The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
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.
Yes he won, but not dominating like a cancellara has done. I xas just using that to justify fabien above alberto.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
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
DFA123 said: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.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.
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.
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.Red Rick said:DFA123 said: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.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.
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.
Red Rick said:DFA123 said: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.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.
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.
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
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.