guess thats also a function of never entering Liege or Lombardia

 

[Red Rick]

What would we consider the bottom end of great one day racers? 3 big wins? Like cutting off after Cunego and Nibali?

Anything to exclude Gerrans really

 

[tobydawq]

Re:

I guess thats also a function of never entering Liege or Lombardia

Obviously, but it's not like this is just easily done if you skip those...

 

[Flamin]

Gilbert's palmares is absolutely insane and if you go only by that, he's probably the best one-day rider of the 21st century. But I find it difficult to acknowledge him as such because he's barely even been the best Belgian classics rider in his whole career. Obviously there was Boonen until 2012 (with the exception of 2011) and from there on GVA was better up until last year.

Possibly the fact that he wasn't that super dominant (bar 2011) and also that both Liège and Lombardia were changing (the latter becoming more of a reduced uphill bunch sprint and the latter a climbers classic) thus making it harder for him to win, made it easier to switch to the cobbles and now he's ended up with a unique palmares in modern cycling. Big kudos to him for making that call as I think Gilbert is incredibly smart and knows better than anyone what he can and what he can't do.

But for me that's not enough to put him in the Boonen/Cancellara-league.

 

[YavorD]

To me podiums in a one day race really matter. In compare to GT's in one day races you have a bit (or a lot) more of a "luck" factor. So having more podiums in monuments kinda shows your true class, shows how consistent you are which is allso important in "äll time greatness"

 

[Bardamu]

Re:

Gilbert's palmares is absolutely insane and if you go only by that, he's probably the best one-day rider of the 21st century. But I find it difficult to acknowledge him as such because he's barely even been the best Belgian classics rider in his whole career. Obviously there was Boonen until 2012 (with the exception of 2011) and from there on GVA was better up until last year.

Possibly the fact that he wasn't that super dominant (bar 2011) and also that both Liège and Lombardia were changing (the latter becoming more of a reduced uphill bunch sprint and the latter a climbers classic) thus making it harder for him to win, made it easier to switch to the cobbles and now he's ended up with a unique palmares in modern cycling. Big kudos to him for making that call as I think Gilbert is incredibly smart and knows better than anyone what he can and what he can't do.

But for me that's not enough to put him in the Boonen/Cancellara-league.

Lol how are Boonen and Cancellara in a higher league than Gilbert?

 

[Flamin]

Re: Re:

Gilbert's palmares is absolutely insane and if you go only by that, he's probably the best one-day rider of the 21st century. But I find it difficult to acknowledge him as such because he's barely even been the best Belgian classics rider in his whole career. Obviously there was Boonen until 2012 (with the exception of 2011) and from there on GVA was better up until last year.

Possibly the fact that he wasn't that super dominant (bar 2011) and also that both Liège and Lombardia were changing (the latter becoming more of a reduced uphill bunch sprint and the latter a climbers classic) thus making it harder for him to win, made it easier to switch to the cobbles and now he's ended up with a unique palmares in modern cycling. Big kudos to him for making that call as I think Gilbert is incredibly smart and knows better than anyone what he can and what he can't do.

But for me that's not enough to put him in the Boonen/Cancellara-league.

Lol how are Boonen and Cancellara in a higher league than Gilbert?

Because they didn't only win and podium more big races, but also in more impressive fashion. And if not for crashes or other circumstances, I believe they could have won even more, unlike Gilbert.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Re:

To me podiums in a one day race really matter. In compare to GT's in one day races you have a bit (or a lot) more of a "luck" factor. So having more podiums in monuments kinda shows your true class, shows how consistent you are which is allso important in "äll time greatness"

I agree. In one day races the 'best' rider is often not the winner, whereas in GT's this is rarely the case.

And shouldn't Gerran's haters be more for the podiums argument?

 

[Valanga]

Re:

Obviously there was Boonen until 2012 (with the exception of 2011) and from there on GVA was better up until last year.

I fail to see that. I know it is portrayed like that in the Flemish media, but I don't really get it.

Comparing major wins (because winning is what it's all about in cycling, right?) (using wikipedia for this):

2012: Greg won nothing, Phil became world champion.
2013: Greg won nothing worth mentioning, Phil at least won a stage in the Vuelta.
2014: Greg again won nothing worth mentioning. He did podium Flanders & Omloop though. Phil won Brabantse Pijl and Amstel.
2015: Again only podiums for Greg. Phil won 2 stages in the Giro.
2016: No doubt Greg had a far better season than Phil, winning Olympics, Tireno, Omloop.
2017: Well, this is a close one imho. Greg won Paris-Roubaix, Omloop, E3 and Gent-Wevelgem. But Phil won Flanders and Amstel, so this is not far behind (if anything).
2018: they both won nothing significant I think? Gregs best achievement was holding on to the yellow jersey for a week or so after a TTT.
2019: Well, so far, Phil > Greg, again. Big time.

I'd say except for 2016, even in his BMC years Phil had better results than Greg.

 

[Bardamu]

Re: Re:

Gilbert's palmares is absolutely insane and if you go only by that, he's probably the best one-day rider of the 21st century. But I find it difficult to acknowledge him as such because he's barely even been the best Belgian classics rider in his whole career. Obviously there was Boonen until 2012 (with the exception of 2011) and from there on GVA was better up until last year.

Possibly the fact that he wasn't that super dominant (bar 2011) and also that both Liège and Lombardia were changing (the latter becoming more of a reduced uphill bunch sprint and the latter a climbers classic) thus making it harder for him to win, made it easier to switch to the cobbles and now he's ended up with a unique palmares in modern cycling. Big kudos to him for making that call as I think Gilbert is incredibly smart and knows better than anyone what he can and what he can't do.

But for me that's not enough to put him in the Boonen/Cancellara-league.

Lol how are Boonen and Cancellara in a higher league than Gilbert?

Because they didn't only win and podium more big races, but also in more impressive fashion. And if not for crashes or other circumstances, I believe they could have won even more, unlike Gilbert.

Already forgetting Gilbert's victory in Flanders? His dominance in Amstel and the WC (Cancellara never came close to the WC, Boonen was not the strongest when he won), his victories in Lombardia.
Would Boonen and Cancellara be able to win Liége or Lombardia? I don't think so. Boonen never even won Sanremo, a race that was right up his alley.

 

[tobydawq]

Re: Re:

Obviously there was Boonen until 2012 (with the exception of 2011) and from there on GVA was better up until last year.

I fail to see that. I know it is portrayed like that in the Flemish media, but I don't really get it.

Comparing major wins (because winning is what it's all about in cycling, right?) (using wikipedia for this):

2012: Greg won nothing, Phil became world champion.
2013: Greg won nothing worth mentioning, Phil at least won a stage in the Vuelta.
2014: Greg again won nothing worth mentioning. He did podium Flanders & Omloop though. Phil won Brabantse Pijl and Amstel.
2015: Again only podiums for Greg. Phil won 2 stages in the Giro.
2016: No doubt Greg had a far better season than Phil, winning Olympics, Tireno, Omloop.
2017: Well, this is a close one imho. Greg won Paris-Roubaix, Omloop, E3 and Gent-Wevelgem. But Phil won Flanders and Amstel, so this is not far behind (if anything).
2018: they both won nothing significant I think? Gregs best achievement was holding on to the yellow jersey for a week or so after a TTT.
2019: Well, so far, Phil > Greg, again. Big time.

I'd say except for 2016, even in his BMC years Phil had better results than Greg.

You can't only look at only the wins like this when comparing season by season. Greg was obviously the better rider from 2013 onwards and the fact that Gilbert won a couple of Giro and Vuelta stages can't change that.

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

I guess thats also a function of never entering Liege or Lombardia

Obviously, but it's not like this is just easily done if you skip those...

It's not, but it does make it completely impossible for other guys.

 

[Red Rick]

GvA is basically a poor man's Gilbert and pretty overrated imo.

 

[Flamin]

Re: Re:

Gilbert's palmares is absolutely insane and if you go only by that, he's probably the best one-day rider of the 21st century. But I find it difficult to acknowledge him as such because he's barely even been the best Belgian classics rider in his whole career. Obviously there was Boonen until 2012 (with the exception of 2011) and from there on GVA was better up until last year.

Possibly the fact that he wasn't that super dominant (bar 2011) and also that both Liège and Lombardia were changing (the latter becoming more of a reduced uphill bunch sprint and the latter a climbers classic) thus making it harder for him to win, made it easier to switch to the cobbles and now he's ended up with a unique palmares in modern cycling. Big kudos to him for making that call as I think Gilbert is incredibly smart and knows better than anyone what he can and what he can't do.

But for me that's not enough to put him in the Boonen/Cancellara-league.

Lol how are Boonen and Cancellara in a higher league than Gilbert?

Because they didn't only win and podium more big races, but also in more impressive fashion. And if not for crashes or other circumstances, I believe they could have won even more, unlike Gilbert.

Already forgetting Gilbert's victory in Flanders? His dominance in Amstel and the WC (Cancellara never came close to the WC, Boonen was not the strongest when he won), his victories in Lombardia.
Would Boonen and Cancellara be able to win Liége or Lombardia? I don't think so. Boonen never even won Sanremo, a race that was right up his alley.

As a GVA supporter, I will of course never forget how he got de Ronde taken away from him in 2017, no even though it was a superb ride from Gilbert.

I don't know, because they never tried. Given how Cancellara performed in hilly classics (Olympics, Strade,...), I do believe he could have won Liège if he totally forgot about the cobbles. Boonen, most likely not, but he doesn't need to because he's one of the best cobble riders ever.

Would Gilbert have given up on Liège if he could become the record holder there? Like I said, he deserves credits for re-orientating and pulling off an amazing feat, but it's really not THE decisive factor for me.

 

[Valanga]

Re: Re:

Obviously there was Boonen until 2012 (with the exception of 2011) and from there on GVA was better up until last year.

I fail to see that. I know it is portrayed like that in the Flemish media, but I don't really get it.

Comparing major wins (because winning is what it's all about in cycling, right?) (using wikipedia for this):

2012: Greg won nothing, Phil became world champion.
2013: Greg won nothing worth mentioning, Phil at least won a stage in the Vuelta.
2014: Greg again won nothing worth mentioning. He did podium Flanders & Omloop though. Phil won Brabantse Pijl and Amstel.
2015: Again only podiums for Greg. Phil won 2 stages in the Giro.
2016: No doubt Greg had a far better season than Phil, winning Olympics, Tireno, Omloop.
2017: Well, this is a close one imho. Greg won Paris-Roubaix, Omloop, E3 and Gent-Wevelgem. But Phil won Flanders and Amstel, so this is not far behind (if anything).
2018: they both won nothing significant I think? Gregs best achievement was holding on to the yellow jersey for a week or so after a TTT.
2019: Well, so far, Phil > Greg, again. Big time.

I'd say except for 2016, even in his BMC years Phil had better results than Greg.

You can't only look at only the wins like this when comparing season by season. Greg was obviously the better rider from 2013 onwards and the fact that Gilbert won a couple of Giro and Vuelta stages can't change that.

Maybe not only, but saying Greg was obviously the better rider when he won less is wrong imho, since that is what counts in the end. Winning.
That's also how we are comparing Boonen/Cancellara/Bettini/Gilbert here. By the monuments they won.
(Not saying Phil was a better rider than Greg in those years, but definitely not obviously the other way around)