Rank 1-4: Boonen, Cancellara, Contador & Valverde

Jul 4, 2015
658
0
0
Valverde definitly first, no doubt about that as shown by pcs. Boonen best cobbled rider of his generation is second no doubt. Hesitating between alberto and fabien yes alberto was great but in a generation of week riders he shown limits when up against more talented riders than him and really struggled (Froome, Quintana, Rodriguez, Valverde, Landa...) For that reason alone i put fabu ahead his demonstration in 2010 against the greatest is something that Contador has never been able to show against another great.
 
Oct 10, 2015
2,059
0
0
Re:

Ramon Koran said:
Valverde definitly first, no doubt about that as shown by pcs. Boonen best cobbled rider of his generation is second no doubt. Hesitating between alberto and fabien yes alberto was great but in a generation of week riders he shown limits when up against more talented riders than him and really struggled (Froome, Quintana, Rodriguez, Valverde, Landa...) For that reason alone i put fabu ahead his demonstration in 2010 against the greatest is something that Contador has never been able to show against another great.
When has Contador struggled against Landa? Last years Giro which he won, also I wouldn't say Contador has struggled against Valverde and Rodriguez.

As to the thread question, can't really compare Boonen and Cancellara to Valverde and Contador
 
Jul 4, 2015
658
0
0
Re: Re:

StryderHells said:
Ramon Koran said:
Valverde definitly first, no doubt about that as shown by pcs. Boonen best cobbled rider of his generation is second no doubt. Hesitating between alberto and fabien yes alberto was great but in a generation of week riders he shown limits when up against more talented riders than him and really struggled (Froome, Quintana, Rodriguez, Valverde, Landa...) For that reason alone i put fabu ahead his demonstration in 2010 against the greatest is something that Contador has never been able to show against another great.
When has Contador struggled against Landa? Last years Giro which he won, also I wouldn't say Contador has struggled against Valverde and Rodriguez.

As to the thread question, can't really compare Boonen and Cancellara to Valverde and Contador
Yes he won, but not dominating like a cancellara has done. I xas just using that to justify fabien above alberto.
 
Jul 29, 2012
11,703
2
0
Re:

Ramon Koran said:
Valverde definitly first, no doubt about that as shown by pcs. Boonen best cobbled rider of his generation is second no doubt. Hesitating between alberto and fabien yes alberto was great but in a generation of week riders he shown limits when up against more talented riders than him and really struggled (Froome, Quintana, Rodriguez, Valverde, Landa...) For that reason alone i put fabu ahead his demonstration in 2010 against the greatest is something that Contador has never been able to show against another great.

No one was called a great in contador's prime cause he put them all to shame. There was no other great because of him

But Menchov and Evans were very very good riders at their best, they weren't even close to Contador.

The giro of 2011 had one of the strongest fields and Contador crushed them all.
 
Jul 29, 2012
11,703
2
0
1.Contador
2.Cancellara
3.Valverde
4.Boonen

nr.2 and 3 was very hard but i can't discount all the classics wins of fabian and the way he rides needs to be applauded. He also has many podiums.

Many WC ITT, and even olympic Gold. Won way more stages in the tour than piti, worth more than piti's podium and euh piti' 3 stage wins (right?) oh wait there's the ones he got from ricco's thing right but don't count for me

But it can change though, if piti has some more results. Oympic gold, maybe he'll continue next year.

Boonen on 4 is the only right place for him.

And Contador is the youngest of them all and still has 2 more good years in him and GT's are the more relevant and he won a *** ton of it and also many one week stage races.
 
Re:

Ramon Koran said:
Valverde definitly first, no doubt about that as shown by pcs. Boonen best cobbled rider of his generation is second no doubt. Hesitating between alberto and fabien yes alberto was great but in a generation of week riders he shown limits when up against more talented riders than him and really struggled (Froome, Quintana, Rodriguez, Valverde, Landa...) For that reason alone i put fabu ahead his demonstration in 2010 against the greatest is something that Contador has never been able to show against another great.
contadors career didnt start in 2012,he beat a lot of great riders at the height of their ehm "powers" before froome and quintana were in the peloton
 
Apr 22, 2012
3,570
0
0
1. Contador 2. Valverde 3. Cancellara 4. Boonen.

Contador and Valverde clearly better for me than the other two; but it's tough to compare between themselves. Contador fenomenal stage racers and I've always considered stage racing the top of it all. Valverde on the other hand excellent stage racer but not so good as Contador plus one day too.
 
1) Valverde
2) Cancellara
3) Boonen
4) Contador

Not just going by palmares - in which case you could pobably make a strong case for any of them - but by talent and diversity. The top three all have insane aerobic and anaerobic ability and can also sprint. Valverde has the edge for me because, like Boonen said a couple of weeks ago, he is the best and can compete with the best in nearly any kind of race. Cancellara and Boonen are kind of equal, but I think Cancellara's wins at Strade Bianche and in a few hilly stage races suggest he's a bit more rounded than Boonen.

Contador a bit behind in terms of talent. He's got an amazing aerobic engine and could put out insane w/kg at threshold in his prime, but his anaerobic power isn't great and his sprint is awful. It's a shame in a way that GTs are so much in favour of one dimensional riders in the modern era with domestiques so strong - it's all about the mountains.
 
Re:

DFA123 said:
1) Valverde
2) Cancellara
3) Boonen
4) Contador

Not just going by palmares - in which case you could pobably make a strong case for any of them - but by talent and diversity. The top three all have insane aerobic and anaerobic ability and can also sprint. Valverde has the edge for me because, like Boonen said a couple of weeks ago, he is the best and can compete with the best in nearly any kind of race. Cancellara and Boonen are kind of equal, but I think Cancellara's wins at Strade Bianche and in a few hilly stage races suggest he's a bit more rounded than Boonen.

Contador a bit behind in terms of talent. He's got an amazing aerobic engine and could put out insane w/kg at threshold in his prime, but his anaerobic power isn't great and his sprint is awful. It's a shame in a way that GTs are so much in favour of one dimensional riders in the modern era with domestiques so strong - it's all about the mountains.
There's plenty of races already that favour sprinters.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
1) Valverde
2) Cancellara
3) Boonen
4) Contador

Not just going by palmares - in which case you could pobably make a strong case for any of them - but by talent and diversity. The top three all have insane aerobic and anaerobic ability and can also sprint. Valverde has the edge for me because, like Boonen said a couple of weeks ago, he is the best and can compete with the best in nearly any kind of race. Cancellara and Boonen are kind of equal, but I think Cancellara's wins at Strade Bianche and in a few hilly stage races suggest he's a bit more rounded than Boonen.

Contador a bit behind in terms of talent. He's got an amazing aerobic engine and could put out insane w/kg at threshold in his prime, but his anaerobic power isn't great and his sprint is awful. It's a shame in a way that GTs are so much in favour of one dimensional riders in the modern era with domestiques so strong - it's all about the mountains.
There's plenty of races already that favour sprinters.
I wouldn't classify any of these riders as sprinters. The point was more that until the mid 1980s all rounders used to win GTs - now only climbers do, because they all have such strong teams that all-rounders can't gain any time on non-mountain stages. It's a lot easier for climbers to win GTs now than it was 30 years ago - and almost impossible for all-rounders to win them, which is a real shame imo. Someone like Van Impe would have won 5 Tours if he was riding now, and Merckx and Hinault would struggle to get any.

For me, Valverde, Cancellara and Boonen are a lot closer to Merckx and Hinault in terms of talent and ability, with their all-round power profile. Contador is much more like Van Impe or Bahamontes - an incredble climber, but perhaps not an incredible cyclist.
 
1.) Contador (really no question for me. In my opinion a gt win is way more important than a monument win and he has won 7 of them and it's quite likely he will win even more in the future)
2.) Cancellara (this was extremely difficult for me. Places 2-4 are more or less even for me and it's hard to argue which one is better. At the end I thought about which rider will be remembered in the future and I think it's Spartacus. I rate him slightly higher than Boonen since he has more variety in his palmares and higher than Valverde because although Valverde has even more variety he doesn't have quite as many big wins)
3.) Boonen (has the edge over Valverde because of the same reason. He has won 4 monuments more than Valverde, an advantage even Valverde's vuelta can't compensate. Besides that Boonen has also won more smaller one day races although Valverde's stage races make it relatively close again. However what really makes a difference is that Boonen has won a rainbow jersey, which is the one win Valverde's palmares is really missing.)
4.) Valverde (because of the reasons mentioned above. However if he wins the Olympics this year or a WC title, because who knows how long this guy will ride, he would probably be 2nd on my list)
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
1) Valverde
2) Cancellara
3) Boonen
4) Contador

Not just going by palmares - in which case you could pobably make a strong case for any of them - but by talent and diversity. The top three all have insane aerobic and anaerobic ability and can also sprint. Valverde has the edge for me because, like Boonen said a couple of weeks ago, he is the best and can compete with the best in nearly any kind of race. Cancellara and Boonen are kind of equal, but I think Cancellara's wins at Strade Bianche and in a few hilly stage races suggest he's a bit more rounded than Boonen.

Contador a bit behind in terms of talent. He's got an amazing aerobic engine and could put out insane w/kg at threshold in his prime, but his anaerobic power isn't great and his sprint is awful. It's a shame in a way that GTs are so much in favour of one dimensional riders in the modern era with domestiques so strong - it's all about the mountains.
There's plenty of races already that favour sprinters.
I wouldn't classify any of these riders as sprinters. The point was more that until the mid 1980s all rounders used to win GTs - now only climbers do, because they all have such strong teams that all-rounders can't gain any time on non-mountain stages. It's a lot easier for climbers to win GTs now than it was 30 years ago - and almost impossible for all-rounders to win them, which is a real shame imo. Someone like Van Impe would have won 5 Tours if he was riding now, and Merckx and Hinault would struggle to get any.

For me, Valverde, Cancellara and Boonen are a lot closer to Merckx and Hinault in terms of talent and ability, with their all-round power profile. Contador is much more like Van Impe or Bahamontes - an incredble climber, but perhaps not an incredible cyclist.
I should rephrase. There's plenty of races that can be won in a sprint already. All riders in the peloton basically thrive in the area that they do because of specialization. If you want GT's to favour alrounders, there's almost nothing left for the pure climbers. I think alrounders are reasonably favoured within their specialty, and by the increased range of races they can win


Basically this list largely boils down to

- How you value GTs, other stage races, classics, TTs and stages
- How you value wins over podiums and top 10s
- How much you value bigger wins over smaller wins
- How much you value diversity on the palmares
- riding style, the rider itself, etc

This is all really subjective, and imo often determined by the riders we like in the first place, so we'll end up talking in circles really.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
1) Valverde
2) Cancellara
3) Boonen
4) Contador

Not just going by palmares - in which case you could pobably make a strong case for any of them - but by talent and diversity. The top three all have insane aerobic and anaerobic ability and can also sprint. Valverde has the edge for me because, like Boonen said a couple of weeks ago, he is the best and can compete with the best in nearly any kind of race. Cancellara and Boonen are kind of equal, but I think Cancellara's wins at Strade Bianche and in a few hilly stage races suggest he's a bit more rounded than Boonen.

Contador a bit behind in terms of talent. He's got an amazing aerobic engine and could put out insane w/kg at threshold in his prime, but his anaerobic power isn't great and his sprint is awful. It's a shame in a way that GTs are so much in favour of one dimensional riders in the modern era with domestiques so strong - it's all about the mountains.
There's plenty of races already that favour sprinters.
I wouldn't classify any of these riders as sprinters. The point was more that until the mid 1980s all rounders used to win GTs - now only climbers do, because they all have such strong teams that all-rounders can't gain any time on non-mountain stages. It's a lot easier for climbers to win GTs now than it was 30 years ago - and almost impossible for all-rounders to win them, which is a real shame imo. Someone like Van Impe would have won 5 Tours if he was riding now, and Merckx and Hinault would struggle to get any.

For me, Valverde, Cancellara and Boonen are a lot closer to Merckx and Hinault in terms of talent and ability, with their all-round power profile. Contador is much more like Van Impe or Bahamontes - an incredble climber, but perhaps not an incredible cyclist.
I should rephrase. There's plenty of races that can be won in a sprint already. All riders in the peloton basically thrive in the area that they do because of specialization. If you want GT's to favour alrounders, there's almost nothing left for the pure climbers. I think alrounders are reasonably favoured within their specialty, and by the increased range of races they can win


Basically this list largely boils down to

- How you value GTs, other stage races, classics, TTs and stages
- How you value wins over podiums and top 10s
- How much you value bigger wins over smaller wins
- How much you value diversity on the palmares
- riding style, the rider itself, etc

This is all really subjective, and imo often determined by the riders we like in the first place, so we'll end up talking in circles really.
Agreed, it's certainly all very subjective. Pesonally, I like to assess the best cyclist by the number of races they can win and be competitive in throughout the year. I guess there are about 250 WT race days throughout a season, and riders like Valverde, Sagan or Cancellara could probably be competitive in over half of them. Riders like Contador and Quintana can probably only compete in about 10%. In the modern era though, those 10% do seem to decide the majority of stage races.

If you put a ride like Sagan or Valverde up against Contador in a 1v1 race in a variety of scenarios, Valverde and Sagan would win the vast majority. That's what makes them better riders for me.
 
Re:

Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
1) Valverde
2) Cancellara
3) Boonen
4) Contador

Not just going by palmares - in which case you could pobably make a strong case for any of them - but by talent and diversity. The top three all have insane aerobic and anaerobic ability and can also sprint. Valverde has the edge for me because, like Boonen said a couple of weeks ago, he is the best and can compete with the best in nearly any kind of race. Cancellara and Boonen are kind of equal, but I think Cancellara's wins at Strade Bianche and in a few hilly stage races suggest he's a bit more rounded than Boonen.

Contador a bit behind in terms of talent. He's got an amazing aerobic engine and could put out insane w/kg at threshold in his prime, but his anaerobic power isn't great and his sprint is awful. It's a shame in a way that GTs are so much in favour of one dimensional riders in the modern era with domestiques so strong - it's all about the mountains.
There's plenty of races already that favour sprinters.
I wouldn't classify any of these riders as sprinters. The point was more that until the mid 1980s all rounders used to win GTs - now only climbers do, because they all have such strong teams that all-rounders can't gain any time on non-mountain stages. It's a lot easier for climbers to win GTs now than it was 30 years ago - and almost impossible for all-rounders to win them, which is a real shame imo. Someone like Van Impe would have won 5 Tours if he was riding now, and Merckx and Hinault would struggle to get any.

For me, Valverde, Cancellara and Boonen are a lot closer to Merckx and Hinault in terms of talent and ability, with their all-round power profile. Contador is much more like Van Impe or Bahamontes - an incredble climber, but perhaps not an incredible cyclist.
I should rephrase. There's plenty of races that can be won in a sprint already. All riders in the peloton basically thrive in the area that they do because of specialization. If you want GT's to favour alrounders, there's almost nothing left for the pure climbers. I think alrounders are reasonably favoured within their specialty, and by the increased range of races they can win


Basically this list largely boils down to

- How you value GTs, other stage races, classics, TTs and stages
- How you value wins over podiums and top 10s
- How much you value bigger wins over smaller wins
- How much you value diversity on the palmares
- riding style, the rider itself, etc

This is all really subjective, and imo often determined by the riders we like in the first place, so we'll end up talking in circles really.
This



The Hitch said:
Absolute peak

1 Contador

2 Cancellara
3 Boonen
4 Valverde

Year to year ability

1 Valverde







2 Contador

3 and 4 Boonen and Canc.


Versatility

1 Valverde



2 Canc

3 Boonen

4 Contador
and this.
 
Re: Rank 1-4: Boonen, Cancellara, Contador Valverde

Oliwright said:
Valverde being involved in doping makes it harder to vote for him.
Boonen won in an era plagued with doping and since has done less
Contador had the Clembuterol case and mechanical doping controversy.
Cancellara has won less compared to the others.

Despite those I genuinely can't split them.
Valverde is so good in every type of race he does.
Contador has 7 GTs
Cancellara has less classics than Boonen but more GT victories.

Impossible questions.
I'm to lazy to look it up, but I'm 99% sure they have the same number of classic wins. Fabian has a MSR which Tom doesn't have.
 
Mar 11, 2009
1,005
0
0
1. Contador
2. Cancellara - before typing I thought Boone winning bunch sprints in the Tour including Champs Elysses, the Worlds and the Green Jersey put him ahead of Cancellara, but I cannot shake 2010 out of my mind when they were both at the height of their powers. Besides that Cancellara has the worlds TTs, San Remo, Tuor de Suisse and IIRC Tirreno on his palmares.
3. Boonen
4. Valverde - Like a lot of others here I see him as having the most broad based skill set. Probably if you did a list of various skills and rated someone 1-10, he would come out on top. But he has stages, the Ardennes Week and the Vuelta as his notable wins. He has a ton of podiums for sure but many like Vuelta 2006, Worlds 2013 and 2009 are notable for brain farts that still resulted in the podiums he sometimes seems too happy to have.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts